WHO MUST BEAR INTERNATIONAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR WRONGFUL CONDUCTS OF UN PEACEKEEPING FORCES?
Abstract
The present paper aims at studying the international rules which have to be applied for the purposes of determining whether a certain conduct taken in the context of a UN-led multinational operation must be attributed to troop-contributing states or to the United Nations. It will also consider whether, and under what circumstances, the same conduct may be attributed to both subjects. The analysis will mainly rely on the interpretation of the rules of attribution set forth in the ILC’s Articles on the responsibility of states, adopted in 2001, and in the Articles on the responsibility of international organizations adopted in 2011. In this regard, it is submitted that, when applying the criterion of attribution set forth in Article 7 of the 2011 Articles to UN peacekeeping forces, importance must be attached in the first place to the manner in which the transfer of powers was formally arranged between the organization and the troop-contributing state.
References
1. Condorelli, L. (2014). De la responsabilité internationale de l’ONU et/ou de l’État d’envoi lors d’actions de forces de Maintien de la Paix: l’écheveau de l’attribution (double?) devant le juge néerlandais [On the international responsibility of the UN and / or the State sending troops for actions of Peacekeeping forces: the tangle of attribution (double?) before the Dutch judge]. QIL-Questions of International Law, Zoom-in 1.
2. Comprehensive Review of the Whole Question of Peacekeeping Operations in All Their Aspects, Report of the Secretary-General, UN doc. A/49/681, 21 November 1994.
3. Court of Appeal of The Hague, Nuhanovic´ v. Netherlands, 5 July 2011, ILDC 1742 (NL 2011).
4. Dannenbaum, T. (2010). Translating the Standard of Effective Control into a System of Effective Accountability: How Liability Should be Apportioned for Violations of Human Rights by Member State Troop Contingents Serving as United Nations Peacekeepers // Harvard International Law Review.
5. District Court of The Hague, HN v. Netherlands (Ministry of Defence and Ministry of foreign Affairs), 10 September 2008, ILDC 1092 (NL 2008)
6. Draft Model Status-of-force Agreement between the United Nations and host countries, UN doc. A/45/594
7. Gill, T.D. (2011). “Legal Aspects of the Transfer of Authority in UN Peace Operations”, Netherlands yearbook of International Law.
8. House of Lords, Attorney General v. Nissan // 11 february 1969, All England Law Reports, 1969-I.
9. Leck, Ch. (2009). International Responsibility in United Nations Peacekeeping Operations: Command and Control Arrangements and the Attribution of Conduct // Melbourne Journal of International Law.
10. Marhic, G. (2013). Le régime de responsabilité des opérations de paix de l’Union européenne: quelles règles applicables? [The rules governing the accountability of EU peace operations: what rules should be applied] // Revue belge de droit international [belgian Journal of International Law].
11. Montejo, b. (2013). The notion of “effective control” under the Articles on the responsibility of international organizations // M. Ragazzi, ed., Responsibility of international organizations. Essays in memory of Sir Ian brownlie, Leiden-boston.
12. Nollkaemper, A. (2011). Dual Attribution: Liability of the Netherlands for Conduct of Dutchbat in Srebrenica // Journal of International Criminal Justice.
13. Report of the International Law Commission.
14. Salerno, f. (2013). International responsibility for the conduct of “blue Helmets”: Exploring the organic link // M. Ragazzi, ed., Responsibility of international organizations. Essays in memory of Sir Ian brownlie, Leiden-boston, 2013.
15. Sari, A. (2012). UN Peacekeeping Operations and Article 7 ARIO: The Missing Link // International Organizations Law Review.
16. Sari, A., and Wessel, R.A. (2013). International Responsibility for EU Military Operations: finding the EU’s Place in the Global Accountability Regime // b. Van Vooren, S. blockmans and J. Wouters, eds, The EU’s Role in Global Governance. The Legal Dimension, Oxford, 2013.
17. Seyersted, f. (1961). United Nations forces: Some Legal Problems // british yearbook of International Law.
18. Tsagourias, N. (2011). The Responsibility of International Organizations for Military Missions // M. Odello and R. Piotrowicz, eds, International Military Missions and International Law, Leiden, 2011.
19. UN doc. A/CN.4/545
20. UN Doc. A/CN.4/637/Add.1
21. Yearbook of the International Law Commission, 2001, vol. Two, Part. II
Review
For citations:
Palchetti P. WHO MUST BEAR INTERNATIONAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR WRONGFUL CONDUCTS OF UN PEACEKEEPING FORCES? Journal of Law and Administration. 2016;(4):98-114. (In Russ.)
Views:
349
Email this article 