8 May 2014
In a decision of 2 May 2014, the British High Court of Justice held that the United Kingdom (UK) was responsible for the continued detention of an individual in Afghanistan, in violation of human rights law. The decision has already been commented on, notably here, here and here, focusing on the affirmation by the Court that the UK’s international human rights obligations applied to the non-international armed conflict in Afghanistan. This post will briefly address another important aspect of the decision, that of attribution of conduct.
The case was brought by Serdar Mohammed, an Afghan national who had been captured by British forces part of the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in April 2010 on the suspicion of being a member of the Taliban. He remained detained without charges until July 2010, when he was transferred to Afghan authorities. He claimed compensation from the UK for a breach of his right to liberty under Article 5 ECHR.
Apart from finding that the detention was in breach of applicable human rights obligations, the Court engaged in a relatively extensive discussion of whether the disputed conduct was to be attributed to the UK (paras 158–187, pp 47–55), thereby adding a new stone to the debate on allocation of responsibility in international military operations. (more…)
7 September 2013
On 6 September 2013, the Dutch Supreme Court confirmed that the Netherlands was responsible in relation to the death of three Bosnians in Srebrenica. Finding no ground for cassation, it upheld the 2011 decisions of the Court of Appeal of The Hague, concluding the last stage of proceedings in the important cases of Nuhanović and Mustafić. These cases are remarkable in that a remedy is finally provided to some victims, but also because they comport a number of important findings for the debate on the shared responsibility of States and international organizations for the conduct of peacekeepers. Notably, the Supreme Court unequivocally recognizes the possibility of multiple attribution, notably under the test of effective control (para 3.11.2). (more…)
2 May 2013
Jérôme Reymond has recently published the book L’attribution de comportements d’organes de facto et d’agents de l’Etat en droit international – Etude sur la responsabilité internationale des Etats (Schulthess, 2013).
This book on international state responsibility seeks to establish the precise scope of the rules on attribution of conduct of de facto organs and state agents under international law.
Source: Schulthess | L'attribution de comportements d'organes de facto et d'agents de l'Etat en droit international | Jérôme Reymond | 2013
2012
In July 2011, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) held in Al-Jedda v. United Kingdom (link) that the UK was responsible for the misconduct of its troops deployed as part of the UN-authorized Multinational Force in … Read more