UNODC ROMENA’s Post

Examining POW Treatment Protocols in Israel and Gaza Under Geneva Conventions: In light of the increased interest and discussion surrounding the treatment of prisoners of war (POWs), the recent images involving the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) and Hamas militants in Gaza provide a context to examine the protocols as outlined by the Geneva Conventions. The Geneva Conventions define POWs to potentially include members of the armed forces, volunteer militias including resistance movements and non-state armed groups, and civilians who accompany the armed forces. When POWs surrender, as some reports suggest happened with Hamas militants emerging from tunnels, or when they are captured, immediate actions are taken. Typically, these actions involve a search of the prisoners. This is standard in many military operations worldwide; for instance, the U.S. military protocol includes steps to search, silence, segregate, speed (to the rear for processing), and safeguard. In conflict zones like Israel and Gaza, where combatants may carry weapons and explosives, including suicide vests, specific tactics are employed for safety. A known tactic of the IDF is to instruct the prisoners to remove their clothing down to their underwear from a distance. This measure is taken to ensure that the prisoners do not pose a threat to their captors or other prisoners with concealed weapons or explosives. Once the POWs are searched, they are quickly taken to secure areas for further processing. This processing often includes gathering intelligence and detainment procedures. Part of this process involves collecting individual information about the POWs. This information is crucial as it is typically submitted to the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) as part of compliance with international humanitarian laws and protocols. These procedures reflect the adherence to and interpretation of the Geneva Conventions' guidelines on the treatment of prisoners of war, ensuring their safety and rights during captivity. Read more on our website https://induslens.com IDF Diana Buttu Doron Spielman Ohad Nakash Kaynar #POWTreatment #GenevaConventions #IsraelGazaConflict #HumanitarianLaw #InternationalLaw #IndusLens #IndusOSINT

There is space for all when there is dialog & nonviolent interaction, this leads to mutual understanding & empathy. There is no need for two states with borders preventing such process. Living as equals will bring people together and break the circle of violence, establishing sustainable peace. www.pax.ngo

UNDERSTANDING WHAT “ADMINISTRATIVE DETENTION” MEANS IN ISRAEL-PALESTINIAN CONFLICT:   The concept of “Administrative Detention” has arisen as Israel and Hamas agreed to a prisoner exchange. What exactly is “Administrative Detention”?   According to rights groups, more than 3k Palestinians were swept up by Israeli security forces post-Oct. 7. The majority reportedly held in administrative detention — that is, a form of incarceration without charge or trial that authorities can renew indefinitely.   This article is interesting because it visits the issue of how and why these prisoners were detained to begin with.   Understanding what is happening begins with the practical reality that the West Bank is under Israel’s military administration, a concept that foreign to most, but some argue began in 1948 when the Israelis imposed military rule on Palestinians who remained after the occupation. The Israeli’s appointed a military governor who worked with the municipality and its mayor. Military rule extended over all Arab communities, managed by a special unit made up of the regular army. After Jordan ceded the Triangle villages to Israel in 1949, military rule was imposed on the population, despite the armistice agreement guaranteeing the rights of residents and creation of local Arab police forces. The tool included control over movements, organization, and the suppression of resistance.   By 1958, a commission created to investigate military rule recommended that it be terminated. The Israelis rejected the recommendation. Legislative efforts to end military rule failed in the early 1960’s. By 1963, a plan was announced to end military rule. It was not until late 1968 that military rule was abolished, the Emergency Regulations suspended, and military surveillance of Palestinians ended. With the 1967 June War and the occupation of the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, Sinai, and the Golan Heights, Israel turned its focus to Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank, again imposing military rule. Under international law, the practice of such detention is limited to exceptional circumstances, but some argue that has not been the case, especially after the number of Palestinians in admin detention grew to close to 1/3 of the total Palestinian prisoner population. Critics argue the process is skewed, unfair, and lacks due process, and the power to incarcerate based on secret evidence is an extreme power, yet Israel uses such power to maintain control. Israel argues that the practice is in line with policies in other democracies and is necessary. The PA, which works with Israeli security, has struggled to control rising anger and militancy among Palestinians. As pointed out, the international community has attacked the policy multiple times. What do you think? https://lnkd.in/gKUqrXdf