本文選題：關塔那摩基地阿富汗戰(zhàn)俘　切入點：1949年《日內瓦四公約》　出處：《湘潭大學》2011年碩士論文

【摘要】：2001年“9·11”恐怖事件發(fā)生后,以美國為首的聯(lián)軍針對阿富汗開展了軍事打擊行動。戰(zhàn)爭結束后,美軍抓獲將近600名阿富汗“基地”組織成員和塔利班士兵并將這部分人移轉至位于古巴關塔那摩的美國海軍軍事基地進行關押和審問。2009年初,美國總統(tǒng)奧巴馬簽署一年內關閉關塔那摩監(jiān)獄的行政命令,使得被關押在美國關塔那摩基地阿富汗囚犯的“戰(zhàn)俘”身份問題受到國際社會的關注。有人認為,奧巴馬這一舉措意味著美國已經承認關塔那摩基地中的被關押人員具有戰(zhàn)俘的地位。然而,美國政府仍然認為關押在關塔那摩的被押人員是“非法交戰(zhàn)者”,不具有戰(zhàn)俘身份,不能享有1949年《關于戰(zhàn)俘待遇的日內瓦公約》(《日內瓦第三公約》)中規(guī)定的戰(zhàn)俘權利。在關塔那摩基地阿富汗囚犯的戰(zhàn)俘身份確定不明的情況下,美國政府沒能建立國際人道法所要求的主管法庭并審查其地位,而是將他們關押在關塔那摩,既不起訴也不釋放。同時,在關押審訊時,也沒有給予關塔納摩基地阿富汗囚犯應有的人道待遇。不管是從人道法的角度,還是從人權法的角度,美國剝奪關塔那摩基地阿富汗囚犯戰(zhàn)俘地位的行為顯然違背了國際人道法和國際人權法。文章主要從三個方面展開研究:首先,從國際人道法的角度來看,阿富汗戰(zhàn)爭是一場國際性武裝沖突,1949年《日內瓦四公約》適用于交戰(zhàn)的各方,因此也適用于阿富汗沖突中被俘的“基地”組織成員和塔利班士兵。其次,遵照《日內瓦第三公約》和《第一附加議定書》的有關規(guī)定,關塔納摩基地阿富汗“基地”組織成員和塔利班士兵應被推定為戰(zhàn)俘而享有相應待遇和保護。對于戰(zhàn)俘地位存有疑問的被關押人員,應由《日內瓦第三公約》規(guī)定的主管法庭對阿富汗囚犯的戰(zhàn)俘身份進行認定。最后,在認定關塔納摩阿富汗囚犯具有戰(zhàn)俘身份后,文章認為關塔納摩阿富汗囚犯應享有《日內瓦第三公約》規(guī)定的戰(zhàn)俘待遇,并且提出了關塔納摩阿富汗囚犯戰(zhàn)俘待遇實現(xiàn)的途徑。
[Abstract]:After the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001, the United States-led coalition forces launched a military strike against Afghanistan. The US military captured nearly 600 Afghan al-Qaida members and Taliban soldiers and transferred them to a US naval base in Guantanamo, Cuba, for detention and interrogation in early 2009. U.S. President Barack Obama has signed an executive order to close Guantanamo prison within a year, drawing international attention to the issue of "prisoner" status of Afghan prisoners held at the Guantanamo base in the United States. Obama's move means the United States has recognized the detainees at Guantanamo as prisoners of war. However, the administration still considers the detainees in Guantanamo "illegal belligerents" and not prisoners of war. Not entitled to the rights of prisoners of war as provided for in the 1949 Geneva Convention relative to the treatment of prisoners of War (the third Geneva Convention)... in cases where the identity of Afghan prisoners at Guant 謾 namo Base is unknown, The United States Government failed to establish the competent courts required by international humanitarian law and to review their status, and instead detained them in Guantanamo, neither for prosecution nor for release... at the same time, during detention and interrogation, Nor have the Afghan prisoners at Guantanamo been given the humane treatment they deserve, whether from the point of view of humanitarian law or from the point of view of human rights law, The deprivation by the United States of the status of prisoners of war in Afghanistan at Guant 謾 namo Base is clearly contrary to international humanitarian law and international human rights law. The article mainly focuses on three aspects: first, from the perspective of international humanitarian law, The war in Afghanistan is an international armed conflict, and the 1949 Geneva Conventions apply to belligerents and, therefore, to members of Al-Qaida and Taliban soldiers captured in the Afghan conflict... second, Guided by the relevant provisions of the third Geneva Convention and additional Protocol I, Members of Al Qaeda in Afghanistan and Taliban soldiers at the Guantanamo base shall be presumed to be prisoners of war and shall enjoy corresponding treatment and protection... detainees whose status of prisoners of war is in doubt, It is for the competent courts under the third Geneva Convention to determine the status of Afghan prisoners as prisoners of war. Finally, after determining that the Afghan prisoners of Guantanamo have the status of prisoners of war, The article holds that the Afghan prisoners of Guantanamo should enjoy the treatment of prisoners of war stipulated in the third Geneva Convention, and puts forward a way to realize the treatment of Afghan prisoners of war in Guantanamo.
【學位授予單位】：湘潭大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2011
【分類號】：D995

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前10條

1 李壽平;;試論“虐俘”行為的國際責任[J];北京理工大學學報(社會科學版);2006年01期

2 趙秉志,王秀梅;美軍虐囚事件中的國際刑法問題[J];法學;2005年05期

3 趙秉志;趙書鴻;;國家安全的強勢保護與人權保障的極度旁落——《2006年美國軍事審判委員會法令》解讀與評釋[J];法學;2007年02期

4 郭曉兵;;關塔那摩被羈押人員現(xiàn)狀[J];國際資料信息;2006年08期

5 邢廣梅,鄭定;戰(zhàn)俘待遇規(guī)則的發(fā)展、內容及美國虐囚事件的違法性[J];甘肅政法學院學報;2004年05期

6 趙云;戰(zhàn)俘的遣返問題探究[J];時代法學;2004年06期

7 黃孝禹;;淺析當代國際反恐作戰(zhàn)中的戰(zhàn)俘保護問題[J];學理論;2009年30期

8 王海濱;;關塔那摩監(jiān)獄的前身今世[J];社會觀察;2009年03期

9 鐘振明;;美國政府“反恐戰(zhàn)”政策對國際法的消極影響[J];社會科學;2008年05期

10 黃列;國際人道法概述[J];外國法譯評;2000年04期

相關碩士學位論文 前1條

1 蔣洪勇;戰(zhàn)俘問題與朝鮮停戰(zhàn)[D];華中師范大學;2005年

，

本文編號：1672534