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

10 Feb 2009

Author:
David Cronin, IPS

RIGHTS: Violations Privatised Away

Though the U.S. has made the most extensive use of [security firms]...it is in Europe where they originated...Four decades later, the European Union is being urged to introduce regulations so that better oversight of private security firms can be guaranteed...While most of the firms in question work in parts of the world where they can be tried for any misdemeanours by local courts, they have been operating in something of a legal vacuum in Iraq, Afghanistan, Congo and Somalia during recent years...The British government, meanwhile, has procrastinated in subjecting private security firms to tougher rules...About 85 percent of private security firms are based in either Britain or the U.S...Amnesty International has complained that Britain's private security firms can evade responsibility for human rights violations they are accused of as they cannot be tried in British courts...the 27-country EU is better placed than national administrations to ensure that regulation occurs. [refers to Blackwater, Watchguard International, Sandline]