Targeted Killings of Suspected Terrorist in the Light of the Right of Self-Defence

• Author: Jacqueline Hellman - Raquel Regueiro
• Position: Ph. D. Associate Professors, Department of Law and Internacional Relations, FAculty of Social Sciences and Communication, Universidad Europea de Madrid.
• Pages: 143-164

Paix et Securité Internationales

ISSN 2341-0868, Num. 3, janvier-décembre 2015, pp. 143-164

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.25267/Paix_secur_ int.2015.i3.07

143

TARGETED KILLINGS OF SUSPECTED TERRORISTS IN THE

LIGHT OF THE RIGHT OF SELF-DEFENCE

JACQUELINE HELLMAN – RAQUEL REGUEIRO1

I. WHAT ARE UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLE OR UNMANNED AIRCRAFT

SYSTEMS? - II. GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS WHEN PERPETRATING

ARMED ATTACKS WITH UAS - III. ANALYSING ARTICLE 51 OF THE

UN CHARTER - IV. IS THE PRINCIPLE OF PROPORTIONALITY DULY

ACCOMPLISHED? - V. CONCLUSIONS

ABSTRACT: The aim of this paper is to examine and discuss if the use of drones -when used as an

offensive weapon to end the life of suspected terrorists- validly falls within the scope of application

of Article 51 of the UN Charter. In order to do so, the requirements established by the mentioned

Charter will be duly analysed. Consequently, we will be able to conclude if drones are or are not

fulf‌i lling the legal requirements requested by the right of self-defence, adjusting in the latter case

the interpretation of international law to the particular national interests of some countries.

KEYWORDS: drones, counter terrorism measures, self-defence, principle of proportionality.

LOS ASESINATOS SELECTIVOS DE PRESUNTOS TERRORISTAS BAJO EL PRISMA

DEL DERECHO A LA LEGÍTIMA DEFENSA

RESUMEN: El objetivo de este artículo consiste en examinar y discutir si el uso de aviones

no tripulados -cuando se utilizan como estrategia para acabar con la vida de terroristas- queda

enmarcado, válidamente, dentro del ámbito de aplicación del artículo 51 de la Carta de la ONU.

Consecuentemente, los requisitos establecidos por la mencionada Carta serán debidamente

analizados. Ello nos permitirá concluir si los drones cumplen o no con los requisitos legales

exigidos -fundamentalmente- por el derecho a la legítima defensa, ajustando en caso contrario la

interpretación del Derecho Internacional a los intereses nacionales de algunos países.

PALABRAS CLAVE: aviones no tripulados, medidas anti-terroristas, legítima defensa, principio

de proporcionalidad.

LES ASSASSINATS SÉLECTIFS DE TERRORISTES PRESUMÉS AU REGARD DU

DROIT DE LA LÉGITIME DÉFENS E

RÉSUMÉ: Cet article a pour f‌i n l’analyse et la discussion de savoir si l’usage d’engins non pilotés,

lorsqu’ils sont utilisés comme stratégie de guerre af‌i n d’éliminer des terroristes présumés, s’ajuste

aux conditions marquées par l’article 51 de la Charte des Nations Unies. L’étude des exigences du

droit de légitime défense permettra conclure si l’utilisation de drones telle qu’on la connaît de nos

jours peut se justif‌i er au regard du droit à la légitime défense ou si, au contraire, l’interprétation faite

1 Ph. D. Associate Professors, Department of Law and Internacional Relations, FAculty of Social

Sciences and Communication, Universidad Europea de Madrid.

Targeted Killings of suspected terrorist in the light of the right of self-defense

Paix et Securité Internationales

ISSN 2341-0868, Num. 3, janvier-décembre 2015, pp. 143-164

144

par certains pays ne se conforme pas à la lettre et l’esprit de la Charte des Nations Unies.

MOTS-CLÉS : engins non pilotés, mesures contre le terrorisme, légitime défense, principe de

proportionnalité

I. WHAT ARE UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLE OR UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS?

Unmanned aerial vehicles, commonly known as drones, are aircrafts that do

not have a human pilot. Within this context, the US Department of Defense

def‌i nes these peculiar planes as “powered, aerial vehicles that do not carry a human

operator, use aerodynamic forces to provide vehicle lift, can f‌l y autonomously or

be piloted remotely, can be expandable or recoverable, and can carry a lethal or

non-lethal payload.”2 However, the UAV Association declared that the term

“Unmanned Aircraft Systems” (UAS) is a more suitable one as it embraces

all different aspects that compounds this vehicle.3

In any event, it is important to stress that this kind of vehicle sustained by

aerodynamic lift, without an on-board crew, cannot be considered a new invention.

During the First World War, UAS were tested although not used in combat.4 In

1926, a report carried out by the New York Times mentioned that planes, which

navigated autonomously with a high level of precision, were able to “blow a small

town inside out.”5 Within the context of the Second World War, another important

step was taken regarding the topic hereby discussed, as the US Military “ref‌i tted

B-24 bombers f‌i lled to double capacity with explosives and guided by remote control

devices to crash at selected targets in Germany and Nazi-controlled France.”6 After,

throughout the Korean War and the Vietnam War, the US Armed Forces used

UAVs for Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR) purposes. Further

2 Cfr. BONE, E., BOLKCOM, C., “Unmanned Aerial Vehicles: Background and Issues for Congress”,

Report for Congress, 2003.

3 From our point of view, UAS is an appropriate term as aircrafts with no pilot on board involves,

among others, the use of ground stations. Therefore, an adequate concept should not only refer to the

air vehicle itself.

4 Vid. Infra, footnote 17.

5 Information hereby provided: <http://www.thenation.com/article/166124/brief-history-

drones#>. Nevertheless, it has to be highlighted that those aircrafts were more similar to cruise

missiles, although those nascent UAVs were designed with the intention of using them further on,

once they had fulf‌i lled their mission; a feature that strongly distinguishes from the formers.

6 Ibidem. However, the technology at that time used had strong def‌i ciencies, as they were not, strictly

speaking, self-piloted during take-offs. In fact, it was when the plane reached a cruising altitude when

the pilots had to parachute.