USD $179.00
Investigating Civilian Casualties in Time of Armed Conflict and Belligerent Occupation
Manoeuvring between Legal Regimes and Paradigms for the Use of Force
Series: - International Humanitarian Law Series, Volume: 54
Author:
In
Investigating Civilian Casualties in Time of Armed Conflict and Belligerent Occupation Alon Margalit discusses the appropriate State response to civilian casualties caused by its armed forces. Various legal and practical challenges, arising when investigating the fatal consequences of the use of force, are examined through the practice of the US, the UK, Canada and Israel during military operations in Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia and the occupied Palestinian territory. Alon Margalit considers this topical and sensitive issue within a broader context, namely the public scrutiny of State behaviour and influence of human rights law during armed conflict. The debate over the scope of the duty to investigate reflects competing approaches looking to (re)shape the balance between military necessity and humanitarian considerations.
Alon Margalit, Ph.D. (2014), University of London, is an Israeli lawyer who has held various legal positions, including at the Intentional Committee of the Red Cross, the Norwegian Refugee Council, SOAS University of London and the Tel Aviv District Court.
Preface
List of Abbreviations
1 The Investigative Response to Civilian Casualties: More Questions Than Answers
1.1 Introduction
1.2 Taking a Closer Look
1.3 Book Overview
1.3.1 The Use of Force, Civilian Casualties and Investigations
1.3.2 Manoeuvring between Operational Paradigms and Legal Regimes
2 ‘The Trigger Question’: When Do Civilian Casualties Require an Investigation?
2.1 The Investigation Trigger under International Human Rights Law (
ihrl
)
2.2 The Investigation Trigger under the Law of Armed Conflict (
loac
)
2.2.1 War Crimes
2.2.2 A Failure of Precautions
2.2.3 A Duty to Investigate All Cases of Civilian Casualties?
2.3 Conclusion
3 ‘The Standards Question’: How to Investigate Civilian Casualties?
3.1 Investigation Standards under
ihrl
3.1.1 General
3.1.2 An Effective Investigation
3.1.3 Independence and Impartiality
3.1.4 Victim Involvement and Transparency
3.1.5 A Formal and Professional Investigation and the Margin of Appreciation
3.2 Investigation Standards under
loac
3.2.1 General
3.2.2 War Crimes
3.2.3 A Failure of Precautions
3.3 Conclusion
4 Translating Investigation Obligations to
loac
Situations
4.1 The Interaction between
ihrl
and
loac
4.2 Classification Issues
4.3 International Armed Conflict (
iac
)
4.4 Non-international Armed Conflict (
niac
)
4.5 A Conduct-of-Hostilities Paradigm: Temporal and Geographical Dimensions
4.6 Occupation
4.6.1 General
4.6.2 Troubled Occupation
4.6.3 The Use of Force
4.7 Conclusion
5 Challenges in Classifying and Identifying the Applicable Normative Framework(s)
5.1 ‘Stretching’ a Hostilities Paradigm
5.1.1
us
5.1.2
uk
5.1.3 Israel
5.2 ‘Stretching’ a Law-Enforcement Paradigm
5.2.1 Iraq
5.2.2 Afghanistan
5.2.3 oPt
5.3 Uncertainty in Relation to the Intensity Test
5.4
iac
/
niac
Classification
5.5 Further Complications: Additional Legal Sources and Policy Considerations
5.5.1
uk
, Canada
5.5.2
us
5.6 The Applicability of
ihrl
5.6.1 General
5.6.2 Effective Control and Provision of Governmental Services
5.6.3 Consent of the Local Government
5.6.4 Prolonged Occupation
5.7 Al-Skeini and B’tselem Cases: Two Sides of a Legal Coin
5.7.1 Al-Skeini
5.7.2 B’tselem
5.8 Conclusion
6 Investigation Models and Constraints in Domestic Military Justice Systems
6.1 Introduction
6.2 Models Identified in State Practice
6.2.1 The Commander Model
6.2.2 The Professional Model
6.2.3 A Mixed Model: Mandatory Reporting to a Professional Body in Serious Cases
6.3 Conclusion
7 Military In-House Investigations and Some Mitigating Arrangements
7.1 Command Investigations
7.1.1 A Controversial Mechanism
7.1.2 Judging Command Investigations in Light of Their Function
7.2 Considering Mitigating Arrangements
7.2.1 Enhancing the Involvement of Professional Bodies
7.2.2 Setting Time Frames and Considering Initial Findings Carefully
7.2.3 Openness
7.3 Problems with Professional Bodies
7.3.1 Failure to Open a Formal and Professional Investigation
7.3.2 Problems with the Conduct of Criminal Investigations
7.4 Conclusion
8 Civilian Oversight of Military Investigations
8.1 An Ad Hoc Civilian Investigatory Body
8.2 Administrative Review
8.3 Judicial Review
8.3.1 General
8.3.2 Jurisdiction and Admissibility
8.3.3 The Scope of Review
8.4 A Permanent Civilian Expert Body
8.4.1 The
mpcc
(Canada)
8.4.2
hmic
(
uk
)
8.4.3 Israel
8.5 Conclusion
9 A Proposal for a Permanent Expert Commission
9.1 A Question of Mandate
9.1.1 General
9.1.2 External-Civilian Investigations?
9.1.3
ihrl
and Lessons Learned from the Civilian Oversight of Police Investigations
9.2 The Proposed Mandate
10 The Duty to Investigate and Shaping the Normative Discourse
10.1 The Difficulties of Investigating
10.2 Enhanced Scrutiny and Heavier Burden
10.3 State Pushback
10.4 A Permanent Expert Commission: Incentives for States
10.5 Conclusion
Table of Treaties and Other International Instruments
Table of International Cases 26
Table of Domestic Instruments
Table of Domestic Cases
Bibliography
List of Abbreviations
Part 1: Introduction
1 The Investigative Response to Civilian Casualties: More Questions Than Answers
1.1 Introduction
1.2 Taking a Closer Look
1.3 Book Overview
1.3.1 The Use of Force, Civilian Casualties and Investigations
1.3.2 Manoeuvring between Operational Paradigms and Legal Regimes
Part 2: Setting the Normative Framework
2 ‘The Trigger Question’: When Do Civilian Casualties Require an Investigation?
2.1 The Investigation Trigger under International Human Rights Law (
2.2 The Investigation Trigger under the Law of Armed Conflict (
2.2.1 War Crimes
2.2.2 A Failure of Precautions
2.2.3 A Duty to Investigate All Cases of Civilian Casualties?
2.3 Conclusion
3 ‘The Standards Question’: How to Investigate Civilian Casualties?
3.1 Investigation Standards under
3.1.1 General
3.1.2 An Effective Investigation
3.1.3 Independence and Impartiality
3.1.4 Victim Involvement and Transparency
3.1.5 A Formal and Professional Investigation and the Margin of Appreciation
3.2 Investigation Standards under
3.2.1 General
3.2.2 War Crimes
3.2.3 A Failure of Precautions
3.3 Conclusion
4 Translating Investigation Obligations to
4.1 The Interaction between
4.2 Classification Issues
4.3 International Armed Conflict (
4.4 Non-international Armed Conflict (
4.5 A Conduct-of-Hostilities Paradigm: Temporal and Geographical Dimensions
4.6 Occupation
4.6.1 General
4.6.2 Troubled Occupation
4.6.3 The Use of Force
4.7 Conclusion
Part 3: Investigating Civilian Casualties in Practice
5 Challenges in Classifying and Identifying the Applicable Normative Framework(s)
5.1 ‘Stretching’ a Hostilities Paradigm
5.1.1
5.1.2
5.1.3 Israel
5.2 ‘Stretching’ a Law-Enforcement Paradigm
5.2.1 Iraq
5.2.2 Afghanistan
5.2.3 oPt
5.3 Uncertainty in Relation to the Intensity Test
5.4
5.5 Further Complications: Additional Legal Sources and Policy Considerations
5.5.1
5.5.2
5.6 The Applicability of
5.6.1 General
5.6.2 Effective Control and Provision of Governmental Services
5.6.3 Consent of the Local Government
5.6.4 Prolonged Occupation
5.7 Al-Skeini and B’tselem Cases: Two Sides of a Legal Coin
5.7.1 Al-Skeini
5.7.2 B’tselem
5.8 Conclusion
6 Investigation Models and Constraints in Domestic Military Justice Systems
6.1 Introduction
6.2 Models Identified in State Practice
6.2.1 The Commander Model
6.2.2 The Professional Model
6.2.3 A Mixed Model: Mandatory Reporting to a Professional Body in Serious Cases
6.3 Conclusion
7 Military In-House Investigations and Some Mitigating Arrangements
7.1 Command Investigations
7.1.1 A Controversial Mechanism
7.1.2 Judging Command Investigations in Light of Their Function
7.2 Considering Mitigating Arrangements
7.2.1 Enhancing the Involvement of Professional Bodies
7.2.2 Setting Time Frames and Considering Initial Findings Carefully
7.2.3 Openness
7.3 Problems with Professional Bodies
7.3.1 Failure to Open a Formal and Professional Investigation
7.3.2 Problems with the Conduct of Criminal Investigations
7.4 Conclusion
8 Civilian Oversight of Military Investigations
8.1 An Ad Hoc Civilian Investigatory Body
8.2 Administrative Review
8.3 Judicial Review
8.3.1 General
8.3.2 Jurisdiction and Admissibility
8.3.3 The Scope of Review
8.4 A Permanent Civilian Expert Body
8.4.1 The
8.4.2
8.4.3 Israel
8.5 Conclusion
Part 4: Looking Forward
9 A Proposal for a Permanent Expert Commission
9.1 A Question of Mandate
9.1.1 General
9.1.2 External-Civilian Investigations?
9.1.3
9.2 The Proposed Mandate
10 The Duty to Investigate and Shaping the Normative Discourse
10.1 The Difficulties of Investigating
10.2 Enhanced Scrutiny and Heavier Burden
10.3 State Pushback
10.4 A Permanent Expert Commission: Incentives for States
10.5 Conclusion
Table of Treaties and Other International Instruments
Table of International Cases 26
Table of Domestic Instruments
Table of Domestic Cases
Bibliography
All interested in public international law, in particular humanitarian law and human rights law, and anyone concerned with military justice and war studies or working in conflict and post-conflict settings.