Слике страница
PDF
ePub

be imposed upon, and means of force may be applied against, private enemy persons for many purposes; such as keeping order and tranquillity on occupied enemy territory; prevention of any hostile conduct, especially conspiracies; prevention of intercourse with, and assistance to, the enemy forces; securing the fulfilment of commands and requests of the military authorities, such as those for the provision of drivers, hostages, farriers; securing compliance with requisitions and contributions, and securing the execution of public works necessary for military operations, such as the building of soldiers' quarters, roads, bridges, and the like; provided the requisitioned services do not make part of the military operations.1

What kinds of violent means may be applied for these purposes is in the discretion of the military authorities, who will act according to expediency, and the rules of martial law established by the belligerents. But there is no doubt that, if necessary, capital punishment and imprisonment 2 are lawful means for these purposes. The limits within which violence may be applied to private individuals in modern warfare find expression in Article 46 of the Hague Regulations: 'family honour and rights, individual lives and private property, as well as religious convictions and liberty, must be respected.'

1 Can private enemy persons be compelled to build fortifications, construct trenches, and the like? The matter is not settled in practice. See below, § 170. See also Holland, War, No. 77; Spaight, p. 151; Ferrand, Des Requisitions en matière de Droit international public (1917), p. 60; Garner in A.Ĵ., xi. (1917), p. 111.

That, in case of general devastation, the peaceful population may be detained in so-called concentration camps, there is no doubt; see below, § 154. And there is likewise no doubt that hostages may be taken

from the peaceful population; see below, §§ 170, 259.

3 That the lives of civilians must be respected is a principle so universally recognised, that the following case has roused the indignation of the whole civilised world. It was published by the Münchner Neueste Nachrichten on October 7, 1914. A German lieutenant, giving an account of the occupation of St. Dié, at the end of August 1914, by the Germans, relates that a German column had entered the town and had barricaded itself into a house to await reinforcements; he then continues: 'We had

Violence

against

of the

Enemy

against Officials

in Important

§ 117. The head of the enemy State and officials in the Head important posts, in case they do not belong to the armed forces, occupy, so far as their liability to direct State and attack, death, or wounds is concerned, a position similar to that of private enemy persons. But they are so important to the enemy States, and they may Positions. be so useful to the enemy and so dangerous to the invading forces, that they may certainly be made prisoners of war. If a belligerent succeeds in obtaining possession of the head of the enemy State or its cabinet ministers, he will certainly remove them into captivity. And he may do the same with diplomatic agents and other officials of importance, because, by weakening the enemy Government, he may thereby influence the enemy to agree to terms of peace.

III

TREATMENT OF WOUNDED, AND DEAD BODIES

Hall, § 130-Westlake, ii. pp. 72-76-Lawrence, § 165-Maine, pp. 156-159Manning, p. 205-Phillimore, iii. § 95-Halleck, ii. pp. 36-39-Moore, vii. § 1134-Taylor, §§ 527-528-Hershey, Nos. 369-374-Bluntschli, §§ 586-592-Lueder in Holtzendorff, iv. pp. 289-318, 398-421-Liszt, § 40, v.-Ullmann, § 178, and in R. G., iv. (1897), pp. 437-445—Bonfils, Nos. 1108-1118'-Despagnet, Nos. 551-554-Pradier-Fodéré, vi. No. 2794, vii. Nos. 2849-2881—Rivier, ii. pp. 268-273-Nys, iii. pp. 499510-Calvo, iv. §§ 2161-2165-Fiore, iii. Nos. 1365-1372, and Code, Nos. 1594-1609-Martens, ii. § 114-Longuet, §§ 85-90, 92-93-Mérignhac, iii. pp. 186-240-Pillet, pp. 165-192-Kriegsbrauch, p. 25-Land

arrested three civilians, and a good
idea occurred to me. They were put
on chairs, and told to go and sit in
the middle of the street. Little by
little one becomes terribly hard.
Well, there they sat in the street.
How many prayers of anguish they
uttered I do not know, but their
hands were clasped as though with
cramp. I am sorry for them, but the
method was immediately efficacious.
The fire from the houses on our flanks
weakens immediately, and we are

able to occupy the opposite house and so are masters of the principal street.' The officer then explains how St. Dié was cleared of the enemy, and adds: As I learned afterwards, the reserve regiment which entered St. Dié more to the north had experiences quite like ours. The four civilians whom they compelled to sit in the street were killed by French bullets. I myself saw them lying in the middle of the street near the hospital.'

Warfare, §§ 174-220—Zorn, p. 122-Bordwell, pp. 249-277-Spaight, pp. 419-460-Higgins, pp. 35-38-Holland, Studies, pp. 61-65-Holland, War, Nos. 41-69-Garner, i. §§ 313-318-Gurlt, Zur Geschichte der internationalen und freiwilligen Krankenpflege (1873)-Lueder, Die Genfer Convention (1876)-Moynier, La Croix rouge, son Passé et son Avenir (1882); La Révision de la Convention de Genève (1898); La Fondation de la Croix rouge (1903)-Buzzatti, De l'Emploi abusif... de la Croix rouge (1890)--Triepel, Die neuesten Fortschritte auf dem Gebiet des Kriegsrechts (1894), pp. 1-41-Müller, Entstehungsgeschichte des rothen Kreuzes und der Genfer Konvention (1897)-Münzell, Untersuchungen über die Genfer Konvention (1901)-Gillot, La Révision de la Convention de Genève, etc. (1902)-Meurer, Die Genfer Konvention und ihre Reform (1906)-Schneider, Die Genfer Konvention (1911)— Roszkowski in R.I., 2nd Ser. iv. (1902), pp. 199, 299, 442-Delpech in R.G., xiii. (1906), pp. 629-724-Macpherson in Z. V., v. (1911), pp. 253-277.

Geneva

§ 118. Although, since the seventeenth century, Origin of several hundred special treaties have been concluded Convenbetween different States regarding the tending of each tion. other's wounded and the exemption of army surgeons from captivity, no general rule of the Law of Nations on these points was in existence until the second half of the nineteenth century, other than one prohibiting the killing, mutilation, or ill-treatment of the wounded. A change for the better was initiated by Jean Henry Dunant, a Swiss citizen from Geneva, who was an eye-witness of the battle of Solferino in 1859, where many thousands of wounded died who could, under more favourable circumstances, have been saved. When he published, in 1861 and 1863, his pamphlet, Un Souvenir de Solférino, the Geneva Société d'Utilité Publique, under the presidency of Gustave Moynier, created an agitation in favour of better arrangements for tending the wounded on the battlefield, and convoked an international congress at Geneva in 1863, where thirty-six representatives of nearly all the European States met and discussed the matter. 1864 the Bundesrath, the Government of the Federal State of Switzerland, took the matter in hand officially, 1 See Macpherson, op. cit., p. 254.

[blocks in formation]

In

and invited all European, and several American, States to send official representatives to a congress at Geneva for the purpose of discussing and concluding an international treaty regarding the wounded. This congress met in 1864, and twelve States were represented. Its result was the Convention 1 for the Amelioration of the Condition of Soldiers wounded in Armies in the Field (commonly called 'Geneva Convention '), signed on August 22, 1864. By and by States other than the original signatories joined the convention, and finally all the civilised States of the world, with the exception of Costa Rica, Monaco, and Lichtenstein, became parties. That its rules were in no wise perfect, and needed to be supplemented regarding many points, soon became apparent. A second international congress met at the invitation of Switzerland in 1868 at Geneva, where additional articles 2 to the original convention were discussed, and signed. These additional articles were, however, never ratified. The First Hague Conference in 1899 unanimously formulated the wish that Switzerland should shortly take steps for the meeting of another international congress to revise the Geneva Convention. This congress assembled in June 1906, and on July 6, 1906, a new Geneva Convention 3 was signed by the representatives of thirtyfive States, including all the Great Powers. No less than twenty-six of these States ratified the convention, and at least eight others have acceded.

The new convention consisted of thirty-three articles, and provided rules for the treatment of the wounded and the dead; and rules concerning military hospitals and mobile medical units; the personnel engaged in the interest of the wounded, including army chaplains ;

See Martens, N.R.G., xviii. p. 607, and above, vol. i. § 560.

2 See Martens, N.R.G., xviii. p.

612.

3 See Martens, N. R. G., 3rd Ser. ii. p. 620, and Treaty Ser. (1907), No. 15.

the material belonging to mobile medical units, military hospitals, and voluntary aid societies; convoys of evacuation; the distinctive emblem; the carrying out of the convention; and the prevention of abuses and infractions.

In the final protocol the conference expressed a desire that, in order to arrive at a unanimous interpretation of the convention, the parties should, so far as the cases and the circumstances permitted, submit to the International Court of Arbitration at the Hague 1 any differences which in time of peace might arise between them concerning its interpretation; but Great Britain and Japan refused to become parties to this.

When the World War broke out, almost all the belligerents were parties to the convention, but not quite all; and it was provided by Article 24 that it ceases to be binding in any war from the moment when a State which is not a party to it becomes a belligerent. However, all the belligerents were parties to the old convention of 1864, which remained in force between those Powers which were parties to it without being parties to the convention of 1906.2 None the less, the provisions of both conventions were often violated during the war.3 The main rules of the convention of 1906 are as follows 4:

Wounded

§ 119. According to Articles 1-5, sick or wounded The persons belonging, or officially attached, to armies and the must be respected and cared for, without distinction Sick. of nationality, by the belligerent in whose power they may be. Should, however, a belligerent be compelled

1 See above, vol. i. § 472.

2 See above, vol. i. § 560.

See details in Garner, i. §§ 318318.

The stipulations of the convention are for the most part of a

technical military character, and
it is impossible in a general treatise
to enter into details. Readers who
take a deeper interest in them must
be referred to the most valuable
article by Macpherson in Z.V., v.
(1911), pp. 253-277.

« ПретходнаНастави »