abusesaffiliationarrow-downarrow-leftarrow-rightarrow-upattack-typeburgerchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-upClock iconclosedeletedevelopment-povertydiscriminationdollardownloademailenvironmentexternal-linkfacebookfiltergenderglobegroupshealthC4067174-3DD9-4B9E-AD64-284FDAAE6338@1xinformation-outlineinformationinstagraminvestment-trade-globalisationissueslabourlanguagesShapeCombined Shapeline, chart, up, arrow, graphLinkedInlocationmap-pinminusnewsorganisationotheroverviewpluspreviewArtboard 185profilerefreshIconnewssearchsecurityPathStock downStock steadyStock uptagticktooltiptwitteruniversalityweb
Article

1 Nov 2008

Author:
James Cockayne, Journal of Conflict and Security Law

Regulating Private Military and Security Companies: The Content, Negotiation, Weaknesses and Promise of the Montreux Document

On 17 September 2008, 17 states…endorsed the ‘Montreux Document’ affirming the legal obligations and describing good practices…related to operations of private military and security companies…[The author] provide[s] an overview of the Montreux Document and the negotiations that produced it. [The author has] a particular perspective on this process, having served as a source of informal advice to the convenors of the Montreux process between mid-2006 and September 2008.5 In the course of this article, [the author] explore[s] how the Document may provide the basis for improved standards and accountability in PMSC activity. Finally, [the author] offer[s] brief reflections on the weaknesses and promise of the Montreux Document as a basis for more effective regulation of PMSCs.