EU operations and private military contractors: Issues of corporate and institutional responsibility

European Journal of International Law

Volumn 19, Issue 5, 2008, Pages 965-988

  White, Nigel D ^a   Macleod, Sorcha ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 58149383788     PISSN: 09385428     EISSN: 14643596     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/ejil/chn067     Document Type: Article

References (148)

1. See SC Res. 1484, 30 May 2003 (DRC); SC Res. 1525, 22 Nov. 2004 (Bosnia); SC 1778, 25 Sept. 2007 (Chad/CAR); SC Res. 1244, 10 June 1999 (Kosovo).
2. H. Wulf, Internationalizing and Privatizing War and Peace (2005), at 42.
3. HC 577, 12 Feb. 2002, at 4.
4. O'Brien, 'What Should and What Should Not be Regulated?', in S. Chesterman and C. Lenhardt (eds), From Mercenaries to Market: The Rise and Regulation of Private Military Companies (2007), at 45.
5. Patterson, 'A Corporate Alternative to United Nations Ad Hoc Military Deployments', 13 J Conflict and Security L (2008) forthcoming.
6. HC 577, supra note 3, at 4.
7. H. Charlesworth and C. Chinkin, The Boundaries of International Law: A Feminist Analysis (2000), at 124.
8. Reparation for Injuries Suffered in the Service of the United Nations, Advisory Opinion [1949] ICJ Rep 174, at 179.
9. The Case of the SS Lotus, PCIJ Series A, No.10 (1927), at 18.
10. Art. 25 Statute of the International Criminal Court UN Doc./ A.CONF.183.9*, 2187 UNTS (1998) 90.
11. Barcelona Traction Light and Power Company [1970] ICJ Rep 3.
12. [1997] Summary of Judgment, 24 May 2007.
13. Garrett, 'The Corporation as Sovereign', 60 Maine L Rev (2008) 129, at 133.
14. The Islands of Palmas Case (The Netherlands v. United States), 2 RIAA (1928) 829.
15. M. Kamminga, Corporate Obligations under International Law, Stakeholder submissions to the report of the High Commissioner for Human Rights on the Responsibilities of Transnational Corporations and related Business Enterprises with regard to Human Rights, available at: www2.ohchr.org/english/issues/globalization/business/docs/kamminga.doc, at 1,
16. citing W. Friedmann, The Changing Structure of International Law (1964), at 230.
17. 1833 UNTS 397, Art. 137(1).
18. 973 UNTS 3.
19. 2225 UNTS 275. See also Clapham, 'On Complicity', in M. Henzelin and R. Roth (eds), Le droit penal à l'épreuve de l'internationalisation (2000), at 241, 261.
20. A. Cassese, International Law in a Divided World (1986), at 103.
21. Ibid.
22. Clapham, 'The Question of Jurisdiction Under International Criminal Law Over Legal Persons: Lessons from the Rome Conference on an International Criminal Court', in M. Kamminga and S. Zia-Zari. (eds), Liability of Multinational Corporations under International Law (2000), at 139, 190.
23. Reparations case, supra note 8.
24. Interpretation of the Agreement of 25 March 1951 between the WHO and Egypt, Advisory Opinion [1980] ICJ Rep 73, at 89-90.
25. Difference Relating to Immunity from Legal Process of a Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights, Advisory Opinion [1999] ICJ Rep 62, at 88.
26. ILC Report on the Work of its Fifty-Fourth Session, UN Doc. A/57/10 (2002), at 232.
27. G. Gaja, First Report on Responsibility of International Organizations, UN Doc. A/CN.4/532, 26 Mar. 2003, at 8.
28. Ibid., at 11
29. ILC Report on the Work of its Fifty-Fifth Session, UN Doc. A/58/10 (2003), 33 (ILC Report, 2003), 42.
30. See generally Tunkin, 'The Legal Nature of the United Nations', 199 Hague Recueil (1966) 1.
31. Wessel, 'Revisiting the International Legal Status of the EU', 5 European Foreign Affairs Rev (2000) 507.
32. A. Orakhelashvili, Peremptory Norms in International Law (2006), at 114.
33. G. Gaja, Third Report on Responsibility of International Organizations, UN Doc. A/CN.4/553, 13 May 2005, at 4.
34. Ibid., at 3.
35. ILC Report on the Work of its Fifty-Fifth Session, UN Doc. A/58/10 (2003), 47 (ILC Report, 2003).
36. Supra note 9.
37. McNair, 'The Functions and Differing Character of Treaties', 11 BYBIL (1930) 100, at 112
38. Lauterpacht, 'The Covenant as the Higher Law', 17 BYBIL (1936) 54.
39. ILC Report on the Work of its Fifty-Seventh Session, UN Doc A/60/10 (2005), at 87-88 (ILC Report, 2005).
40. C.F. Amerasinghe, Principles of the Institutional Law of International Organizations (2005), at 400.
41. Ibid.
42. Gaja, supra note 26, at 12.
43. D. Sarooshi, International Organizations and their Exercise of Sovereign Powers (2005).
44. Brownlie, 'The United Nations as a Form of Government', in J.E.S. Fawcett and R. Higgins (eds), International Organization (1974), at 13, 26-27.
45. Gaja, supra note 26, at 15.
46. ILC Report, 2002, supra note 25, at 232.
47. Scobbie, 'International Organizations and International Relations', in R.-J. Dupuy (ed.), A Handbook on International Organizations (1998), at 891.
48. See also G. Gaja, Second Report on Responsibility of International Organizations, UN Doc. A/CN.4/541, 2 Apr. 2004, at 16-17.
49. Ibid., at 19.
50. Thakur and Banerjee, 'India: Democratic, Poor, Internationalist', in C. Ku and H. Jacobson (eds), Democratic Accountability and the Use of Force in International Law (2003), at 176, 198.
51. App. Nos. 71412/01 and 78166/01, Behrami and Saramati v France, Germany and Norway, ECHR Grand Chamber Decision, 2 May 2007 (Admissibility).
52. But see ibid., at paras 5-7, 126.
53. Ibid., at para. 132.
54. Sari, 'Jurisdiction and International Responsibility in Peace Support Operations: The Behrami and Saramati Cases', 8 Human Rights L Rev (2008) 151, at 159.
55. Behrami case, supra note 47, at para. 133.
56. Case Concerning Military and Paramilitary Activities in and Against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States), Judgment [1986] ICJ Rep 14, at 62-64
57. Case Concerning the Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro), Judgment [2007] ICJ Rep, at paras 401-407.
58. But see Cassese, 'The Nicaragua and Tadic Tests Revisited in the Light of the ICJ Judgment on Genocide in Bosnia', 18 EJIL (2007) 649, at 653-654, 663.
59. Ibid., at 665-667.
60. Prosecutor v. Tadic, 15 July 1999, IT-94-1-A, at para. 117.
61. Gaja, supra note 44, at 9.
62. See also Tomuschat, 'The International Responsibility of the European Union', in E. Cannizaro (ed.), The European Union as an Actor in International Relations (2002), at 177, 180.
63. ILC Report on the Work of its Fifty-Sixth Session, UN Doc. A/59/10 (2004), at 95-99.
64. Ibid., at 106.
65. Gaja, supra note 44, at 29.
66. See ILC Report 2004, supra note 56, at 99 for Draft Art. 4.
67. Ibid., at 102.
68. Ibid., at 109.
69. See the argument in relation to states by Lehnardt, 'Private Military Companies and State Responsibility', in S. Chesterman and C. Lehnhardt (eds), From Mercenaries to Market (2007), at 152-153.
70. For a general overview of the structure and workings of the Guidelines see OECD, Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, Revision 2000 particularly the Commentary
71. see also Karl, 'The OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises', in M.K. Addo (ed.), Human Rights Standards and the Responsibility of Transnational Corporations (1999), at 89.
72. OECD Guidelines, supra note 62, I(1) and II(1) and (2).
73. Ibid., II(3), (6), and (7). Also Guideline III(1), (2), (3), and (4).
74. For a discussion of the OECD Guidelines and the NCPs see MacLeod, 'Reconciling Regulatory Approaches to Corporate Social Responsibility: The European Union, OECD and United Nations Compared', 13 European Public L (2007) 671
75. see the Guidelines 'Annex 1, 'Structure of the National Contact Points', at 20, 24.
76. See http://globalwitness.org/media_library_detail.php/507/.
77. The OECD Guidelines, supra note 62, Commentary, at 41, para. 2.
78. Council Decision, June 2000, II(4).
79. Ibid., at 47, para. 4.
80. See www.unglobalcompact.org and UN Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/2003/12/Rev.2 of 26 Aug. 2003 respectively.
81. See further MacLeod, 'The United Nations and Transnational Corporations: Challenging the International Legal Order', in N. Boeger, R. Murray, and C. Villiers (eds), Perspectives on Corporate Social Responsibility (2008), at 64-84.
82. See www.unglobalcompact.org/AboutTheGC/index.html.
83. Ibid.
84. See H. Ward, Corporate Responsibility and the Business of Law (International Institute for Environment and Development Globalt Ansvar, Swedish Partnership for Global Responsibility) Report No 6, Sept. 2005, at 20-21.
85. 'The Global Compact and Human Rights', available at: www.globalcompact.org.
86. See www.unglobalcompact.org/ParticipantsAndStakeholders/index.html.
87. Global Compact Report 2002, on file with the authors, at 3.
88. See www.unglobalcompact.org/AboutTheGC/TheTenPrinciples/index.html.
89. United Nations Global Compact, 'The Ten Principles', available at: hwww.globalcompact.org.
90. The Global Compact, 'Policy on the Use of the Global Compact Name and Logos', 9 Mar. 2005, available at: www.unglobalcompact.org/content/ NewsDocs/gc_logo∝l.pdf. Corporations may not use the GC name or logo for promotional purposes, branding, or as a 'permanent graphical element of stationery', nor may there be any suggestion or implication that the GCO 'has endorsed or approved' any particular activity.
91. See www.unglobalcompact.org/AboutTheGC/integrity.html.
92. See also 'Policy on the Use of the Global Compact Name and Logos', supra note 79.
93. NGO Letter to Kofi Annan Recommending Redesign of Global Compact, 29 Jan. 2002, available at: www.globalcompact.org. See also Global Compact Report 2002 at 18-19.
94. GC Report 2002, supra note 76, at 19.
95. For the latest Communications on Progress see: www.unglobalcompact.org/ CommunicatingProgress/index.html.
96. See www.unglobalcompact.org/NewsAndEvents/news_archives/2007_01_30.html, Press Release, 'Record Quarter for Companies Communicating on Progress', New York, 30 Jan. 2007.
97. As at 19 June 2008: See www.unglobalcompact.org/NewsAndEvents/ news_archives/2008_01_28.html.
98. Ibid., at 13 and 6.
99. See, e.g., the Global Policy Dialogue on the Role of Business in Zones of Conflict, available at: Www.unglobalcompact.org/Issues/ conflict_prevention/index.html, at 13.
100. See www.unglobalcompact.org/Issues/conflict_prevention/index.html.
101. See the EU Eco-label Homepage, available at: http://europa.eu.int/comm/ environment/ecolabel/index_en.htm.
102. European Multistakeholder Forum on CSR, Final Results & Recommendations (2004), 2, available at: http://circa.europa.eu/irc/empl/ csr_eu_multi_stakeholder_forum/info/data/en/ CSR%20Forum%20.nal%20report.pdf. European Commission Green Paper Promoting a European Framework for Corporate Social Responsibility, COM(2001)366. Final responses were invited from interested parties and submitted by 31 Dec. 2001.
103. Ibid., at 23.
104. Ibid., at 6.
105. See, e.g., Submission from Amnesty International on the Green Paper, available at: http://europa.eu.int/comm/employment_social/soc-dial/csr/ pdf2/091-NGOINT_Amnesty-international_int_011219_en.htm (§1 Definition of CSR).
106. Commission Communication concerning Corporate Social Responsibility: A Business Contribution to Sustainable Development, COM(2002)347, at 4.
107. Ibid. See also the individual responses of the NGOs and trade unions to the Green Paper.
108. Commission Communication concerning Corporate Social Responsibility, supra note 92.
109. Ibid., at 13-14.
110. Ibid., at 17. The EMS Forum was established in 2002 and reported in 2004.
111. Communication on Corporate Social Responsibility, supra note 92, at 21-22.
112. European Commission, The European Union's Role in Promoting Human Rights and Democratisation in Third Countries, COM(2001)252.
113. Communication on Corporate Social Responsibility, supra note 92, at 22-23.
114. European Parliament Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, Report on the Communication from the Commission concerning Corporate Social Responsibility: A Business Contribution to Sustainable Development, COM(2002)347-2002/2261(INI)), 12 A5-0133/2003, 28 Apr. 2003.
115. Ibid., at 16.
116. Ibid., at 22.
117. For an overview of the NGO position see the European Coalition for Corporate Justice (ECCJ) Advocacy Briefing, 'Corporate Social Responsibility at EU Level: Proposals and Recommendations to the European Commission and the European Parliament', Nov. 2006, at 4ff, available at: www.corporatejustice.org/spip.php?=eng.
118. Letter from Anne-Sophie Parent, President, Social Platform, et al. to Commissioner Liikanen et al. (29 June 2004), available at: http://psicondec.rediris.es/RSC/legalissues_corporate.pdf.europa.eu.int/ comm/enterprise/csr/documents/29062004/ngocs.pdf.
119. COM(2006)136, 22 Mar. 2006.
120. ECCJ Advocacy Briefing, supra note 103, at 1, 3, and 4: '[a] multistakeholder approach... has been abandoned outright'.
121. Letter from the NGO UNICE, 26 Nov. 2001, Responses to the Green Paper, at 5, available at: www.ec.europa.eu/employment_social/soc-dial/csr/ csr_responses.htm.
122. Ibid., at 4.
123. See also Press Release, 'Europe sees progress on Corporate Social Responsibility', IP/06, Brussels, 8 Dec. 2006.
124. Ibid., at 3-4.
125. Ibid., at 3.
126. ECCJ Advocacy Briefing, supra note 103, at 6.
127. European Parliament Resolution on Corporate Social Responsibility: A New Partnership, A6-0471/2006, adopted 13 Mar. 2007.
128. See http://ec.europa.eu/trade/issues/global/csr/index_en.htm
129. G. Gaja, Fifth Report on Responsibility of International Organizations, UN Doc. A/CN.4/583, 2 May 2007, at 7.
130. Ibid., at 11, Draft Art. 34
131. ILC Report on the Work of its Fifty-Ninth Session, UN Doc. A/62/10 (2007), at 203 (ILC Report, 2007).
132. Gaja, supra note 114, at 15
133. ILC 2007, supra note 115, at 212 citing UN Doc. A/51/389, at para. 16.
134. See the analysis of practice in M.C. Zwanenburg, Accountability under International Humanitarian Law for United Nations and North Atlantic Treaty Organization Operations (2004), at 240-251.
135. Draft Articles 37-40, ILC 2007, supra note 114, at 197
136. Gaja, supra note 114, at 16.
137. Opinion of Poares Maduro AG in Case C-402/05 P, Yassin Abdullah Kadi v. Council of the European Union and Commission of the European Communities, delivered on 16 Jan. 2008.
138. App. No. 52207/99, Bankovic et al. v. Belgium et al., ECtHR Decision of 12 Dec. 2001. International Law Association, Draft Report on Compensation for Victims of War, available at http://www.ila-hq.org/en/ committees/index.cfm/cid/1018
139. F. Francioni (ed.), Access to Justice as a Human Right (2007), esp. Ch. 3, Ronzitti, 'Access to Justice and Compensation for Violations of the Law of War'.
140. Art. 195 EC Treaty.
141. Art. VIII, s. 29: Convention on Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations, 1946.
142. 'Protect, Respect and Remedy: A Framework for Business and Human Rights', A/HRC/8/5 (2008).
143. The British Association of Private Security Companies (BAPSC) makes specific reference to human rights standard throughout its Charter, but it also more generally requires members to comply with international law and international humanitarian law: See www.bapsc.org.uk/ key_documents-charter.asp.
144. IPAO members are encouraged to adhere to a variety of international instruments including, inter alia, the Universal Declaration on Human Rights, the Geneva Conventions, and the Convention Against Torture: Http://ipoaonline.org/php/ index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=205&Itemid=172.
145. IPAO Press Release, 12 Oct. 2007, available at: http://ipoaonline.org/ php/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=156.
146. See, e.g., UK Department for International Development (DFID), 'Democratic Republic of Congo: Country Plan', May 2008, available at: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/32/50/40692153.pdf.
147. See http://globalwitness.org/media_library_detail.php/507/.
148. Supra note 123, at para. 51.