The targeted killing of terrorists on foreign soil - Institute of Advanced ...
The targeted killing of terrorists on foreign soil - Institute of Advanced ...
The targeted killing of terrorists on foreign soil - Institute of Advanced ...
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Tobias Ruettersh<str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>f<br />
Panel 4 (a)<br />
In principle, the classificati<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>terrorists</str<strong>on</strong>g> as illegal combatants is supported (see e.g.<br />
Frowein 2002, 879; Vöneky 2004, 937; Kretzmer 2005, Wedgwood 2002, 335). Albeit, there<br />
is disagreement about what c<strong>on</strong>stitutes ‘direct participati<strong>on</strong> in hostilities’. Some argue that<br />
<str<strong>on</strong>g>terrorists</str<strong>on</strong>g> permanently participate in hostilities and can be attacked at any time, because they<br />
have a “combatant like approach” (Watkin 2003, 12). Terrorists are <strong>on</strong>ly not seen as<br />
combatants because they disregard the rules and customs <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> IHL. Such a disregard should<br />
not result in a betterment <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>terrorists</str<strong>on</strong>g> by not being legitimate targets (Watkin 2004, 17).<br />
However, mere membership in a terrorist organisati<strong>on</strong> as indicator for direct participati<strong>on</strong><br />
would undermine the principle <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> distincti<strong>on</strong> (see Kretzmer 2005, 198). Firstly, <str<strong>on</strong>g>terrorists</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
must have a permanent combat role to classify as direct participants. C<strong>on</strong>sidering that<br />
terrorist organisati<strong>on</strong>s can be a party to a n<strong>on</strong>-internati<strong>on</strong>al armed c<strong>on</strong>flict, they must have<br />
members which permanently participate in hostilities (see Sandoz 1987, para. 4789).<br />
Admittedly, the competence to decide about whether a terrorist plays such a key role lies<br />
with the state which c<strong>on</strong>ducts the operati<strong>on</strong>. Still, <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>ten enough high-ranking <str<strong>on</strong>g>terrorists</str<strong>on</strong>g> make<br />
no secret <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> their participati<strong>on</strong> in terrorist attacks (see Kretzmer 2005, 199). However,<br />
spiritual leaders must not be classed as full time-fighters as they d<strong>on</strong>’t have a permanent<br />
combat role. <str<strong>on</strong>g>The</str<strong>on</strong>g>ir <str<strong>on</strong>g>killing</str<strong>on</strong>g> would be illegal and could possible qualify as an assassinati<strong>on</strong> (see<br />
David 2002, 22). For example, the previously menti<strong>on</strong>ed <str<strong>on</strong>g>killing</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> Sheikh Ahmed Yassin<br />
(see above, 10) must be c<strong>on</strong>sidered as illegal, as he was clearly ideologically participating in<br />
terrorist attacks against Israel but due to his old age and paraplegia he certainly did have a<br />
combat role (see Schmitz-Elvenich 2007, 217 f.).<br />
Sec<strong>on</strong>dly, <str<strong>on</strong>g>terrorists</str<strong>on</strong>g> must participate in combat missi<strong>on</strong>s. This includes the active and direct<br />
participati<strong>on</strong> in fighting as well as any “acts which by their nature and purpose are intended<br />
to cause actual harm to the pers<strong>on</strong>nel and equipment <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the armed forces” (Sandoz 1987,<br />
para. 1943 f.). Thus, ‘direct participati<strong>on</strong>’ has to be interpreted in the sense that it does not<br />
<strong>on</strong>ly include armed acti<strong>on</strong>s. However, the mere support <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> illegal combatants with food,<br />
medicine or with m<strong>on</strong>ey and logistical means cannot be c<strong>on</strong>sidered as direct participati<strong>on</strong><br />
(see Israeli Supreme Court 2006, para. 35).<br />
Thirdly, it is debatable whether illegal combatants can retrieve their civilian status again. <str<strong>on</strong>g>The</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />
argument against this view is that <str<strong>on</strong>g>terrorists</str<strong>on</strong>g> would enjoy “the best <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> both worlds” (Kretzmer<br />
2005, 193) as they would generally be c<strong>on</strong>sidered civilians but could selective participate in<br />
hostilities. <str<strong>on</strong>g>The</str<strong>on</strong>g> phenomen<strong>on</strong> is also known as “revolving door theory” (Watkin 2003, 12).<br />
This argument surely cannot be denied, because <str<strong>on</strong>g>terrorists</str<strong>on</strong>g> can abuse their civilian status to<br />
- 21 -