New Security Council resolution on protection of journalist

The Security Councilhas passed a new resolution on the protection of journalists yesterday. Resolution 2222 (2015) builds on Resolution 1738, adopted on 23 December 2006, which is the only Council decision to specifically address the safety and protection of journalists, media professionals and associated personnel. The new resolution was adopted unanimously by the Council. The full text can be found here. Background on the drafting of the resolution can be found here.

In addition to the Council debate, an open debate and panel discussion was held open to all UN member states and civil society entitled "Protection of Journalists and Media Freedom - Key to Sustainable Future". The open debate was co-hosted by Lithuania and Latvia. Latvia currently holds the EU president presidency until 1 July 2015. The recording of the open debate is available here (note there are three parts). The concept note for the open debate circulated by Lithuania, the Council president in May 2015, is available here.

/ Sally

Continue reading »

UK court decision on Iraqi civilians detention and transfer by UK forces

On 18 May 2015 the High Court of England and Wales handed down a decision on a preliminary issue relating to a number of claims in the ongoing litigation regarding treatment of Iraqi civilians detained by UK forces during the conflict 2003-2009.

The decision concerned a number of individuals who had initially been detained by UK forces and later transferred to the custody of US armed forces. They claim they suffered torture and other serious ill-treatment while detained by US forces and that the UK government is liable for that ill-treatment and for alleged unlawful detention after they were handed over. Their claim is based in part on the law of tort, a common law mechanism for claiming damages for harm suffered against a civil wrong. In the UK, the applicable law to determine that question would be Iraq law, as that is where the events occurred. As such, the court was asked to determine whether the UK Ministry of Defence would be liable under Iraqi law for the harm caused to the Iraqi civilians making the claim.

The court held that "if the claimants are able to prove that after being handed over by UK forces to the armed forces of the United States they were subjected to serious and deliberate ill-treatment by US soldiers, then, to establish that the defendant is jointly liable for their injuries under Iraqi law,...the claimants [would have to prove]: (a) an intention to facilitate the claimant's ill-treatment; or (b) actual foresight that the claimant might suffer such ill-treatment, coupled with failure to act in accordance with a legal duty to protect the claimant; or (c) contemplation and acceptance of the risk that transferring the claimant would facilitate his ill-treatment".

The full judgement can be found here. The claims will now be referred back to the courts for further hearings to make determinations on the merits of the claims involved.

There are hundreds of claims still pending before the courts brought by Iraqi civilians against the UK Ministry of Defence. The UK government established the Iraq Historic Allegations Team (IHAT) to review and investigate allegations of abuse of Iraqi civilians by UK armed forces personnel in Iraq during the period of 2003 to July 2009. The Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights handed down a judgement (Hassan v UK) in September last year relating to a claim of an individual in similar circumstances, who was held in the same camp as the individuals in the UK court claim. In finding the UK had not violated Mr Hassan's rights, the Grand Chamber made important findings on the relation between the law of armed conflict and human rights law, grounds for detention and extraterritorial application of the Convention.

/ Sally

Continue reading »

New guidelines on the right to review lawfulness of detention

The UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention has adopted a new "Basic Principles and Guidelines on Remedies and Procedures on the Right of Anyone Deprived of His or Her Liberty by Arrest or Detention to Bring Proceedings Before Court". The document provides a comprehensive review of the principles on the judicial review of the lawfulness of detention and includes recommendations and guidance for detention during armed conflict. The text has now been submitted to the Human Rights Council. Among other things, the principles set out that in non-international armed conflicts administrative detention or internment may only be permitted in the exceptional circumstance where public emergency is invoked to justify such detention and in accordance with the requirement for derogation from human rights obligations.

The full text of the principles was included in a press release available here.

/ Sally

Continue reading »

Update: UN Appeals Tribunal rules on suspension of whistleblower in CAR scandal

On Tuesday 5 May the UN Appeals Tribunal handed down its decision concerning the individual under investigation for leaking a confidential report detailing allegations of serious sexual assault against children by members of the peace mission in Central Africa Republic. The Tribunal ruled that the decision to suspend Anders Kompass on administrative leave was unlawful according to the UN's internal rules.

The judgement of the UN Appeals Tribunal can be found here.

In related news, French prosecutors announced they have launched an investigation into the allegations against the French armed forces personnel.

/ Sally

Continue reading »

Joint SIPRI and International Law Centre event to be held on autonomous weapons

The International Law Centre of the Swedish Defence University together with SIPRI invite you to a public lecture on 11 May:

Do we need new norms and new laws to control fully autonomous weapon systems?

Please note that you have to confirm your participation. Information on how to confirm will be found below.

To what extent does the increased automation and computerization of warfare challenge our interpretation of the law and its applicability, and possibly require revising existing law and or writing law anew? These questions are at the core of the current international debate on lethal autonomous weapon systems (LAWS) that is currently taking place under the framework of the 1981 United Nations Conventions on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW). At present, experts, NGOs and states parties to the Convention, have very different interpretations as to whether LAWS—understood as weapons which could select and engage target independent of human control— could comply with international laws, or might require special regulations.

Dr Peter Asaro will present and discuss his most recent publication, ‘Jus Nascendi, Robotics Weapons and the Martens Clause’, in which he addresses specific reasons for establishing an international legal instrument to prohibit the use of lethal autonomous weapons systems. He will also present the legal framework and means by which new law could come into place for new robotics technologies, as well as the philosophical issues that arise in this process.

Featured Speaker

Dr Peter Asaro, Assistant Professor with the School of Media at the The New School, USA and Visiting Fellow with the Center for Information Technology Policy of Princeton University, USA. Dr Asaro is a philosopher of science, technology and media. His current research focuses on the social, cultural, political, legal and ethical dimensions of military robotics and UAVs (drones). He is a member of International Committee for Robot Arms Control (ICRAC) and the Campaign to Stop Killer Robots.

Moderators

Dr Heather Harrison Dinniss, Senior Lecturer in International Law, International Law Centre, Department of Security, Strategy and Leadership, Swedish Defence University. Her research focuses on the impact of modern warfare on international humanitarian law, in particular on cyber warfare, advanced and autonomous weapons systems.

Dr Vincent Boulanin, Researcher, Cybersecurity Project, European Security Programme Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. He works on issues related to the production, use and control of emerging military and security technologies.

Where and When

Monday 11 May 2015, 17.15-18.45 at Swedish Defence University,

Drottning Kristinas väg 37, Stockholm

Room: Sverigesalen

Please confirm your participation no later than Thursday, 7 May 2015 by sending an email with your name,  affiliation, and ID card number (required for entering the building) to Reint-Jan Groot Nuelend, grootnuelend@sipri.org.

For further questions please contact Dr Vincent Boulanin, + 46 76 628 6215, Boulanin@sipri.org

/Heather

Continue reading »

The International Law Centre's Dr Harrison Dinniss on BBC: How scary is cyber warfare?

Senior lecturer Dr Heather Harrison Dinniss recently gave an interview to the BBC World Service radio programme "The Inquiry" on the topic 'Is cyber warfare really that scary?' Are the warnings of a cyber Pearl Harbour hype or reality? Four expert witnesses discussed the possibility of online attacks causing damage and death, and whether by focusing on these dramatic scenarios we might be missing the real threat.

You can listen to the interview here (link to the BBC website).

/Heather

Continue reading »