Would like your comments on the legality of this verdict (execution) based on the Geneva convention on dealing with spies.
Which convention do you think applies/should apply?
The Geneva Conventions apply in
wars between two or more sovereign states
The first Geneva Convention ("for the Amelioration of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces and Field")
The second Geneva Convention ("for the Amelioration of the Condition of Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces at Sea")
The third Geneva Convention ("Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners
of War")
The fourth Geneva Convention ("Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons
in Time of War")
The first two are similar, covering land and sea respectively, and embody the main idea which led to the founding of the Red Cross: if a member of the armed forces is wounded or sick, and therefore in no condition to take an active part in the hostilities, he is no longer part of the fighting force and becomes a vulnerable person in need of protection and care. The main points of these two Conventions are: The sick, wounded and shipwrecked must be cared for adequately. Belligerents must treat members of the enemy force who are wounded, sick or shipwrecked as carefully they would their own. All efforts should be made to collect the dead quickly; to confirm death by medical examination; to identify bodies and protect them from robbery. Medical equipment must not be intentionally destroyed and medical establishments and vehicles must not be attacked, damaged or prevented from operating even if, for the moment, they do not contain patients.
The third convention covers members of the armed forces who fall into enemy hands. They are in the power of the enemy State, not of the individuals or troops who have captured them. The fourth covers all individuals "who do not belong to the armed forces, take no part in the hostilities and find themselves in the hands of the Enemy or an Occupying Power".
Please note there is not a state of War between Pakistan and India.
There is no case of a military conflict or military occupation.
See e.g.
http://www.ppu.org.uk/learn/texts/doc_geneva_con.html
https://www.icrc.org/en/war-and-law/treaties-customary-law/geneva-conventions
As for the treatment of spies specifically, see
https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v2_rul_rule107_sectionb
https://www.quora.com/Does-the-Geneva-Convention-apply-to-spies
Article 5 of the 1949 Geneva Convention IV provides: “Where
in occupied territory an individual protected person is detained as a spy … such … [person] shall nevertheless be treated with humanity, and in case of trial, shall not be deprived of the rights of fair and regular trial prescribed by the present Convention.”
> occupation is not the case
Additional Protocol I
Article 46(1) of the 1977 Additional Protocol I provides:
Notwithstanding any other provision of the Conventions or of this Protocol, any member of the armed forces of a Party
to the conflict who falls into the power of an adverse Party while engaging in espionage
shall not have the right to the status of prisoner of war and may be treated as a spy.
> armed conflict is not the case
> even if it were the case, spies cannot claim PoW status
Article 45(3) of the 1977 Additional Protocol I provides:
Any person
who has taken part in hostilities, who is not entitled to prisoner-of-war status and who does not benefit from more favourable treatment in accordance with the Fourth Convention shall have the right at all times to the protection of Article 75 of this Protocol.
> taking part in hostilities is not the case
> article 75, see
https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/appl...t&documentId=086F4BB140C53655C12563CD0051E027
For those nations that have ratified
Protocol I of the Geneva Conventions, are also bound by Article 45.3 of that protocol which curtails GCIV Article 5.
Any person who has taken part in hostilities, who is not entitled to prisoner‑of‑war status and who does not benefit from more favourable treatment in accordance with the Fourth Convention shall have the right at all times to the protection of Article 75 of this Protocol. In occupied territory, any such person,
unless he is held as a spy, shall also be entitled, notwithstanding Article 5 of the Fourth Convention, to his rights of communication under that Convention.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unlawful_combatant
More info, see
http://notabeneuh.blogspot.nl/2013/11/spying-and-international-law.html
.
