Accountability for private military and security contractors in the international legal regime

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

The rapidly growing presence of private military and security contractors (PMSCs) in armed conflict and post-conflict situations in the last decade brought corresponding incidents of serious misconduct by PMSC personnel. The two most infamous events-one involving the firm formerly known as Black water and the other involving Titan and CACI-engendered scrutiny of available mechanisms for criminal and civil accountability of the individuals whose misconduct caused the harm. Along a parallel track, scholars and policymakers began examining the responsibility of states and international organizations for the harm that occurred. Both approaches have primarily focused on post-conduct accountability-of the individuals who caused the harm, of the state in which the harm occurred, or of the state or organization that hired the PMSC whose personnel caused the harm. Less attention, however, has been paid to the idea of pre-conduct accountability for PMSCs and their personnel. A broad understanding of "accountability for" PMSCs and their personnel encompasses not only responsibility for harm caused by conduct, but responsibility for hiring, hosting, and monitoring these entities, as well as responsibility to the victims of the harm. This article provides a comprehensive approach for analyzing the existing international legal regime, and whether and to what extent the legal regime provides "accountability for" PMSCs and their personnel. It does so by proposing a practical construct of three phases based on PMSC operations-Contracting, In-the-Field, and Post-Conduct-with which to assess the various bodies of international law.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)193-212
Number of pages20
JournalCriminal Justice Ethics
Volume31
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 2012
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Military
responsibility
personnel
conflict situation
International Organizations
hiring
international law
incident
monitoring
firm
organization
water
event

Keywords

  • Accountability
  • International criminal law
  • International humanitarian law
  • Internationalhuman rights law
  • Montreux document
  • Private military and security contractors
  • U.N. draft convention on private military and security contractors

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Law

Cite this

Accountability for private military and security contractors in the international legal regime. / Huskey, Kristine A.

In: Criminal Justice Ethics, Vol. 31, No. 3, 12.2012, p. 193-212.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{d4777b9128bc478382e003592a3f751f,
title = "Accountability for private military and security contractors in the international legal regime",
abstract = "The rapidly growing presence of private military and security contractors (PMSCs) in armed conflict and post-conflict situations in the last decade brought corresponding incidents of serious misconduct by PMSC personnel. The two most infamous events-one involving the firm formerly known as Black water and the other involving Titan and CACI-engendered scrutiny of available mechanisms for criminal and civil accountability of the individuals whose misconduct caused the harm. Along a parallel track, scholars and policymakers began examining the responsibility of states and international organizations for the harm that occurred. Both approaches have primarily focused on post-conduct accountability-of the individuals who caused the harm, of the state in which the harm occurred, or of the state or organization that hired the PMSC whose personnel caused the harm. Less attention, however, has been paid to the idea of pre-conduct accountability for PMSCs and their personnel. A broad understanding of {"}accountability for{"} PMSCs and their personnel encompasses not only responsibility for harm caused by conduct, but responsibility for hiring, hosting, and monitoring these entities, as well as responsibility to the victims of the harm. This article provides a comprehensive approach for analyzing the existing international legal regime, and whether and to what extent the legal regime provides {"}accountability for{"} PMSCs and their personnel. It does so by proposing a practical construct of three phases based on PMSC operations-Contracting, In-the-Field, and Post-Conduct-with which to assess the various bodies of international law.",
keywords = "Accountability, International criminal law, International humanitarian law, Internationalhuman rights law, Montreux document, Private military and security contractors, U.N. draft convention on private military and security contractors",
author = "Huskey, {Kristine A.}",
year = "2012",
month = "12",
doi = "10.1080/0731129X.2012.737169",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "31",
pages = "193--212",
journal = "Criminal Justice Ethics",
issn = "0731-129X",
publisher = "Institute for Criminal Justice Ethics",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Accountability for private military and security contractors in the international legal regime

AU - Huskey, Kristine A.

PY - 2012/12

Y1 - 2012/12

N2 - The rapidly growing presence of private military and security contractors (PMSCs) in armed conflict and post-conflict situations in the last decade brought corresponding incidents of serious misconduct by PMSC personnel. The two most infamous events-one involving the firm formerly known as Black water and the other involving Titan and CACI-engendered scrutiny of available mechanisms for criminal and civil accountability of the individuals whose misconduct caused the harm. Along a parallel track, scholars and policymakers began examining the responsibility of states and international organizations for the harm that occurred. Both approaches have primarily focused on post-conduct accountability-of the individuals who caused the harm, of the state in which the harm occurred, or of the state or organization that hired the PMSC whose personnel caused the harm. Less attention, however, has been paid to the idea of pre-conduct accountability for PMSCs and their personnel. A broad understanding of "accountability for" PMSCs and their personnel encompasses not only responsibility for harm caused by conduct, but responsibility for hiring, hosting, and monitoring these entities, as well as responsibility to the victims of the harm. This article provides a comprehensive approach for analyzing the existing international legal regime, and whether and to what extent the legal regime provides "accountability for" PMSCs and their personnel. It does so by proposing a practical construct of three phases based on PMSC operations-Contracting, In-the-Field, and Post-Conduct-with which to assess the various bodies of international law.

AB - The rapidly growing presence of private military and security contractors (PMSCs) in armed conflict and post-conflict situations in the last decade brought corresponding incidents of serious misconduct by PMSC personnel. The two most infamous events-one involving the firm formerly known as Black water and the other involving Titan and CACI-engendered scrutiny of available mechanisms for criminal and civil accountability of the individuals whose misconduct caused the harm. Along a parallel track, scholars and policymakers began examining the responsibility of states and international organizations for the harm that occurred. Both approaches have primarily focused on post-conduct accountability-of the individuals who caused the harm, of the state in which the harm occurred, or of the state or organization that hired the PMSC whose personnel caused the harm. Less attention, however, has been paid to the idea of pre-conduct accountability for PMSCs and their personnel. A broad understanding of "accountability for" PMSCs and their personnel encompasses not only responsibility for harm caused by conduct, but responsibility for hiring, hosting, and monitoring these entities, as well as responsibility to the victims of the harm. This article provides a comprehensive approach for analyzing the existing international legal regime, and whether and to what extent the legal regime provides "accountability for" PMSCs and their personnel. It does so by proposing a practical construct of three phases based on PMSC operations-Contracting, In-the-Field, and Post-Conduct-with which to assess the various bodies of international law.

KW - Accountability

KW - International criminal law

KW - International humanitarian law

KW - Internationalhuman rights law

KW - Montreux document

KW - Private military and security contractors

KW - U.N. draft convention on private military and security contractors

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85027955095&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85027955095&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/0731129X.2012.737169

DO - 10.1080/0731129X.2012.737169

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85027955095

VL - 31

SP - 193

EP - 212

JO - Criminal Justice Ethics

JF - Criminal Justice Ethics

SN - 0731-129X

IS - 3

ER -