5cjxburmr

operations, and provision for transfer of captured persons to coalition partners who areconducting humane detention operations). 108.1.3.2 Specific Procedures or Restrictions Applicable to Detention Outside theContext of POW or Protected Person Internment. Ad hoc legal instruments may provideadditional procedures or restrictions applicable to detention outside the context of the internmentof POWs or protected persons. For example, special agreements between opposing non-Stateparties to a conflict could be used to bring into force provisions of the GPW or GC for thepurposes of that conflict. 11 As another example, agreements among coalition partners regardingthe transfer of detainees between one another might prescribe additional requirements.8.1.4 Sources of Baseline Standards for the Treatment of Detainees. The baselinestandards for the treatment of detainees by U.S. armed forces addressed in this Chapter arederived from Common Article 3 of the 1949 Geneva Conventions, applicable customaryinternational law, and applicable U.S. law and national policy. The principle of humanityanimates the rules discussed in this Chapter. 12 In addition, analogous provisions of the GPW andthe GC may also be helpful in understanding the baseline rules for detention.8.1.4.1 Common Article 3 of the 1949 Geneva Conventions. Although CommonArticle 3 of the 1949 Geneva Conventions provides that it applies “[i]n the case of armed conflictnot of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High ContractingParties,” Common Article 3 reflects minimum standards for humane treatment that apply to allmilitary operations. 13 Thus, during both international and non-international armed conflict,Common Article 3 reflects a minimum yardstick of humane treatment protections for “allpersons taking no active part in hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laiddown their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any othercause.” 14 DoD policy has explicitly incorporated the standards in Common Article 3 as minimumstandards. 1510 Refer to § 5.5.7 (Prohibition Against Declaring That No Quarter Be Given).11 Refer to § 17.3 (Special Agreements Between Parties to the Conflict).12 Refer to § 2.3 (Humanity).13 Refer to § 3.1.1.2 (Applying Law of War Standards as Reflecting Minimum Legal Standards).14 GWS art. 3; GWS-SEA art. 3 (same); GPW art. 3 (same); GC art. 3 (same). See Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, 548 U.S.557, 630-31 (2006) (explaining that Common Article 3 provides “some minimal protection” in all armed conflicts);Military and Paramilitary Activities in and Against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States), Merits, Judgment, 1986I.C.J. 14, 114 (218) (explaining that the rules in Common Article 3 of the 1949 Geneva Conventions “constitute aminimum yardstick,” in all armed conflicts and reflect “elementary considerations of humanity”) (quoting CorfuChannel Case (United Kingdom v. Albania), Merits, Judgment, 1949 I.C.J. 4, 22).15 For example, DOD DIRECTIVE 2310.01E, DoD Detainee Program, 3a (Aug. 19, 2014) (“Until a detainee’srelease, repatriation, or transfer from DoD custody or control, all persons subject to this directive will, withoutregard to a detainee’s legal status, at a minimum apply: (1) The standards established in Common Article 3 toReferences (b) through (e).”); DOD DIRECTIVE 2310.01E, The Department of Defense Detainee Program, 4.1-4.2(Sept. 5, 2006) (requiring that all detainees “be treated humanely” and “shall receive, at a minimum, the standard oftreatment discussed in Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions”).489