Are Mercenaries in Iraq Considered POWs Under the Geneva Conventions?

[pelastration]

No, the antiwar senators refused to approve it just as much as the prowar ones. It would have become the "law of the land" and completely overridden our own court system with an arbitrary legal system where anybody can be hailed into court by anybody, without safeguards.

1. And now we see in Guantanamo:
a. completely overridden the own US court system
b. with an arbitrary non-legal system
c. where anybody can be held, even US citizen
d. without even minimal safeguarding law
e. trials with no right of appeal to any court.
f. future trials with a lower standard of evidence than in ordinary courts
e. in inhuman conditions
http://web.amnesty.org/pages/guantanamobay-index-eng

But we should also talk about the two next points in my previous post on the private contractors.
2. No legal action was taken because of a lack of jurisdiction, but the CIA and Justice Department were investigating.

3. Is this normal? No justice?
----
4. A lack of jurisdiction means or:
a. badly organized
b. intentional vacuum
But is clear that the criminal acts of the private contractor were done in an compound under US control and authority. So also criminal offends should accountable under US law or under Iraqi law (just like al-Sadr was accused of murder).

5. On the simple 'common sense" level of human reasoning: Is it acceptable that a fellow human is killed in a prison - at the mercy of his interrogator - and that the interrogator is no punished? Is this "normal"?

 

[kat]

But we should also talk about the two next points in my previous post on the private contractors.
2. No legal action was taken because of a lack of jurisdiction, but the CIA and Justice Department were investigating.

3. Is this normal? No justice?
----
4. A lack of jurisdiction means or:
a. badly organized
b. intentional vacuum
But is clear that the criminal acts of the private contractor were done in an compound under US control and authority. So also criminal offends should accountable under US law or under Iraqi law (just like al-Sadr was accused of murder).

5. On the simple 'common sense" level of human reasoning: Is it acceptable that a fellow human is killed in a prison - at the mercy of his interrogator - and that the interrogator is no punished? Is this "normal"?

2. You seem to contradict yourself here. I believe it's because you're taking a portion of a statement out of context. The military legal system has no jurisdiction ove the private contractor. That is why the CIA and Justice Dept. are investigating. Maybe it's not normal for your country to investigate a crime before making arrests?

3. "being investigated" does not equal "No Justice". It usually means..they're investigating...you know, finding out who is guilty and then building a case...isn't that how you do it in your country? Or even in the ICC?

4. A lack of jurisdiction..means...just that...it's not our jurisdiction..it's another departments...The military has an internal legal system that does not apply to civilians. This does not rule out civilian law applying to military personal, only that military law does not apply to civilians, that includes contractors...who would be charged under civilian laws.

5. again, investigating...does not equal ignoring. The wheels of the justice system are often slow but that does not mean they do not serve justice. In comparision, the ICC is particularly slow..(except in the case of Israel, but that's another story) or haven't you noticed?

 

[Njorl]

Actually, a bill passed in 2001 explicitly gave the US jurisdiction to proscecute contractors hired by the defense department for crimes committed outside normal US jurisdiction. It is a condition of their employment that they agree to submit to this jurisdiction. I don't know if it is equivalent to the UCMJ, which is sometimes more harsh and sometimes less harsh than civilian justice, but they are not going to evade proscecution for lack of jurisdiction.

Here is a link.

http://www.house.gov/judiciary/paul0330.htm

Edit - this just describes the opening of debate of the bill. It did pass eventually, but I don't know exactly what it will cover. Seeing as how its intent was to cover exactly what happened in Iraq, I think any civilians involved will be prosecuted.