Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Policy Discussion Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Brumar89 who wrote (2024)	1/10/2003 9:19:52 AM
From: zonder	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 15987

What is "competent tribunal"? Here's a lawyer's opinion: ------------------------------------------------ The better view in my opinion (and this is I believe supported by the other articles of the Convention dealing with the rights of prisoners in the context of criminal charges and the general purpose of the convention in protecting the rights of POWs and other treaties dealing with human rights) is that it must be judicial in nature and carry on its proceedings in accordance with "natural justice" - a specific legal term meaning, amongst other things, that the judge or similar deciding authority must be competent in the relevant area of law and unbiased, that all parties have the right to speak and present all relevant evidence and are entitled to competent representation if they desire it. This is supported by the use of the term "tribunal" (rather than, for example, "authority") which, in it's usual English usage, means a "A court of justice; a judicial assembly" (from the OED). Certainly under English law any tribunal determining legal matters (and the status of a person as a POW or not is undeniably a legal matter) which did not act in accordance with natural justice (and there are numerous precedents confirming that this applies to military tribunals as much as civil) would be liable to have it's rulings quashed. --------------------------------------------------- And what would POW status mean? Would you care to look it up in the Geneva Convention? It's pretty clear. At the end of the day, there has been no such tribunal and the POW status of detainees has not even been considered, let alone decided on by a "competent tribunal" as the Geneva Convention demands. I find this inconsistent with the western culture and values that we are fighting to preserve. That's all.

To: Brumar89 who wrote (2024)	1/10/2003 9:35:28 AM
From: Alastair McIntosh	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 15987

What is a competent tribunal? What happens when its unclear whether someone is a POW or just a detainee? That person is to enjoy POW protection until their status is formally determined. If there's a factual question about whether the Geneva Convention applies to someone, the issue is to be decided by a "competent tribunal"—in practice, usually a panel of military officers from the capturing country. terrorismanswers.com