Related Rule
South Africa
Practice Relating to Rule 100. Fair Trial Guarantees
South Africa’s LOAC Manual (1996) provides that depriving a “protected person of the rights to a fair and regular trial” constitutes a grave breach of the 1949 Geneva Conventions. 
South Africa, Presentation on the South African Approach to International Humanitarian Law, Appendix A, Chapter 4: International Humanitarian Law (The Law of Armed Conflict), National Defence Force, 1996, § 40. This manual is also included in Chapter 4 of the Draft Civic Education Manual of 1997.
South Africa’s ICC Act (2002) reproduces the war crimes listed in the 1998 ICC Statute, including “wilfully depriving a prisoner of war or other protected person of the rights of fair and regular trial” in international armed conflicts and “the passing of sentences … without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all judicial guarantees which are generally recognised as indispensable” in non-international armed conflicts. 
South Africa, ICC Act, 2002, Schedule 1, Part 3, §§ (a)(vi) and (c)(iv).
In 2004, in the Basson case before the Constitutional Court of South Africa, Justice Sachs stated in his concurring opinion:
In conclusion, it should be emphasised that none of the above should be taken as suggesting that because war crimes might be involved, the rights to a fair trial of the respondent as constitutionally protected are in any way attenuated. When allegations of such serious nature are at issue, and where the exemplary value of constitutionalism as against lawlessness is the very issue at stake, it is particularly important that the judicial and prosecutorial functions be undertaken with rigorous and principled respect for basic constitutional rights. The effective prosecution of war crimes and the rights of the accused to a fair trial are not antagonistic concepts. On the contrary, both stem from the same constitutional and humanitarian foundation, namely the need to uphold the rule of law and the basic principles of human dignity, equality and freedom. 
South Africa, Constitutional Court, Basson case¸ Judgment, 10 March 2004, § 126.
South Africa’s Military Discipline Supplementary Measures Act (1999) provides:
3. (1) This Act shall, subject to subsection (2), apply to any person subject to the [Military Discipline] Code irrespective whether such person is within or outside the Republic.
(2) For the purposes of the application of this Act and the Code, “person subject to the Code” includes, to the extent and subject to the conditions prescribed in this section and in the Code –
(h) every prisoner of war as contemplated in Articles 4 and 33 of the Geneva Convention Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War of August 12, 1949, or by customary international law, and who is in the power of the Republic and detained by the South African National Defence Force.
Right to legal representation
23. Every person subject to the Code has the right –
(a) to legal representation of own choice at his or her own expense, or to be assigned military defence counsel at State expense when he or she is to appear before or to be tried by a Court of a Military Judge or Senior Military Judge; and
(b) to consult with his or her legal representative or with a military defence counsel prior to making any election to be heard at a disciplinary hearing.
Privilege
38. Every privilege which in law attaches to communications between any practising advocate or attorney and such practitioner’s client, shall apply to communications between any member of the military legal services law staff and such person’s individual or departmental client. 
South Africa, Military Discipline Supplementary Measures Act, 1999, §§ 3, 23 and 38.
South Africa’s Military Discipline Supplementary Measures Act (1999) provides:
3. (1) This Act shall, subject to subsection (2), apply to any person subject to the [Military Discipline] Code irrespective whether such person is within or outside the Republic.
(2) For the purposes of the application of this Act and the Code, “person subject to the Code” includes, to the extent and subject to the conditions prescribed in this section and in the Code –
(h) every prisoner of war as contemplated in Articles 4 and 33 of the Geneva Convention Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War of August 12, 1949, or by customary international law, and who is in the power of the Republic and detained by the South African National Defence Force.
Language
39. Any accused in a military trial is entitled to have the proceedings interpreted into a language preferred by the accused. 
South Africa, Military Discipline Supplementary Measures Act, 1999, §§ 3 and 39.
South Africa’s Military Discipline Supplementary Measures Act (1999) provides:
3. (1) This Act shall, subject to subsection (2), apply to any person subject to the [Military Discipline] Code irrespective whether such person is within or outside the Republic.
(2) For the purposes of the application of this Act and the Code, “person subject to the Code” includes, to the extent and subject to the conditions prescribed in this section and in the Code –
(h) every prisoner of war as contemplated in Articles 4 and 33 of the Geneva Convention Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War of August 12, 1949, or by customary international law, and who is in the power of the Republic and detained by the South African National Defence Force.
Right to review of trial
25. Every person subject to the Code who is convicted and sentenced by a military court has the right to the automatic, speedy and competent review of the proceedings of his or her trial to ensure that any proceedings, finding, sentence or order is either valid, regular, fair and appropriate, or remedied. 
South Africa, Military Discipline Supplementary Measures Act, 1999, §§ 3 and 25.