Eritrea-Ethiopia Claims Commission - Partial Award: Prisoners of War - Eritrea's Claim 17

REPORTS OF INTERNATIONAL ARBITRAL AWARDS RECUEIL DES SENTENCES ARBITRALES Eritrea-Ethiopia Claims Commission - Partial Award: Prisoners of War - Eritrea's Claim 17 1 July 2003 VOLUME XXVI pp. 23-72 NATIONS UNIES - UNITED NATIONS Copyright (c) 2009 PART II Partial Award Prisoners of War—Eritrea’s Claim 17 Decision of 1 July 2003 Sentence partielle Prisonniers de guerre—Réclamation de l’Érythrée No 17 Décision du 1er juillet 2003 Partial Award, Prisoners of war—Eritrea’s claim 17, Decision of 1 july 2003 Sentence partielle, Prisonniers de guerre—Réclamation de l’Érythrée No 17, Décision du 1er juillet 2003 Jurisdiction of the Commission—determination of the liability of States for breaches of international obligations—liability only for serious violations of international humanitarian law affecting seeral victims—liability engaged only for systematic, frequent and recurring iolations—no jurisdiction oer indiidual crimes . Law in force during the armed conflict—Eritrea subject to customary humanitarian rules before becoming a party to Genea Conentions—customary status of international humanitarian rules as exemplified by the Genea Conentions—burden of proof on the State denying customary status to a specific proision of a Genea Conention . Succession to treaties—no automatic succession to Genea Conentions by Erit- rea after its separation from Ethiopia—rebuttal of the usual presumption in faour of succession in iew of the statements of Eritrea . Customary international humanitarian law principles—training soldiers to respect rules goerning treatment of POWs—preenting violations—inestigating and prosecuting iolations that occurred . Treatment of POWs—POWs’ surial and well-being considered as the principal objectie of humanitarian rules—standard of medical care contingent on the circum- stances and equipment aailable—scarcity of financial resources and infrastructure not an acceptable excuse for the lack of medical care—obliging POWs to walk barefoot during eacuations considered inhumane treatment—liability incurred as a result of permitting the confiscation of POWs‘ personal property without issuance of a receipt for its future return—systematic separation, segregation and compulsory indoctri- nation of POWs considered as mental abuse—absence of liability arising from poor conditions of detention not endangering the health of POWs—obligation to repatriate POWs diligently—reciprocity not required for repatriation of POWs—a request for clarification of the fate of a number of missing combatants deemed a reasonable and appropriate request, as well as the suspension of repatriation . Question of eidence—requirement of clear and conincing eidence for crimes of a certain graity—burden of proof on the claimant—credit accorded to cumulatie, reinforcing and detailed testimonies . Claim filing proceedings—clear statement of facts—clear identification of violations of international law—necessity to gie to the other Party a fair warning of claims presented and a possibility to reply—further refinement of legal theory or detailed presentation of facts not considered as an additional claim—requirement of balanced and informed arbitration proceedings . 26 eritrea/ethiopia Remedy—monetary compensation for stolen personal property of POWs—restitution not considered as in accordance with international practice nor as appropriate or effectie . Compétence de la Commission—détermination de la responsabilité étatique pour violation d’obligations internationales—responsabilité limitée aux violations importantes du droit international humanitaire affectant plusieurs victimes—respon- sabilité uniquement engagée pour des violations systématiques, fréquentes et récur- rentes—absence de compétence s’agissant des crimes indiiduels . Droit en vigueur pendant le conflit armé—Érythrée soumise aux règles du droit international humanitaire coutumier aant même de deenir Partie aux Conentions de Genèe—caractère coutumier de règles humanitaires internationales tel qu’illustré par les Conentions de Genèe—charge de la preue reposant sur l’État réfutant le cara- ctère coutumier d’une disposition particulière de l’une des Conentions de Genèe . Succession aux traités—absence de succession automatique de l’Érythrée aux Conentions de Genèe après sa séparation d’aec l’Éthiopie—réfutation de la présomp- tion habituelle en faeur de la succession résultant des déclarations de l’Érythrée . Principes du droit international humanitaire coutumier—formation des soldats à respecter les règles relaties au traitement des prisonniers—préention des infractions— inestigations et mise en oeure de poursuites à l’égard de violations ayant eu lieu . Traitement des prisonniers—surie et bien-être des prisonniers considérés comme objectif principal des règles humanitaires—standard des soins médicaux dépendant des circonstances et de l’équipement disponible— réfutation de l’argument selon lequel le manque de ressources financières et d’infrastructures serait une excuse acceptable pour le manque de prise en charge médicale—assimilation de l’obligation pour les prisonniers de marcher pieds-nus lors des éacuations à un traitement inhumain— responsabilité engagée par la confiscation des affaires personnelles des prisonniers sans reçu permettant leur future restitution—séparation systématique, ségrégation et l’endoctrinement obligatoire des prisonniers assimilés à des séices moraux—absence de responsabilité pour de mauaises conditions de détention des prisonniers ne met- tant pas en danger leur santé—obligation de rapatrier les prisonniers de manière dili- gente—pas de réciprocité exigée en matière de rapatriement de prisonniers—demande d’éclaircissement relatie au sort de plusieurs combattants disparus considérée comme raisonnable et appropriée, de même que la suspension consécutie du rapatriement . Question des preues—nécessité de preues claires et conaincantes pour les crimes d’une certaine graité—charge de la preue reposant sur le plaignant—crédit accordé aux témoignages cumulatifs, complémentaires et détaillés . Procédure de soumission de réclamation—claire exposition des faits—claire identification des violations du droit international—nécessité de donner à l’autre Partie une indication sur les réclamations présentées ainsi qu’une possibilité d’y répondre— affinement subséquent de la théorie juridique ou présentation plus détaillée des faits non considérés comme une nouelle plainte—nécessité d’une procédure d’arbitrage pondérée et informée . Part II—prisoners of war eritrea’s claim 17 27 Réparation—indemnisation pécuniaire pour la confiscation des effets personnels des prisonniers—restitution non considérée comme conforme à la pratique interna- tionale, ni appropriée ou adéquate . ERITREA-ETHIOPIA CLAIMS COMMISSION PARTIAL AWARD Prisoners of War Eritrea’s Claim 17 between The State of Eritrea and The Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia By the Claims Commission, composed of: Hans an Houtte, President George H . Aldrich John R . Crook James C .N . Paul Lucy Reed The Hague, July 1, 2003 PARTIAL AWARD—Prisoners of War—Eritrea’s Claim 17 between the Claimant, The State of Eritrea, represented by: Government of Eritrea His Excellency, Ali Said Abdela, Minister of Foreign Affairs, Agent for the Goernmentof Eritrea Professor Lea Brilmayer, Co-Agent for the Goernment of Eritrea Counsel and Consultants Professor James Crawford Mr . Payam Akhaan Ms . Semhar Araia 28 eritrea/ethiopia Ms . Megan Munzert Ms . Amanda Jones and the Respondent, The Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia, represented by: Government of Ethiopia His Excellency Mr . Seyoum Mesfin, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia, Agent His Excellency Ambassador Fisseha Yimer, Permanent Representatie of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia to the United Nations, Genea, Co-Agent Mr . Seifeselassie Lemma, Minister, Permanent Mission of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia to the United Nations, New York Mr . Reta Alemu, First Secretary, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Fed- eral Democratic Republic of Ethiopia, Addis Ababa Counsel and Consultants Mr . B . Donoan Picard, Piper Rudnick LLP, Washington, D C. ;. Member of the Bar of the District of Columbia; Member of the Bar of the Supreme Court of the United States Mr . W . DeVier Pierson, Piper Rudnick LLP, Washington, D C. ;. Member of the Bar of the District of Columbia; Member of the Bar of the Supreme Court of the United States Professor Sean D . Murphy, George Washington Uniersity Law School, Washington, D C. .; Member of the State Bar of Maryland Mr . Knox Bemis, Piper Rudnick LLP, Washington, D C. .; Member of the Bar of the District of Columbia; Member of the Bar of the Supreme Court of the United States Ms . Lynn M . Van Buren, Piper Rudnick LLP, Washington, D C. ;. Member of the Bar of the District of Columbia; Member of the State Bar of Wisconsin Mr . Michael McDonald, Piper Rudnick LLP, Washington, D C. Part II—prisoners of war eritrea’s claim 17 29 TABLE OF CONTENTS I . Introduction . 30 A . Summary of the Positions of the Parties . 30 B . Ethiopian POW Camps . 30 C . General Comment by the Commission . 31 II . Proceedings . 32 III . Jurisdiction . 32 A . Jurisdiction oer Claims Arising Subsequent to December 12, 2000 . 32 B . Jurisdiction oer Claims Not Filed by December 12, 2001 . 35 C . Additional Relief . 37 IV . The Merits . 37 A . Applicable Law . 37 B . Eidentiary Issues . 40 1 . Quantum of Proof Required . 40 2 . Proof of Facts . 41 3 . Eidence under the Control of the ICRC . 42 C . Violations of the

Load more