Chapter 7: State responsibility for the act of outsourcing
A key question of this book is whether contracting states violate their international legal obligations by outsourcing certain functions to PMSCs. It is argued that contracting states cannot uphold the principle of distinction in good faith while relying on private contractors to regularly directly participate in hostilities even though they qualify as civilians. To determine whether the principle of distinction was violated, the category of inherently governmental function is particularly useful. The argument is made that to uphold the principle of distinctions, states should not outsource functions which are consistent with the principle of the state monopoly on the legitimate use of force, especially the widespread and regular direct participation in hostilities, waging war and combat operations.
You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.
Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.
Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.
Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.