News

Clarification required on drone killings case

The legal case for using drone strikes outside of armed conflict needs ‘urgent clarification’ from ministers, the Joint Committee on Human Rights has said. Two UK citizens were killed in Syria last nearby an RAF drone, with the government defending its actions by claiming it is prepared to take ‘lawful action’ over direct threats to the UK. Khan, it is claimed, had been plotting ‘barbaric’ attacks on UK soil, making the strike an ‘act of self-defence’. However, that defence, used by Prime Minister David Cameron, is not justified under international law, and later statements justified the killing in the context of the armed conflict in Iraq. The committee has said that while it understands the drone strikes as Law of War, the explanation provided by the government contained contradictions and inconsistencies, and asked for clarification. Harriet Harman, committee chairman and Labour MP, explained on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme: “As the world faces the grey area between terrorism and war, there needs to be a new international consensus on when it is acceptable for a state to take a life outside of armed conflict. "Our government has said they're going to be targeting people in other parts of the world, but there's no independent scrutiny afterwards.” A UK government spokesman said: "Where we identify a direct and imminent threat to the UK we will take lawful action to address it and report to Parliament after we have done so. "Such actions are only to be carried out as a last resort when all other options have been exhausted, and we would always do so in accordance with international humanitarian law."

Partners

View the latest
digital issue