Page 46 - Coespu 2019-1

IN DEPTH

dance with the obligations under
international law, that any person
who participates in the financing,
planning, preparation or perpetra-
tion of terrorist acts or in support of
terrorist acts is brought to justice,
on the basis of the principle to ex-
tradite or prosecute, with due re-
spect for human rights and funda-
mental freedoms, and that such
terrorist acts+++ are established
as serious criminal offences in do-
mestic laws and regulations. Con-
sequently, it is necessary to consi-
der multiple facets of the IHRL and
CAPT. Claudio Sanzò
how they relate to the use of dro-
death” that raised in the internatio- IHL is not ap- plicable which nes. The first aspect we should
nal community a hot debate. The means that International Human consider is the right to life, a fun-
biggest of them is relate about the Rights law must be applied. On damental right within IHRL reco-
Human Rights of those killed, ter- this matter the UN Global Coun- gnized by multiple treaties and as
rorist and civilians, relatives of ter-Terrorism Strategy has reaffir- a norm of customary international
them or simply property owners med that states must ensure that law. According with article 6 of the
that have seen their goods de- any measures taken to combat ter- International Convention on Civil
stroyed by a bomb strike. Why ar- rorism comply with their obliga- and Political Rights, which is bin-
guing about that? If we are in a tions under international law, in ding upon all states using drones
“war” against the terrorism, we particular human rights law, refu- – no one can be arbitrarily depri-
have an inherent right to strike, gee law and international humani- ved of his life. As cited above the
haven’t we? That’s the point, and it tarian law’. Furthermore, the UN term ‘arbitrary’ if interpreted in li-
is not so simple to solve. Actually, Strategy requires that any State ght of norms of IHL, is subjected to
only part of these strikes are con- make every effort to develop and the principles of military necessity,
ducted in “war zones” were IHL maintain an effective and rule of distinction and proportionality.
could, by virtue of “military neces- law-based national criminal justice That would result so that if an indi-
sity” principle, justify them. There- system that can ensure, in accor-
fore, where the Law of Armed
Conflicts is not applicable and the-
re is no legal ground to apply a
resolute deadly force. At the end,
we are debating not only about
what is morally right or wrong but
also what is just in front of the law.
It took centuries to reach the cur-
rent level of development of the
human rights law and the pro-
tections recognized to every indivi-
dual by it. Can we simply ignore it,
or use double standards? Many vi-
ctims of drone attacks were hit in
countries where there were not
conflicts on going. Pakistan, Ye-
men, Somalia are just examples.

46