scholarly journals Private military and security companies in international law

2020 ◽  
pp. 81-94
Author(s):  
A. Yu. Skuratova ◽  
E. E. Korolkova
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Legal Obligations ◽  
State Practice ◽  
The Status ◽  
Draft Convention ◽  
Working Groups ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Security Companies

INTRODUCTION. The article analyses the sources of international law, national legislation of the Russian Federation, as well as that of certain foreign States regulating the operation of private military and security companies (PMSCs) in armed conflict. The article highlights the out-comes of the work of the UN Special Rapporteurs and Working Groups to study the activity of PMSCs and the impact it had on the observance of human rights. The authors further analyze the status of PMSC personnel under international humanitarian law. The article also looks at the positions expressed by the delegations of Member States during the discussion of the 2010 Draft Convention on Private Military and Security Companies (PMSCs) and provides recommendations for developing an appropriate international regulatory framework. The authors also examined State practice of the implementation of the The Montreux Document on Pertinent International Legal Obligations and Good Practices for Statesт Related to Operations of Private Military and Security Companies During Armed Conflict related to the operation of private military and security companies during armed conflict.MATERIALS AND METHODS. The article contains an analysis of the main sources of international law, the documents drafted by the United Nations International Law Commission, special rapporteurs and working groups on the matter, and State practice. It also addresses Russian and foreign legal scholarship. From a methodological perspective, this study relied on the general scientific (analysis, synthesis, systemic approach) and private legal methods of knowledge (formal-legal, comparative legal studies).RESEARCH RESULTS. Based on the study, it is argued that an international treaty should be adopted to regulate the activities of PMSCs, which would establish mechanisms to monitor and hold PMSCs and their employees legally accountable.

11. International humanitarian law

2021 ◽  
pp. 247-266
Author(s):  
Nicole Scicluna
Keyword(s):  
Armed Conflict ◽  
The Political ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Legal Implications ◽  
Legitimate Target ◽  
Self Interest ◽  
State Practice ◽  
The Status ◽  
International Legal Order

This chapter investigates whether and how the laws that govern armed conflict achieve their objective of minimizing the suffering of combatants and non-combatants alike. International humanitarian law (IHL) reflects the tensions of an international legal order that oscillates between the apologist tendency to reflect state practice and state self-interest and the utopian desire to reflect higher values of justice and human dignity. The chapter begins with a brief overview of the evolution of this body of law, the codification of which dates from the second half of the nineteenth century. It then turns to the question of terminology, analysing the political origins and legal implications of the relatively recent term ‘international humanitarian law’. The chapter focuses on two key questions. Firstly, who or what is a legitimate target during an armed conflict? Secondly, what are legitimate means of conducting armed conflict? The chapter also considers the status of nuclear weapons under international law, a topic that captures well both the possibilities and limits of IHL.

From Peacekeepers to Parties to the Conflict: An IHL’s Appraisal of the Role of UN Peace Operations in NIACs

2020 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 209-236
Author(s):  
Bianca Maganza
Keyword(s):  
Armed Conflict ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Peace Operations ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Evolutionary Interpretation

Abstract The article analyses the application of international humanitarian law (IHL) to UN ‘peace operations’ when, due to their factual involvement in hostilities, they become parties to a non-international armed conflict. It argues that the notion of party to the conflict allows to focus on the collective entity and its obligations, and to infer the status of individual members of the operation from the mission's collective status. In assessing the consequences of that scenario, the article further discusses the external and internal borders of the scope of the notion of party to the conflict as applied to UN peace operations, and examines the impact of the loss of protection from attack on the principle of distinction. It concludes by suggesting that, in light of the increasing involvement of UN peace operations in situations that factually amount to armed conflict, an evolutionary interpretation of the theory of IHL's application to the situation is needed.

Commentary on Part I of the Montreux Document on Pertinent International Legal Obligations and Good Practices for States Related to Operations of Private Military and Security Companies During Armed Conflict

2014 ◽  
Vol 96 (893) ◽  
pp. 305-358 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marie-Louise Tougas
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
General Rule ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Good Practices ◽  
Legal Obligations ◽  
Security Companies

AbstractThe Montreux Document on Private Military and Security Companies (Montreux Document) was adopted in 2008 by seventeen States to reaffirm and, as far as was necessary, clarify the existing obligations of States and other actors under international law, in particular under international humanitarian law (IHL) and international human rights law (IHRL). It also aimed at identifying good practices and regulatory options to assist States in promoting respect for IHL and IHRL by private military and security companies (PMSCs). Today, fifty-one States and three international organizations have endorsed the Montreux Document. It contains twenty-seven “Statements” – sections recalling the main international legal obligations of States in regard to the operations of PMSCs during armed conflicts. Each statement is the reaffirmation of a general rule of IHL, IHRL or State responsibility formulated in a way that clarifies its applicability to PMSC operations. This article aims to detail the basis of each legal obligation mentioned in the first part of the Montreux Document (Part I). The article follows the structure of Part I, in order to better facilitate its comprehension. The second part of the Montreux Document, relating to good practices, is not covered in this article.

Disconnecting Humanitarian Law from EU Subsidiary Protection: A Hypothesis of Defragmentation of International Law

2016 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 463-483 ◽  
Author(s):  
SALVATORE FABIO NICOLOSI
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
International Law ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Internal Armed Conflict ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Eu

AbstractThe development of the Common European Asylum System (CEAS) has often revealed the tight interrelation between refugee law, humanitarian law and international criminal law. It has been argued that the latter bodies of law have, in fact, played a major role in the development of most key concept of the European Union asylum acquis.Drawing from the judgment issued by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in Diakité, this article aims to prove that this assumption is not always true, especially with reference to the interpretation of specific concepts of international humanitarian law (IHL) and, in particular, the controversial notion of ‘internal armed conflict’. In tackling the sensitive issue of clarifying the meaning of ‘internal armed conflict’ in order to investigate the grounds to warrant subsidiary protection under the Qualification Directive, the Court provided an autonomous interpretation that goes beyond IHL, thus offering another occasion to investigate the interrelation between international law and the EU legal order.While contributing to the ongoing debate on the relationship between international law and the EU legal order, the article will consider the impact of the Court's reasoning on the EU asylum acquis, and will consider whether disconnecting the Qualification Directive from IHL, instead of producing further fragmentation of international law, may contribute to its defragmentation, conceived of as a harmonic co-ordination of different branches of law.

International Humanitarian Law and Non-State Practice in Armed Conflict: Combatant’s Privilege and Kurdish Fighters in Syria

2019 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 271-296
Author(s):  
Ilana Rothkopf
Keyword(s):  
Armed Conflict ◽  
International Community ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Armed Groups ◽  
Prisoner Of War ◽  
Geneva Conventions ◽  
State Practice ◽  
The Status

Abstract Do fighters associated with non-state armed groups have the combatant’s privilege in armed conflict? Non-state armed groups are commonplace in contemporary armed conflicts. However, international humanitarian law (IHL), particularly the law that pertains to combatant’s privilege and prisoner of war status, was designed with state actors in mind. This article assesses the conditions under which the members of non-state armed groups have combatant’s privilege. Throughout, it uses the case of Kurdish fighters in Syria as an example of the timeliness of this question and its ramifications for conflict actors. This article notes, with support from the Geneva Conventions, Additional Protocols, and other sources of IHL, that IHL does not foresee a combatant’s privilege for armed groups in a non-international armed conflict. It contends, however, that the international community should agree to a generalisable rule for the treatment of fighters as combatants regardless of conflict type, if these fighters demonstrate the capability and willingness to adhere to IHL. Such a rule would reduce the need to assess both conflict type and the status of individual fighters should they be captured, and more importantly, it would incentivise continued compliance with IHL.

scholarly journals Feminist Debates on Civilian Women and International Humanitarian Law

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 385 ◽  
Author(s):  
Valerie Oosterveld
Keyword(s):  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Legal Aspects ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Gender Inequalities ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
The Status ◽  
Droit International ◽  
Civilian Women ◽  
Female Specific ◽  
The Impact

International humanitarian law [IHL] provisions address the situation of civilian women caught in armed conflict today, but is this law enough? Feminist commentators have considered this question and have come to differing conclusions. This article considers the resulting debate as to whether female-specific IHL provisions are adequate but underenforced, or inadequate, outdated and in need of revision. One school of thought argues that the main impediment to the protection of female civilians during hostilities is lack of observance of existing IHL. A second school of thought believes that something more fundamental is needed to meet the goal of protecting civilian women during war: revision and reconceptualization of IHL to take into account systematic gender inequality. This article considers the status of this debate within three areas of IHL considered by many to be central legal aspects of the experience of female civilians caught in armed conflict: the general non-discrimination provisions, the specific protection for civilian women against sexual violence and the specific protection of pregnant women and mothers. It concludes that, while there has been a vibrant debate within feminist circles on the adequacy of existing IHL provisions, mainstream action has tended to focus on enforcement. This is unfortunate, as it means that certain insights into the impact of deep gender inequalities on conflict have largely been left unexplored.Les dispositions du droit international humanitaire [DIH] traitent de la situation de femmes civiles prises de nos jours dans un conflit armé, mais ces lois suffisent-elles? Des commentatrices féministes ont songé à cette question et en sont venues à des conclusions différentes. Cet article porte sur le débat qui en résulte à savoir si les dispositions du DIH spécifiques aux femmes sont adéquates mais pas suffisamment mises en vigueur, ou si ellessont inadéquates, surannées et doivent être révisées. Une école de pensée soutient que l’obstacle principal à la protection de femmes civiles au cours d’hostilités est l’inobservation du DIH existant. Une deuxième école de pensée croit qu’il faut quelque chose de plus fondamental pour atteindre le but de protéger les femmes civiles pendant une guerre : la révision et la reconceptualisation du DIH pour tenir compte de l’inégalité systématique entre les sexes. Cet article examine l’état de ce débat dans trois domaines du DIH que plusieurs considèrent être des aspects légaux qui se situent au centre de l’expérience de femmes civiles prises dans un conflit armé : les dispositions générales contre la discrimination, la protection spécifique aux femmes civiles contre la violence sexuelle et la protection spécifique de femmes enceintes et de mères. On conclut que quoiqu’un débat animé ait été tenu au sein de cercles féministes en rapport avec la suffisance des dispositions existantes du DIH, l’action principale a eu tendance à être concentrée sur l’application de la loi. C’est malheureux, car cela signifie que certaines intuitions quant à l’impact sur le conflit d’inégalités profondes entre les sexes demeurent en grande partie inexplorées.

Business goes to war: private military/security companies and international humanitarian law

2006 ◽  
Vol 88 (863) ◽  
pp. 525-572 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emanuela-Chiara Gillard
Keyword(s):  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Legal Issues ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Military Operations ◽  
Close Proximity ◽  
The Status ◽  
Military Security ◽  
The Law ◽  
Security Companies

AbstractRecent years have witnessed an increase in the number of private military and security companies (PMCs/PSCs) operating in situations of armed conflict, as well as a change in the nature of their activities, which are now increasingly close to the heart of military operations and which often put them in close proximity to persons protected by international humanitarian law. It is often asserted that there is a vacuum in the law when it comes to their operations. In situations of armed conflict, however, there is a body of law that regulates both the activities of the staff of PMCs/PSCs and the responsibilities of the states that hire them. Moreover, other states also have a role to play in promoting respect for international humanitarian law by such companies. This article examines the key legal issues raised by PMCs/PSCs operating in situations of armed conflict, including the status of the staff of these companies and their responsibilities under international humanitarian law; the responsibilities of the states that hire them; and those of the states in whose territory PMCs/PSCs are incorporated or operate.

Of Rebels, Insurgents, and Belligerents

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tilman Rodenhäuser
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Laws Of War ◽  
Armed Group ◽  
State Practice

The first chapter opens the substantive analysis of the organization requirement for non-state parties to armed conflicts. First, it briefly examines why the laws of war have originally been state-focused, and shows how this state focus coined international law requirements of main characteristics of a party to an armed conflict. Second, it analyses how philosophers broadened the legal notion of ‘war’ as to include conflicts involving certain non-state entities. Subsequently, this chapter examines state practice to identify which qualities a non-state armed group needed to possess to obtain the ‘belligerent’ status. It also examines the question of which kind of entities could qualify as ‘insurgents’ or ‘rebels’.

scholarly journals International law protecting the environment during armed conflict: gaps and opportunities

2010 ◽  
Vol 92 (879) ◽  
pp. 569-592 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Bothe ◽  
Carl Bruch ◽  
Jordan Diamond ◽  
David Jensen
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Environmental Damage ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
International Environmental Law ◽  
Basic Principles ◽  
Principle Of Proportionality ◽  
Definition Of

AbstractThere are three key deficiencies in the existing body of international humanitarian law (IHL) relating to protection of the environment during armed conflict. First, the definition of impermissible environmental damage is both too restrictive and unclear; second, there are legal uncertainties regarding the protection of elements of the environment as civilian objects; and third, the application of the principle of proportionality where harm to the environment constitutes ‘collateral damage’ is also problematic. These gaps present specific opportunities for clarifying and developing the existing framework. One approach to addressing some of the inadequacies of IHL could be application of international environmental law during armed conflict. The detailed norms, standards, approaches, and mechanisms found in international environmental law might also help to clarify and extend basic principles of IHL to prevent, address, or assess liability for environmental damage incurred during armed conflict.

Health Care Providers in War and Armed Conflict: Operational and Educational Challenges in International Humanitarian Law and the Geneva Conventions, Part I. Historical Perspective

2018 ◽  
Vol 13 (02) ◽  
pp. 109-115 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frederick M. Burkle ◽  
Adam L. Kushner ◽  
Christos Giannou ◽  
Mary A. Paterson ◽  
Sherry M. Wren ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Historical Perspective ◽  
Geneva Convention ◽  
World Health ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
The Impact

AbstractSince 1945, the reason for humanitarian crises and the way in which the world responds to them has dramatically changed every 10 to 15 years or less. Planning, response, and recovery for these tragic events have often been ad hoc, inconsistent, and insufficient, largely because of the complexity of global humanitarian demands and their corresponding response system capabilities. This historical perspective chronicles the transformation of war and armed conflicts from the Cold War to today, emphasizing the impact these events have had on humanitarian professionals and their struggle to adapt to increasing humanitarian, operational, and political challenges. An unprecedented independent United Nations–World Health Organization decision in the Battle for Mosul in Iraq to deploy to combat zones emergency medical teams unprepared in the skills of decades-tested war and armed conflict preparation and response afforded to health care providers and dictated by International Humanitarian Law and Geneva Convention protections has abruptly challenged future decision-making and deployments. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2019;13:109–115)

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document