Challenging the Myths which Suggest that Human Rights Bodies Cannot Address Armed Non-state Actors in Situations of Armed Conflict: With Special Emphasis on the Case of Agnes Taylor

Abstract

The Chapter takes as a focus the interpretation given to the offence of torture given by the UK Supreme Court in the Case of R v Reeves Taylor in 2019. Even though Mrs Agnes Reeves Taylor was not eventually prosecuted for the alleged torture committed in Liberia in 1990, the idea that human rights treaties create offences to be prosecuted in the states parties, even where the individual belonged to a non-state actor, has confirmed that international law attaches to these private individuals and that the international human rights regime contains obligations for these individuals. This goes some way to busting the myth that human rights law derived from UN human rights treaties does not apply to non-state actors. The Chapter also considers the work of UN bodies such as the Security Council, Human Rights Treaty Bodies, Special Rapporteurs and Commissions of Inquiry that have already applied human rights norms to armed non-state actors. Lastly, it considers some factors that would affect a Commission’s choice of whether to describe an act of torture as a war crime or a human rights crime.