Annex 1: List of documents
Country Instrument Period Link
Afghanistan DCI 2014-2020 Link
Bangladesh DCI 2014-2020 Link
Bhutan DCI 2014-2020 Link
Bolivia DCI 2014-2016 Link
Botswana EDF 2014-2020 Link
Burundi (French) EDF 2014-2020 Link
Cape Verde EDF 2014-2020 Link
Columbia DCI 2014-2017 Link
Cote d’Ivoire (French) EDF 2014-2020 Link
Cuba DCI 2014-2020 Link
Djibouti (French) EDF 2014-2020 Link
DRC Congo (French) EDF 2014-2020 Link
Ecuador DCI 2014-2017 Link
El Salvador DCI 2014-2020 Link
Ethiopia EDF 2014-2020 Link
Gabon (French) EDF 2014-2020 Link
Ghana EDF 2014-2020 Link
Guatemala DCI 2014-2020 Link
Honduras DCI 2014-2020 Link
Kenya EDF 2014-2020 Link
Kyrgyzstan DCI 2014-2020 Link
Lesotho EDF 2014-2020 Link
Liberia EDF 2014-2020 Link
Mauritania (French) EDF 2014-2020 Link
Mongolia DCI 2014-2020 Link
Nepal DCI 2014-2020 Link
Nicaragua DCI 2014-2020 Link
Niger (French) EDF 2014-2020 Link
Nigeria EDF 2014-2020 Link
Pakistan DCI 2014-2020 Link
Paraguay DCI 2014-2020 Link
Peru DCI 2014-2017 Link
Rwanda EDF 2014-2020 Link
Seychelles EDF 2014-2020 Link
Sierra Leone EDF 2014-2020 Link
Somalia EDF 2014-2020 Link
South Africa DCI 2014-2020 Link
Sri Lanka DCI 2014-2020 Link
St. Lucia EDF 2014-2020 Link
St. Vincent and the Grenadines EDF 2014-2020 Link
Suriname EDF 2014-2020 Link
Swaziland EDF 2014-2020 Link
Tajikistan DCI 2014-2020 Link
Tanzania EDF 2014-2020 Link
The Philippines DCI 2014-2020 Link
Turkmenistan DCI 2014-2017 Link
Uzbekistan DCI 2014-2020 Link
Vietnam DCI 2014-2020 Link
Zimbabwe EDF 2014-2020 Link
Annex 2: Coding scheme
The following table contains the coding scheme and search terms employed in the analysis. At every occurrence of a search term, it has been considered whether the term appears in a context relevant to human rights and a human rights-based approach.
Variable Categories / search terms
META
Country Title
Instrument 1. Development Cooperation Instrument
2. European Development Fund Period
Total amount of aid
Region 1. West / Central Africa
2. East / Southern Africa 3. Latin America and Caribbean 4. Central Asia
5. South / South East Asia Title of sector programme (for programme-level analysis
only)
Sector (for programme-level analysis only) 1. Governance, democratization, justice sector and public sector
2. Agriculture and rural development
3. Education, health, other social services, social protection, inclusion and employment
4. Energy, environment, climate change and infrastructure
Nepal DCI 2014-2020 Link
Nicaragua DCI 2014-2020 Link
Niger (French) EDF 2014-2020 Link
Nigeria EDF 2014-2020 Link
Pakistan DCI 2014-2020 Link
Paraguay DCI 2014-2020 Link
Peru DCI 2014-2017 Link
Rwanda EDF 2014-2020 Link
Seychelles EDF 2014-2020 Link
Sierra Leone EDF 2014-2020 Link
Somalia EDF 2014-2020 Link
South Africa DCI 2014-2020 Link
Sri Lanka DCI 2014-2020 Link
St. Lucia EDF 2014-2020 Link
St. Vincent and the Grenadines EDF 2014-2020 Link
Suriname EDF 2014-2020 Link
Swaziland EDF 2014-2020 Link
Tajikistan DCI 2014-2020 Link
Tanzania EDF 2014-2020 Link
The Philippines DCI 2014-2020 Link
Turkmenistan DCI 2014-2017 Link
Uzbekistan DCI 2014-2020 Link
Vietnam DCI 2014-2020 Link
Zimbabwe EDF 2014-2020 Link
Annex 2: Coding scheme
The following table contains the coding scheme and search terms employed in the analysis. At every occurrence of a search term, it has been considered whether the term appears in a context relevant to human rights and a human rights-based approach.
Variable Categories / search terms
META
Country Title
Instrument 1. Development Cooperation Instrument
2. European Development Fund Period
Total amount of aid
Region 1. West / Central Africa
2. East / Southern Africa 3. Latin America and Caribbean 4. Central Asia
5. South / South East Asia Title of sector programme (for programme-level analysis
only)
Sector (for programme-level analysis only) 1. Governance, democratization, justice sector and public sector
2. Agriculture and rural development
3. Education, health, other social services, social protection, inclusion and employment
4. Energy, environment, climate change and infrastructure
5. Other categories, including promotion of trade and investment, conflict resolution and illicit drug
programmes Amount allocated to sector (for programme-level
analysis only)
HUMAN RIGHTS IN GENERAL
Human rights mentioned in introduction EN: ‘human right(s)’
FR: ‘droit(s) de l'homme’
Civil and political rights mentioned in introduction EN: ‘civil right(s)’, ‘political right(s)’, ‘civil and political rights’
FR: ‘droit(s) civil(s)’, ‘droit(s) politique(s)’, ‘droits civils et politiques’
Economic and social rights mentioned in introduction EN: ‘economic right(s)’, ‘social right(s)’, ‘economic, social and cultural rights’
FR: ‘droit(s) économique(s)’, ’droits sociaux’, ‘droits économiques et sociaux’
Human rights mentioned in (programme) narrative - Civil and political rights mentioned in (programme)
narrative -
Economic and social rights mentioned in (programme)
narrative -
Human rights mentioned in (programme) objectives - Civil and political rights mentioned in (programme)
objectives -
Economic and social rights mentioned in (programme)
objectives -
Human rights mentioned in (programme) expected
results -
Civil and political rights mentioned in (programme)
expected results -
Economic and social rights mentioned in (programme)
expected results -
Human rights mentioned in (programme) indicators - Civil and political rights mentioned in (programme)
indicators -
Economic and social rights mentioned in (programme)
indicators -
SPECIFIC RIGHTS
Right to education EN: ‘right to education’
FR: ‘droit à l'éducation’
Right to health EN: ‘right to health’
FR: ‘droit à la santé’
Right to water EN: ‘right to water’
FR: ‘droit à l'eau’
Indigenous people’s rights EN: ‘indigenous people’s rights’, ‘rights of indigenous people’
FR: ‘droits des peuples autochtones’
Land rights EN: ‘land rights’
FR: ‘droit(s) foncier(s)’
Labour rights EN: ‘labour rights’, ‘labour standards’, ‘workers’ rights’
FR: ‘droit(s) du travail’, ‘droits des travailleurs’
Gender rights / women’s rights EN: ‘gender rights’, ‘women’s rights’, ‘rights of women’
FR: ‘droits des femmes’
Children’s rights EN: ‘children’s rights’, ‘rights of children’
FR: ‘droits des enfants’
Property rights EN: ‘property rights’, ‘right to property’
FR: ‘droit(s) de propriété’
INDICATIO NS OF HRBA?
HRBA mentioned in entire document? EN: ‘rights-based approach’, ‘rights based approach’
FR: ‘approche fondée sur les droits de l'homme’
HRBA mentioned in programme description -
Focus on vulnerable groups EN: ‘vulnerable’/’marginalized’
FR: ‘vulnérable’, ‘marginalisé’
Empowerment EN: ‘empowerment’, ‘empower’
FR: ‘autonomisation’
Participation EN: ‘participation’, ‘participatory’
FR: ‘participation’, ‘participatif’, ‘participative’
Non-discrimination EN: ‘non-discrimination’, ‘discrimination’, ‘equal access’
FR: ‘non-discrimination’, ‘discrimination’, ‘égalité d'accès’, ‘accès équitable’
Inclusion EN: ‘inclusion’
FR: ‘inclusion’
Accountability EN: ‘accountability’, ‘accountable’
FR: ‘responsabilisation’, ‘responsable’
Transparency EN: ‘transparency’, ‘transparent’
FR: ‘transparence’, ’transparent’
Rule of law EN: ‘rule of law’
FR: ’l’état de droit’
VI. Legal factors: A case-study on international human rights and international humanitarian law in EU’s Common Security and Defence Policy Operations and Missions
A. Introduction
The EU has, since the launch in January 2003 of the EU Police Mission in Bosnia and Herzegovina (EUPM BiH), launched around 30 civilian and military missions and operations under EU’s Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP). The EU is currently involved in 16 CSDP missions and operations, including eleven civilian missions and five military operations. This chapter seeks to explore and define the role of the EU as a global security provider and a promoter of human rights through CSDP military operations in third States.
In November 2014, the Council of the European Union reiterated an ‘urgent need of enabling the EU and its Member States to assume increased responsibilities to act as a security provider, at the international level and in particular in the neighborhood (such as Iraq, Libya, the Sahel, Syria and Ukraine), thereby also enhancing their own security and their global strategic role by responding to these challenges together’ (Council of the European Union, 2014, p. 1). It is thereby envisaged that the EU (and thus the CSDP) should play an increasingly more important and prominent role in the future.
The European External Action Service (EEAS) likewise stressed in December 2014 that the EU is a global actor, ready to share the responsibility for global security (EEAS, 2014, para. 4). To make these ambitions credible, deployments must be able to support diplomacy and other means of conflict resolution anywhere in the world. Hence, it is envisaged that military power combined with civilian
Empowerment EN: ‘empowerment’, ‘empower’
FR: ‘autonomisation’
Participation EN: ‘participation’, ‘participatory’
FR: ‘participation’, ‘participatif’, ‘participative’
Non-discrimination EN: ‘non-discrimination’, ‘discrimination’, ‘equal access’
FR: ‘non-discrimination’, ‘discrimination’, ‘égalité d'accès’, ‘accès équitable’
Inclusion EN: ‘inclusion’
FR: ‘inclusion’
Accountability EN: ‘accountability’, ‘accountable’
FR: ‘responsabilisation’, ‘responsable’
Transparency EN: ‘transparency’, ‘transparent’
FR: ‘transparence’, ’transparent’
Rule of law EN: ‘rule of law’
FR: ’l’état de droit’
VI. Legal factors: A case-study on international human rights and international humanitarian law in EU’s Common Security and Defence Policy Operations and Missions
A. Introduction
The EU has, since the launch in January 2003 of the EU Police Mission in Bosnia and Herzegovina (EUPM BiH), launched around 30 civilian and military missions and operations under EU’s Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP). The EU is currently involved in 16 CSDP missions and operations, including eleven civilian missions and five military operations. This chapter seeks to explore and define the role of the EU as a global security provider and a promoter of human rights through CSDP military operations in third States.
In November 2014, the Council of the European Union reiterated an ‘urgent need of enabling the EU and its Member States to assume increased responsibilities to act as a security provider, at the international level and in particular in the neighborhood (such as Iraq, Libya, the Sahel, Syria and Ukraine), thereby also enhancing their own security and their global strategic role by responding to these challenges together’ (Council of the European Union, 2014, p. 1). It is thereby envisaged that the EU (and thus the CSDP) should play an increasingly more important and prominent role in the future.
The European External Action Service (EEAS) likewise stressed in December 2014 that the EU is a global actor, ready to share the responsibility for global security (EEAS, 2014, para. 4). To make these ambitions credible, deployments must be able to support diplomacy and other means of conflict resolution anywhere in the world. Hence, it is envisaged that military power combined with civilian
The authors of this chapter are Anja Møller Pedersen, Legal Advisor, and Peter Vedel Kessing, Senior Researcher, the Danish Institute for Human Rights.
instruments, in symmetric and asymmetric scenarios, needs the capability to project tailored forces and expertise, with short preparation time, over strategic distances into remote regions.
It is thus evident, that the use of force is a necessary tool in EU-led military operations in third States.
When acting internally in the EU, the EU and its Member States implementing EU law are clearly bound by fundamental rights. Furthermore, it is laid down in the Treaty on European Union (TEU) that the EU shall seek to promote and strengthen international human rights in its relations with third States. But to what extent are the EU and troop-contributing Member States involved in CSDP military operations in third States bound by International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and International Human Rights Law (IHRL) standards? Shall EU-led military forces respect and protect IHL and IHRL standards in military operations in third States?
Uncertainty about the content and scope of IHL and IHRL obligations in EU-led military operations in third States is a legal factor that may hamper the effective protection of IHL and IHRL.
Publicly available EU human rights policy documents on CSDP operations and missions have mainly focused on the promotion of IHRL and IHL in third States – by third States themselves – rather than on the EU’s own compliance with IHL and IHRL when involved in CSDP missions and operations. Such possible incoherence between the policy towards third States and the EU/Member States is a factor that might hinder the effectiveness of the EU human rights policy and the effectiveness of CSDP military operations in third States.
Closely linked to the question of which IHL and IHRL standards EU-led troops are bound by when involved in military operations in third States, is the question of attribution and responsibility of potential IHL and IHRL breaches. Is it EU as an international organization or the troop-contributing Member States that are responsible for a possible breach of IHL or IHRL during a military operation in a third State? This question has been much debated in academic literature in recent years and will, therefore, only be briefly touched upon in this chapter.
Through a case study on the CSDP, the chapter seeks to explore and define the role of the EU as a global security provider and a promoter of human rights and international law. More specifically it is examined whether EU-led military forces from a legal and policy perspective are required to respect and protect IHL and IHRL standards in CSDP military operations in third States.
Many of the findings in this chapter, e.g. concerning attribution (section D) and on applicable international legal norms (section C), can also be of relevance for EU-led civilian CSDP missions in third States. Nevertheless, this chapter focuses on EU-led military operations and on the specific questions that arise in such operations e.g. the applicability of IHL and the relationship and interaction between IHL and IHRL.