5cjxburmr

9.23.1.1 Making Requests and Complaints to the ICRC. Such complaints mayalso be made to the delegates of the ICRC who enjoy the same prerogatives of access as therepresentatives of the Protecting Power. 526 In the past, the ICRC has been able to takeappropriate measures besides merely forwarding the complaint to the Power on which the POWsdepend, including measures on a confidential basis that help improve the situations of POWs. 5279.23.2 Communication of Requests and Complaints. These requests and complaints shallneither be limited nor considered to be part of the correspondence quota referred to in Article 71of the GPW. 528 They must be transmitted immediately. 5299.23.2.1 Review and Censorship of Requests and Complaints by the DetainingPower. Complaints and requests by the POWs that are to be transmitted to the representatives ofthe Protecting Power may be reviewed and censored for security reasons by the DetainingPower, although the right of the POWs to make complaints about their conditions of captivity tothe representatives of the Protecting Power must not be restricted. 530 In addition, security reviewand censorship must be conducted in accordance with the general rules on censoring POWcorrespondence. 5319.23.2.2 No Punishment for Making Complaints. Even if the complaints arerecognized to be unfounded, they may not give rise to any punishment. 532 This rule departs fromthe usual practice in armed forces, in which excessive use of the right of complaint within a526 Refer to § 9.33.1.2 (ICRC Delegates Enjoying the Same Prerogatives of Access).527 For example, I REPORT OF THE INTERNATIONAL COMMITTEE OF THE RED CROSS ON ITS ACTIVITIES DURING THESECOND WORLD WAR (SEPTEMBER 1, 1939 – JUNE 30, 1947) 342 (1948) (“On receiving a complaint [from POWs],the ICRC sought the most appropriate means in its power to put right the matter complained of, first verifying as faras possible the genuine foundation of the grievance. … The Committee was more concerned with finding somepractical remedy for the deficiencies complained of than with bringing them to the notice of the PW’s own country,as there was always a possible risk of provoking reprisals. In some cases, it made immediate representations,usually to the person or officials of the Detaining Power directly concerned, but sometimes also to higher authority.In other cases it instructed its delegates to take appropriate steps on the spot to bring about an improvement. Theseconstant daily efforts, though often never heard of, are probably among the most useful services that the Committeewas able to render to PW.”).528 GPW art. 78 (“These requests and complaints shall not be limited nor considered to be a part of thecorrespondence quota referred to in Article 71.”). Refer to § 9.20.2 (POW Correspondence Rights and Quota).529 GPW art. 78 (“They must be transmitted immediately.”).530 GPW COMMENTARY 384 (“The problem is to reconcile the Detaining Power’s own security requirements withthe need to ensure that the right of complaint can be effectively exercised. For reasons of security, the DetainingPower must obviously make sure that prisoners of war do not use it as a means of communication with the outsideworld. The Conference of Government Experts therefore rejected the suggestion that the words ‘withoutamendment’ should be added to the obligation to transmit complaints. Such an addition would have resulted indoing away with censorship, and the Detaining Power could not agree to that. The authors of the Conventionconsidered, however, that matters concerning only the ‘conditions of captivity’ could be mentioned withoutrestriction, and the wording adopted seemed best suited to take into account both the interests of the prisoners of warand the Detaining Power’s own security requirements.”).531 Refer to § 9.20.6 (Censorship and Security Review of POW Correspondence and Shipments).532 GPW art. 78 (“Even if they are recognized to be unfounded, they may not give rise to any punishment.”).583