¹ Judgement (1947) 41 AJIL 172, 229.Google Scholar

² Flory, William E. S., Prisoners of War: A Study in the Development of International Law, 1942, Washington D.C., American Council on Public Affairs, p. 39.Google Scholar

³ Article 4 of the Hague Regulations of 1907 said no more than that “They must be humanely treated”.

⁴ Flory added that the German delegate was dissatisfied with the Hague rule on the ground that “the definition of ‘humanity’ is not uniform throughout the world”.

⁵ The case of Kurt Maelzer, War Crimes Report 11 (1949) 53.Google Scholar

⁶ The International Military Tribunal in Tokyo similarly condemned the Japanese practice of “parading prisoners of war through cities and exposing them to ridicule and insults”. See the UK Manual of Military Law, Part III, London, H.M.S.O., 1958, p. 51 Google Scholar. Another instance from the Second World War where allied prisoners were exposed to the wrath of the local population, on this occasion with fatal results, was the Essen Lynching case ( Heyer and others. War Crimes Reports 1 (1947) 88)Google Scholar. Captain Heyer, a German officer, gave instructions that a party of three allied officers were to be escorted to a Luftwaffe unit for interrogation. He ordered their guards not to interfere if civilians should attempt to molest them. These instructions were given in a loud voice, and in the hearing of a crowd of civilians. When the prisoners reached one of the main streets in Essen, they were attacked by the crowd and eventually thrown over the parapet of a bridge to their deaths. However, the charge preferred against Captain Heyer and his six co-accused at their trial by a British Military Court in December 1945 appears to have made no reference to the prisoners' exposure to insults and public curiosity (understandably, in view of the fact that they suffered far worse consequences), but instead alleged that “in violation of the laws and usages of war, [they] were, with other persons, concerned in the killing of three unidentified British airmen, prisoners of war”.

⁷ See, e.g., The Times History of the War, two volumes of which are cited in Notes 13 and 14 below.

⁸ E.g. Korea — The First War We Lost , Bevin Alexander, Hippocrene Books, New York, 1986, following p. 448 Google Scholar, showing Americans emerging from a cave to surrender to Chinese soldiers. A further example, referred to by Levie, H. in The Falklands War (Coll, and Arends, , eds.), Allen & Unwin, Boston, 1985, p. 72 Google Scholar, is the widely-publicised photograph of the British Royal Marines surrendering at Port Stanley, showing a number of Marines lying face down on the ground.

⁹ E.g. Best, S. H.'s The Story of The British Red Cross, Cassell & Co. Ltd., 1938 Google Scholar, which opposite p. 144 shows a British medical officer tending a wounded Turk after the battle of Tikrit in November 1917.

¹⁰ E.g. The Longest War — The Iran-Iraq Military Conflict , Hiro, Dilip, Grafton Books, London, 1989 Google Scholar, which includes (following p. 136) a picture of Iraqi prisoners of war taken in February 1984.

¹¹ E.g. At the Going Down of the Sun, Lindsay, Oliver, Hamish Hamilton, London, 1981, opposite p. 152 Google Scholar, which includes a picture of allied prisoners of war marching to Shamuipo Camp, Hong Kong, on 30 December 1941, watched by Japanese soldiers, four days after Hong Kong surrendered.

¹² E.g. British Forces in the Korean War, ed. Cunningham-Boothe, and Farrar, , The British Korean Veterans Association, Leamington Spa, 1988, p. 132 Google Scholar, showing North Korean and Chinese prisoners captured by Royal Marines and held aboard H.M.S. Belfast.

¹³ See, e.g. Vol. VI of The Times History of the War, The Times, London, 1916, which on p. 262 Google Scholar shows “British prisoners at work — digging trenches in Germany and preparing wood for supports for the trenches”.

¹⁴ See, e.g. Vol. XII of The Times History of the War, The Times, London, 1917, which on p. 246 Google Scholar shows “British Prisoners of War engaged in farm work”.

¹⁵ E.g. Monty — The Field-Marshal — 1944 — 1976, Hamilton, Nigel, Hamish Hamilton, London, 1986, opposite p. 420 Google Scholar, showing Field-Marshal Busch, commander-in-chief of the surrendered German armies in the north, being reprimanded by Field-Marshal Montgomery for failing to obey orders promptly.

¹⁶ E.g. The Illustrated History of the Vietnam War, Becket, Brian, Blandford Press, Poole, Dorset, 1985, p. 41 Google Scholar, showing South Vietnamese Marines subjecting “a Viet Cong prisoner to on-the-spot interrogation. The prisoner's head is held under water until he's about to drown”.

¹⁷ E.g. Beckett, , op. cit., at p. 76 Google Scholar, with the caption “The interrogation of a NVA [North Vietnamese Army] prisoner. In a brutal, dirty war like Vietnam, there were excesses on both sides”.

¹⁸ Pictet, J., ed., Commentary on Geneva Convention III of 1949, Geneva, ICRC, 1960, p. 141 Google Scholar, which emphasizes that the concept of humane treatment implies more than an absence of corporal punishment, and involves a positive obligation “to stand up for [the prisoner], to give him assistance and support and also to defend or guard him from injury or danger”.

¹⁹ See The Times, 13 02 1991.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

²⁰ This may have been the motive of the photographer who took the picture of Bosnian Muslims in a Bosnian Serb-run prison camp featured in the Amnesty International advertisement in The Times on 19 09 1992. It was undoubtedly Amnesty International's motive in publishing it.Google Scholar

²¹ See Hampson, 's chapter on “Liability of War Crimes” in The Gulf War 1990–91 in International and English Law (ed. Rowe, ), Routledge, London, 1993.Google Scholar

²² See Hampson, , op. cit. Google Scholar

²³ Protocol I additional to the 1949 Geneva Conventions deals with international armed conflicts including wars of national liberation (Article 1.4), while Protocol II is concerned with non-international armed conflicts — see also Note 27 relating to Article 3 common to the 1949 Conventions.

²⁴ Under Article 27 of the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949, civilians in the territories of parties to the conflict and in occupied territories enjoy protection similar to that contained in Article 13 of the Third Convention.

²⁵ The Times, 25 01 1991.Google Scholar

²⁶ See Rowe, 's chapter “Prisoners of War in the Gulf” in The Gulf War 1990–91 in International and English Law (ed. Rowe, ), Routledge, London, 1993.Google Scholar

²⁷ It is of interest that in relation to armed conflicts not of an international character, Article 3 common to all four Geneva Conventions of 1949 requires humane treatment in all circumstances and prohibits “outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment” against “Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces … placed hors de combat by … detention…”. Thus the “humiliation” test already pertains to conflicts to which common Article 3 applies.

²⁸ By drawing attention to Article 13, compliance with the terms of this resolution and the “individual recognition” test might encourage the media to become more familiar with international humanitarian law generally.

²⁹ As an illustration, over the last few years the British Red Cross Society has organized a number of half-day courses of instruction in international humanitarian law for trainee television journalists.