Legal Examination of Targeted Assassination and Violations of International Human Rights Law

Targeted assassination has become a common policy among some states to advance their military and security objectives. This form of assassination can occur in various situations and conditions, whether during armed conflict or in peacetime. The means employed in such assassinations are not of primary importance. This concept has undergone significant changes following the events of September ۱۱. Although it remains a policy and military tool that is still considered legal and legitimate under international law, it is utilized by certain countries, such as the United States, as a terrorist instrument, which lacks acceptance in the international community. It is essential to examine and analyze the doctrine of "targeted assassination" from the perspectives of international humanitarian law and human rights law. The military application refers to directing operations toward a specific person, location, or object for attack. Thus, targeting means guiding an operation to the direction where the attack should occur. The term "assassination" in "targeted assassination" shares similarities with the concept of extrajudicial execution, as both entail the taking of another's life. However, they differ conceptually in legal terms. The U.S. military action in the targeted assassination of the Quds Force commander clearly contradicts the principles and conditions of legitimate self-defense, constituting a gross violation of international law and international humanitarian law. International bodies must pursue appropriate measures to hold the U.S. accountable for such actions.

کلیدواژه ها:

Targeted assassination ، Quds Force Commander ، Human Rights Law ، Drones