This document presents the findings of a study into methods that can help counterterrorism professionals make decisions about ethical problems. The study was commissioned by the Research and Documentation Centre (Wetenschappelijk Onderzoeken Documentatiecentrum, WODC) of the Dutch Ministry of Security and Justice (Ministerie van Veiligheid en Justitie), on behalf of the National Coordinator for Counterterrorism and Security (Nationaal Coördinator Terrorismebestrijding en Veiligheid,NCTV). The research team at RAND Europe was complemented by applied ethics expert Anke van Gorp from the Research Centre for Social Innovation (Kenniscentrum Sociale Innovatie) at Hogeschool Utrecht. The study provides an inventory of methods to support ethical decision-making in counterterrorism, drawing on the experience of other public sectors – healthcare, social work, policing and intelligence – and multiple countries, primarily the Netherlands and the United Kingdom
Abstract Chapter 4: Basing ourselves on a literature review and expert interviews we create an overview of methods and tools to identify and respond to ethical questions used in healthcare, social work, police and the military. We identify six main types of methods or tools that can support professionals or organisations in dealing with ethical issues. Some of these methods are already used in CT or could be used. Some methods or tools are targeted at individual professionals or small groups, whilst others are targeted at the organisational level. The methods and tools are described in brief. Samenvatting boek: Wat is ethisch wel en wat niet geoorloofd? De aanslagen die de Europese hoofdsteden teisteren wrijven het ons in: terrorismebestrijding is noodzakelijk en is onlosmakelijk verbonden met de moderne samenleving. De inlichtingendiensten en andere organisaties die zich hiermee bezighouden, stuiten echter telkens op de vraag hoe ver zij mogen gaan. Waar liggen de grenzen? Wat is ethisch wel en wat niet geoorloofd? En vooral: hoe gaan professionals met deze soms levensgrote dilemma's om? In deze Engelstalige uitgave reflecteren wetenschappers, terrorismebestrijders en ethici op dit zeer actuele thema.
MULTIFILE
Hoofdstuk 15 15.1 Introduction 15.2 An international law perspective 15.3 The American position 15.4 International human rights developments 15.5 Effective remedy and reparations 15.6 Reflections References In the international arena there are some encouraging developments in relation to accountability and transparency for the use of armed drones. It is increasingly recognized that remote pilotless aircraft have become part of modern warfare, and that sometimes they are also used outside the context of armed conflict. Subsequently, both international humanitarian and human rights law can apply. The issue of access to justice, however, receives less explicit socio-political attention. Victims of armed remote pilotless aircraft strikes meet countless challenges in effectuating their right to an effective remedy. Often even a formal recognition that a strike has taken place is lacking. Furthermore, the states involved fail to publicly release information about their own investigations. This makes it difficult for those affected to substantiate their status as a victim and seek justice, including reparations. The international community should, in addition to urging involved states to independently and impartially investigate all armed drone strikes, ensure that access to an effective remedy for civilian victims, whether on an international, transnational or national level, becomes a reality.
LINK
