Targeted Killing and Human Rights

Abstract

The contemporary diversification of battlefield caused by the military capabilities of non-State actors to plan and execute intensive military operations has shaken an already established world legal order. To curtail the challenges posed by the non-State actors, States have adopted a policy of targeted killing as a counter-terrorism measure. The propriety and the legal regime that govern this policy have been contentious. Hence, a lot has been written about targeted killing, both in favour and against. This research endeavoured to enhance legal certainty in the area of targeted killing by considering the practice of targeted killing under the respective legal regimes and conclude that neither of the legal regimes absolutely prohibit targeted killing. Rather, the legality or otherwise of targeted killing is dependent on the compliance with the rules of the applicable legal regimes. Consequently, this research dispels the argument of impropriety and/or inadequacy of present laws on use of force against non-State actors. In view of the fact that there is no legal void in targeted killing operations, rather than aligning with the argument for an entirely new law, this research calls for interpretive guidance on the controversial areas of the existing laws to enhance legal certainty that will guide State practice in targeted killing operations.