At a summit meeting of 24 September in
which over 50 government representatives were heard, the Security
Council unanimously adopted Resolution 2178
(2014) which foresees measures to contain the travel of and support for
persons intending to participate in terror acts, notably against the
background of the rise of the group “Islamic State in Iraq and the
Levant” (ISIL) and the Al-Nusra front and other affiliates of Al-Qaida.
Resolution 2178 “reaffirms” what
previous resolutions since 9/11 had found, namely that “terrorism
[normally committed by natural persons] … constitutes one of the most
serious threats to international peace and security” (preamble first
indent; see previously, e.g., UNSC res. 1368 (2001)). In preamble indent
12, the Council defines a “new threat”, namely the “foreign terrorist
fighter threat” which “includes, among others, individuals supporting acts or activities of Al-Qaida and its cells”.
Most paragraphs of the res. 2178 are, in
their structure, not novel. They oblige states to adopt measures, and
“ensure in their domestic laws” (para. 6) to suppress, combat,
prosecute, and penalise the recruiting, organising, transporting, and
equipping of individuals travelling for the purpose of perpetrating
terrorist acts, e.g. in paras 2, 5, 6, 8. The obligations to criminalise
certain behaviour seem, however, quite far reaching as also pointed out
by Kai Ambos.
One interesting feature of res. 2178 is that it directly addresses individuals: Operative
para. 1 “demands that all foreign terrorist fighters disarm and cease
all terrorist acts and participation in the conflict”. The three
interrelated questions discussed in this post are whether res. 2178,
firstly, creates binding international legal obligations for individuals
themselves; secondly, whether (some of) the resolution’s provisions are
directly applicable in the domestic order of the UN Member states; and
thirdly, whether the non-observance of these individual obligations
constitute a crime by virtue of the resolution itself.
International individual obligations flowing from Res. 2178?
The question is whether Res. 2178 is
able to impose legally binding international obligations on the
individuals addressed. Is the resolution itself the legal basis for an
obligation of “foreign terrorist fighters” to desist from forging
identity papers, to desist from travelling to the combat field of ISIS,
to recruit volunteers, and of course to refrain from committing
terrorist acts, and the like?http://www.ejiltalk.org/security-council-resolution-2178-2014-the-foreign-terrorist-fighter-as-an-international-legal-person-part-i/
No comments:
Post a Comment