This paper will explore responsibilities that might arise under international law from the
privatisation of the military use of force.
The aim of the paper is threefold: first, it explores which responsibilities states
and international organizations incur under international law if they use the services of
Private Military Companies (PMCs), ie if they privatise the use of military force. Second, the paper will use this survey of responsibilities to address the question whether there are, at present,
substantial gaps in international law that need to be filled in order to deal adequately
with the outsourcing of military force. Third, the paper will then suggest how to deal
with such gaps.
The paper will be structured as follows: Part II introduces the private military industry. The focus here will be on a categorization of the industry and a description of its impact on the common understanding of warfare which assumes a state-monopoly on the use of force. An understanding of the different categories within the industry and the industry’s impact on warfare is essential for addressing the legal question of whether PMCs are sufficiently covered by the existing international laws. Part III deals with the responsibility of states arising from privatising the use of force; this part will first provide a brief categorization of states that might incur responsibility and then introduce, as a point of departure and mental guideline, the accepted rule of state responsibility, whereby a state incurs responsibility for the commission of international wrongful acts. For the evaluation of a state responsibilities, part III will then proceed to introduce states’ international obligations that are most likely to be violated in connection with the privatisation of the use of force.
Inhaltsverzeichnis (Table of Contents)
- I. INTRODUCTION
- II. THE PMC INDUSTRY
- Introduction
- Categorisation of the industry
- (a) Military provider firms
- (b) Military consulting firms
- (c) Military support firms
- The impact of the industry
- (a) The quantitative impact
- (b) The qualitative impact
- Are PMCs and/or their employees mercenaries?
- (a) PMCs and their employees are not effectively covered by existing international anti-mercenary laws
- (b) PMCs differ significantly from traditional mercenaries
- (c) Summary
- III. STATE RESPONSIBILITY
- General rules of state responsibility
- Categorisation of states
- Breach of international obligation
- (a) Law on the recourse of force (jus ad bellum)
- (i) The prohibition on the use of force
- (ii) The principle of non-intervention
- (b) Laws of neutrality
- (c) International humanitarian law (jus in bello)
- (i) Introduction
- (ii) Obligations of the occupying power
- (iii) Obligations in connection with prisoners of war
- (iv) Obligations in connection with the principle of distinction
- (d) Other obligations
- (i) International humanitarian law
- (ii) International human rights law
- (ii) Arms restriction and arms embargos
- (iii) Principle of permanent sovereignty over natural resources
- (iv) Mercenary laws
- Where PMC conduct is attributable to a state
- (a) Introduction
- (b) Article 4 DASR ‘state organ’
- (c) Article 5 DASR ‘authorized by the law to exercise governmental authority’
- (d) Article 6 DASR ‘organ placed at the disposal of a State by another State’
- (e) Article 8 DASR ‘instruction or direction and control’
- (f) Conduct ultra vires
- Where PMC conduct is not attributable to a state
- (a) Introduction to the concept of due diligence
- (b) Due diligence and international human rights law
- (c) Due diligence and international humanitarian law
- Preliminary summary
- IV. INTERNATIONAL ORGANISATIONS' RESPONSIBILITY
- Introduction: international organisations and their present and potential future use of PMCs
- Preliminary remarks on the responsibility of international organisations for the commission of international delicts
- General rules of international organisation's responsibility
- Breach of international obligation
- (a) The capacity to bear international obligations: are international organisations vested with objective legal personality?
- (b) Conduct ultra vires the competences of the international organisation
- (c) International humanitarian law
- (i) The applicability ratione personae
- (ii) Applicability ratione materiae in situations of armed conflict
- Where the PMC conduct is attributable to the international organisation
- Where the PMC conduct is not attributable to the international organisation
- Preliminary summary
Zielsetzung und Themenschwerpunkte (Objectives and Key Themes)
This dissertation aims to explore the legal responsibilities arising under international law from the privatization of military force. It examines the roles and responsibilities of both states and international organizations in relation to Private Military Companies (PMCs).
- The increasing privatization of military services since the end of the Cold War.
- The categorization and impact of the PMC industry.
- State responsibility for the actions of PMCs.
- The legal status of PMCs in relation to mercenary laws.
- Responsibility of international organizations for PMC actions.
Zusammenfassung der Kapitel (Chapter Summaries)
Chapter I: Introduction introduces the topic of privatized military force and its increasing prevalence since the end of the Cold War, highlighting the contributing factors.
Chapter II: The PMC Industry categorizes PMCs (military providers, consultants, and support firms), analyzing their quantitative and qualitative impacts. It also discusses the legal ambiguities surrounding their status relative to mercenary laws.
Chapter III: State Responsibility examines general rules of state responsibility and delves into situations where the conduct of PMCs might be attributed to a state, considering various legal articles and principles such as due diligence.
Chapter IV: International Organizations' Responsibility explores the responsibility of international organizations for the actions of PMCs, examining their capacity to bear international obligations and the application of international humanitarian law in this context.
Schlüsselwörter (Keywords)
Private Military Companies (PMCs), privatization of military force, state responsibility, international humanitarian law, international human rights law, international organizations, mercenaries, jus ad bellum, jus in bello, due diligence, attribution.
- Quote paper
- LL.M. Frank Heemann (Author), 2006, Privatising the military use of force, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/124464
