View previous stories
	Landmine kills Afghan girls collecting firewood by International Campaign to Ban Landmines   The International Campaign to Ban Landmines (ICBL) is a global network in over 100 countries that works for a world free of antipersonnel landmines, where landmine survivors can lead fulfilling lives.   The Campaign was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in recognition of its efforts to bring about the 1997 Mine Ban Treaty. Since then, we have been advocating for the words of the treaty to become a reality, demonstrating on a daily basis that civil society has the power to change the world.   17 Dec, 2012 (Reuters)   A landmine left over from decades of conflict in Afghanistan has killed 10 girls as they collected firewood in the east of the country.   Officials say the girls, aged between nine and 11, were collecting wood in remote Chaparhar district, near the border with Pakistan, which is infested with some of the world"s most dangerous militant groups.   Chaparhar district governor Mohammad Sediq Dawlatzai told AFP they accidentally struck the mine with an axe.   "An old mine left over from the time of the jihad [against Soviet troops in the 1980s] exploded, killing 10 girls and wounding two others," he said.   Despite international clearance efforts, more than three decades of war have left Afghanistan one of the most heavily-mined countries in the world.   The explosives were placed during three recent conflicts: the 1980s war against the Soviets, the 1990s civil war, and during fighting between the Northern Alliance and the Taliban before they were ousted from power in 2001.   The Taliban now plant bombs, or improvised explosive devices, to target Afghan troops and their NATO backers, but these regularly kill civilians.   Women and children are often the victims of the war between the Taliban and US-led NATO and Afghan forces, now in its 11th year.   * Afghanistan: More than 2 million people at risk of cold, disease and malnutrition:   http://www.unocha.org/top-stories/all-stories/afghanistan-more-2-million-people-risk-cold-disease-and-malnutrition Visit the related web page
	Privatising conflict means bypassing democratic oversight by Arjun Sethi, Faiza Patel Chairperson of the Working Group on the use of Mercenaires & agencies   Nov 2013   UN expert group calls for robust international regulation of private military and security companies   Governments worldwide must recognize the need for a legally binding international agreement to regulate the use and activities of private military and security companies (PMSCs) to complement existing regulatory mechanisms, the United Nations Working Group on the use of mercenaries urged today.   “Providing security is a fundamental human right and a fundamental responsibility of the State,” said independent expert Anton Katz, who currently chairs the five-member UN expert group. “But the ever expanding activities of PMSCs continue to raise a number of challenges, and the outsourcing of security to these companies by States create risks for human rights, hence the need to regulate their activities.”   Mr. Katz stressed during the presentation of the Working Group’s report to the UN General Assembly that existing national legislation is not sufficient to address the challenges posed by PMSCs, due to inadequacies related registering and licensing, and the lack of effective and transparent mechanisms and remedies for human rights violations.   “These limitations are worsened by the transnational nature of PMSCs and the difficulties in ensuring accountability for any human rights violations that may occur,” the expert said. “The Working Group is thus currently encouraging States to recognize the need for an internationally legally binding instrument that will complement existing mechanisms in regulating PMSCs.”   Mr. Katz also referred to the value of self-regulatory initiatives such as the Montreux Document and the International Code of Conduct which have been established by a number of States and corporate actors in the past years to try and address the challenges posed by PMSCs. “However,” he warned, “these initiatives are not legally binding and cannot be considered as complete solutions for the problems concerning PMSCs.”   On the issue of mercenaries, the independent expert noted that it is still a live issue. “Recent events in several parts of the world clearly demonstrate that mercenaries remain a threat not only to security but also to human rights and the right of peoples to self-determination. We continue to call on States to cooperate in eliminating this phenomenon.”   The Working Group’s report to the General Assembly covered its activities in the past year including two country visits to Somalia and Honduras and an expert panel event in New York that focused on the use of PMSCs by the United Nations.   A national legislation project has also been launched by the Working Group to look into analysing good practices and possible shortcomings in States’ protection of human rights in transnational security related activities. The Working Group has also embarked on a study on United Nations use of PMSCs which will be the focus of its report to the General Assembly in 2014.   Privatising conflict means bypassing democratic oversight, by Arjun Sethi.   In early 1995, Sierra Leone was on the brink of collapse. A violent civil war had ravaged the country, leaving thousands dead and countless others wounded. The insurgent rebels, infamous for recruiting child soldiers, were just weeks from the beleaguered capital, Freetown, and appeared unassailable.   Several months later, however, the tide had turned: the government"s authority was strengthened, rebel forces were repelled, and control over the country"s major economic assets was restored. Executive Outcomes, a private military contractor armed with helicopters and state of the art artillery, helped change the course of the war.   Nearly every tool necessary to wage war can now be purchased: combat support, including the ability to conduct large-scale operations and surgical strikes; operational support, like training and intelligence gathering; and general support, like transportation services and paramedical assistance. The demand for these services, in turn, has ballooned: the gross revenue for the private military contractor industry is now in excess of $100bn a year.   The privatization of conflict is no longer a trend. It"s the norm.   The United States relied so heavily on contractors during the recent Iraq war that no one knows with certainty how many were on the ground. In late 2010, the United Arab Emirates, fearful that the Arab uprisings might spread to the Gulf, paid Erik Prince, the founder of Blackwater Worldwide, $529m to create an elite force to safeguard the emirate. And today, Russia is openly considering forming a cadre of private military contractors to further its interests abroad.   Yet, the laws that govern this industry tell a different story. Instead of a transnational system with meaningful collaboration, we have a patchwork of state laws that allow companies to forum-shop and circumvent regulations. Contractors can likewise relocate, as they typically rent the equipment necessary to complete their contracts; their primary source of capital is human, not physical.   In addition to closing loopholes, states must monitor contractors, and prosecute them when they commit crimes. To this day, not a single contractor has been successfully prosecuted for its role in the Abu Ghraib prison atrocities or the Nisour Square massacre, in which 17 Iraqi civilians were killed.   Contractors claim that their services are market- and self-regulated. They contend that wanton violence would stop governments from seeking their assistance. Yet, the theatre of war often obscures their activities.   In its final report to the US Congress, the Commission on Wartime Contracting found that the US government lost more than $30bn to contractor waste and fraud in Afghanistan and Iraq. Also, corporations can rename and rebrand, thereby mitigating reputational harm. Consider Blackwater USA, which changed its name to Xe Services LLC, and then to Academi – all in the last four years.   The UN working group on the use of mercenaries has suggested that certain military functions, like combat services and interrogation, not be outsourced to private contractors. Its guidelines should be followed. Outsourcing foreign policy goals undermines democratic oversight because contractor activities, including casualties, typically escape public scrutiny. It can also allow states to evade legislative oversight.   The greatest check against war is the horror of war itself. Yet, as the physical distance between warring states grows, so does the temptation to loosen our moral compass. Violence that lacks immediacy is easier to ignore. Permitting third parties to wage war for profit risks a world in which war is not the last resort but an economic transaction in which the victims are faceless and nameless.   And so, we return to Sierra Leone. Although the intervention by Executive Outcomes is sometimes touted as illustrating the viability of military contractors, history suggests otherwise. The contractor was later accused of interfering in domestic politics to pursue financial gain, and an associated firm received payment through diamond mine concessions, which compromised the country"s economic future.   Moreover, violence resumed after Executive Outcomes left Sierra Leone. It became clear that the government had over-relied on the contractor and undercut its own institutions.   The fog of war is hazy enough. We don"t need additional, unregulated cloud cover.   * Arjun Sethi is a lawyer in Washington.   September 20, 2013   Legally binding international mechanisms needed for oversight of private military contractors. (Inter Press Service)   Member governments, security companies and civil society organisations on Thursday formally created the first international body to be tasked with the monitoring and oversight of private military contractors’ adherence to human rights standards and international law.   Advocates say the move is significant, formalising a sector whose actions – and for whom the potential for judicial repercussions – have often fallen into legal grey areas amidst the complexity of conflict and humanitarian emergency.   Yet critics warn that the voluntary agreement lacks sufficient enforcement mechanisms while potentially legitimising the privatisation of armed conflict, a process that has been on a steep climb over the past two decades.   In late 2011, under the guidance of the Swiss government, founding states, security companies and NGOs formally agreed upon the substance of what is known as the International Code of Conduct for Private Security Service Providers (ICoC). The code offers guidance for security contractors on their responsibilities under international law, on resolving complaints of rights violations and on ongoing monitoring of adherence to the ICoC principles.   Thursday saw the formal creation of the ICoC Association, at a summit in Geneva. The body will now be mandated with overseeing companies’ adherence to the ICoC guidelines.   “There have always been significant regulatory gaps when it comes to the activities of private military contractors,” Gabor Rona, international legal director for Human Rights First, an advocacy group that served as a founding ICoC civil society group, told IPS.   “Sometimes, for instance, they are registered in one country but are recruiting in another country while operating in a third country. So things get lost in the jurisdictional shuffle, particularly if any of their employees commit human rights violations.”   Rona mentions the so-called Nisour Square massacre, when 17 Iraqi civilians were killed in Baghdad in 2007 by military contractors with the U.S. company then known as Blackwater Worldwide (now renamed Academi), allegedly in self-defence. Despite official U.S. findings that those killed were innocent, jurisdictional confusion has dogged the prosecutions, and Rona says there has been “huge uncertainty” over whether the accused will be held accountable.   That case is ongoing. Last week, a judge directed the U.S. government to speed up the proceedings, giving a deadline of Oct. 21 for the U.S. Justice Department to decide on what charges it will file.   The use of private security contractors, particularly by the United States and Europe but also by global extractives companies, has increased substantially in recent years.   In 1990, for instance, military personnel outnumbered private contractors by 60 to 1, according to a report released last year by Jordi Palou Loverdos, a Spanish lawyer. By 2003, when the war began in Iraq, that ratio had dropped to 10 to 1, and by the 2010 these figures were essentially equal.   “By 2007, it is estimated that around 190,000 contractors were working in Iraq on U.S.-funded contracts,” the report states. “Furthermore, this shift to the private sector has created a highly prosperous industry, with revenues’ estimations ranging from 20 to 100 billion dollars annually. The rapid growth … clearly reflects the new business face of war.”   As of the beginning of this month, more than 700 security companies headquartered in dozens of countries worldwide have signed on to the ICoC. Primary government support for the process has come from the United States and United Kingdom, as well as Switzerland and Australia.   Corporate interest has also come substantially from these countries. Some 208 British private security companies have signed on to the ICoC, for instance, as have 64 from the United States – the two leading suppliers of private contractors.   “There is broad buy-in – I’ve seen no indication that companies in certain countries are uninterested or boycotting this process,” Human Rights First’s Rona says. “But the true success of this initiative will be when states make participation and compliance a condition for government contracts – hopefully that will be the trend.”   Critically, both the United States and United Kingdom have already taken steps to tie membership in the ICoC Association to lucrative government security contracts.   “Aware of the influence we have and the role we play as a client and regulator in this sector, we have committed to using our contracting processes to support this process,” Betty King, the U.S. ambassador to the U.N. in Geneva, stated Thursday.   “We believe [this initiative] can play an important role in improving the standards for, and conduct of, private security companies [PSCs] operating in complex environments. This is imperative because, while we do our best to ensure responsible conduct by those PSCs which we contract and supervise, misconduct by other PSCs can sour public perceptions and undermine the positive impact of all PSCs.”   Legitimising mercenaries   King noted that the U.S. government sees domestic legislation and regulation as the primary methods of overseeing the private security sector, but also stated that international efforts such as the ICoC play “an important role in raising industry standards”.   Indeed, membership in the ICoC Association remains strictly voluntary, with the potential negative impact on contracts being the only real enforcement mechanism – though many are hoping that will constitute significant motivation. At the same time, a similar draft framework on private military companies’ conduct is currently being negotiated before the U.N. Human Rights Council, and it appears that would be legally binding.   That discrepancy has led some rights groups to warn against the potential impact of the ICoC guidelines.   The ICoC “leaves these firms to police themselves, lacks teeth and fails to tackle the dangerous privatisation of war,” Ruth Tanner, campaigns and policy director for War on Want, a British charity, said Thursday.   “The code is a limited voluntary mechanism, does nothing to change the culture of impunity that [private military and security companies] enjoy, and represents a licence for abuse … The code will be used by companies to legitimise the industry and by government to sidestep proper controls.”   Tanner is calling instead for “national regulation, alongside legally binding international mechanisms” and expresses support for the discussions currently taking place before the U.N. Human Rights Council.   The U.N. intergovernmental working group tasked with dealing with this issue is currently slated to meet for a third time in December. Its mandate was recently extended by two years, through March 2015.   Dec 2012 (UN News)   UN experts on use of mercenaries urge greater oversight for private security contractors in Somalia.   The Government of Somalia must do more to ensure the security of its citizens while increasing regulations on private military and security companies, a United Nations expert panel urged today at the conclusion of its seven-day visit to the Horn of Africa country.   “As Somalia rebuilds its security institutions, the Government should ensure that private security forces are properly regulated and do not become a substitute for competent and accountable police,” said Faiza Patel, who currently heads the UN’s Working Group on the use of mercenaries.   “All Somalis have the right to security, not just those who can afford to pay for it,” she added.   After decades of factional fighting, the East Africa country has been undergoing a peace and national reconciliation process, with a series of landmark steps that have helped bring an end to the country’s nine-year political transition period and the resulting security vacuum which rendered Somalia one of the most lawless States on the planet. These steps included the adoption of a Provisional Constitution, the establishment of a new Parliament and the appointments of a new President and a new Prime Minister.   The Working Group commended the formation of the new Government and its efforts to establish a functioning, peaceful and democratic nation. It noted, however, that the new administration needed to reinforce its control over the private armed security sector through redefined laws and offered its assistance in developing such legislation by drawing on best practices learned from other countries.   “Such laws and their consistent application are critical to guarantee that private security providers operate in a legal, transparent and accountable manner,” Working Group-member Anton Katz stated, adding that the availability of private security should not detract from “the urgent need to provide security for all Somalis.”   In its findings, the Working Group noted that some private security contractors have not always operated transparently in the East African country and, occasionally, veer away from their prescribed goals of providing simple protection from armed factions, bandits and pirates.   Pointing to one instance in the state of Puntland, the UN experts cited incidents involving the Puntland Maritime Police Force (PMPF) which was created with the aim to repel the continuing scourge of piracy afflicting the Somali coast.   The Working Group established that the PMPF had engaged in operations unrelated to piracy, including a recent case in which the police force had worked to prevent a candidate for the Puntland presidency from campaigning in Bossaso, the area’s largest city.   Ms. Patel warned that the PMPF was operating outside the legal framework and called on local authorities to integrate the force into “the agreed-upon Somali national security structure and ensure that it is used strictly for the purposes for which it is intended.”   Turning to the issue of piracy – a problem which has long affected international shipping in the heavily trafficked waterways off the coast of Somalia – the UN experts said they were satisfied that piracy had decreased over the past year, although they expressed concern at the continuing use of armed guards aboard vessels.   Ms. Patel called upon the international community to reach an agreement on regulations and procedures regarding the use of armed personnel in the shipping industry, cautioning that a failure to do so created risks for human rights violations at sea.   International Commission of Jurists calls for human rights focussed continuation of UN work on PMSCs.   The ICJ has submitted a written statement calling on the UN Human Rights Council to extend the mandate of the open-ended intergovernmental working group (IGWG) on private military and security companies (PMSCs).   The statement was submitted ahead of the 22nd session of the Council (22 February to 25 March 2013).   Recognizing that the IGWG identified, during its second session in August 2012, that there are a number of existing gaps and areas of concern relating to the protection of human rights in the context of the activities of private security companies, the ICJ urged the Council and all States participating in the IGWG to:   Consider the possibility of elaborating a legally binding instrument on the regulation, monitoring and oversight and accountability of the activities of PMSCs, as well as complementary approaches and strategies; and approach the issue of the regulation of PMSCs from a human rights perspective, particularly on the questions of accountability and access to justice.   http://www.icj.org/icj-calls-for-human-rights-focussed-continuation-of-un-work-on-pmscs/ http://www2.ohchr.org/english/issues/mercenaries/index.htm http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Mercenaries/WGMercenaries/Pages/AnnualReports.aspx Visit the related web page
	View more stories