nach oben

Erschienen in:

2016 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

13. The Obligations under International Law of the Foreign Fighter’s State of Nationality or Habitual Residence, State of Transit and State of Destination

verfasst von : Sandra Krähenmann

Erschienen in: Foreign Fighters under International Law and Beyond

Verlag: T.M.C. Asser Press

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

The phenomenon of foreign fighters raises a series of issues under international law for their State of origin (i.e. their State of nationality or habitual residence), the States of transit, and the State of destination (i.e. the State where the armed conflict takes place) at all stages of their mobilization, i.e. before joining an armed conflict, during the armed conflict, and upon their return. First, the question arises whether and to what extent States of origin and States of transit have an obligation under international law to prevent the departure of foreign fighters, including in light of relevant Security Council Resolutions. Moreover, due to the linkages between foreign fighting and terrorism, many States may, and are indeed, using their national anti-terrorism legislation to prevent the departure of foreign fighters. Second, against the background of the current foreign fighters mobilization, some States have taken measures to prevent foreign fighters from returning, namely by revocations of citizenship or exclusion orders. The implications under international law of such measures will be assessed as well. The influx of foreign fighters finally also raises the question what the obligations are of the State of destination, not only to prevent the foreign fighters from arriving, but also as regards the treatment of foreign fighters during an armed conflict.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Vorheriges Kapitel Armed Opposition Groups’ (and Foreign Fighters’) Abidance by International Human Rights Law: The Issue of Compliance in Syria and Iraq

Nächstes Kapitel The Role Played by the UN in Countering the Phenomenon of Foreign Terrorist Fighters

Indeed, the unprecedented influx of foreign fighters to the group that calls itself the Islamic State is considered as one of the biggest contemporary terrorist threats, see for example A. Barnard and E. Schmitt, ‘As Foreign Fighters Flood Syria, Fears of a New Extremist Haven’, New York Times, 8 August 2013.

H. Eddine Zaougui and P. van Ostaeyen, ‘Overblown Fears of Foreign Fighters’, New York Times, 29 July 2014; R. Norton-Taylor, ‘Islamist terror threat to West blown out of proportion—former MI6 chief’, Guardian, 7 July 2014.

Byman and Shapiro 2014, p. 1.

See Chap. 8 by Coticchia, in this volume. In his systematic cross-conflict study, Thomas Hegghammer concludes that among the Western foreign fighters who participated in conflicts abroad from 1990 to 2006, ‘no more than one in nine’ returning foreign fighters became involved in acts of terrorism upon their return, see: Hegghammer 2013, p. 1. For an overview of the trajectories of returning foreign fighters, see de Roy van Zuijdewijn and Bakker 2014.

Hegghammer 2013, p. 10.

Felter and Fishman 2008, p. 32 et seq.

Zelin 2012.

Felter and Fishman 2008, p. 62.

L. Sly, ‘Turkey Confronts Policy Missteps on Syria with Rise of Al-Qaeda Across the Border’, Washington Post, 16 November 2013.

C. Letsch, F. Hawramy and E. Graham-Harrison ‘Besieged town of Kobani gets reinforcements in fight against Isis’, Guardian, 20 October 2014.

In the pre-Charter area, the question of foreign fighters was mainly addressed in the law of neutrality. However, the latter only applies to international-armed conflicts. For a more detailed analysis of the law of neutrality, the principle of non-intervention and the no harm principle, see Krähenman 2014, p. 49 et seq.

See A. Conte, Chap. 16, ‘Prevention and Responses to the Phenomenon of Foreign Fighters Against the Backdrop of International Human Rights Law Obligations,’ in this volume. See also Krähenmann 2014, p. 59 et seq.

For example, Syria repeatedly denounced the participation of foreign fighters as an unlawful interference, see for example the letter dated 18 June 2014 from the Permanent Representative of the Syrian Arab Republic to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General, UN Doc. S/2014/426, 20 June 2014. Similarly, Russia was condemned for unlawfully interfering in Ukraine on account of the role played by Russian ‘volunteers’ in the armed conflict in Eastern Ukraine, see A. E. Kramer, ‘Russians Find Few Barriers to Joining Ukraine Battle’, New York Times, 9 June 2014, ‘The Russians fighting a “holy war” in Ukraine’, BBC, 18 December 2014.

Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua vs. United States of America), ICJ, Judgment of 27 June 1987, para 202.

UN Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, third principle (non-intervention). As part of the principle prohibiting the use of force (first principle), the same declaration uses more restrictive terms, namely requiring States to ‘refrain from instigating, assisting or participating in acts of civil strife or terrorist acts in another State or acquiescing in organised activities within its territory directed towards the commission of such acts’.

Jamnejad and Wood 2009, p. 361.

The Corfu Channel Case (United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland v. Albania), ICJ, Judgment of 9 April 1949, para 22.

Trapp 2011, p. 64.

Sands 2003, p. 217.

Trapp 2011, p. 65.

Dinstein 1989, p. 66.

Trapp 2011, p. 65.

See Sect. 13.1.3.2 below.

For an overview of the response by the UN, including the Security Council, see, Chap. 14 by de Guttry in this volume.

Such sanctions regimes usually include travel bans for designated individuals.

The list of entities and groups associated with al-Qaeda and subjected to the sanctions regime is available at: http://www.un.org/sc/committees/1267/entities_other_groups_undertakings_associated_with_Al-Qaida.shtml. Accessed 11 May 2015.

UN Doc. S/RES/2178 (2014), preambular para 8.

Ibid., para 1.

Ibid., paras 6(a)–(c).

For an overview of various approaches to define ‘foreign fighters’, including whether co-ethnic fighters are included, see Krähenmann 2014, pp. 5–7.

Indeed, the Human Rights Committee pointed out that ‘there are few, if any, circumstances in which deprivation of the right to enter one’s own country could be reasonable’, see General Comment No. 27: Freedom of Movement, UN Doc. CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add.9 (1999), para 20.

Report of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms While Countering Terrorism, UN Doc. A/HRC/28/28 (2014), paras 47–49.

M. Scheinin, ‘A Comment on Security Council Resolution 2178 (Foreign Terrorist Fighters) as a “Form” of Global Governance’, Just Security, 6 October 2014, http://justsecurity.org/15989/comment-security-council-res-2178-foreign-fighters-form-global-governance. Accessed 11 May 2015.

K. Ambos, ‘Our Terrorists, Your Terrorists? The United Nations Security Council Urges States to Combat “Foreign Terrorist Fighters”, But Does Not Define “Terrorism”’, EJIL Talk, 2 October 2014, http://www.ejiltalk.org/our-terrorists-your-terrorists-the-united-nations-security-council-urges-states-to-combat-foreign-terrorist-fighters-but-does-not-define-terrorism. Accessed 11 May 2015.

UN Doc. S/RES/2178 (2014), preambular para 7.

Ibid.

M. Scheinin, ‘Back to Post-9/11 Panic? Security Council Resolution on Foreign Terrorist Fighters’, Just Security, 23 September 2014, http://justsecurity.org/15407/post-911-panic-security-council-resolution-foreign-terrorist-fighters-scheinin. Accessed 11 May 2015.

K. Ambos, ‘Our Terrorists, Your Terrorists?’, n. 34 above.

Ibid.

Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment (Foreign Fighter) Act 2014, No.116, Section 119.2 (1) (a) and (b).

Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment (Foreign Fighter) Act 2014, No.116, Section 119.3 (1).

Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment (Foreign Fighter) Act 2014, No.116, Section 119.2.

See the list of ‘declared areas’, available at: http://www.nationalsecurity.gov.au/WhatAustraliaisdoing/Pages/DeclaredAreaOffence.aspx. Accessed 27 April 2015.

‘U.N. Security Council Plans to Suppress Foreign Extremist Fighters’, Reuters, 9 September 2014.

M. Scheinin, ‘The Council of Europe’s Draft Protocol on Foreign Terrorist Fighters Is Fundamentally Flawed’, Just Security, 18 March 2015, http://justsecurity.org/21207/council-europe-draft-protocol-foreign-terrorist-fighters-fundamentally-flawed/. Accessed 11 May 2015.

On the differences between terrorism and armed conflict, including the undesirable consequences flowing from conflating the two legal regimes, see Pejic 2012, pp. 171–204; Krähenmann 2014, pp. 23–31 and 61 et seq.

M. Scheinin, ‘The Council of Europe’s Draft Protocol on Foreign Terrorist Fighters Is Fundamentally Flawed.’.

See Sect. 13.1.4 below.

M. Scheinin, ‘The Council of Europe’s Draft Protocol on Foreign Terrorist Fighters Is Fundamentally Flawed.’ For a discussion on the scope of the ‘exclusion’ clauses in such treaties, including references to contrary views, see Krähenmann 2014, pp. 35–36.

ICRC, ‘International Humanitarian Law and the Challenges of Contemporary Armed Conflicts’, 2011, p. 49; Gasser 2002, pp. 559 and 562.

UN Doc. S/RES/2178 (2014), para 10.

M. Scheinin, ‘A Comment on Security Council Resolution 2178 (Foreign Terrorist Fighters) as a “Form” of Global Governance’.

For example, attempts to travel to Ukraine, by both pro-Russian and pro-government foreign fighters may be covered as well. See ‘Ukraine War Pulls In Foreign Fighters’, BBC, 31 August 2014.

To implement Security Council Resolution 1373, the EU created a separate autonomous or discretionary sanctions list with Council regulation 2580/2001 to list groups and individuals at its own discretion. The listed entities include groups that are party to an armed conflict, such as the New People’s Army in the Philippines, Hamas, the military wing of Hezbollah, PKK, and the FARC, see Implementing Regulation 790/2014 of 22 July 2014 implementing Article 2(3) of Regulation 2580/2001 on specific restrictive measures against certain persons and entities with a view to combating terrorism, and repealing Implementing Regulation 125/2014, eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32014R0790&from=EN. Accessed 11 May 2015.

See for example ‘Dutch and German Biker Gangs Join the Kurds in Battle against ISIS,’ The Australian, 17 October 2014; T. J. Raphael, ‘American Veterans Choose to Head Back to Iraq to Fight Against ISIS’, PRI, 13 March 2015.

Implementing Regulation 790/2014 of 22 July 2014 implementing Article 2(3) of Regulation 2580/2001 on specific restrictive measures against certain persons and entities with a view to combating terrorism, and repealing Implementing Regulation 125/2014, eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32014R0790&from=EN. Accessed 11 May 2015.

See the list of proscribed groups and organizations, available at www.gov.uk/government/publications/proscribed-terror-groups-or-organisations--2. Accessed 8 May 2015.

See the list of designated foreign terrorist organizations, available at www.state.gov/j/ct/rls/other/des/123085.htm. Accessed 8 May 2015.

O. Bowcott, ‘British Teenage Girl Charged with Trying to Join Kurdish Forces fighting Isis’, The Guardian, 13 March 2015.

ICRC, Commentary to Customary Rule 3: Definition of Combatant, https://www.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v1_cha_chapter1_rule3. Accessed 11 May 2015.

Additional Protocol II, Article 1(1). The 2009 ICRC Interpretative Guidance on the Notion of Direct Participation in Hostilities specifies that only individuals who exercise a continuous combat function are considered members of armed groups, see 33–34.

Additional Protocol I, Article 45.

Additional Protocol I, Article 51 (3); Additional Protocol II, Article 13(1).

See the 2009 ICRC Interpretative Guidance on the Notion of Direct Participation in Hostilities, at 34.

See Chap. 7 by van Leuven, Mazurana and Gordon in this volume.

In contrast, there is no such presumption in cases of women joining militias with known female combat units, see for example O. Bowcott, ‘British Teenage Girl Charged with Trying to Join Kurdish Forces Fighting Isis’, Guardian, 13 March 2015.

See for example ‘ISIS and the Foreign Fighter Phenomenon’, J. Stern and J.M. Berger, The Atlantic, 8 March 2015, which describes the ‘typical jihadi foreign fighters’ as male who ‘join’ for a variety of reasons. In contrast, women are described as ‘supporters’ who were ‘lured’ into ISIS.

See for example V. Dodd, A. Topping and A. Gani, ‘Missing Girls Lured by Isis Won’t Face Terrorism Charges, Says Met Chief’, Guardian, 10 March 2015.

K. Ambos, ‘Our terrorists, your terrorists?’, n. 34 above.

Generally on the various possibilities to prosecute prospective and returning foreign fighters, see Krähenmann 2014, pp. 51–53.

See for example A. J. Rubin, ‘Fearing Converts to Terrorism, France Intercepts Citizens Bound for Syria’, New York Times, 2 June 2014; O. Bowcott, ‘Syria Terrorism Cases on Rise, CPS says’, Guardian, 10 September 2014.

For an overview, see Walker 2006, p. 1137.

Cancio Melía and Petzsche 2013, p. 94.

See Sect. 13.2 below.

Both Islamic State and al-Nusra are proscribed organizations, see the List of Proscribed Groups and Organizations, available at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/proscribed-terror-groups-or-organisations--2. Accessed 27 April 2015.

Convention offences are the offences set forth in the 2005 Council of Europe Convention on the Prevention of Terrorism which require the exercise of extra-territorial jurisdiction, such as causing explosions, hostage taking etc. For a complete list of the Convention offences, see Schedule 1 of the Terrorism Act 2006.

Middleton 2011, p. 179.

Serious Crime Act 2015, Section 81.

R v. Iqbal (Abbas Niazi), R v. Iqbal (Ilya Niazi) [2010] EWCA Crim 3215.

‘Student Sentenced Over Terror Bid’, BBC News, 17 June 2009.

S. Laville, ‘First British Conviction for Syria-related Terror Offence’, The Guardian, 20 May 2014; P. Peachey, ‘Two Birmingham Men Admit Terrorist Offences After Travelling to Syria War Zone, The Independent, 18 July 2014. http://www.independent.co.uk/incoming/two-birmingham-men-admit-terrorist-offences-after-travelling-to-syria-war-zone-9593094.html.

R v. Gul [2013] UKSC 64, para 8.

Ibid., para 38.

R v. Gul [2013] UKSC 64, para 28.

R v. Gul [2013] UKSC 64, paras 42–49. See also Greene 2014, p. 780; A. Coco, ‘Crocodile Tears: The UK Supreme Court’s Broad Definition of Terrorism in R. v. Mohammed Gul’, EJIL Talk, 13 November 2013, http://www.ejiltalk.org/crocodile-tears-the-uk-supreme-courts-broad-definition-of-terrorism-in-r-v-mohammed-gul. Accessed 8 May 2015.

See for example the criticism by David Anderson QC, The Terrorism Acts in 2012, Report of the Independent Reviewer of the Operation of the Terrorism Act 2000 and Part 1 of the Terrorism Act 2006, July 2013, para 4 et seq, https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/243472/9780108512629.pdf. Accessed 8 May 2015.

K. Trapp, ‘R v. Mohammed Gul: Are You a Terrorist if You Support the Syrian Insurgency?’, EJIL Talk, 14 March 2012, http://www.ejiltalk.org/r-v-mohammed-gul-are-you-a-terrorist-if-you-support-the-syrian-insurgency. Accessed 8 May 2015.

David Anderson QC, The Terrorism Acts in 2013, Report of the Independent Reviewer of the Operation of the Terrorism Act 2000 and Part 1 of the Terrorism Act 2006, July 2014, para 10.67, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/terrorism-acts-in-2013. Accessed 8 May 2015.

Ibid., para 10.68.

Ibid.

Ibid., para 10.69.

18 U.S.C. §2339A.

18 U.S.C. §2339A(b) and 2339B(a)(1).

18 U.S.C. §2339D(a) and 2339D(c)(1).

18 U.S.C. § 2339A.

18 U.S.C. §2332 f. Modelled after the 1997 UN Convention Against Terrorist Bombings, para d(1) excludes ‘the activities of armed forces during an armed conflict, as those terms are understood under the law of war, which are governed by that law.’

See Supreme Court of the United States, Holder, Attorney General, et al . v. Humanitarian Law Project et al. Decision of 21 June 2010, where the Supreme Court confirmed that engaging a FTO to promote humanitarian norms may amount to prohibited material support.

See the list of FTOs available at: http://www.state.gov/j/ct/rls/other/des/123085.htm. Accessed

9 May 2015.

The State Department amended its designation of al-Qaeda in Iraq in 2012 to include two new aliases, namely the Islamic State of Iraq and the al-Nusra front. In May 2014, the State department further amended the list to reflect the schism between al-Qaeda, its Syrian affiliate al-Nusra and the Islamic State: The Islamic State of the Levant became the primary name over al-Qaeda in Iraq and al-Nusra was designated as a separate entity, see http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2014/05/226067.htm. Accessed 9 May 2015.

100

18 U.S.C. §2339A(b).

101

18 U.S.C. 2339 D (a).

102

18 U.S.C. §2339B (d) and 18 U.S.C. §2339D (b).

103

B. van Schaack, ‘John Walker Lindh’s Legacy: To Join the Fight Is Criminal’, Just Security, 5 September 2014, http://justsecurity.org/14616/john-walker-lindhs-legacy-crime-fighting/. Accessed 9 May 2015.

104

F. Lindh, ‘America’s “detainee 001”—the persecution of John Walker Lindh’, Guardian, 10 July 2011.

105

Ibid.

106

B. van Schaack, ‘John Walker Lindh’s Legacy: To Join the Fight Is Criminal’; United States v. Lindh, 212 F. Supp. 2d 541 (E.D. Va. 2002), https://www.courtlistener.com/vaed/d1wQ/united-states-v-lindh/. Accessed on 9 May 2015. Mr. Lindh ultimately accepted a plea bargain for two non-terrorism related charges, namely violation the US sanctions against the Taliban and a weapons enhancement charge.

107

‘US Citizen Sentenced to Prison for Receiving Military Training from a Terrorist Organization,’ US Department of Justice, Press Release, 20 July 2007, http://web.archive.org/web/20071020032329/http://houston.fbi.gov/dojpressrel/pressrel07/houston072007.htm. Accessed 9 May 2015.

108

See for example Associated Press, ‘California Man Arrested for Trying to Join Extremists in Syria’, Guardian, 17 March 2014, ‘Colarado Woman arrested for trying to support Isis’, BBC News, 3 July 2014.

109

D. Temple-Raston, ‘U.S Officials Try to Gauge Threat from American Fighters in Syria’, NPR, 27 August 2014.

110

S. Shane and R. Zemansky, ‘Judge Rules against Veteran who Fought Alongside Syrian Rebels’, New York Times, 8 April 2013; US Citizen Indicted for Conspiracy to Provide Material Support to a Foreign Terrorist Organization, US Attorney’s Office, 20 June 2013, http://www.fbi.gov/washingtondc/press-releases/2013/u.s.-citizen-indicted-for-conspiring-to-provide-material-support-to-a-foreign-terrorist-organization. Accessed 11 May 2015.

111

‘Army Veteran Pleads to a Lesser Charge in Syrian Fighting Case, CNN, 20 September 2013.

112

ICRC, ‘International Humanitarian Law and the Challenges of Contemporary Armed Conflicts’, 2011, pp. 51–53; Modirzadeh et al. 2011, p. 623 et seq.

113

Cole 2008, p. 233ff.

114

See the criticism by B. Fishman, ‘The Foreign Policy Essay: What’s in a Name? Al Qaeda, ISIS and Domestic Radicalization’, Lawfare, 29 June 2014, http://www.lawfareblog.com/2014/06/the-foreign-policy-essay-whats-in-a-name-al-qaeda-isis-and-domestic-radicalization/. Accessed 10 May 2015.

115

Cole 2008, p. 238.

116

D. Temple-Raston, ‘U.S. Officials Try to Gauge Threat from American Fighters in Syria’, NPR, 27 August 2014.

117

UN Doc. S/RES/2178 (2014), para 2.

Ibid., para 8.

Ibid.

Li 2010, p. 382.

See Bill C-24, Strengthening Canadian Citizenship Act which provides for the possibility to remove the citizenship of dual nationals convicted of terrorist offenses or who fought with the armed forces of a state or a non-state armed group in an armed conflict against Canada.

122

See also Chap. 23 by Van Waas in this volume.

123

The phenomenon of (British) foreign fighters directly influenced this legislative framework, first the case of the ‘Australian Taliban’ David Hicks, who under the old rules was eligible for British citizenship, and second, the case of the Iraqi-born UK citizen Hilal al-Jedda, see Krähenmann 2014, pp. 55–56.

124

S. 40(2), 1981 British Nationality Act.

125

S. 66 (1), 2014 Immigration Act.

126

Arbitrary Deprivation of Nationality. Submission of the Immigration Law Practitioners’ Association to the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Immigration Law Practitioners Association, 14 February 2013.

127

Counter-Terrorism and Security Act 2015, Chapter 2 (1) to 2(6).

128

Nottebohm Case (Liechtenstein v. Guatemala), ICJ, Judgment of 6 April 1955, at 20.

129

Human Rights and Arbitrary Deprivation of Nationality, Report of the UN Secretary-General, UN Doc. A/HRC/13/34, 14 December 2009, para 20; see also Chap. 23 by Van Waas in this volume.

130

Ibid., para 21.

131

G. S. Goodwin-Gill, ‘“Temporary Exclusion Orders” and their implications for the United Kingdom’s Legal Obligations.’ Part II, EJIL Talk, 9 December 2014, http://www.ejiltalk.org/temporary-exclusion-orders-and-their-implications-for-the-united-kingdoms-international-legal-obligations-part-ii/. Accessed 9 May 2015; G. S. Goodwin-Gill, Mr Al-Jedda, Deprivation of Citizenship, and International Law, Information paper submitted to the UK parliament, 2014, www.parliament.uk/documents/joint-committees/human-rights/GSGG-DeprivationCitizenshipRevDft.pdf. Accessed 9 May 2015.

132

Dissenting Opinion by Judge Read, Nottebohm Case (Liechtenstein v. Guatemala), ICJ, Judgment of 6 April 1955, p. 47; see also G. S. Goodwin-Gill and Mr Al-Jedda, n. 131 above, p. 12.

133

G. S. Goodwin-Gill and Mr Al-Jedda, n. 131 above, p. 12.

134

G.S Goodwin-Gill, n. 131 above. He also explains the practical arrangements the United Kingdom could make to implement such exclusion orders in the host States, yet notes that these may violate the United Kingdom’s human rights obligations towards their citizens, for example in cases of detention or when individuals under an exclusion order are living in destitute conditions.

135

G. S. Goodwin-Gill, n. 131 above.

136

Ibid.

137

UN Doc. RES/S/2178 (2014), para 4.

138

UN Doc. RES/S/2178 (2014), para 11 et seq.

139

Niemi-Kiesiläinen 1999, pp. 215–216.

140

The same principles apply in relation to measures that aim at preventing prospective foreign fighters from leaving, such as for example withdrawals of passports and other travel documents.

141

Stamose v. Bulgaria, European Court of Human Rights, Judgment of 27 November 2012, para 32.

142

General Comment No. 27: Freedom of Movement, UN Doc. CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add.9 (1999), para 14.

143

Ibid., 11–16.

144

Stamose v. Bulgaria, European Court of Human Rights, Judgment of 27 November 2012, para 32.

145

Ibid., para 51.

146

General Comment No. 27, para 20.

Ibid.

Ibid.

Ibid, para 21.

See, e.g., Al-Nashif v. Bulgaria, European Court of Human Rights, Judgment of 20 June 2002; Slivenko v. Latvia, European Court of Human Rights, Judgment of 9 October 2003.

151

See, e.g., Al-Skeini and Others v the United Kingdom, European Court of Human Rights, Judgment of the Grand Chamber of 7 July 2011, para 137; Hirsi Jamaa and others v. Italy, European Court of Human Rights, Judgment of the Grand Chamber of 23 February 2012, para 74.

152

G. S. Goodwin-Gill and Mr Al-Jedda, n. 131 above, p. 13.

153

G. S. Goodwin-Gill, n. 131 above, Part I, EJIL Talk, 8 December 2014, http://www.ejiltalk.org/temporary-exclusion-orders-and-their-implications-for-the-united-kingdoms-international-legal-obligations-part-i/. Accessed 9 May 2015.

154

See for example Vidal Martins v. Uruguay, Human Rights Committee, Views of 23 March 1982, U.N. Doc. Supp. No. 40 (A/37/40) p. 157 (1982), Lichtenstein v. Uruguay, Human Rights Committee, Views of 31 March 1983, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/OP/2 p. 102 (1990).

155

Kurić and Others v. Slovenia, European Court of Human Rights, Judgment of the Grand Chamber of 26 June 2012, para 341 et seq.

156

Al-Nashif v. Bulgaria, European Court of Human Rights, Judgment of 20 June 2002, para 117 et seq.

157

Ibid., paras 22–26.

158

De Souza Ribeiro v. France, European Court of Human Rights, Judgment of the Grand Chamber of 13 December 2012.

159

UN Doc. S/RES/2170 (2014), preambular para 4; UN Doc. S/RES/2178 (2014), preambular para 10.

160

UN Doc. S/RES/2170 (2014), para 8; UN Doc. S/RES/2178 (2014), paras 2–3.

161

UN Doc. S/RES/2170 (2014), preambular para 15.

162

On the question of their status under international humanitarian law, see chapter 9 by Sommario, in this volume.

163

General Comment No. 31: The Nature of the General Legal Obligation Imposed on States, UN Doc. CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add.13, 29 March 2004, para 8.

164

Künzli 2001, pp. 249 et seq; Pisillo Mazzeschi 2008, p. 390 et seq.

165

Krähenmann 2013, p. 170 et seq.

166

González et al . (“Cotton Field”) v. Mexico, Inter-Amrican Court of Human Rights, Judgment of 16 November 2009, para 280; Zimbabwe Human Rights NGO Forum v. Zimbabwe, African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, Decision of 30 September 2006, para 158.

167

97 Members of the Gldani Congregation of Jehova's Witnesses and 4 Others against Georgia, European Court of Human Rights, Judgment of 3 May 2007; Association of Victims of Post Electoral Violence and Interights v. Cameroon, African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, Decision of 26 May 2010, paras 115–124.

168

Under the doctrine of positive obligations, a State needs to possess an effective law enforcement machinery for the implementation of its criminal laws, see for example Koku v. Turkey, European Court of Human Rights, Judgment of 31 May 2005, para 126; Sudan Human Rights Organisation & The Sudan Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions, African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, Decision of 27 May 2009, para 147. See also Pisillo Mazzeschi 2008, p. 335.

169

Moreover, in later cases the Commission adopted a much more nuanced approach, see Association of Victims of Post Electoral Violence and Interights v. Cameroon, African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, Decision of 26 May 2010.

170

Commission Nationale des Droits de l'Homme et des Libertés v. Chad, African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, Decision of 11 October 1995, para 22; Amnesty International and Others v. Sudan, African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, Decision of 15 November 1999, para 50; Malawi African Association and Others v. Mauritania, African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, Decision of 11 May 2000, para 140.

171

See the criticism by Künzli 2001, pp. 251–252.

172

Krähenmann 2014, pp. 17–19.

173

See, e.g., Commentary on Article 3, 1949 Geneva Convention I, p. 54.

174

Commentary on 1977 Additional Protocol II, at 1359: ‘The Protocol applies to all residents of the country engaged in a conflict, irrespective of their nationality, including refugees and stateless persons. It may happen that the authorities take special security measures with regard to aliens, and certain offences committed in connection with the conflict situation may be considered of greater or less severity, depending on whether they were committed by foreigners or nationals. These are administrative or judicial measures which, although based on the nationality criterion, are without prejudice to the guarantees on the treatment of individuals.’

175

Commentary on 1977 Additional Protocol II, p. 1358.

176

Commentary on 1977 Additional Protocol II, p. 1359.

177

Ibid.

178

Ibid.

179

Rosand 2006, at 400.

Byman D, Shapiro J (2014) Be afraid. Be a little afraid: the threat of terrorism from Western foreign fighters in Syria and Iraq. Policy Paper 34, Brookings Institution, Washington DC

Cancio Melía M, Petzsche A (2013) Terrorism as a criminal offence. In: Masferrer A, Walker C (eds) Counter-terrorism, human rights and the rule of law. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp 87–105

Cole D (2008) Terror financing, guilt by association and the paradigm of prevention. In: Bianchi A, Keller A (eds) Counterterrorism: democracy’s challenge. Hart Publishing, Oxford, pp 233–276

de Roy van Zuijdewijn J, Bakker E (2014) Returning Western foreign fighters: the case of Afghanistan. Bosnia and Somalia, ICCT Background Note

Dinstein J (1989) Terrorism as an international crime. Isr Yearb Hum Rights 19:55–73

Felter J, Fishman B (2008) The demographics of recruitment, finances, and suicide. In: Fishman B (ed) Bombers, bank accounts and bleedout. Al-Qa’ida’s road in and out of Iraq, Harmony Project, 2008, pp 32–65

Gasser H-P (2002) Acts of terror, ‘terrorism’ and international humanitarian law. ICRC Rev 84(847):547–570

Greene A (2014) The quest for a satisfactory definition of terrorism: R v Gul. Mod Law Rev 77(5):780–793CrossRef

Hegghammer T (2013) Should I Stay or Should I Go? Explaining variation in Western Jihadists’ choice between domestic and foreign fighting. Am Polit Sci Rev 107(1):1–15CrossRef

Jamnejad M, Wood M (2009) The principle of non-intervention. Leiden J Int Law 22(2):345–381CrossRef

Krähenmann S (2013) Positive obligations in human rights law during armed conflict. In: Kolb R, Gaggioli G (eds) Research handbook on human rights and humanitarian law. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp 170–187CrossRef

Krähenmann S (2014) Foreign fighters under international law. Geneva Academy Briefing No. 7

Künzli J (2001) Zwischen Rigidität und Flexibilität: der Verpflichtungsgrad internationaler Menschenrechte. Duncker & Humblot, Berlin

Li D (2010) A universal enemy?: ‘Foreign fighters’ and legal regimes of exclusion and exemption under the ‘Global War on Terror’. Columbia Hum Rights Law Rev 4(2):355–427

Middleton B (2011) Preparing for Terrorism. J Crim Law 75(3):177–180

Modirzadeh NZ, Lewis DA, Bruderlein C (2011) Humanitarian engagement under counter-terrorism: a conflict of norms and the emerging policy landscape. Int Rev Red Cross 93(883):623–648CrossRef

Niemi-Kiesiläinen J (1999) Article 9. In: Alfredsson GA, Eide A (eds) The universal declaration of human rights. A Common Standard, Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague, pp 209–222

Pejic J (2012) Armed conflict and terrorism: there is a (big) difference. In Salinas de Frías AM, Samuel KLH, White ND (eds) Counter-terrorism. International law and practice. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 171–204

Pisillo Mazzeschi R (2008) Responsabilité de l’État pour violation des obligations positives relatives aux droits de l’homme. RCADI 333:175–506

Rosand E (2006) The UN-led multilateral response to Jihadist terrorism: is a global counterterrorism body needed. J Confl Secur Law 11(3):399–427CrossRef

Sands P (2003) Principles of international environmental law, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRef

Trapp K (2011) Responsibility for international terrorism. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRef

Walker C (2006) Clamping down on terrorism in the United Kingdom. J Int Crim Justice 4(5):1137–1151CrossRef

Zelin A (2012) Foreign fighters trickle into Syrian rebellion. The Washington Institute, Policy Watch No. 1950

Titel: The Obligations under International Law of the Foreign Fighter’s State of Nationality or Habitual Residence, State of Transit and State of Destination
verfasst von: Sandra Krähenmann
Verlag: T.M.C. Asser Press
Buch: Foreign Fighters under International Law and Beyond
Print ISBN: 978-94-6265-098-5

Electronic ISBN: 978-94-6265-099-2

Copyright-Jahr: 2016
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6265-099-2_13

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Premium Partner