In the movies “Stalag 17” and “Hart’s War,” some of the POW’s are involved in sabotage, which changes their status as far as their captors are concerned. Are POW’s prohibited from acts of sabotage by the Geneva Convention? Or were the Germans making their own rules?
Article 68, Geneva Convention:
The penal provisions promulgated by the Occupying Power in accordance with Articles 64 and 65 may impose the death penalty against a protected person only in cases where the person is guilty of espionage, of **serious acts of sabotage **against the military installations of the Occupying Power or of intentional offences which have caused the death of one or more persons, provided that such offences were punishable by death under the law of the occupied territory in force before the occupation began.
There’s the story that many escaping POWs were wearing at least part of their uniform under their disguise; that being caught in civilian clothes meant you could be shot as a spy, not treated as an enemy combatant.
Towards the end of the war, Germany took a hard line against escaped P.O.W.s. After the famous escape from Stalag Luft III, Hitler personally ordered that all recaptured officers were to be killed.
Edited title to better indicate subject.
Colibri
General Questions Moderator
Apparently one of the top brass in Berlin had a hairy canary over the Great Escape and specifically ordered a group of the recaptured ones executed.
On Ken Burns WWII doc some American soldiers admitted to killing German prisoners. German and USSR forces routinely murdered prisoners. Os this not pne unexplored aspect of WWII; the massive barbarity by the individual soldier?
Moderator Note
This is getting away from the question asked in the OP. Since this is GQ, let’s stick more closely to the question at hand.
Colibri
General Questions Moderator
OK…apologies for the digression.
I think when the Germans decided to kill POWs for various reasons it was just ad hoc. But you can put them to death under the Geneva Convention relating to POWs as cited–but you’re supposed to hold some sort of judicial hearing. There was a famous case of German soldiers housed in a camp in the United States where they considered one of their fellow soldiers a collaborator or something so they murdered him. They had hearings for the Germans involved and sentenced them to death for murder.
Its been a while since I’ve had any in depth Geneva Convention training, but IIRC, the general rule is that a POW is supposed to fall under the same military discipline as members of the detaining power. IOW, if a German POW, held in America, sets fire to a building on the POW camp, he can be tried by a military tribunal, just as American military personnel would be tried by court martial proceedings. If the German POW is on a work detail and sets fire to a building in the nearby town in order to create a diversion while he escapes, he could then be tried by a civlian court for arson, just as an American soldier walking around town setting fires could be tried. If found guilty by a civilian court, the POW would still be entitled to protection under the Geneva Convention. So a POW convicted by a civilan court may be held in a civilian prison, as long as those prison conditions are equivalent to those provided in the POW camp.
(bolding mine)
So, the POW is subject to any penalty/punishment that is applicable for the crime committed, after being tried and convicted for said crime, in a civilian court of law?
Yes, as long said penalty/punishment is applicable to members of the detaining power’s own military members. Likewise a POW also receives the same civil protections as members of the detaining power’s military. If Freedonian law says that Freedonian soldiers can’t be tried for shoplifting, then a POW in Freedonia can’t be tried for shoplifting. He could still be subject to disciplanary action for shoplifting in the POW camp if Freedonian law allows for military disciplinary action for Freedonian soldiers who shoplifts. If Freedonian law says a Freedonian soldier can be sentenced to twice the penalty of a civilian, than a POW could also receive twice the penaly of a civilian.
There’s a really interesting (if niche) book I read one time called Nazi Prisoners of War in America. In that book in a section on escape, it mentioned that the differing powers had separate opinions on this question. It’s not a crime for a POW to escape, as such, but apparently it’s more of an open question as to what other sorts of offenses a POW can permissibly commit while trying an escape. The US would charge escaping POWs with auto theft if they stole cars, but some of the other nations considered this as a legitimate part of an escape attempt. I don’t think any nation permitted POWs to commit any sort of violent offense without repercussions though.
IIRC the recaptured “Great Escape” prisoners were not implicated in any actual sabotage. They were simply killed in retaliation for their actons in embarassing the Reich.
There’s a well-known (in Canada) case of a group of Canadian soldiers captured on D-Day and excuted by a German squad. However, any such actions by front-line soldiers in the heat of battle are not usually indicative of official policy. It was most likely an on-the-spot decision by a local commander who did not want to tie up his squad managing a large number of prisoners. (Plus, a dash of sadism and viciousness)
My questions have definitely been answered. Thank you all, especially jtur88.
I was confused, because in the “Stalag 17” situation, if Dunbar had dropped a bomb on the ammo train, and then been captured, he would have been entitled to Geneva Convention protection. But sabotaging the train after being captured was apparently a criminal act.
“a hairy canary” that’s a new one on me. All I get on Google is a list of hair salons and restaurants.
It’s obviously the case that combatants are permitted to kill and steal enemy equipment while in combat status without committing an offense. E.g. if you and your buddies landed on Normandy beach, shot up a bunch of German soldiers, stole a German tank, ran over a German sergeant with it, then were caught trying to liberate Paris with it, the Germans weren’t supposed to charge you with murder, grand theft auto, and hit and run.
Are there any rules as to when an escaped POW has returned to combat status and is no longer an escaping POW subject to criminal jurisdiction? E.g. if I shank a Nazi guard and take his Luger and run into the wilderness, am I an American combatant again on the battlefield or do I need to “return to home base” or something in order to “reactivate”/“become a soldier again”/etc. and make my future actions legitimate?
“Congratulations, Corporal robert_columbia, you successfully escaped a Nazi POW camp. Place your hand on this pedestal here. By the power vested in my by the United States War Department, I return you to active duty status so you can kill more Germans without being charged with Murder under German law.”
It was more sadism and viciousness with the tiniest dash of not wanting to tie up troops guarding prisoners. 156 Canadian and 2 British POWs were murdered by the 12th SS Panzer Division* Hitlerjugend* in cold blood; there was nothing on-the-spot or in the heat of battle about it. Prior to this, in retaliation for two trains being derailed by a partisan bomb soldiers from the division rounded up and murdered 86 French civilians in the Ascq massacre.