Balancing necessity and individual rights in the fight against transnational terrorism : "targeted killings" and international law
Host item entries:
Windsor yearbook of access to justice, Vol. 27, 2009, p. 285-319
This article explores the restraints international human rights law and international humanitarian law place on a State's use of lethal force against suspected terrorists. Although the law restricts the ability to target suspected terrorists, it is argued that these limits should be respected in order to protect innocent civilians from undue harm. Under IHRL, it is argued that the right to life as a peremptory norm restricts extra-territorial targeted attacks of suspected terrorists. Accordingly, such action should only be considered lawful when it is necessary to protect the State's population from a known threat and lesser force would not suffice. Under IHL, it is argued that there is no third category of "unprivileged" or "unlawful" combatants who are subject to lawful targeting for the duration of the hostilities; rather, non-State actors who participate in an armed conflict may be lawfully targeted for the duration of their participation, including an ongoing chain of hostile acts.
By entering this website, you consent to the use of technologies, such as cookies and analytics, to customise content, advertising and provide social media features. This will be used to analyse traffic to the website, allowing us to understand visitor preferences and improving our services. Learn more