Seán Sherlock (Cork East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 124: To ask the Minister for Foreign Affairs if, in view of the need to promote and protect human rights internationally by controlling more effectively the conditions under which military and security transfers take place, particularly in the context of armed conflict, he will support calls for measures to unequivocally prohibit mercenary activity of any kind by Irish citizens in an armed conflict. [24994/07]

Dermot Ahern (Louth, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I assume the Deputy is referring to the use by States of private military/private security companies (PMCs/PSCs) in situations of armed conflict. I am advised that both the staff of private military/private security companies and any State hiring them have responsibilities under international humanitarian law. An Irish citizen working for such a company would be bound by international humanitarian law and would, for example, have individual criminal responsibility for any war crimes committed.

The use of mercenaries is not as such prohibited under customary general international law or under any broadly ratified international treaty. International humanitarian law does not prohibit mercenaries, but rather focuses on their status if captured. Article 47 of the First Additional Protocol of 1977 to the Geneva Convention provides that "a mercenary shall not have the right to be a combatant or a prisoner of war", i.e. that a mercenary is not entitled to the privileged treatment of a prisoner of war. However, the Protocol's criteria for the definition of a mercenary make it apparent how problematic it can be to distinguish between categories of military forces.

The question of any illegal activity by private military/security companies within the State would be a matter for the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform and the Garda Síochána. While I would be open to considering any broadly-based international effort to clarify or regulate the complex issues involved, I do not believe that any blanket prohibition of the type proposed is likely to be practicable.