Red Cross denied access to PoWs

[shanek]

http://www.observer.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,963108,00.html

Up to 3,000 Iraqis - some of them civilians - believed to be gagged, bound, hooded and beaten at US camps close to Baghdad airport

The International Committee of the Red Cross so far has been denied access to what the organisation believes could be as many as 3,000 prisoners held in searing heat. All other requests to inspect conditions under which prisoners are being held have been met with silence or been turned down.

There is circumstantial evidence that prisoners are being gagged and hooded, in the manner of the Afghans and other captives held at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba - treatment in itself questionable under international law.

Unlike the Afghans in Cuba, there is no doubt about the status of these captives, whether PoWs or civilians arrested for looting or other crimes under military occupation: all have the right, under the laws of war, to be visited and documented by the International Red Cross. 'There is no argument about the situation with regard to the Iraqi armed forces and even the Fedayeen Saddam,' said the ICRC's spokeswoman in Baghdad, Nada Doumani.

 

[Bjorn]

.... whether PoWs or civilians ....

If it is true, they must be "Illegal combattants". No doubt. That's the only group I know that has no rights whatsoever. As defined by the US.

 

[Jon_in_london]

America seems to have forgotten the geneva convention again very quickly.

 

[aerocontrols]

I can find no verification for this story on the ICRC's website.

The Observer also notes the following claim:

Civilians held, she said, have similar rights because they have been detained by an occupying power, which the ICRC insists the Americans to be, even if they do not use those words of themselves.

That's just plain incorrect. Both the US and Great Britain have accepted 'occupying power' status, and even went so far as to put the words into the UN resolution 1483:

Noting the letter of 8 May 2003 from the Permanent Representatives of the United States of America and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to the President of the Security Council (S/2003/538) and recognizing the specific authorities, responsibilities, and obligations under applicable international law of these states as occupying powers under unified command (the “Authority”),

This article is older than the resolution, and the US was on record even earlier than that as presenting this resolution with the 'occupying power' language in it.

I'm going to wait for more information. Hopefully the Red Cross itself will make a statement.

MattJ