9

During World War II, the Japanese hated Allied "coastwatchers" on Pacific Islands who observed and reported their movements, and therefore hunted, captured and executed many of them. Under what circumstances might the Japanese be within their rights?

If an Allied person "fraternized" with Japanese soldiers or officers and was caught gathering intelligence, that would be "spying," subject to execution.

If an Allied person was carrying a firearm, or even a blade weapon while out of uniform, and used it against a Japanese soldier he encountered, that would be illegal activity by a non-combatant, and also subject to summary execution. Then the main question is, would wa "recording device" such as a camera legally constitute a "weapon" in this context? How about pencil and paper?

Put another way, if an Allied civilian were unfortunate enough to encounter a Japanese soldier or sailor, how much resistance would he have to put up before he could "legally" be put to death.

Improve this question
2
  • 2
    I don't think I have the expertise to answer this, but my instinct is that you are correct that someone going out of their way to aid a belligerent whilst fronting as a civilian is typically treated as a spy if caught. Of course Japan at that point had actually signed the Geneva Conventions, but rather famously ignored them. Commented 2 days ago
  • 2
    Official coast watchers were commissioned in the RANVR. Theoretically, under the Geneva Convention, as long as they were wearing identifiable articles of uniform, if captured they would fall under POW status. For most though, about 20% of watchers, the Geneva POW status did not prevent their executions. Commented yesterday

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
17

According to the convention espionage is defined as, "gathering or attempting to gather information in territory controlled by an adverse party through an act undertaken on false pretenses or deliberately in a clandestine manner." The definition includes combatants who wear civilian attire. So that covers cameras, people taking notes with paper and pencil, and so on.

A civilian loses their status as a noncombatant when they participate directly in hostilities. While A precise definition of the term “direct participation in hostilities” does not exist, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights has stated that the term is generally understood to mean “acts which, by their nature or purpose, are intended to cause actual harm to enemy personnel and matériel”.

Since the intelligence coast-watchers and similar folks provided was intended to cause harm to the Imperial Japanese Navy (IJN) they could absolutely be treated like spies IF they were in civilian clothing. Since by definition such people would be caught in the territory controlled by Imperial Japan, Japanese internal law would apply. Though the convention states that spies should not be executed without trial. However many coast watchers appear to have worn appropriate uniforms while performing their duties. In such cases they should have been (but often weren't) afforded all the rights of a POW under international law.

Improve this answer
2
  • 3
    In particular, these coast watchers would not be counted as civilians. The question is rather whether they count a soldiers or as spies. Commented 2 days ago
  • 3
    It all depends on if they were conducting their activity in uniform or out of it. If out of it, they would certainly be considered spies. I added the bit about when a civilian loses their status as a noncombatant to show that even if a Coastwatcher was in civilian clothes and caught without the Japanese knowing if they were allied military, the Japanese would still have been "Justified" in executing them as spies. Commented yesterday

Start asking to get answers

Find the answer to your question by asking.

Ask question

Explore related questions

See similar questions with these tags.