Translate this page:
Nota Bene. Books, journals, publishing technologies.
Please select your language to translate the article


You can just close the window to don't translate ☒
Library
 Your profile
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Back to contents

Law and Politics
Reference:

Savryga K.P. Use of force by the personnel of private military and security companies in conflict zones

Abstract: This work analyzes the legal regimes within which the personnel of private military and security companies (PMSC) are allowed to use force. Analysis is conducted on the consequences for the legal status of the personnel of PMSC in cases of application of various regimes. The author clarifies the notion of direct involvement in military activity and legal consequences. Pertaining to the legal regime of self-defense the author provides requirements that should be met in order to use force and not lose the protection of international law. It is determined that the personnel of PMSC can use force only within the framework of two legal regimes: direct involvement in armed conflict, and self-defense. The author concludes that vast majority of the PMSC personnel does not have the status of combatants and their direct involvement in military action can lead to loss of protection that is given to them as civilians by international law. Thus, the only solution for the personnel of PMSC is use of force in the regime of self-defense. It should be noted that this is only allowed with regards to objects protected by international law (civilian population and objects), otherwise their actions would be considered as direct involvement in military operations.


Keywords:

Rules of engagement, Non-combatant, Combatant, Self-defense, Military operation, Use of force, International law, Human rights law, International humanitarian law, Private military company

This article can be downloaded freely in PDF format for reading. Download article


References
1. De Nevers R. Private security companies and the law of war// Security dialogue. 2009. ¹2. rp.169-190
2. Corn G. Unarmed but how dangerous? Civilian augmentees, the law of armed conflict and the search for more effective test for permissible civilian battlefield function// Journal of national security law and policy. 2008. ¹2, rr.257-287
3. Dinstein Y. The Conduct of Hostilities under the Law of International Armed Conflict.Cambridge. 2004. pp.320
4. ICRC. Fifth Expert Meeting on Notion of Direct participation in Hostilities: Summary report. 2008.pp.78
5. Francioni F., Ronzitti N. War by contract: human rights, humanitarian law and private contractors. Oxford. 2011.pp.532
6. ICRC. Fourth expert meeting on the notion of direct participation in hostilities : summary report. 2006. pp.85
7. Melzer. N, Interpretive Guidance on Notion of Direct Participation in Hostilities.ICRC. Geneva. 2009, pp.92
8. Raad D. “Armed attack” after the “Oil Platform case”// Leiden journal of international law. 2004. ¹17, rr.719-735
9. O’Connell M. Defining armed conflict// Journal of conflict and security law, 2008. ¹3. rp.394-400
10. Sandoz Y., Swinarsky C., Zimmermann B. (ed) Commentary on the Additional Protocols of 8 June 1977 to the Geneva Convention of 12 August 1949.(Geneva. 1987.pp.1944
11. Sassoli M., Cameron L., The Protection of Civilian Objects Current State of the Law and Issues de Lege Ferenda, in Ronzziti N., Venturini G. (eds), Current Issues in the International Humanitarian Law of Air Warfare. Utrecht. Eleven. 2005, pp. 35-74
12. Schmitt M. The Interpretive Guidance on Notion on Direct Participation in Hostilities: A Critical Analysis//Harvard National Security Law Journal vol.1. 2010.pp.20-43
13. Schmitt M., Pejic J. International law and armed conflict: Exploring the Faultlines, BRILL. 2007. pp.590
14. Solis G. The law of armed conflict: international humanitarian law in war. Cambridge.2010. p.659
15. Venice Commission, Report on private military and security firms and erosion the state monopoly on the use of force(CDL-AD(2009)038. Study 531/2009)june 2009
16. Nebol'sina M.A. Chastnye voennye i okhrannye kompanii v Irake i Afganistane: aspekty deyatel'nosti i mekhanizmy kontrolya // Ezhegodnik IMI.2011 ss.288-307
17. Rusinova V.N. Rukovodstvo Mezhdunarodnogo komiteta Krasnogo kresta po tolkovaniyu ponyatiya «neposredstvennoe uchastie v voennykh deistviyakh»: pro et contra // Moskovskii zhurnal mezhdunarodnogo prava. 2011. ¹ 4. S. 19-36
18. Syrkhaev A.A. Privatizatsiya voiny v SShA // Istoriya gosudarstva i prava. 2012. N 16. S. 46 – 48
19. Savryga K.P. Chastnye voennye i okhrannye kompanii po mezhdunarodnomu pravu// Mezhdunarodnoe pravo i mezhdunarodnye organizatsii-International law and international organization.2013 ¹4, ss.456-464
20. Cockayne J. The global organization of legitimate violence: military entrepreneurs and the private face of international humanitarian law//International review of the Red Cross. Vol.88. ¹863. 2006. pp.459-490
21. Cameron L. and Chetail V., Privatizing War: Private Military and Security Companies under Public International Law. Cambridge. 2013.pp.720
22. E. Yu. Bondarenko. Mezhdunarodno-pravovye aspekty voennogo plena v mezhgosudarstvennykh i rossiiskikh normativno-pravovykh aktakh kontsa XIX – XX vv. // Mezhdunarodnoe pravo i mezhdunarodnye organizatsii / International Law and International Organizations. – 2012. – ¹ 2. – S. 104-107.
23. T.U. Khakimov. Razvitie normativno-pravovoi bazy rezhimov chrezvychainogo i voennogo polozheniya // Pravo i politika. – 2013. – ¹ 1. – S. 104-107. DOI: 10.7256/1811-9018.2013.01.8
24. Yu.A. Razumov. Genezis implementatsii norm mezhdunarodnogo prava v voennoi i pogranichnoi sferakh: periody i faktory // Pravo i politika. – 2013. – ¹ 1. – S. 104-107. DOI: 10.7256/1811-9018.2013.01.15
25. Kostyukhin A.A.. Zapadnaya ekspertnaya otsenka vozmozhnostei i perspektiv voennogo sotrudnichestva s gosudarstvami Tsentral'noi Azii // Mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya. – 2013. – ¹ 1. – S. 104-107. DOI: 10.7256/2305-560Kh.2013.01.8
26. A.A. Semyachkin. Sovremennoe sostoyanie rossiisko-indiiskikh otnoshenii v sfere voenno-tekhnicheskogo sotrudnichestva // Natsional'naya bezopasnost' / nota bene. – 2013. – ¹ 1. – S. 104-107. DOI: 10.7256/2073-8560.2013.01.4
27. A.V. Fomin. Normativno-pravovye aspekty voenno-tekhnicheskogo sotrudnichestva Rossii s gosudarstvami-chlenami ODKB // Politika i Obshchestvo. – 2013. – ¹ 2. – S. 104-107. DOI: 10.7256/1812 – 8696.2013.02.8
28. Shinin O.V.. Organizatsiya organami Sovetskoi vlasti Amurskoi oblasti voennoi agenturnoi razvedki v 1920 g. // Istoricheskii zhurnal: nauchnye issledovaniya. – 2013. – ¹ 5. – S. 104-107. DOI: 10.7256/2222-1972.2013.5.8839
29. Savryga K.P.. Chastnye voennye i okhrannye kompanii po mezhdunarodnomu pravu // Mezhdunarodnoe pravo i mezhdunarodnye organizatsii / International Law and International Organizations. – 2013. – ¹ 4. – S. 104-107. DOI: 10.7256/2226-6305.2013.4.10098
30. Trunov I.L.. Pravovoe regulirovanie chastnykh voennykh kompanii // Administrativnoe i munitsipal'noe pravo. – 2013. – ¹ 11. – S. 104-107. DOI: 10.7256/1999-2807.2013.11.9670
31. Sergunin A.A. KONTsEPT «VOENNAYa BEZOPASNOST''» I EVOLYuTsIYa VOENNO-POLITIChESKOGO MYShLENIYa POSTSOVETSKOI ROSSII // NB: Natsional'naya bezopasnost'. — 2012.-¹ 2.-S.119-140. DOI: 10.7256/2306-0417.2012.2.183. URL: http://e-notabene.ru/nb/article_183.html
32. Razumov Yu.A. Nekotorye konstitutsionno-pravovoye osobennosti realizatsii norm mezhdunarodnogo prava v voennoi sfere v zarubezhnykh stranakh // NB: Mezhdunarodnoe pravo. — 2013.-¹ 1.-S.171-183. DOI: 10.7256/2306-9899.2013.1.684. URL: http://e-notabene.ru/wl/article_684.html
33. Danilov A.P.. Voennyi aspekt arkticheskoi politiki Rossii. // Natsional'naya bezopasnost' / nota bene. – 2013. – ¹ 6. – S. 104-107. DOI: 10.7256/2073-8560.2013.6.9904
34. Andryushin S.V. Rol' Evropeiskogo oboronnogo agentstva v voennoi integratsii Evropeiskogo Soyuza // NB: Natsional'naya bezopasnost'. — 2013.-¹ 6.-S.31-44. DOI: 10.7256/2306-0417.2013.6.10681. URL: http://e-notabene.ru/nb/article_10681.htm
35. Sazonova K.L. Institut otvetstvennosti gosudarstv za primenenie sily: sovremennoe sostoyanie i perspektivy razvitiya // NB: Voprosy prava i politiki. - 2012. - 3. - C. 78 - 91. URL: http://www.e-notabene.ru/lr/article_255.html
36. M. R. Khubieva Konkurentsiya yurisdiktsii v sluchae predpisaniya vremennykh mer pravovoi zashchity pri razreshenii mezhdunarodnykh morskikh sporov // Mezhdunarodnoe pravo i mezhdunarodnye organizatsii / International Law and International Organizations. - 2012. - 2. - C. 119 - 123.
37. A. R. Khagush Rol' mezhdunarodnykh dvustoronnikh dogovorov v regulirovanii voenno-tekhnicheskogo sotrudnichestva Rossii s inostrannymi gosudarstvami // Mezhdunarodnoe pravo i mezhdunarodnye organizatsii / International Law and International Organizations. - 2012. - 2. - C. 124 - 132.
38. D. E. Vidus Otvetstvennost' gosudarstv za genotsid // Mezhdunarodnoe pravo i mezhdunarodnye organizatsii / International Law and International Organizations. - 2012. - 2. - C. 92 - 102.
Nota Bene
 
For authors
 
Other
 
Our sites
© 1998 – 2024 Nota Bene. Publishing Technologies. NB-Media Ltd.