Killing Citizens: Core Legal Dilemmas in the Targeted Killing Abroad of Canadian Foreign Fighters

2017 ◽  
Vol 54 ◽  
pp. 134-187
Author(s):  
CRAIG FORCESE ◽  
LEAH WEST SHERRIFF
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
International Law ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Terrorist Attack ◽  
Armed Forces ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Military Force ◽  
Targeted Killing ◽  
Canadian Government ◽  
The United Kingdom

AbstractFor the first time since the introduction of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Canada is in an armed conflict with an insurgency that has actively recruited Canadians and directed them to use or promote violence against Canada. In the result, the Canadian government may ask its soldiers to target and kill fellow Canadians abroad or to assist allies in doing so. This situation raises a host of novel legal issues, including the question of “targeted killing.” This matter arose for the United Kingdom in 2015 when it directed the use of military force against several Britons believed to be plotting a terrorist attack against the United Kingdom from abroad. This incident sparked a report from the British Parliament highlighting legal dilemmas. This article does the same for Canada by focusing on the main legal implications surrounding a targeted killing by the Canadian government of a Canadian citizen abroad. This exercise shows that a Canadian policy of targeted killing would oblige Canada to make choices on several weighty legal matters. First, the article discusses the Canadian public law rules that apply when the Canadian Armed Forces deploy in armed conflicts overseas. It then analyzes international law governing state uses of military force, including the regulation of the use of force (jus ad bellum) and the law of armed conflict (jus in bello). It also examines an alternative body of international law: that governing peacetime uses of lethal force by states. The article concludes by weaving together these areas of law into a single set of legal questions that would necessarily need to be addressed prior to the targeted killing of a Canadian abroad.

The Obama Administration and Targeting “War-Sustaining” Objects in Noninternational Armed Conflict

2016 ◽  
Vol 110 (4) ◽  
pp. 663-679 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ryan Goodman
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Armed Forces ◽  
Second Order ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Islamic State ◽  
President Obama ◽  
Law Of Armed Conflict ◽  
Economic Infrastructure ◽  
Significant Attention

Since September 11, 2001, legal experts have focused significant attention on the lethal targeting of individuals by both the George W. Bush and Obama administrations. An equally significant legacy of the post-9/11 administrations, however, may be the decisions to target specific kinds of objects. Those decisions greatly affect the success of U.S. efforts to win ongoing conflicts, such as the conflict with the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL). These decisions may also become precedents for military attacks that states consider lawful, whether carried out by cyber or kinetic means, in future armed conflicts.To achieve the goal of destroying ISIL, President Obama embraced what many in the international law community long regarded as off-limits: targeting war-sustaining capabilities, such as the economic infrastructure used to generate revenue for an enemy's armed forces. Although the weight of scholarly opinion has for years maintained that such objects are not legitimate military targets, the existing literature on this topic is highly deficient. Academic discussion has yet to grapple with some of the strongest and clearest evidence in support of the U.S. view on the legality of such targeting decisions. Indeed, intellectual resources may be better spent not on the question of whether such objects are legitimate military targets under the law of armed conflict, but on second-order questions, such as how to apply proportionality analysis and how to identify limiting principles to guard against unintentional slippery slopes. In this article, I discuss the legal pedigree for war-sustaining targeting. I then turn to identify some of the most significant second-order questions and how we might begin to address them.

Converting treaties into tactics on military operations

2014 ◽  
Vol 96 (895-896) ◽  
pp. 919-942 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew J. Carswell
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Armed Forces ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Military Force ◽  
Military Operations ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Law Of Armed Conflict ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Operational Guidance ◽  
Direct Attack

AbstractDespite widespread State acceptance of the international law governing military use of force across the spectrum of operations, the humanitarian reality in today's armed conflicts and other situations of violence worldwide is troubling. The structure and incentives of armed forces dictate the need to more systematically integrate that law into operational practice. However, treaty and customary international law is not easily translated into coherent operational guidance and rules of engagement (RoE), a problem that is exacerbated by differences of language and perspective between the armed forces and neutral humanitarian actors with a stake in the law's implementation. The author examines the operative language of RoE with a view to facilitating the work of accurately integrating relevant law of armed conflict and human rights law norms. The analysis highlights three crucial debates surrounding the use of military force and their practical consequences for operations: the dividing line between the conduct of hostilities and law enforcement frameworks, the definition of membership in an organized armed group for the purpose of lethal targeting, and the debate surrounding civilian direct participation in hostilities and the consequent loss of protection against direct attack.

scholarly journals ARMED CONFLICT IN THE SOUTH-EAST OF UKRAINE: LEGAL QUALIFI-CATIONS AND CONSEQUENCES

2019 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 394-412
Author(s):  
Petr P. Kremnev
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Armed Forces ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
The South ◽  
Legal Doctrine ◽  
Legal Norms ◽  
Legal Consequences

Unconstitutional change of power in Ukraine as a result of the "Maidan revolution" in February 2014, with the subsequent power grab by Ukrainian radicals of local authorities under nationalist slogans, led to the establishment of control over parts of the territory of Donetsk and Lugansk regions by Donbass militias, and then to the ongoing fighting between the armed formations of the latter with units of the regular armed forces of Ukraine. The purpose of this publication is to establish the form of the armed conflict and its legal consequences from the standpoint of current international law, which has not yet found proper legal analysis and coverage in either domestic or foreign (including Ukrainian) legal doctrinе. In official statements and legislative acts of Ukraine, this conflict is declared as a "state of war with Russia", "aggression of Russia", and the Ukrainian doctrine of international law almost unanimously declares the need to apply to the conflict the norms of international humanitarian law and qualifies it as an international armed conflict. In this publication, on the basis of the analysis of existing international legal norms and legal doctrine, the qualification of existing forms of armed conflicts is carried out: war, international armed conflict, non-international armed conflict, internationalized armed conflict. This examines the legal consequences (or otherwise the obligations of the parties to the conflict) that are caused by each form of such armed conflict, that is concealed and ignored by the Ukrainian side. On the basis of the theoretical and legal analysis of the UN Charter, the relevant provisions of the Geneva conventions on the protection of victims of war of 1949 and Additional protocols I and II of 1977, the author qualifies the situation in the South-East of Ukraine as a non-international armed conflict and the obligation to comply with applicable legal norms by all parties to the conflict. At the same time, the author comes to the conclusion about the insolvency of the claims about the applicability of the rules governing other mentioned forms of armed conflicts.

scholarly journals Media as a Transmitter of Information Provided by Armed Forces, the State and Terrorist Organisations in Armed Conflicts and Terrorist Attacks

2021 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Tomasz Bąk
Keyword(s):  
Media Coverage ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Terrorist Attack ◽  
Television News ◽  
Armed Forces ◽  
The State ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
The Media ◽  
Terrorist Acts

Abstract The article deals with issues related to the media as a relay of information provided by the armed forces, the state and terrorist organizations, in armed conflicts and terrorist acts. It contains two main subchapters, namely: the first on the role of the media in armed conflicts and terrorist acts, and the second describing the use of media by terrorists. There is no doubt that almost every ongoing armed conflict or terrorist attack can count on a broad media coverage. It is an event that neither news agencies, broadcasters of television news services, nor print media publishers can miss. The text mentions the basic models of behavior of state authorities in this matter of informing the public about events such as warfare or terrorist attack. Forms of providing information from conflict regions or terrorist activities by contemporary journalism have also been described. There was also information about the role of the Internet in the process of reporting the course of the war. An important part of the article is to describe the media strategy in relation to this type of event. The summary concludes on the role of mass media in contemporary armed conflict and the terrorist attack.

scholarly journals Implications of Children’s Rights for Military Justice in the Context of Members of the Armed Forces Younger than the Age of Eighteen

2016 ◽  
Vol 20 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 275-301
Author(s):  
Gus Waschefort
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
International Law ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Armed Forces ◽  
Children's Rights ◽  
Children’S Rights ◽  
Duty Of Care ◽  
Military Justice ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
State Obligations

A number of States lawfully enlist persons younger than eighteen (but at least sixteen) into their national armed forces. While such enlistment is consistent with the relevant States’ international law obligations, a number of additional obligations are triggered that the State owes towards the child enlistee by virtue of international children’s rights. This article engages with these additional obligations as they apply to child members of the armed forces who are in conflict with the law. In particular, focus is placed on States that maintain a separate and distinct military justice system, and the examples of Australia, Canada and the United Kingdom are relied upon for illustrative purposes. In order to properly engage with State obligations, in this regard, the article also endeavors to address the nature of the duty of care owed by the armed forces in respect of child members.

Comparing Interpretations of States’ and Non-State Actors’ Obligations Toward Cultural Heritage in Armed Conflict and OccupationMilitary Manuals and the Law of War

2020 ◽  
pp. 56-81
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Varner
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Cultural Heritage ◽  
International Law ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Hague Convention ◽  
The United States ◽  
Cultural Property ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
The United Kingdom

The 1954 Hague Convention on the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict (1954 Hague Convention) remains the leading treaty on the treatment of cultural heritage during armed conflict and occupation. After several decades of relative dormancy, eleven States have joined the 1954 Hague Convention in the last decade, including two major military powers: the United States and the United Kingdom. In addition to the 1954 Hague Convention, a host of laws touch on the protection of cultural property in armed conflict, as well as those under customary international law. Nonetheless, there are disagreements in interpretations of States’ obligations toward cultural property during armed conflict stemming from a variety of factors. These factors can include: whether States are Parties to the instrument that conveys the obligation or if the obligation is one of customary international law, which itself is often contested; the individual State’s interpretation; interpretation by tribunals; and a plethora of other factors. Given these discrepancies in interpretation, a review of States’ military manuals is useful to see if they shed any light on the State’s interpretation of their obligations toward cultural property under the law of armed conflict (LOAC) and international obligations in LOAC more generally. This chapter will analyze and compare the military manuals of the United States and the United Kingdom to determine how they elucidate several key issues in the protection of cultural property during armed conflict, such as the definition of ‘cultural property’, requirements for ‘respect’, the doctrine of military necessity, and laws applicable in non-international armed conflicts.

Introduction

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ian Park
Keyword(s):  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Armed Forces ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Right To Life

The introduction sets out the broad questions to be addressed, namely: do states have right to life obligations during armed conflict; if so, what are these obligations; when do they apply, and in respect of whom; and how can states best ensure compliance with these obligations? The introduction also provides a précis of each chapter and the themes explored therein. Additionally, it makes reference to the fact that UK armed forces doctrine and procedures in respect of recent armed conflicts will be used as examples to explore the issues under consideration in the book. The aim is also to proffer a view on where the current UK procedures do not comply with the state’s right to life obligations and how this can be rectified.

Introduction

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kubo Mačák
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Research Methodology ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Normative Framework ◽  
Comprehensive Examination

This chapter introduces the central aim of this book: to provide a comprehensive examination of the notion, process, and effects of internationalization of armed conflicts in international law. It presents a brief research overview, outlining the scope of the enquiry, the research methodology, and the structure of the book. It then lays out the conceptual and normative framework for the rest of the book. To that end, it first justifies the need for the present study by confirming the continuing distinction between international and non-international armed conflicts in international law. Then, it puts forward a conception of internationalization that expresses the legal transformation from a non-international to an international armed conflict.

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’.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document