The Legality of Drone Strikes.



Interesting that it has been mentioned very recently on these threads:

It at least shows that there may be an issue that requires investigation and resolution.

Under this analysis States wishing to take action against suspected terrorists located outside a recognised situation of international armed conflict must first try to effect an arrest, and may use lethal force only if the person they are seeking resists arrest and it proves strictly necessary to use firearms.............

...........Given that the technology is routinely deployed against targets that are deeply embedded in civilian communities within the tribal areas of Pakistan and Yemen for example, concerns have been raised that there is an unacceptably high risk of civilian casualties......

.........The purpose of the investigation is to assist me to put those plausible allegations to the relevant States for a response, and to report my findings to the General Assembly in the autumn of 2013, with a view to making recommendations for further action at UN level if that proves to be justified by the findings of my inquiry.

Rather indicates the West's assertion, and often repeated by others on here, of terrorists hiding behind/ amongst civilians, as false!

Incidentally Ben Emmerson, mentioned (Hard Talk BBC) that only US, UK and Israel have used armed drones.
He even suggested that a result may be an International Criminal investigation. He was careful to point out that any verdict would be the court's, based on evidence.

His report is due in October.

From my initial communications with relevant States I have grounds to be optimistic that the inquiry will receive good co-operation from the governments of Pakistan, Yemen, the United States and the United Kingdom.
Hmmm, who's missing?
Sponsored Links