Troops told Geneva rules don't apply to Taliban

[CHIMO]

WASHINGTON — Canadian troops in Afghanistan have been told the Geneva Conventions and Canadian regulations regarding the rights of prisoners of war don't apply to Taliban and al-Qaeda fighters captured on the battlefield.

That decision strips detainees of key rights and protections under the rules of war, including the right to be released at the end of the conflict and not to be held criminally liable for lawful combat.

“The whole purpose of those regulations is to know if Geneva applies,” said Amir Attaran, a law professor at the University of Ottawa who has been pressing the Defence Department for details of its detainee policy for months.

The 1991 Canadian regulations — developed during the Persian Gulf war — included provisions to hold tribunals to determine a detainee's status under Geneva if there is any doubt.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060530.wxdetainee30/BNStory/Afghanistan/home

[Bassic]

1. What are they not considered human?

The Geneva convention shouldn't be something that you can throw out the window the minute you walk into a conflict. What the hell do we have that if we can simply decide it doesen't apply?

[Spazito]

2. Geez! This needs to be spread far and wide!

Harper will trash Canada's reputation like bush has trashed the U.S.'s. There is NO legal designation of "unlawful combatant", it is another of the bush admin's made-up words that has no legal basis.

I note the General says this:

“They are not entitled to prisoner-of-war status but they are entitled to prisoner-of-war treatment,” he said, asserting that all detainees are humanely treated."


and then we find out this:

"Canada has provided few details on the fate of detainees its forces have handed over to U.S. authorities since 2002; neither the number nor the names have been made public. All the government has said is that none are currently at Guantanamo Bay. But it's unknown whether they have been released, or are being held at the Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan or in secret prisons in Eastern Europe.

Similar secrecy cloaks what happens to detainees handed over to Afghan authorities by Canadian Forces fighting in Kandahar province. Gen. Gauthier indicated such transfers occur regularly, if not daily then several times a week. But no numbers are publicly available.

“Our default setting is transfer,” he said. “We haven't held anybody for more than a few hours and we would prefer not to.”

In other words, we don't know what happened to those transferred and we don't care. Because they are transferred out of our hands does NOT absolve us of war crimes if they are tortured, etc, in the hands of those we transferred them to.

We, unlike bush, ARE a member of the ICC and he and his government can be charged with war crimes.

Geez.

[MrPrax]

4. Hopefully...

It will be spread far and wide, but so far there seems to be more reporting about the minor sideline of Lieutenant-General Michel Gauthier telling O'Connor telling Parliament telling us that it isn't a war:

"I don't consider this war," O'Connor said, but he declined to explain.

"To me, war would be — well, I can start going into what war would be, I just don't consider this to be war."

CBC quoting the Canadian Minister of Defense, Gordon O'Conner, age 6

Of course, can't be a 'war' because the term would denote a basis for armed struggle against a foreign occupier and over the past decade or so dissent and liberation (with it's attendent demands of fairness, justice, autonomy, legality, etc) has been criminalized under the western totalitarian view of a global police state which necessarily must be explain itself as something other than invasion and plunder.

Of course Our Dear Leaders haven't bother to fill in the 'something' part, so it's kinda interesting all the 'hooey' about a noble military tradition and noble soldiers fighting noble causes in noble wars, that is trotted out each Remembrance Day, is tossed by the military (Hiller, Gauthier, et al) the first chance they get.

[Minstrel Boy]

3. A national disgrace

that should be our shame for generations.

[Bragi]

5. In summary, so what?

Looks to me like all you have to do is get someone to claim to be the government of a country. Once you do that, any dispute between the new government leader and anyone else in that country becomes civil strife. As it does not entail warfare between combatant states, it is then not legally covered the Geneva Convention. It's like a legal mobius strip.

- B

[Spazito]

6. What may not been seen, by Harper and Bush, as covered by

the Geneva Conventions IS covered by the HUMAN RIGHTS IN THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE: PROTECTION OF PERSONS SUBJECTED TO DETENTION OR IMPRISONMENT :

Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or Imprisonment


Adopted by General Assembly resolution 43/173 of 9 December 1988
Scope of the Body of Principles
These principles apply for the protection of all persons under any form of detention or imprisonment.

Use of Terms
For the purposes of the Body of Principles:

( a ) "Arrest" means the act of apprehending a person for the alleged commission of an offence or by the action of an authority;

( b ) "Detained person" means any person deprived of personal liberty except as a result of conviction for an offence;

( c ) "Imprisoned person" means any person deprived of personal liberty as a result of conviction for an offence;

( d ) "Detention" means the condition of detained persons as defined above;

( e ) "Imprisonment" means the condition of imprisoned persons as defined above;

( f ) The words "a judicial or other authority" means a judicial or other authority under the law whose status and tenure should afford the strongest possible guarantees of competence, impartiality and independence.

Principle 1
All persons under any form of detention or imprisonment shall be treated in a humane manner and with respect for the inherent dignity of the human person.

Principle 2
Arrest, detention or imprisonment shall only be carried out strictly in accordance with the provisions of the law and by competent officials or persons authorized for that purpose.

Principle 3
There shall be no restriction upon or derogation from any of the human rights of persons under any form of detention or imprisonment recognized or existing in any State pursuant to law, conventions, regulations or custom on the pretext that this Body of Principles does not recognize such rights or that it recognizes them to a lesser extent.

Principle 4
Any form of detention or imprisonment and all measures affecting the human rights of a person under any form of detention or imprisonment shall be ordered by, or be subject to the effective control of, a judicial or other authority.

Principle 5
1. These principles shall be applied to all persons within the territory of any given State, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion or religious belief, political or other opinion, national, ethnic or social origin, property, birth or other status.

2. Measures applied under the law and designed solely to protect the rights and special status of women, especially pregnant women and nursing mothers, children and juveniles, aged, sick or handicapped persons shall not be deemed to be discriminatory. The need for, and the application of, such measures shall always be subject to review by a judicial or other authority.

Principle 6
No person under any form of detention or imprisonment shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. 1 No circumstance whatever may be invoked as a justification for torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Principle 7
1. States should prohibit by law any act contrary to the rights and duties contained in these principles, make any such act subject to appropriate sanctions and conduct impartial investigations upon complaints.

2. Officials who have reason to believe that a violation of this Body of Principles has occurred or is about to occur shall report the matter to their superior authorities and, where necessary, to other appropriate authorities or organs vested with reviewing or remedial powers.

3. Any other person who has ground to believe that a violation of this Body of Principles has occurred or is about to occur shall have the right to report the matter to the superiors of the officials involved as well as to other appropriate authorities or organs vested with reviewing or remedial powers.


more

http://www.ohchr.org/english/law/bodyprinciples.htm