Practitioners' guide to human rights law in armed conflict

400 Pages·2016·1.66 MB·English

by  Daragh Murray

PR ACTITIONERS’
GUIDE TO HUMAN
RIGHTS LAW IN
ARMED CONFLICT
DARAGH MURRAY
consultant editors
DAPO AKANDE
CHARLES GARRAWAY
FRANÇOISE HAMPSON
NOAM LUBELL
ELIZABETH WILMSHURST
4
’
PRACTITIONERS GUIDE TO HUMAN RIGHTS
LAW IN ARMED CONFLICT
Chatham House (the Royal Institute of International Affairs) is an independent body which
promotestherigorousstudyofinternationalquestionsanddoesnotexpressopinionsofitsown.
Theopinionsexpressedinthispublicationaretheresponsibilityoftheauthors.
’
PRACTITIONERS
GUIDE TO HUMAN
RIGHTS LAW IN
ARMED CONFLICT
D M
ARAGH URRAY
Consultant Editors:
DAPO AKANDE
CHARLES GARRAWAY
FRANÇOISE HAMPSON
NOAM LUBELL
ELIZABETH WILMSHURST
Publishedinassociationwith
theRoyalInstituteof
InternationalAffairs(ChathamHouse)
1
3
GreatClarendonStreet,OxfordOX26DP,
UnitedKingdom
OxfordUniversityPressisadepartmentoftheUniversityofOxford.
ItfurtherstheUniversity’sobjectiveofexcellenceinresearch,scholarship,
andeducationbypublishingworldwide.Oxfordisaregisteredtrademarkof
OxfordUniversityPressintheUKandincertainothercountries
©TheRoyalInstituteofInternationalAffairs2016
ChathamHouse,10StJames’sSquare,LondonSW1Y4LE
www.chathamhouse.org
Charityregistrationno:208223
Themoralrightsoftheauthorhavebeenasserted
FirstEditionpublishedin2016
Impression:1
Allrightsreserved.Nopartofthispublicationmaybereproduced,storedin
aretrievalsystem,ortransmitted,inanyformorbyanymeans,withoutthe
priorpermissioninwritingofOxfordUniversityPress,orasexpresslypermitted
bylaw,bylicenceorundertermsagreedwiththeappropriatereprographics
rightsorganization.Enquiriesconcerningreproductionoutsidethescopeofthe
aboveshouldbesenttotheRightsDepartment,OxfordUniversityPress,atthe
addressabove
Youmustnotcirculatethisworkinanyotherform
andyoumustimposethissameconditiononanyacquirer
CrowncopyrightmaterialisreproducedunderClassLicence
NumberC01P0000148withthepermissionofOPSI
andtheQueen’sPrinterforScotland
PublishedintheUnitedStatesofAmericabyOxfordUniversityPress
198MadisonAvenue,NewYork,NY10016,UnitedStatesofAmerica
BritishLibraryCataloguinginPublicationData
Dataavailable
LibraryofCongressControlNumber:2016943358
ISBN 978–0–19–879139–3
Printedandboundby
CPIGroup(UK)Ltd,Croydon,CR04YY
LinkstothirdpartywebsitesareprovidedbyOxfordingoodfaithand
forinformationonly.Oxforddisclaimsanyresponsibilityforthematerials
containedinanythirdpartywebsitereferencedinthiswork.
FOREWORD
Whiletherelevanceofinternationalhumanrightslawtoarmedconflicthaslong
been affirmed by the International Court of Justice, the practical application of
that body of law to theatres of war is a matter of some difficulty. The various
international human rights courts and other entities have all pronounced on
differentaspectsofit.Idoubtwhetherthereisamorefast-movingorimportant
areaofthelawthanthatwhichtheauthorsofthisbookhavetackled.InAl-Skeini
and others v. United Kingdom1 the European Court of Human Rights redefined
the test of the jurisdiction within which States are obliged to comply with the
European Convention, and the manner in which they are obliged to do so. In
Bankovic v. Belgium2 the Grand Chamber had ruled that jurisdiction was
essentially territorial. Subject to some exceptions, the Convention applied to
the way that Member States treated people within their own territories. Within
such jurisdiction all the Convention rights had to be respected; there was no
question of having to comply with parts of the Convention in circumstances
whereMemberStatescouldnotcomplywithallofit.Therewasnorequirement
to‘divideandtailor’Conventionrightsaccordingtotheparticularsituation.Nor
was it legitimate to apply the doctrine that the Convention was a ‘living
instrument’ so as to expand this jurisdiction. In Al-Skeini the Grand Chamber
disregardedthisandrecognizedamuchwidertestofjurisdiction.AStatewould
have jurisdiction for the purposes of the Convention whenever its agents ex-
ercisedcontrolandauthorityoveranindividualanditwasappropriateto‘divide
and tailor’ the Convention so as to impose on a State the obligation to protect
thoserightsthatfellwithinitscontroleventhoughtherewereothersthatitwas
not in a position to protect.
The consequence of this decision is that the Convention is now applied by
Strasbourg to the conduct of the armed forces of Member States, where these
are taking part in militaryoperationsin foreign countries. In such circumstances,
however,Statesarealsosubjecttothelawofarmedconflictcontainedinthefour
Geneva Conventions, or ‘international humanitarian law’ as this is somewhat
euphemistically described, and other Conventions that deal specifically with the
1 Al-Skeini andOthersv.the UnitedKingdom,Judgment, App.no.55721/07(ECtHR,7 July
2011).
2 BankovicandOthersv.Belgiumand16otherContractingStates,AdmissibilityDecision,App.
no.52207/99(ECtHR,12December2001).
v
Foreword
useofarmedforce.InHassanv.UnitedKingdom3theStrasbourgCourtrecognized
that in circumstances of military activity the Convention had to be read with
international humanitarian law, but how the two interrelate is no easy matter.
In their introduction to this work, the authors comment that it ‘has not been an
easy book to write’. Its aim is to provide specific guidance to the military lawyer,
the judge, and the practitioner, and indirectly to those serving in the field, in
respect of the requirements of the amalgam of human rights law and the law of
armedconflictinthespecificsituationsthatariseinarmedconflict.Thishasbeen
noeasytaskasthelawisonthemoveand‘classificationofmilitaryactivitycanbea
complex and challenging endeavour’. They have helpfully differentiated between
what they have termed ‘active hostilities’ and ‘security operations’. In relation to
the former the law of armed conflict plays the predominant role, whereas in
relation to the latter it is human rights law that is dominant.
Thefirstpartofthebookgivesanoverviewofthesetwobodiesoflaw,givingdue
prominencetotheeffectofAl-Skeini.Thesecondpartgivespracticalguidanceto
armed forces on the ground. Whom can they lawfully try to kill in the course of
armedconflictandwhommusttheytrytoprotect?Whichweaponsarelegitimate
andwhichoutlawedinallcircumstances?Whataretheirobligationsinrespectof
prisonersofwar,andthecivilianpopulation?Howdoesthetestofproportionality
apply when planning a bombing raid, and what is the very different test when
decidingwhethertodetainaterroristsuspect?Thesearequestionsthatourarmed
forces have to answer in the heat of military operations. They, and indeed the
armed forces of other nations, need the best guidance that they can get. This
ambitious work should help those who have to advise them to pick their way
through a legal minefield.
Lord Philipps of Worth Maltravers
3 Hassanv.UnitedKingdom,Judgment,App.no.29750/09(ECtHR,16September2014).
vi
CONTENTS
Tableof Cases xvii
Tableof Treaties and Other Instruments xxvii
Abbreviations xxxvii
Introduction 1
PART I
1. Understanding International Human Rights Law
1. Introduction 1.01
2. The Relevance of Human Rights Law to the Activities
of Armed Forces 1.04
3. Features that Distinguish Human Rights Law from the Law
of Armed Conflict 1.08
3.1. TheOriginsofHumanRightsLawandtheLawofArmedConflict 1.08
3.2. AsymmetricApplicationofHumanRightsLawv.Symmetric
ApplicationoftheLawofArmedConflict 1.10
3.3. ContrastingComplianceMechanismsforInternationalHuman
RightsLawandtheLawofArmedConflict 1.12
3.4. KeyDifferencesBetweentheOperationoftheLawofArmed
ConflictandHumanRightsLaw 1.17
4. Understanding Human Rights Law 1.23
4.1. StateObligationsinRespectofHumanRights 1.24
4.2. LimitationstoHumanRights 1.25
5. Human Rights Law Instruments 1.26
5.1. UNTreatiesandInstitutions 1.28
5.1.1. TheHumanRightsCouncil 1.30
5.1.2. TheOfficeoftheHighCommissionerforHumanRights 1.32
5.1.3. SpecialProceduresoftheHumanRightsCouncilandSpecial
RepresentativesoftheUNSecretary-General 1.33
5.1.4. Treatybodies(andtheMainUNHumanRightsTreaties) 1.35
5.2. OtherTreatiesandStandards 1.60
5.3. RegionalTreatiesandArrangements 1.62
5.3.1. EuropeanConventiononHumanRights1950 1.63
5.3.2. EuropeanUnionCharterofFundamentalRights2000 1.69
vii
Contents
5.3.3. AmericanDeclarationoftheRightsandDuties
ofMan1948 1.71
5.3.4. AmericanConventiononHumanRights1969 1.72
5.3.5. AfricanCharteronHumanandPeoples’Rights1981 1.75
5.3.6. ArabCharteronHumanRights2004 1.78
5.3.7. ASEANIntergovernmentalCommissiononHuman
Rights2009 1.79
5.4. CustomaryInternationalLaw 1.80
6. Liability and Responsibility 1.82
7. Pleadings Before Human Rights Courts and Other Bodies 1.87
2. Identifying, Defining, and Classifying the Activities of Armed Forces
1. Introduction 2.01
2. International Armed Conflict 2.03
3. Non-international Armed Conflict 2.06
3.1. CommonArticle3andCustomaryInternationalLaw 2.06
3.1.1. IntensityofViolence 2.10
3.1.2. DegreeofOrganizationofNon-StateArmedGroups 2.13
3.2. AdditionalProtocolII 2.14
3.3. DistinctionBetweenAdditionalProtocolIIandCommonArticle3 2.16
4. The Interface Between Non-international Armed Conflict and
International Armed Conflict 2.19
4.1. ParticipationinaNon-internationalArmedConflictbyanExternalState 2.19
4.2. MilitaryAssistancebyaStatetoaNon-StateArmedGroup 2.22
4.3. Extra-territorialUseofForceAgainstIndividuals 2.27
5. Occupation 2.28
6. Other Military Activity 2.30
6.1. PeaceSupportOperations 2.30
6.2. HumanitarianAssistance/DisasterReliefOperations 2.33
6.3. MilitaryOperationsintheAirandintheMaritimeEnvironment 2.34
6.4. MultinationalOperations 2.35
7. The Classification of Military Activity 2.36
3. The Extra-Territorial Applicability of International Human
Rights Law
1. Introduction 3.01
1.1. JurisdictioninInternationalHumanRightsTreaties 3.07
1.2. TheApproachofHumanRightsTreatyBodiestothe
Extra-territorialApplicabilityofHumanRights 3.10
1.3. ‘DividingandTailoring’HumanRightsObligations 3.19
1.4. ObligationstoRespect,Protect,orFulfil 3.24
1.5. HumanRightsObligationsinDifficultOperationalCircumstances 3.25
1.6. TheRoleoftheLawofArmedConflict 3.27
viii
Contents
2. Categories of Territorial and Extra-territorial Jurisdiction 3.28
3. Territorial Jurisdiction 3.34
3.1. JurisdictiononVesselsandAircraft 3.36
4. ‘Effective Control’ Over an Area 3.39
4.1. Occupation 3.43
4.2. Indirect‘EffectiveControl’ 3.51
4.3. TheExerciseofTemporaryControlDuringMilitaryOperations 3.56
5. State Agent Authority and Control 3.59
6. Considerations for the Practitioner 3.67
4. The Relationship Between the Law of Armed Conflict and
International Human Rights Law
1. Introduction 4.01
2. The Case Law 4.08
3. The Model Used in This Guide: The ‘Active Hostilities’
and ‘Security Operations’ Frameworks 4.25
3.1. The‘ActiveHostilities’Framework 4.30
3.2. The‘SecurityOperations’Framework 4.33
3.3. InternationalArmedConflict 4.36
3.4. Non-internationalArmedConflict 4.41
3.5. BelligerentOccupation 4.56
4. Determining the Balance Between the Law of Armed Conflict and
International Human Rights Law Under the ‘Active Hostilities’
and ‘Security Operations’ Frameworks 4.61
4.1. ComplementaryObligationsUndertheLawofArmedConflict
andInternationalHumanRightsLaw 4.64
4.2. Rule-silenceUnderOneBodyofLaw 4.67
4.3. PotentiallyConflictingObligationsUndertheLawofArmed
ConflictandInternationalHumanRightsLaw 4.69
5. Derogation from International Human Rights Law Treaties 4.72
5.1. DerogationinInternationalArmedConflict 4.73
5.2. DerogationinNon-internationalArmedConflict 4.75
6. Conclusions 4.78
PART II
5. Conduct of Hostilities and Targeting
1. Introduction 5.01
1.1. WhenShouldthe‘ActiveHostilities’and‘SecurityOperations’
FrameworksBeApplied? 5.03
1.1.1. InternationalArmedConflict 5.05
1.1.2. Non-internationalArmedConflict 5.08
ix