Search results

AbstractFifty-two years ago, in 1971, President Nixon declared the "War on Drugs", identifying drug abuse as a public enemy in the United States. Since then, US drug policy has been militarized and, more recently, privatized. Every year, the US government increasingly contracts private military and security companies to provide intelligence, logistical support and training to armed forces in drug-producing or drug-transit States. In Latin America, this militarization and privatization has increased the intensity of violence and has complexified domestic situations, to the extent that the existing international legal regimes now seem inappropriate to respond to the challenges posed by the War on Drugs. On the one hand, human rights law does not adequately address situations where the State faces organized crime groups that are able to control territory. On the other hand, international humanitarian law (IHL) was not created to address law enforcement situations, which the War on Drugs and the fight against organized crime ostensibly are.This article examines the situation in Latin America, looking at examples of different types of situations through the lens of intensity and organization of the group involved and, in some cases, the group's control over territory. It discusses the application of IHL and human rights law (focusing on the inter-American system of human rights) in these situations and their complementarity, and debates how these bodies of law are adapting or may need to be adapted.

Defence date: 8 December 2014 ; Examining Board: Professor Francesco Francioni, European University Institute (Supervisor) Professor Nehal Butha, European University Institute Professor Andrew Clapham, Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies Professor Jorge E. Viñuales, University of Cambridge. ; The use of private military and security companies (PMSCs) is a growing phenomenon in Latin America and the Caribbean, where complex situations are common. Even though the use of PMSCs is not per se problematic, the lack of an efficient international and national regulatory framework for PMSCs raises several concerns about the protection of human rights. This study aims first to analyze PMSCs' activities and regulation thereof in conditions in which there is a mix of several types of situation, such as armed conflict and criminal activities or post-disaster and post-conflict. This complexity challenges the identification of the law applicable—international humanitarian law or/and international human rights law— and, thus, challenges the enforcement of any adequate regulation for PMSCs. Three case studies—Colombia, Mexico, and Haiti—illustrate these issues. In Colombia, a noninternational armed conflict has been ongoing for approximately fifty years alongside criminal activities linked to drug trafficking. In Mexico, the War on Drugs has escalated to a situation technically classifiable as an armed conflict. Finally, in Haiti, the situation evolved from an armed conflict (2004-2007), to a situation of peace with a high criminal rate before the earthquake (2007-2010), to a post-earthquake disaster situation in which criminality is rising but the intensity of the violence has not reached the level to be classified an armed conflict (2010-present). In order to implement international standards concerning PMSC regulation it is necessary to consider both bodies of law and force territorial states to assume their responsibilities. Considering these elements I then argue that the Inter-American System of Human Rights can play a significant role in improving PMSCs' regulation in Latin America and the Caribbean thanks to is avant-gardiste features. Its jurisprudence on non-state actors coupled with its use of external sources to interpret the American Convention on Human Rights would allow the implementation of international norms, including international initiatives on PMSCs, in the region.

The use of Private Military and Security Companies (PMSCs) in the so-called War on Drugs has considerable implications for the application of international humanitarian law and raises concern about the respect for human rights under anti drug assistance programs. This article will focus, in particular, on the ways in which the lack of state control over PMSC activities poses a major challenge for human rights protections in the short-term—by restricting the application of human rights law—as well as in the long-term—by further undermining state capacity and weakening the rule of law. Using the cases of Colombia and Mexico, this article will illustrate how PMSCs tend to add another dimension of complexity to complicated situations where the application of the rule of law is already uneven, increasing the risk of human rights violations and impunity.

This article aims to highlight the evolution of crime in Colombia and how it is a drawback to the current understanding of the applicability of international humanitarian law. The peace agreement between the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia-FARC, the government and the emerging armed actors are a challenge to Colombian law and legal institutions. Accordingly, the article concluded that the use of force by the Colombian government against drug trafficking organizations, or so-called Criminal Gangs-BACRIM, does not seem to be the legal way to combat them since these organizations do not necessarily participate in hostilities, which means that the government has to follow a specific procedure. ; Este trabajo tiene como objeto exponer la evolución del crimen en Colombia y como esta desafía la comprensión actual de la aplicabilidad del derecho internacional humanitario. El acuerdo de paz entre las Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia-FARC, el gobierno y los actores armados emergentes son un reto para el derecho y las instituciones jurídicas colombianas. Luego del análisis de estos factores se concluye que el uso de la fuerza por parte del gobierno colombiano contra las organizaciones de narcotráfico, o las llamadas Bandas Criminales-BACRIM, no parece ser la forma legal para combatirlos, toda vez que estas organizaciones no necesariamente participan en las hostilidades, lo cual significa que el estado tiene que seguir un procedimiento específico.

This article aims to highlight the evolution of crime in Colombia and how it is a drawback to the current understanding of the applicability of international humanitarian law. The peace agreement between the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia-FARC, the government and the emerging armed actors are a challenge to Colombian law and legal institutions. Accordingly, the article concluded that the use of force by the Colombian government against drug trafficking organizations, or socalled Criminal Gangs-BACRIM, does not seem to be the legal way to combat them since these organizations do not necessarily participate in hostilities, which means that the government has to follow a specific procedure. ; Este trabajo tiene como objeto exponer la evo- lución del crimen en Colombia y como esta desafía la comprensión actual de la aplicabilidad del derecho internacional humanitario. El acuerdo de paz entre las Fuerzas Arma- das Revolucionarias de Colombia-FARC, el gobierno y los actores armados emergentes son un reto para el derecho y las instituciones jurídicas colombianas. Luego del análisis de estos factores se concluye que el uso de la fuerza por parte del gobierno colombiano contra las organizaciones de narcotráfico, o las llamadas Bandas Criminales-BACRIM, no parece ser la forma legal para combatirlos, toda vez que estas organizaciones no necesariamente participan en las hostilidades, lo cual significa que el estado tiene que seguir un procedimiento específico.