Extraterritoriellt våld mot en icke-statlig aktör - under vilka förutsättningar?

Sammanfattning: This essay addresses the issue of states extraterritorial use of force against non-state actors. If concluded that such a right exists, the essay will continue to examine under which conditions. Since 9/11 states have been eager to adress the issue of wether they are allowed to use force against non-state actors, who act from another state’s territory. To be able to answer this question I have looked at the UN-charter and international customary law. The UN-charter regulates when and for what purposes states may use force against each other. The main principle is the prohibition of the of force in art. 2(4). However, one exception to this principle is the right to use force in self-defence in art. 51. Commentators try to justify extraterritorial use of force against non-state actors in different ways. Some say force against non-state actors falls outside of the scope of art. 2(4). Others argue that art. 51 is applicable also when the perpetrator of an armed attack is a non-state actor. The ICJ however seems resistant to accepting the latter position. They seem to insist on that only a state can be the origin of an armed attack. Another alternative, examined in this essay, is wether the right to self-defence in international customary law goes beyond the scope of the right to self-defence in art. 51. Some argue that the right to use force in self-defence against a non-state actor always has existed in international customary law. Others say that international law has shifted since the attacks of 9/11. The extraterritorial use of force against non-state actors, thus is still a question up for debate. However the broad acceptance for such a right, allows it to be admitted here that this at least is where we are headed.