CYIL vol. 11 (2020)

JOSEF MRÁZEK CYIL 11 (2020) various official statements declaring the legality of targeted killings. Some authors in support of the official targeted killing policy draw a distinction between “ illegal assassination” and the “ lawful targeting ” in armed conflicts of those, who are a “ direct threat ” to the United States. This study is trying to analyze if the targeted killing policy is consistent with international law requirements, starting with the notions of targeted killing, assassination, or extrajudicial execution. It centers mainly on the acts of targeted killings in self-defense against non-state actors or on the asserted basis of the authorized use of force by the United Nations Security Council (UNSC). The author in this context discuss a number of questions relating to the existence and conceptions of “ continuing armed conflict ”, armed attack, targeted strikes beyond the scope of any existing conflict, individual targeting strikes in the territory of third states (outside armed conflict). Targeted international killings raise a number of serious questions, regarding both facts and the use of lethal force under international law. 2. The notion of targeted killing Targeted killings have become a very contentious aspect not only in modern warfare, but also outside the battlefield or outside armed hostilities. Most of the targeted killings have been carried out using unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV) usually called “drones”. Drones are, as a rule, defined as sleek, unmanned aerial vehicles, that don’t carry a human operator, which are expendable and can either be lethal or non-lethal load carriers. 5 According to the U.S. Department of Defense, a drone or unmanned aircraft is an “aircraft or balloon that does not carry a human operator and is capable of flight under remote control or autonomous programming” . 6 The U.S. has carried out the vast majority of all drone strikes, mainly those outside direct battlefields. Armed drones have been also employed by Israel, the United Kingdom, France, Russia, and other countries. The theaters of drone military operations are e.g. Afghanistan, Mali, and other countries. Many European and non-European countries are increasingly acquiring armed drones for their military forces. Targeted killings are not only limited to drone strikes. The means and methods of targeted killings vary and include “ sniper fire shooting at close range, missiles from helicopters, gunshots, drones, the use of car bombs and poison ”. 7 The term “targeted killing” in fact is not defined under international law. Ph. Alston e.g. characterized targeted killing as “ the international, premeditated and deliberate use of lethal force by States or their agents acting under color of law or by organized army group in armed conflict against a specific individual who is not in the physical custody of the perpetrator ”. 8 The term “targeted killings” came into common usage in 2000 after Israel “ made public a policy of targeted killings of alleged terrorists in the occupied Palestinian territories ”. 9 N. Melzer in his earlier book defined targeted killing similarly as “ the use of lethal force attributable to a subject of international law 5 FRANCIS R., Seminar Report, 24 May 2012, International Law and Practice of Targeted Killing with Drones . British Institute hosted a lecture by prof. M. E. O’Connell chaired by prof. R. McCorquodale, Director of this Institute. 6 Department of Defense, 331, Joint Publication on 1-02, Dictionary of Military and Associated Conflict Resolution Clinic at Stanford Law School and Global Justice Clinic at NYU, School of Law, Living under Drones: Deaths, Injury and Trauma to Civilians from U.S. Drone Practices in Pakistan , 2012. 7 ALSTON, Ph. Report of the Special Rapporteur, supra note 1, p. 4. 8 Ibid. p. 3. 9 Ibid. p. 4.

298