UN Special Rapporteur reports on the use of armed drones and complain of lack of transparency and marketing ambiguities
Ben Emmerson, the UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights in the Covering of Terrorism, was commissioned in January, for the UN Human Rights Council a report on the legalitat of targeted totters with drones and the victims in Pakistan, in Yemen, in Somalia and Afghanistan to create. Emmerson has traveled with a Team Pakistan to find out on site, visited numerous conferences and talked to experts. Its report makes it clear, above all, that the drone states want to keep the US, coincidence and Israel their actions in the dark.
Reaper drone with lightfire missiles. Image: USAF
In May Emmerson still praised US Prasident Obama after he had promised to control the drone attacks in more detail (Obama in finesse). He also praised that the US government has published evidence for the first time, with which steps target persons are selected for the totung from the air (we can thirst, whom we hold for dangerous). That’s a step towards more transparency and vernate word, said Emmerson.
Now the special rapporteur has submitted an interim report, the final report will be available until the next year. The work has become more difficult than foreseen. He wants to examine 33 drone attacks, where civilians have come about living. This is not an indication that the attacks are not legal, but it emphasizes questions of transparency and justification. And this reproduces the reason to complain about the lack of transparency of the US government and to call them to submit information about the drone attacks and the victims.
It is still unclear under what conditions attacks with drones or other remote-controlled combat robots according to international law legally or. be illegal. Parallel to Emmerson also examines the UN Special Rapporteur for Extralegal Totungen, Christof Heyns. Similar to Emmerson, he calls for more transparency in his report on the use and disclosure of the legal basis. Uncertainty prevails in the special rapporteurs who both explain that the use of armed drones is not in itself against the Volkerrecht, but that they "easily abused" you can make and targeted totes much easier
After Emmerson, the increasing use of armed drones requires updating the rules. In an armed conflict a list "Individual military goals" to create, is not illegal from the outset. Therefore, he does not want from "Targeted totters" speak. Be unlawful "Warburish totungs" Abain of armed conflicts. Legally, it is crucial whether a person is killed in an armed conflict or outside such a one. However, the geographical space of an armed conflict is in question. The US government has seen each other in a worldwide armed conflict with Al-Qaeda and derived from the entitlement to become targeted tuts against terrorists in principle exports worldwide exports. Controversial is also whether Al-Qaeda continues to "Organized military group" is and whether you can use your associated groups with goals.
According to international law, a state in self-defense is only allowed to attack an armed group in another country if this or the UN Security Council has agreed or the group can be attributed to the state. The US, on the other hand, see drone attacks as justified as the state in which an armed group acts which can not neutralize or wants to neutralize from this outgoing threat. Meanwhile, said Emmerson, an attack from the bottom of one "anticipatory self-defense"! considered justified when an immediate threat is present. But there is no agreement about when such an immediate threat is present.
The aim of a legal attack can only be members of armed groups that are directly and actively involved in hostile activities. This leads to restrictions for targeted totters in organized armed groups, which usually recruit their members from the population. According to the guidelines of the International Red Cross, only such people can be considered as active members of an armed group, which passes on information that is directly needed for an attack, which trace the equipment in the immediate vicinity of an attack or act as guard or spy. Who makes propaganda, Campfer supplies or helps to escape, but thirst will become aim. It is unclear whether and where the United States will take into account these standards, but there are significant doubts as to whether the selection criteria that releases a person to launch is sufficiently.
In any case, the states that armed drones had to use at the dead of people, each funified amption argue that civilians have fallen victim to an attack. The results of the investigations had to be published. And the states urgently had to understand when drone attacks are right. The interest of this fragrance should be minimal. According to the role models, especially the US and Israel, each state will want to keep the action options openly, opponents not only monitor them with drones, but also to death.
Allegedly high number of totete civilians, but hardly any durable information
Emmerson points out in his report that he has received a statistic about the drone attacks by the Pakistani Dire Ministry during his visit. Afterwards his since 2004 to Marz 2013 at least 330 attacks in the tribal areas. By you are at least 2.200 people killed and 600 have been seriously injured. To determine exact numbers due to the security situation in these often difficult to access areas, which were also buried after the tradition of the Pashtunen living there possible to quickly. The Pakistani Government confirmed that at least 400 civilians had been killed, 200 more likely to have been a camphor. According to government officials, the numbers are probably high. However, since 2012, a significant rint of the number of totete civilians. While the Pakistan government probably tolerated earlier drone attacks, she rejected the Pakistani Parliament in 2012. The new government also sees a violation of the sovereignty and calls for immediate stop.
No more accurate numbers on the number of totenes are available for Yemen, Iraq, Afghanistan and Somalia. In Libya, although NATO drones have been flown 250 inserts and had shot down 145 missiles, but there were no civilians have been killed, says NATO. Doubt. For the Israeli attacks on the Gaza Strip 2008/2009 and 2012 is also unknown as many people were killed and whether including civilians.
Emmerson writes in view of the airplane, mostly missing information from the American, British and Israeli dispute, which have used armed drones: "The anxious obstacle for a valuation of the civil victims of drone attacks is the lack of transparency that makes it very difficult to objectively judge accusations of targeted totes." The result "Responsibility vacuum". Of course, Emmerson can not say it directly, but it was clear that the responsible people consciously benefit a little information about the drone attacks carried out by their disputes so as not to be denounced due to war crimes.
In the case of the US, Emmerson writes the stake of the CIA participation in Jemen and Pakistan "Almost unused obstacle for transparency" dar. Everything takes place here under secrecy, which also applies to the hidden missions of special units. So far, the United States had not yet created its own data on civil victims, a reference to national security is no reason to refuse transparency for Emmerson. Prasident Obama, however, has indicated to allow drone attacks in the future no longer exports through the CIA, but by the dispute. Although the deployment of parliament of parliacs, investigations are only carried out internally by the militar, the results are not published. In Israel, lack of transparency and account.