
	Право и политика Правильная ссылка на статью: Саврыга К.П. Ответственность принимающего государства и государства места инкорпорации за противоправные действия частных военных и охранных компаний // Право и политика. 2014. № 1. С. 42-52. URL: https://nbpublish.com/library_read_article.php?id=52136 Саврыга К.П. Ответственность принимающего государства и государства места инкорпорации за противоправные действия частных военных и охранных компаний Аннотация: Государства прибегают к услугам частных военных и охранных компаний во время военных конфликтов и оккупаций, для выполнения задач, считавшихся ранее привилегией военнослужащих. Однако, так же как и военнослужащие, сотрудники частных военных компаний способны совершать противоправные деяния в нарушение норм международного права. В данной статье, автором исследован праовой режим ответственности и обязательства, субъектом которого являются принимающее государство и домашнее государство(места инкорпорации). Автор приходи к выводу, что несмотря на то, что они не вступают непосредственно в договорные отношения с частными военными компаниями, и не могут являться непосредственными виновниками совершения ими военные преступлений или иных серьезных нарушений международного права, на них лежит непорседственная обязанность по соблюдению обязательств должной осмотрительности в отношении норм международного гуманитрного права, законов о нейтралитете и международного права прав человека. Ключевые слова: государство инкорпорации, домашнее государство, нейтралитет, военные преступления, право прав человека, международное гуманитарное право, ответственность государства, частные военные компании, международно-правовая ответственность, принимающее государство Abstract: Various states use the services of private military and security companies during armed conflicts and occupations in order to perform tasks that were previously considered as a privilege of the military. However, as well as the military personnel, the employees of private military companies are able to commit unlawful acts in violation of international law. In this article, the author studied the legal regime of responsibility and commitment, the subject of which is the receiving State and the home State (place of incorporation). The author concludes that despite the fact that they do not enter directly into agreements with private military companies, and cannot be directly responsible for committing military crimes or other serious violations of international law, they shall have a duty to comply with due diligence obligations in respect with the norms of international humanitarian law, neutrality laws and international human rights law. Keywords: State of incorporation, home State, neutrality, military crimes, human rights law, international humanitarian law, the responsibility of the state, private military companies, international legal responsibility and host State. Эта статья может быть бесплатно загружена в формате PDF для чтения. Обращаем ваше внимание на необходимость соблюдения авторских прав, указания библиографической ссылки на статью при цитировании. Скачать статью Библиография 1. Wright Q. “Subversive Intervention” American journal of International Law,54, 1960 2. Wright Q. “US Intervention in Lebanon”, American Journal of International Law, 53, 1959 3. Watkin K.,“Controlling the Use of Force: A Role for Human Rights Norms in Contemporary Armed Conflict”, American Journal of International Law,98, 2004 4. Wippman l., ”Change and Continuity in Legal Justification for Military Intervention in Internal Conflicts”, Colunbia Human Rights Law Review, 27,1997 5. Van der Herik F. and Cernic L. “Regulating Corporations under International Law: from Human Rights to International Criminal Law and Back Again”, Journal of International Criminal Justice, 2010 6. Warbrick Y. “The New British Policy on Recognition of Governments”, International and Comparative Law Quarterly , 30,1981 7. Tonkin H.“State Control over Private Military and Security Companies in Armed Conflict (Cambridge Studies in International and Comparative Law)”Cambridge University Press, 2013 8. UCIHL, “Expert Meeting on Private Military Contractors”, Geneva, 2005 9. UN Secretariat, Survey of International Law, UN Doc. A/CN4/1 Rev.1(1949) 10. Stanio G., “Suing Private Military Contractors for Torture: How to Use Alien Tort Statute Without Granting Sovereign Immunity-Related Defenses”, Santa Clara Law Review,50,2010 11. Talmon H. “Recognition of Governments: An Analysis of the New British Policy and Practice”, British Yearbook of International Law, 1992 12. McCorquodale N. “Responsibility Beyond Borders: State Responsibility for Extraterritorial Violations by Corporations of International Human Rights Law”, Modern Law Review, 70, 2004 13. McGoldrick L,. “The Principle of Non-Intervention: Human Right” in Lowe and Warbrick(ed.) “The UN and the Principles of International Law”, Routledge, 1994 14. Meron T., “International Criminalization of Internal Atrocities”, American Journal of International Law, 89, 1995 15. O’ Brien K. «Military-Advisory Groups and African Security: Privatised Peace-keeping», International Peacekeeping, 5 (3), August 1998 16. Ruggie J., “Protect, Respect and Remedy: A Framework for Business and Human Rights”, UN Doc. A/HRC/8/5(7 april 2008) 17. Maffai М., “Accountability for Private Military and Security Companies Employees that Engage in Sex Trafficking and Related Abuses While under Contract with the United States Overseas”, Wisconsin International Law Journal, 09, 2008 18. Lauterparcht H. “Revolutionary activities by Private Persons Against Foreign States”/ American Journal of International Law,22, 1928 19. Gehring “Liability for Transboundary Environmental Damage: Toward a General Liability Regime?”, European Journal of International Law, 4, 1993 20. ICRC, Customary International Humanitarian Law Study, ICRC,2009 21. Lauterpacht H. “The Revision of the Law of War”, British Yearbook of International Law, 29, 1952 22. Fleck D. “Handbook of International Humanitarian Law”, Oxford, 2008 23. Fleck D.,“International Accountability for Violations of the Ius in Bello: the Impact of the ICRC Study on Customary International Humanitarian Law”, in Journal of Conflict and Security Law, Vol. 11, No. 2, 2006 24. Fay Report, “Investigation of the Abu Ghraib Detention Facility and 205th Military Intelligence Brigade “(august 2004). 25. Doswald-Beck L. “The Legal Validity of Military Intervention by Invitation of the Government”, British Yearbook of International Law, 56,1985 References 1. Wright Q. “Subversive Intervention” American journal of International Law,54, 1960 2. Wright Q. “US Intervention in Lebanon”, American Journal of International Law, 53, 1959 3. Watkin K.,“Controlling the Use of Force: A Role for Human Rights Norms in Contemporary Armed Conflict”, American Journal of International Law,98, 2004 4. Wippman l., ”Change and Continuity in Legal Justification for Military Intervention in Internal Conflicts”, Colunbia Human Rights Law Review, 27,1997 5. Van der Herik F. and Cernic L. “Regulating Corporations under International Law: from Human Rights to International Criminal Law and Back Again”, Journal of International Criminal Justice, 2010 6. Warbrick Y. “The New British Policy on Recognition of Governments”, International and Comparative Law Quarterly , 30,1981 7. Tonkin H.“State Control over Private Military and Security Companies in Armed Conflict (Cambridge Studies in International and Comparative Law)”Cambridge University Press, 2013 8. UCIHL, “Expert Meeting on Private Military Contractors”, Geneva, 2005 9. UN Secretariat, Survey of International Law, UN Doc. A/CN4/1 Rev.1(1949) 10. Stanio G., “Suing Private Military Contractors for Torture: How to Use Alien Tort Statute Without Granting Sovereign Immunity-Related Defenses”, Santa Clara Law Review,50,2010 11. Talmon H. “Recognition of Governments: An Analysis of the New British Policy and Practice”, British Yearbook of International Law, 1992 12. McCorquodale N. “Responsibility Beyond Borders: State Responsibility for Extraterritorial Violations by Corporations of International Human Rights Law”, Modern Law Review, 70, 2004 13. McGoldrick L,. “The Principle of Non-Intervention: Human Right” in Lowe and Warbrick(ed.) “The UN and the Principles of International Law”, Routledge, 1994 14. Meron T., “International Criminalization of Internal Atrocities”, American Journal of International Law, 89, 1995 15. O’ Brien K. «Military-Advisory Groups and African Security: Privatised Peace-keeping», International Peacekeeping, 5 (3), August 1998 16. Ruggie J., “Protect, Respect and Remedy: A Framework for Business and Human Rights”, UN Doc. A/HRC/8/5(7 april 2008) 17. Maffai M., “Accountability for Private Military and Security Companies Employees that Engage in Sex Trafficking and Related Abuses While under Contract with the United States Overseas”, Wisconsin International Law Journal, 09, 2008 18. Lauterparcht H. “Revolutionary activities by Private Persons Against Foreign States”/ American Journal of International Law,22, 1928 19. Gehring “Liability for Transboundary Environmental Damage: Toward a General Liability Regime?”, European Journal of International Law, 4, 1993 20. ICRC, Customary International Humanitarian Law Study, ICRC,2009 21. Lauterpacht H. “The Revision of the Law of War”, British Yearbook of International Law, 29, 1952 22. Fleck D. “Handbook of International Humanitarian Law”, Oxford, 2008 23. Fleck D.,“International Accountability for Violations of the Ius in Bello: the Impact of the ICRC Study on Customary International Humanitarian Law”, in Journal of Conflict and Security Law, Vol. 11, No. 2, 2006 24. Fay Report, “Investigation of the Abu Ghraib Detention Facility and 205th Military Intelligence Brigade “(august 2004). 25. Doswald-Beck L. “The Legal Validity of Military Intervention by Invitation of the Government”, British Yearbook of International Law, 56,1985

Журналы

Книги

Саврыга К.П. Ответственность принимающего государства и государства места инкорпорации за противоправные действия частных военных и охранных компаний