In 1998 Sandline International, a British private military company (PMC), signed a contract with the then exiled President of Sierra Leone to supply arms in contravention of a United Nations embargo. The fallout from this affair demonstrated the serious implications PMC activities can have on UK foreign policy. This report argues that the UK government should control the activities of mercenaries and private military companies operating out of the UK. It also proposes options for prospective legislation.
There is growing concern about the lack of accountability and absence of any binding legislation to regulate private military services, due to their potentially negative impact on peace, stability and the protection of human rights. It is important to clearly define the activities the principle actors providing private military services are engaged in so as to form legislation. Mercenaries are those who profit from war with no regard for the suffering it inflicts. PMCs often employ mercenaries but are legally registered companies that aim to provide public security. Private security companies share the same attributes as private military companies but are orientated around crime prevention and public order.
Currently there are no instruments in international law that prohibit mercenary activity. The UK should provide leadership in addressing this problem by legislating against mercenary activity committed by UK individuals.
- Other countries have legislated to control mercenary activities in response to the requirements of neutrality laws or to deal directly with mercenary activity. They have also regulated the provision of foreign military assistance as opposed to merely mercenary activities and have legislated for arms export control systems.
- The UK should learn from best practice in these countries, particularly South Africa and the USA, with regard to prohibition on direct participation in conflict, definitions of military services that should be regulated, and the need for transparency.
The following recommendations are made in light of current international instruments in place to regulate mercenaries and national legislation to regulate private military companies:
- The starting point for developing national legislation should be its legal basis. Legislation should reflect relevant international human rights and humanitarian law. It should also clearly define the actors, activities and services to which it would apply.
- Legislation should state the activities from which individual mercenaries and PMCs should be prohibited from, such as direct participation in hostilities or illicit economic activities. It should also define the kind of military activities companies are permitted to carry out, including military advice and training and intelligence gathering.
- Legislation should state the criteria upon which license applications will be considered, such as whether the activities would, for example, violate international embargoes or contribute to external aggression.
- To enforce legislation, clear statements on the relevant punishment and the maximum penalties for those found to be involved in offences should be made. Legislation should also have extra-territorial power, so it applies both to acts committed on UK territory and acts committed abroad.
- A regulatory system should be set up to administer the implementation of the legislation and, in particular, the registering and licensing of individuals and PMCs wishing to supply military services abroad. Any regulatory body would need to have the power to impose administrative sanctions such as withdrawing licenses or seizing of assets.
