This is probably the second time I have posted videos of The Daily Show with Jon Stewart. I always thought he is just a comedian, but goodness gracious, this man is smart, well-read and very very sharp. In comparison, the comedians we have on TV back here are really really pathetic, though admittedly it has been years since I bothered watching guys like Jack Neo and Mark Lee on TV and surely they must have improved, there is no more downside left!
I am still wondering though - if country X is not a signatory to the Geneva Convention, and country Y is, then in a war, is country Y bound to treat their prisoners of war from country X as prescribed under the Geneva Convention?
sleepy
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif)
themis_euterpe
Comments
However, this obligation appears under general IL to be owed to other signatories and not to Country X (or maybe there's some other Article somewhere else reversing this? I dunno).
Alternative: plead custom (=
I was just curious, cos when I scanned through the list of countries that were signatories to the Geneva Convention (not sure which one I was looking at), it appears that Singapore is not a signatory.
Sigh ... so many things to learn, so little time to do it.
I've no idea what Singapore's philosophy is on all these conventions but I discovered during our fourth year in law school that many of the conventions we have a predictable interest in (e.g., maritime) were conventions we acceded to instead of signing.
Also, perhaps the Geneva Convention can be argued to be binding as customary international law? Singapore seems to take a similar approach when it comes to the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties - we're not a party yet, and it's crazy to go signing all these FTAs unless we are prepared to argue that the VCLT has become custom.