Private Military Contractors (PMCs) within modern history, are traced back to the 1960s to 1980s with the arrival of groups, such as the Executive Outcomes (EO) in South Africa. which were established and seen as one of the first modern groups of PMCs. Despite this recent history, however, hired soldiers or mercenaries can be traced back to ancient times and seen as nations hiring foreign fighters to supplement and fight within their armies. This rings true today, with the end of the cold war and particularly within the 1990s, PMCs became more prevalent again. This can be partially accredited to the reductions in state military budgets creating a multitude of now-unemployed military personnel and non-state actors taking advantage of the opportunity to fill the vacuum of security needs with corporate alternatives. Numerous PMC companies would then arise with Executive Outcomes and Sandline International being some of the first to sustain themselves with work outsourced by governments and multinational corporations, in order to meet the security needs within conflict zones and areas of political instability. This need for outsourced security services has only intensified in recent years with the United States’s engagement in the “War on Terror” and the utilisation of Russia’s Wagner Group within the Russo-Ukrainian War.
How have Private Military Contractors developed into their modern context?
While this new modern practice has been seen as a solution to meet the important need for security services where state alternatives may not be reliable or available. The business of PMCs has not been without controversy or developing concerns, which have been raised regarding their accountability and transparency. In particular, their potential to perpetuate human rights abuses and errors of democratic institutions. As a result of this worrying trend, many voices within the international community have expressed a desire to implement regulation and governing mechanisms for the use of PMCs in order to prevent further abuses.
The idea of PMCs has developed over time and become a more common phenomenon and there are several key factors that this can be contributed to. Firstly is the idea of globalisation. The economy has increasingly become globalised with security services being sought out of other countries by multinational corporations. This is with the main aim of assets being secured by PMCs for the sake of corporations within regions that are more volatile.
Another key factor that has contributed to the growth of PMCs is the changing nature of warfare. Smaller, asymmetrical conflicts have contained many PMCs who have played significant roles in regards to providing support services to military forces. This can be seen as a shift since the end of the cold war from large-scale conflicts that are seemingly conventional to these smaller-scale operations.
Moreover, with the costs rising in relation to the military, governments have resorted to outsourcing private contractors to be able to provide security as well as other services in a more efficient and economical. However, another reason which could attribute to the rise in PMCs is that there’s a lack of accountability as they operate in a grey area legally. This means that they are able to operate and work without the fear of prosecution and that both political and legal risks can be avoided by governments and corporations in relation to their own military forces yet continue to deploy soldiers. Despite some controversy, it can be seen that PMCs have become more popular due to economic, political, and technological factors combined. Overall they are likely to continue to contribute to global security for the foreseeable future.
To what extent have PMCs undermined human rights and how have these contractors eroded or violated them?
There are a number of clear examples of this behaviour throughout recent years, such as the Abu Ghraib prison scandal of 2004. When the staff of the PMC group known as Blackwater, now Academi, were involved in a number of illegal activities such as the mistreatment of detainees and torturing of individuals. This prompted widespread condemnation of this behaviour and began to open people’s eyes to the negative consequences of involving PMCs in military operations. However, this would only be the beginning of these incidents with numerous reports of civilian deaths at the hands of PMCs, with many accusations of innocent civilians being killed in Iraq and Afghanistan. Contextualized with the infamous Nisour Square Massacre orchestrated by employees of the then Blackwater PMC group, which resulted in a shooting incident in Baghdad that left 17 civilians dead and the perpetrators pardoned of their crimes in 2020. These actions have presented one of the most integral issues of the PMC world, which is a distinct lack of accountability that has allowed PMCs to operate outside of the traditional military chain of command and are not sufficiently subject to the same regulations and oversights as state military institutions. This behaviour has also been seen in the now typical tactics of exploitation by PMCs in the countries they operate with accusations of exploiting local workers and causing economic disturbances to individuals with limited access to legal protections. This can be seen with the Wagner Group’s activity in Central African Republic (CAR), with the group using the CAR’s government’s reliance on their security services to carve economic opportunity from the country’s natural resources, including the Ndassima gold mine. Further reports have added that Wagner has also intimidated and forcefully removed surrounding locals to better protect and maximize their production efforts for the Ndassima site. This reveals the issue of PMCs’ ability to abuse their power against weaker state actors and how they undermine human rights as a way of exploitation for economic gain. On the whole, then, the use of PMCs has garnered significant concerns for its new dimension of human rights abuses and how to hold those that abuse them accountable. While PMCs do represent a potential benefit for providing flexibility and specialised expertise for both state and non-state actors that lack important security infrastructure, it is an area that requires a better standard of operational accountability and a legal framework that respects human rights with an oversight mechanism that can help provide that accountability. 
How can PMCs be regulated and their human rights abuses be minimalised?
There are several ways in which PMCs’ human rights violations can be minimalised with one being consequences for any violations that are undertaken. This includes a variety of things such as criminal prosecutions but also for contracts being terminated. This will allow for any violations of actions that take place to be shown as not acceptable and a stand to be taken. However, in order for this to occur, there needs to also be legal frameworks implemented by the UNHRC internationally, thus allowing for the necessary sanctions to occur in cases of human rights abuses.
Additionally, when contracting any private militia, it would be beneficial for it to be stated within their contractual obligations that it is important they adhere to human rights standards. This would include training for all involved through the human rights council to ensure that the same standard is issued across all PMCs. Transparency is key for accountability and therefore information regarding PMCs should be more regularly available and discussed to ultimately assist in minimising human rights abuses.
What is the United Nations Human Rights Council?
The United Nations Human Rights Council (HRC) was established on 15th March 2006 by the United Nations General Assembly. This was with the aim to replace the pre-existing United Nations Commission on Human Rights. This intergovernmental body’s main aim is to promote and protect human rights globally. The 47 member states meet in Geneva around three times annually to assess and review the human rights situations through different countries whilst also attempting to create resolutions, all with the main aim of promoting and protecting human rights. In order to maintain a democratic council, the member states are elected by the UN General Assembly and remain in office for three-year terms. Every four years, the council meets together to partake in a Universal Periodic Review (UPR) in which they assess UN member states and their human rights. Many human rights issues are discussed within this council as well as investigating any human rights abuses. Furthermore, they aim to protect and promote the freedom of expression, religion, belief, and also the right to a fair trial. Overall, the HRC is vital in ensuring that global human rights issues are protected and discussed.
What role can the United Nations Human Rights Council play in minimising human rights abuses by private military contractors?
HRC can play a key role in ensuring that PMCs don’t conduct human rights abuses and if they do that they are held accountable. Firstly, they can do this by monitoring the actions of PMCs and ensuring that if any misconduct occurs, it is correctly reported and investigated. This includes monitoring their compliance with human rights standards and taking action if needed.
Additionally, in order to keep up with these standards, it is important that the HRC develop and analyse these, setting minimum standards ensuring the protection of human rights. Advocating for human rights and raising awareness about the PMCs and any abuses they commit will ensure that there’s sufficient accountability for the actions they undertake whilst also assisting in building and strengthening the capacity to protect human rights.
One other role that the HRC can play in this regard is engaging with stakeholders and creating a dialogue surrounding human rights issues related to PMC such as the lack of accountability they have as mentioned earlier. Furthermore, there are risks of labor rights being violated as the United Nations have discussed themselves, with incorrect management and assessment of maritime security being the key problem. Therefore the HRC discussing these issues and assessing International human rights standards will provide a dialogue around human rights abuses regarding PMCs.
Does the UN’s relationship with PMCs also need to be changed in order to combat the industry’s impact on human rights?
Overall there is a complex relationship between the United Nations and Private military contractors with the UN having used PMCs in the past during peacekeeping operations globally, highlighting that they support the general concept of PMCs. They themselves have contracted private militia to operate in high-risk areas, providing logistical support as well as transportation service to conflict-affiliated areas. However, despite this, they have also been critical in regard to some PMC companies and their lack of accountability in relation to human rights. They have called for further regulation of PMCs with the aim to uphold them to international human rights standards and if this is failed, then to ensure any violations committed are dealt with correctly. Furthermore, they have suggested and urged countries to use regular military forces for activities such as combat operations and refrain from resorting to PMCs.
Summary
Overall, it is clear to see that throughout the years, private military contractors have become the norm, with increased use as well as more media discussing the topic. However, with this new phenomenon, it is vital that there’s a set of guidelines and legalities in place globally to be able to create accountability as well as ensure that human rights are upheld. Therefore, it is a topic that needs to be discussed more and brought forward to the United Nations Human Rights Council.
Questions for the HRC in relation to PMCs
When visiting Geneva, if the opportunity to meet and ask questions with the United Nations Human Rights Council members arises, I would ask the following questions in regard to the increase of PMCs.
- What feasible strategies are available to limit the abuses of power PMCs conduct onto the populations they interact with?
- What legal frameworks can actually be achieved to curb the lack of oversight PMCs face, through the powers of the HRC?
- What possible legal loopholes must be addressed to help regulate the prosecution of members of PMCs that have committed crimes against human rights?