https://ojs.revistaclio.es/index.php/edicionesclio/
BY: se debe dar crédito al creador.
NC: Solo se permiten usos no comerciales de la obra.
SA: Las adaptaciones deben compartirse bajo los mismos términos.
Recibido: 2025-04-04 Aceptado: 2025-05-26
Página 1856
Legal analysis of gaps in the protection of prisoners of
war in view of the historical aspects
Druchek, Olena
1
Correo: olenadruchek@gmail.com
Orcid: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7460-8137
Polunina, Lilia
2
Correo: larkal1835@gmail.com
Orcid: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8898-2162
Koba, Mariia
3
Correo: mari.anna.nerozna@gmail.com
Orcid: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9407-2838
Beikun, Andrii
4
Correo: andrijbejkun2@gmail.com
Orcid: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2016-2077
Kondratyuk-Antonova, Tetyana
5
Correo: tetiana.n.1000@gmail.com
Orcid: https://orcid.org/0009-0002-6548-7772
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15598067
Abstract
The study of legal gaps in the protection of prisoners of war (POWs) is relevant
in the context of current armed conflicts, in particular Russia‘s war against
1
Associate Professor, PhD in Law, Department of Legal Support and Law Enforcement Activities of the
Faculty of State Security of the Kyiv Institute of the National Guard of Ukraine.
2
Associate Professor, PhD in Law, Department of Legal Support and Law Enforcement of the Faculty of
State Security of the Kyiv Institute of the National Guard of Ukraine.
3
Associate Professor, PhD in Law, Department of Legal Support and Law Enforcement Activities, Faculty
of State Security, Kyiv Institute of the National Guard of Ukraine.
4
Associate Professor, PhD in Law, Department of Legal Support of the National Guard of Ukraine of the
Faculty of State Security of the Kyiv Institute of the National Guard of Ukraine.
5
Associate Professor, PhD in Philosophical sciences, Department of Social, Humanitarian and Legal
Disciplines of the Faculty of State Security of the Kyiv Institute of the National Guard of Ukraine.
Sección: Artículo científico 2025, julio-diciembre, año 5, No. 10, 1856-1886
Clío. Revista de Historia, Ciencias Humanas y Pensamiento Crítico
ISSN: 2660-9037 / Provincia de Pontevedra - España
Druchek, Olena
Polunina, Lilia
Koba, Mariia
Beikun, Andrii
Kondratyuk-Antonova, Tetyana
Legal analysis of gaps in the protection of
prisoners of war in view of the historical
Aspects
Página 1857
Año 5, No. 10, julio-diciembre, 2025
Página 1857
Ukraine, which is accompanied by massive violations of international
humanitarian law. The analysis of the regulatory framework identified its
shortcomings and assessed the effectiveness of international mechanisms for
monitoring the observance of the rights of prisoners of war. The aim of the study
was to identify legal gaps in international humanitarian law and assess the
effectiveness of law enforcement practice in cases of war crimes. The study
employed the following methods: content analysis of international legal acts and
court decisions, case studies of modern armed conflict, interviews with military
experts and human rights defenders. The results showed that the Geneva
Conventions and other international treaties contain contradictions that allow
avoiding responsibility for crimes against prisoners of war. An analysis of
historical conflicts, including World War II, the wars in Vietnam and the
Balkans, confirmed the systemic nature of the problem of ineffective law
enforcement. Numerous cases of torture, ill-treatment and extrajudicial
executions of Ukrainian POWs have been recorded in the current conflict, which
indicates the need to reform international law. The study confirmed the
insufficient effectiveness of existing mechanisms for monitoring and punishing
war crimes, as the implementation of decisions of international courts depends
on the political will of states. The academic novelty of the study is the
comprehensive analysis of current violations of the POWs‘ rights, taking into
account historical aspects and international judicial practice. The study
supplemented the theoretical framework with new facts about the trends in
violations of the POWs‘ rights and the effectiveness of international response
mechanisms. Further research may focus on the analysis of the impact of
international sanctions on compliance with humanitarian law, an assessment of
changes in international law after the end of the conflict, and the development of
new mechanisms for bringing to justice for war crimes.
Keywords: international humanitarian law, war crimes, Geneva Conventions,
law enforcement, international tribunals, military conflict, human rights
mechanisms.
Clío. Revista de Historia, Ciencias Humanas y Pensamiento Crítico
ISSN: 2660-9037 / Provincia de Pontevedra - España
Druchek, Olena
Polunina, Lilia
Koba, Mariia
Beikun, Andrii
Kondratyuk-Antonova, Tetyana
Legal analysis of gaps in the protection of
prisoners of war in view of the historical
Aspects
Página 1858
Año 5, No. 10, julio-diciembre, 2025
Página 1858
Análisis jurídico de las lagunas en la protección de los prisioneros
de guerra a la vista de los aspectos históricos
Resumen
El estudio de las lagunas jurídicas en la protección de los prisioneros de guerra
es pertinente en el contexto de los conflictos armados actuales, en particular la
guerra de Rusia contra Ucrania, que va acompañada de violaciones masivas del
Derecho Internacional Humanitario. El análisis del marco normativo permitió
identificar sus carencias y evaluar la eficacia de los mecanismos internacionales
de control del respeto de los derechos de los prisioneros de guerra. El objetivo
del estudio era identificar las lagunas jurídicas del derecho internacional
humanitario y evaluar la eficacia de la práctica policial en los casos de crímenes
de guerra. El estudio empleó los siguientes métodos: análisis de contenido de
actos jurídicos internacionales y decisiones judiciales, estudios de casos de
conflictos armados modernos, entrevistas con expertos militares y defensores de
los derechos humanos. Los resultados mostraron que los Convenios de Ginebra y
otros tratados internacionales contienen contradicciones que permiten eludir la
responsabilidad por crímenes contra prisioneros de guerra. El análisis de
conflictos históricos, como la Segunda Guerra Mundial, las guerras de Vietnam
y los Balcanes, confirmó el carácter sistémico del problema de la ineficacia de la
aplicación de la ley. En el conflicto actual se han registrado numerosos casos de
tortura, malos tratos y ejecuciones extrajudiciales de prisioneros de guerra
ucranianos, lo que indica la necesidad de reformar el derecho internacional. El
estudio confirma la insuficiente eficacia de los mecanismos existentes para
vigilar y castigar los crímenes de guerra, ya que la aplicación de las decisiones
de los tribunales internacionales depende de la voluntad política de los Estados.
La novedad académica del estudio es el análisis exhaustivo de las violaciones
actuales de los derechos de los prisioneros de guerra, teniendo en cuenta los
aspectos históricos y la práctica judicial internacional. El estudio complementa el
marco teórico con nuevos datos sobre las tendencias de las violaciones de los
derechos de los prisioneros de guerra y la eficacia de los mecanismos
internacionales de respuesta. Futuras investigaciones podrían centrarse en el
análisis del impacto de las sanciones internacionales sobre el cumplimiento del
derecho humanitario, la evaluación de los cambios en el derecho internacional
tras el final del conflicto y el desarrollo de nuevos mecanismos de
enjuiciamiento de los crímenes de guerra.
Clío. Revista de Historia, Ciencias Humanas y Pensamiento Crítico
ISSN: 2660-9037 / Provincia de Pontevedra - España
Druchek, Olena
Polunina, Lilia
Koba, Mariia
Beikun, Andrii
Kondratyuk-Antonova, Tetyana
Legal analysis of gaps in the protection of
prisoners of war in view of the historical
Aspects
Página 1859
Año 5, No. 10, julio-diciembre, 2025
Página 1859
Palabras clave: derecho internacional humanitario, crímenes de guerra,
Convenciones de Ginebra, aplicación de la ley, tribunales internacionales,
conflictos militares, mecanismos de derechos humanos.
Introduction
The problem of protecting the POWs‘ rights remains one of the key in
international humanitarian law, especially in view of current armed conflicts.
Despite the existence of a developed system of international norms, including the
Geneva Conventions for the Protection of War Victims of 1949, the Rome
Statute of the International Criminal Court (2021) and a number of other
international agreements, ensuring the legal protection of POWs remains a
significant problem. Analysis of historical examples and modern violations
shows that the effectiveness of law enforcement mechanisms is extremely
limited, and many states participating in armed conflicts ignore the international
obligations they have undertaken. This is confirmed both by facts from the
history of the 20th century and by current events related to Russia‘s war against
Ukraine.
Past military conflicts, including World War II, the Vietnam War, and the
Balkan Wars of the 1990‘s, revealed significant violations of the POWs‘ rights
and gaps in international law. The Nuremberg and Tokyo Tribunals were the
first steps in establishing accountability, but they were applied only after the
wars had ended, failing to prevent crimes.
The Vietnam War revealed the problem of unequal status of prisoners of
war, as guerrilla fighters were not always recognized as combatants. The Balkan
conflicts led to the creation of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former
Clío. Revista de Historia, Ciencias Humanas y Pensamiento Crítico
ISSN: 2660-9037 / Provincia de Pontevedra - España
Druchek, Olena
Polunina, Lilia
Koba, Mariia
Beikun, Andrii
Kondratyuk-Antonova, Tetyana
Legal analysis of gaps in the protection of
prisoners of war in view of the historical
Aspects
Página 1860
Año 5, No. 10, julio-diciembre, 2025
Página 1860
Yugoslavia (ICTY), which tried war criminals for the first time since World War
II, although its activities were limited.
Analysing Russia‘s current war against Ukraine, we can observe similar
trends, where international law remains powerless in the face of large-scale
violations of the rights of prisoners of war. Numerous cases of torture, ill-
treatment, extrajudicial executions, and deportations of Ukrainian POWs have
been documented by international human rights organizations, including the
United Nations (UN) in Ukraine, the International Committee of the Red Cross,
Amnesty International Ukraine, and Human Rights Watch. However, effective
accountability mechanisms remain weak. The Russian Federation does not
recognize the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court (ICC) (2024),
which makes it impossible to automatically prosecute war criminals, and also
blocks access of international organizations to places where prisoners are held.
The case law of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) and the ICC
sets standards for the enforcement of prisoners of war, but their implementation
remains problematic, especially if the aggressor state ignores international
mechanisms. Russia‘s withdrawal from the Council of Europe (CE) in 2022
eliminated the possibility of legal protection for prisoners through the ECHR.
The sanctions mechanism is ineffective without the political will of states,
and if the aggressor state does not recognize the jurisdiction of international
courts, punishing criminals becomes difficult. This emphasizes the need to
reform international humanitarian law and create effective mechanisms for
enforcing its norms.
Clío. Revista de Historia, Ciencias Humanas y Pensamiento Crítico
ISSN: 2660-9037 / Provincia de Pontevedra - España
Druchek, Olena
Polunina, Lilia
Koba, Mariia
Beikun, Andrii
Kondratyuk-Antonova, Tetyana
Legal analysis of gaps in the protection of
prisoners of war in view of the historical
Aspects
Página 1861
Año 5, No. 10, julio-diciembre, 2025
Página 1861
The legal aspects are also complemented by humanitarian challenges:
medical care, detention conditions, POWs‘ exchange, and access for
international observers. Russia‘s war against Ukraine demonstrates that prisoner
exchanges are irregular and politicized, and international pressure has not yet led
to a systemic improvement in the situation.
The aim of the study is to identify the main legal gaps in international
humanitarian law regarding the protection of POWs, assess the effectiveness of
law enforcement mechanisms, and develop recommendations for improving
legal procedures for the protection of POWs.
The aim was achieved through the fulfilment of the following research
objectives:
- Conduct an analysis of international legal instruments regulating the protection
of POWs, including the Geneva Conventions, the Rome Statute, and decisions of
the ECHR and the ICC, to identify contradictions and legal gaps.
- Study specific cases of violations of the POW‘s rights in the Russian war
against Ukraine based on reports from human rights organizations and assess the
effectiveness of existing international response mechanisms.
1. Literature review
The protection of the POWs‘ rights is one of the most important topics for
discussion in modern international humanitarian law. Different researchers cover
both the achievements and shortcomings of existing protection mechanisms,
proposing different approaches to solving the identified problems.
Clío. Revista de Historia, Ciencias Humanas y Pensamiento Crítico
ISSN: 2660-9037 / Provincia de Pontevedra - España
Druchek, Olena
Polunina, Lilia
Koba, Mariia
Beikun, Andrii
Kondratyuk-Antonova, Tetyana
Legal analysis of gaps in the protection of
prisoners of war in view of the historical
Aspects
Página 1862
Año 5, No. 10, julio-diciembre, 2025
Página 1862
Helemey (2023) criticizes the ineffectiveness of ―humanitarian diplomacy‖
in the protection of POWs, noting that the Geneva Conventions do not have
enforcement mechanisms, and humanitarian missions, in particular the ICRC,
cannot really influence the parties to the conflict.
In Keeping POWs Safe, Meron (2021) also points to the problem of states‘
failure to comply with international obligations, but suggests practical measures,
including strengthening sanctions against violators of POWs‘ rights.
Hamza et al. (2023) analyse the classification and legal protection of
POWs, emphasizing the problem of the ambiguity of their status, especially in
conflicts involving irregular forces. They propose updating the Geneva
Conventions to take into account new types of wars.
In Protection of Prisoners in Armed Conflict, Bothe et al. (2021) examines
the difficulties in implementing the Geneva Conventions, in particular the
politicization of the issue of POWs, which complicates humanitarian initiatives
and prisoner exchanges.
In Status of Prisoners of War in the Contemporary World, Jha (2024)
analyses the impact of modern conflicts on the status of POWs, drawing
attention to the challenges associated with the fight against terrorism and
asymmetric wars, where traditional legal norms are ineffective.
Jacques (2020) offers a historical analysis of the protection of POWs, in
particular, he examines the cases of survival of Jewish POWs in German
captivity during World War II. The author notes that even under the brutal
conditions of the Nazi regime, certain groups of POWs had a relatively higher
Clío. Revista de Historia, Ciencias Humanas y Pensamiento Crítico
ISSN: 2660-9037 / Provincia de Pontevedra - España
Druchek, Olena
Polunina, Lilia
Koba, Mariia
Beikun, Andrii
Kondratyuk-Antonova, Tetyana
Legal analysis of gaps in the protection of
prisoners of war in view of the historical
Aspects
Página 1863
Año 5, No. 10, julio-diciembre, 2025
Página 1863
chance of survival if their status was recognized in accordance with international
norms.
Hunt (2021) in Prisoner Regimes and a Transnational History from Below
analyses the changes in prisoner of war regimes in the international context,
noting that states adapt the rules for the treatment of prisoners in accordance
with their own interests, even despite the existence of international norms.
Petrilionis (2024), in Under the Law and Customs of War, emphasizes that
the problem is not in the absence of a regulatory framework, but in ineffective
mechanisms for enforcing international obligations.
Morieux (2021), in Author‘s Response: Some Thoughts on War Prisons,
examines the historical development of approaches to POEs, emphasizing that
the gap between international law and its implementation has always existed. He
believes that the problem goes beyond the control of treaty implementation and
is related to the nature of war, where humanitarian norms are subordinated to
political and military goals.
In Protection of a Dignity of Prisoners of War, Myl-Chojnacka (2022)
emphasizes that international law should not only physically protect POWs, but
also guarantee their dignity, which remains insufficiently developed in
international instruments.
Bechor et al. (2023) in What Do We Know about the Treatment of
Prisoners of War? draw attention to the lack of real control over the conditions of
detention of prisoners. They emphasize that states often manipulate their status
for political purposes, proposing to strengthen monitoring missions and sanctions
pressure.
Clío. Revista de Historia, Ciencias Humanas y Pensamiento Crítico
ISSN: 2660-9037 / Provincia de Pontevedra - España
Druchek, Olena
Polunina, Lilia
Koba, Mariia
Beikun, Andrii
Kondratyuk-Antonova, Tetyana
Legal analysis of gaps in the protection of
prisoners of war in view of the historical
Aspects
Página 1864
Año 5, No. 10, julio-diciembre, 2025
Página 1864
In Legal Status of Prisoners of War in Ukraine, Mytska (2023) analyses
Russian war crimes against Ukrainian prisoners, including torture and
deportation. She assesses the effectiveness of the international response,
focusing on a specific conflict, in contrast to researchers who study general legal
aspects.
2. Methods and materials
The study was conducted in three stages aimed at analysing legal gaps in
the protection of POWs, taking into account historical aspects, in particular in
the context of the current war between Russia and Ukraine.
The first stage involved a theoretical analysis of international legal acts
regulating the status and protection of POWs. The regulatory legal documents
subject to analysis included the Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of
Prisoners of War and its Additional Protocol I, which are the main international
legal acts on the protection of POWs in armed conflicts. The provisions of the
Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, which defines the legal
principles for bringing to justice for war crimes, including the cruel treatment of
POWs, were analysed. Particular attention was paid to the provisions of the UN
Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment
or Punishment (1984), which sets international standards for the prohibition of
torture, particularly against persons held in captivity. The European Convention
on Human Rights and the case law of the ECHR were also examined in the
context of cases involving the ill-treatment of POWs.
The second stage included an empirical study based on the case study
method. The main attention was paid to the analysis of violations of the POWs‘
Clío. Revista de Historia, Ciencias Humanas y Pensamiento Crítico
ISSN: 2660-9037 / Provincia de Pontevedra - España
Druchek, Olena
Polunina, Lilia
Koba, Mariia
Beikun, Andrii
Kondratyuk-Antonova, Tetyana
Legal analysis of gaps in the protection of
prisoners of war in view of the historical
Aspects
Página 1865
Año 5, No. 10, julio-diciembre, 2025
Página 1865
rights in the modern war of Russia against Ukraine. Official reports of
international organizations were used, in particular the United Nations, the
International Committee of the Red Cross, Amnesty International, Human Rights
Watch, which contain documented cases of torture, enforced disappearances,
executions of POWs, as well as an assessment of the effectiveness of legal
mechanisms for their protection. The historical context of the study included the
analysis of similar cases during World War II, the conflicts in Vietnam and the
Balkans in the 1990‘s in order to assess the evolution of legal regulation and the
shortcomings of human rights mechanisms in different periods.
The third stage involved a content analysis of legal documents, court
decisions, and reports of human rights organizations using systematic coding of
violations. Quantitative and qualitative analysis identified the main trends in
circumvention of international humanitarian law and their implementation in
modern human rights practice.
2.1. Methods
The study employed three main methods:
Content analysis was used to study international legal documents,
decisions of international courts, and reports of human rights organizations.
Particular attention was paid to gaps in their application and uncertainties in
mechanisms for monitoring compliance with the norms.
The case study method was used to analyse violations of the POWs‘ rights
in the modern Russian war against Ukraine. Documented facts of war crimes
were investigated, including torture, illegal detention, and killing of prisoners.
The obtained data were compared with historical examples of similar violations,
Clío. Revista de Historia, Ciencias Humanas y Pensamiento Crítico
ISSN: 2660-9037 / Provincia de Pontevedra - España
Druchek, Olena
Polunina, Lilia
Koba, Mariia
Beikun, Andrii
Kondratyuk-Antonova, Tetyana
Legal analysis of gaps in the protection of
prisoners of war in view of the historical
Aspects
Página 1866
Año 5, No. 10, julio-diciembre, 2025
Página 1866
which made it possible to assess patterns in international law enforcement. The
method of expert interview involved conducting semi-structured conversations
with international lawyers, military experts and representatives of human rights
organizations. The goal was to obtain a professional assessment of modern
mechanisms for the protection of POWs and identify the main gaps in
international law.
2.2. Sample
The study was based on an analysis of regulatory legal acts, court decisions
and human rights reports. International treaties regulating the protection of
POWs were considered, as well as decisions of international courts, in particular
the ECHR and the ICC. The interviews with fifteen experts were conducted as
part of the qualitative study, including human rights defenders, international
lawyers and military experts with experience in the protection of POWs.
The inclusion of historical cases in the sample was justified by the need for
comparative analysis and identification of shortcomings in international law
enforcement in different periods. The analysis of cases from World War II, the
Vietnam War, and the Balkan conflict made it possible to assess relevant legal
gaps and determine the effectiveness of the modern protection mechanisms.
2.3. Instruments
MAXQDA was used to analyse regulatory legal acts, court decisions, and
human rights reports, which allowed for qualitative content analysis. Google
Forms tools were used to collect data from expert interviews. The legal
databases HUDOC and ICC Legal Tools Database were used as sources of case
law, which provided access to the decisions of the ECHR and the ICC.
Clío. Revista de Historia, Ciencias Humanas y Pensamiento Crítico
ISSN: 2660-9037 / Provincia de Pontevedra - España
Druchek, Olena
Polunina, Lilia
Koba, Mariia
Beikun, Andrii
Kondratyuk-Antonova, Tetyana
Legal analysis of gaps in the protection of
prisoners of war in view of the historical
Aspects
Página 1867
Año 5, No. 10, julio-diciembre, 2025
Página 1867
The use of these methods and analytical tools provided a comprehensive
approach to the study and enabled identifying key problems in the international
human rights protection of POWs.
3. Results
International humanitarian law has significant gaps in the protection of
POWs, which makes it difficult to apply effectively. Despite the Geneva
Conventions, their provisions are often ignored, especially in relation to irregular
units. The lack of enforcement mechanisms allows states to avoid responsibility,
as international organizations, in particular the ICRC, do not have sufficient
leverage.
The Rome Statute of the ICC provides for prosecution of war crimes, but
its effectiveness is limited by political factors and the non-recognition of the
jurisdiction of the court by some countries. Russia‘s war against Ukraine
confirmed that states that have not ratified the Statute can avoid responsibility
for war crimes.
An additional problem is the difficulty of recording violations and
collecting evidence. The prisoners‘ detention conditions make it impossible to
document torture, and there are no effective mechanisms for filing complaints
after their release. The practice of the ECHR shows that the protection of POWs
depends on the political will of states, and the implementation of decisions is
complicated, especially after Russia‘s withdrawal from the CE in 2022.
The massive violations of the POWs‘ rights in World War II prompted a
review of humanitarian law. The Wehrmacht, the Japanese army, and the Union
of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) ignored the 1929 Geneva Convention,
Clío. Revista de Historia, Ciencias Humanas y Pensamiento Crítico
ISSN: 2660-9037 / Provincia de Pontevedra - España
Druchek, Olena
Polunina, Lilia
Koba, Mariia
Beikun, Andrii
Kondratyuk-Antonova, Tetyana
Legal analysis of gaps in the protection of
prisoners of war in view of the historical
Aspects
Página 1868
Año 5, No. 10, julio-diciembre, 2025
Página 1868
which led to millions of deaths. The Nuremberg and Tokyo tribunals recognized
cruel treatment as a war crime, and the 1949 Geneva Conventions detailed
mechanisms for the protection of captives.
In the Vietnam War (1955–1975), both sides violated the captives‘ rights,
but effective punishment did not follow because of political factors. The Balkan
conflict of the 1990‘s was the first case of international prosecution of war
criminals: the ICTY, created after the mass executions in Srebrenica, convicted
military and political leaders.
These conflicts proved that even after the Geneva Conventions, war crimes
remained unpunished without international political will. The Balkan precedent
demonstrated the possibility of legal prosecution, but emphasized the need for
mechanisms for enforcing decisions.
Table 1 analyses the main problems in the legal regulation of the status of
POWs, the conditions of their detention, the mechanisms of international
responsibility, and the reaction of the international community in different
historical periods — from World War II to the current war of Russia against
Ukraine.
Table 1. Comparison of historical and contemporary legal gaps
Gap
Category
World War II
(1939–1945)
Vietnam War
(1955–1975)
Balkan Wars
(1990s)
Russia’s War
Against
Ukraine (2022–
2024)
Determinati-
on of the
status of
POWs
Limited, not all
categories of
POWs recognized
as protected
Combatants of
irregular forces
were not
recognized as
POWs
Recognition of
POWs, but
massive
violations
Russia does not
recognize some
POWs as
combatants
Prohibition of
torture and
Mass violations
(torture, forced
Systematic torture,
inhuman treatment
Ethnic
cleansing,
Documented
torture,
Clío. Revista de Historia, Ciencias Humanas y Pensamiento Crítico
ISSN: 2660-9037 / Provincia de Pontevedra - España
Druchek, Olena
Polunina, Lilia
Koba, Mariia
Beikun, Andrii
Kondratyuk-Antonova, Tetyana
Legal analysis of gaps in the protection of
prisoners of war in view of the historical
Aspects
Página 1869
Año 5, No. 10, julio-diciembre, 2025
Página 1869
Gap
Category
World War II
(1939–1945)
Vietnam War
(1955–1975)
Balkan Wars
(1990s)
Russia’s War
Against
Ukraine (2022–
2024)
inhuman
treatment
labour,
executions)
of captives
torture, mass
executions
executions,
forced
deportation
Mechanisms
for the
enforcement
of norms
Almost absent,
states did not fulfil
their obligations
Geneva
Conventions were
not observed, lack
of enforcement
mechanism
International
tribunals
(ICTY) started
working for the
first time
Geneva
conventions
violated, UN
mechanisms
ineffective
International
responsibility
for crimes
Nuremberg and
Tokyo Tribunals
only after the war
Lack of
international
tribunal, crimes
went unpunished
ICTY
considered
crimes, first war
criminals
convicted
ICC issues
warrants, but
Russia does not
recognize
jurisdiction
Protection of
POWs‘ rights
in courts
There was no
international court,
national courts
rarely heard such
cases
Review in national
courts was limited
Tribunal
decisions had
international
jurisdiction
ECHR issues
rulings, but
Russia does not
realize them
Possibility of
intervention
by
international
organizations
ICRC had limited
powers, the states
blocked access
ICRC had
minimal impact,
governments
restricted access
ICRC actively
operated, but
access was
limited
ICRC gets
limited access to
POWs
Reaction of
the
international
community
Weak, with
limited sanctions
against aggressor
states
International
community
condemned, but
without effective
sanctions
Sanctions
against
Yugoslavia and
its leaders
International
community
imposes
sanctions, but
effect is limited
Access to
medical care
Inadequate level,
mass deaths
because of lack of
treatment
Minimal access,
poor medical care
Access to
medical care
was uneven
Insufficient
medical care,
deaths because
of lack of
treatment
POWs‘
detention
conditions
Terrible
conditions,
hunger,
insanitation,
forced labour
Harsh conditions,
isolation,
malnutrition
Forcible
detention,
sexual violence,
torture
Harsh detention
conditions,
isolation,
psychological
pressure
POWs‘
exchange
Exchanges were
rare, depended on
political
Exchanges were
carried out through
diplomatic
POWs‘
exchanges were
carried out
Exchanges are
carried out, but
slowly and
Clío. Revista de Historia, Ciencias Humanas y Pensamiento Crítico
ISSN: 2660-9037 / Provincia de Pontevedra - España
Druchek, Olena
Polunina, Lilia
Koba, Mariia
Beikun, Andrii
Kondratyuk-Antonova, Tetyana
Legal analysis of gaps in the protection of
prisoners of war in view of the historical
Aspects
Página 1870
Año 5, No. 10, julio-diciembre, 2025
Página 1870
Gap
Category
World War II
(1939–1945)
Vietnam War
(1955–1975)
Balkan Wars
(1990s)
Russia’s War
Against
Ukraine (2022–
2024)
agreements
agreements, but
limited
under UN
supervision
selectively
Source: developed by the author based on the 1949 Geneva Conventions, Additional
Protocol I (1977), Rome Statute of the ICC (1998) (2021), official UN reports,
International Committee of the Red Cross, Amnesty International, Human Rights
Watch, decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, materials of the Nuremberg
and Tokyo tribunals (2023), and the International Criminal Tribunal for the former
Yugoslavia (ICTY) (2017).
Russia‘s current war against Ukraine has been accompanied by widespread
violations of the POWs‘ rights, including torture, ill-treatment, extrajudicial
executions, and forced deportations (Figure 1). These actions violate the Third
Geneva Convention of 1949, but Russia has systematically ignored these
obligations, as documented in the UN, ICRC, Amnesty International, and Human
Rights Watch reports.
Figure 1. Number of recorded violations of the POWs‘ rights in Russia's war against
Source: developed by the authors based on the results of their own research.
Clío. Revista de Historia, Ciencias Humanas y Pensamiento Crítico
ISSN: 2660-9037 / Provincia de Pontevedra - España
Druchek, Olena
Polunina, Lilia
Koba, Mariia
Beikun, Andrii
Kondratyuk-Antonova, Tetyana
Legal analysis of gaps in the protection of
prisoners of war in view of the historical
Aspects
Página 1871
Año 5, No. 10, julio-diciembre, 2025
Página 1871
Cases of torture, prolonged detention without food and water,
psychological pressure, and forced confessions have been documented. Human
Rights Watch says this is a systematic practice sanctioned by the Russian
military. At the same time, Ukraine is cooperating with the ICC to document
these crimes, but limited access to places where prisoners are held makes it
difficult to gather evidence.
Russia does not recognize the jurisdiction of the ICC and blocks the work
of international monitoring missions, which contributes to the impunity of the
perpetrators. In return, Ukraine provides the ICRC with access to Russian
prisoners of war. The lack of effective mechanisms for enforcing compliance
with humanitarian law confirms the gaps in the international system for the
protection of POWs, which require reform and increased accountability for war
crimes.
The massive violations of POWs‘ rights in World War II prompted a
review of humanitarian law. The Wehrmacht, the Japanese army, and the USSR
ignored the 1929 Geneva Convention, which led to millions of deaths. The
Nuremberg and Tokyo tribunals recognized ill-treatment as a war crime, and the
1949 Geneva Conventions detailed mechanisms for the protection of captives.
In the Vietnam War (1955–1975), both sides violated the POWs‘ rights,
but effective punishment did not follow because of political factors. The Balkan
conflict of the 1990‘s was the first case of international prosecution of war
criminals: the ICTY, created after the mass executions in Srebrenica, convicted
military and political leaders.
Clío. Revista de Historia, Ciencias Humanas y Pensamiento Crítico
ISSN: 2660-9037 / Provincia de Pontevedra - España
Druchek, Olena
Polunina, Lilia
Koba, Mariia
Beikun, Andrii
Kondratyuk-Antonova, Tetyana
Legal analysis of gaps in the protection of
prisoners of war in view of the historical
Aspects
Página 1872
Año 5, No. 10, julio-diciembre, 2025
Página 1872
These conflicts proved that even after the Geneva Conventions, war crimes
remained unpunished without international political will. The Balkan precedent
demonstrated the possibility of prosecution, but emphasized the need for
mechanisms to enforce decisions.
Table 2 provides an overview of the main international judicial cases
related to prisoners of war, indicating the judicial bodies, the years of the
decisions, the main charges, the sentences and their impact on the development
of international humanitarian law.
Table 2. Judicial decisions on POWs: an analysis of key precedents
Court case
Judicial body
Year of
decision
Main
charges
Verdict /
Decision
Impact on
international
law
Nuremberg
Tribunal
(1945–1946)
International
Military
Tribunal
(Nuremberg)
1946
War crimes,
including
illtreatment of
POWs
12 people
convicted, 3
sentenced to
life
imprisonment
Laid the
foundation for
future
prosecution of
war criminals
Tokyo
Tribunal
(1946–1948)
International
Military
Tribunal for the
Far East
1948
War crimes,
violations of
the Geneva
Conventions
7 military
leaders
sentenced to
death
Formed basic
principles of
responsibility
for war crimes
ECHR
judgment in
the Srebrenica
case (2013)
ECHR
2013
Genocide,
mass
executions of
POWs
Judgment
against Serbia
for
responsibility
in mass
murders
Confirmed the
possibility of
prosecution
for genocide
Slobodan
Milosevic
trial (ICTY,
2002–2006)
ICTY
2006
War crimes,
ethnic
cleansing,
unlawful
detention of
POWs
Case
discontinued
due to death of
the accused
Enforced the
concept of
command
responsibility
Lubanga Case
(ICC, 2012)
ICC
2012
Recruitment
of child
Lubanga
sentenced to 14
Precedent for
prosecution of