Attribution of Conduct in Peace Operations: The 'Ultimate Authority and Control' Test

Abstract

The article addresses the issue of whether conduct in international peace operations is attrib- utable to the troop contributing states or to the United Nations, taking the European Court of Human Rights ' admissibility decision in the Behrami and Saramati cases as a point of ref- erence. The Court concluded that conduct by UNMIK and KFOR troops in Kosovo is attrib- utable to the United Nations. The article examines the content of the ' ultimate authority and control ' test that is applied by the Court, and argues that the Court should have taken a different approach. The Court's test is in the author's view diffi cult to reconcile with the International Law Commission's work on the responsibility of international organizations, with United Nations practice on responsibility for unlawful conduct in peace operations, and with the Court's own jurisprudence concerning attribution of conduct to the state. The author argues further that the Court's arguments are incomplete even if the Court's approach were to be considered correct. The article concludes by expressing concern that the Court's deci- sion, when seen in connection with previous case law, in practice renders the European Con- vention on Human Rights irrelevant in international peace operations.