The Strasbourg Court is dealing with situations arising out of the military conduct of Contracting Parties abroad. Some of this conduct arises from European troops acting within the framework of international multinational forces under the UN’s auspices. While the Strasbourg Court in the Behrami and Saramati case started by attributing exclusive liability to the UN — in an attempt to stay clear of interfering with the UN’s universal peace and security mission —, its latest case-law has moved away from that path. In the Al-Jedda case, the Strasbourg Court admits the possibility of dual or multiple attribution, which means that the same conduct can be attributed both to the UN and to one or more Contracting Parties. Through dual or multiple attribution, the Strasbourg Court has opened a way to avoid confrontations with the UN’s universal mission, and has returned to supervising the conduct of the individual Contracting Parties that send troops to be part of the UN multinational forces, improving the protection offered to victims of those Contracting Parties in foreign lands.
Lock (2010) supra note 11 p. 531; see also C Costello ‘Case Comment: The Bosphorus Ruling of the European Court of Human Rights: Fundamental Rights and Blurred Boundaries in Europe’ (2006) 6 Human Rights Law Review p. 130.
Milanovic and Papic (2009) supra note 39 p. 280; Bodeau-Livinec Buzzini & Villalpando supra note 45 p. 328.
Blokker (2000) supra note 43 pp. 563–564; Milanovic & Papic (2009) supra note 39 p. 285.