Did the United States Expressly Authorize the Use of Deadly Force in its Security Contracts?

Did the United States expressly authorize the use of deadly force in its security contracts?

You would think that killing eight civilians in a foreign country would get you in a bit of trouble. I'm referring, of course, to Blackwater USA losing its license to provide security in Iraq based on a deadly gunfight while protecting a State Department envoy. Assuming the Blackwater employees used excessive force or otherwise violated a law (a fact that has yet to be established), the question becomes what happens next.

The answer depends on whose laws apply. Iraq's? America's? Or Paul Bremer's? I say Paul Bremer's because the Coalition Provisional Authority Regulation reads, "Pursuant to my authority as Administrator of the CPA, relevant U.N. Security Council Resolutions, including Resolution 1483, and the laws and usages of war, I hereby promulgate the following." (It's good to be the King!).

One of PB's rules (Order 17) applies specifically to "Contractors," which is loosely defined as "non-Iraqi legal entities ... not normally resident in Iraq, supplying goods or services under a Contract." One of the definitions of "contract" includes "a contract for security services provided by Private Security Companies." This portion of the CPA appears to apply specifically to private, hired-guns like Blackwater USA who have government contracts, making them subject to its rules.

But here's where it gets interesting. The CPA goes on to say that contractors have immunity "from Iraqi legal process with respect to acts performed by them pursuant to the terms and conditions of a Contract." Initially that sounds like they have immunity because in this case the killings occurred while protecting their clients. But that interpretation may depend on the precise wording of their U.S. government contract. Unless they were specifically granted the right to use deadly force, how could they be acting pursuant to the terms of the contract when they killed someone?

Think of it this way. If you were negotiating a contract for Blackwater with the United States government that involved going into a highly unstable region of the world, wouldn't you ask what level of force you are entitled to use? And if you're the government, and you are paying Blackwater millions of dollars to protect Bremer and other important people, how would you answer that question?

Even assuming that they were acting within the scope of their duties, the U.S. government could hang them out to dry since the CPA also states that "Immunity for Iraqi legal process of ... Contractors ... may be waived." Clearly that's not likely, and in 2006 the CPA was used to protect two U.S. soldiers from Iraqi prosecution when they raped and killed a young Iraqi girl and killed her family. Even more troubling for Blackwater is that Iraq is now operating as a sovereign government, and the CPA arguably no longer applies.

Back at home, a wrongful death suit by family members of former Blackwater employees is moving forward because federal courts have denied Blackwater's claims that they are protected under the CPA. What do you reckon is the likelihood of the families of the eight dead Iraqis getting access to justice?

Comments

[MikeDu]

What I find most interesting is how U.S. government officials are using highly-paid mercenaries as bodyguards instead of our own troops. That's quite a slap in the face for our military, isn't it! Do they perhaps fear being shot in the back by some PTSD'd G.I. who's been on deployment for fourteen months straight and had just found out his wife gave birth to twins?

[OldKnute]

Well, if General Pace is to be believed we have about 2 MILLION in the Military.

Yes that would be about right.

For every grunt on the ground Helo pilot or fighter joy-stick pusher, you would have about 3 to back them up.

That would give us about 1.5 Million, jet mechanics, cooks. engine repairman, motor pool operators, flight instructors, supply clerks, boiler technicians, seamen, refueling flight crews, deck crews, flight line support, adjutants, instructors, maintenance and medical personnel. All God Damn hard working loyal, country loving, dedicated, patriotic, SOBs.

Oh and let’s not forget a BLOATED and incompetent Officer Corps who never even get in the fray, except for a RARE and brave few.

Yes, I think Gen Pace is right!!!!

500,000 turnips to squeeze blood out of, and 1,500,000 to feed them.

The trifle of facts these “Armageddon Crusaders” FORGET to glean from the Book of Revelations, is that this 2 Million strong STANDING army they MIGHT oppose, are BOOTS ON THE GROUND.

Live, walking, talking well-trained troops with guns in their hands.

GRUNTS!

NOW!

We have a choice.

Just as the people of Noah’s day did. All prophecies offer a choice.

We can follow our skepticism, laugh and joke, ridicule and poke fun, or we can get on the ARK.

In this instance, we can follow our lusts for blood, revenge, racial hatreds, angers, false dreams of supremacy and ignore wisdoms of the ages and turn away from evil and the darkest leanings of our hearts,,,,,,

OR, we can launch headlong into battle outnumbered 4 to 1.

Actually, about 100 to 1, if the rest of the world, including the 2 Million, would oppose our New World Order, trying to Dominate THE EARTH.

Bottom Line?????

WE choose!

WE choose.

Work together, join with the people in cooperation and brotherhood, help BUILD the ARC, or suffer the consequences.

It was the same for the times of Enoch, Abraham, Elijah, Joseph, Moses, Ezekiel, Isaiah, Solomon, David, Jesus.

WE CHOOSE!

Death and War,,,, or LIFE and peace.

We choose.

All the best

Knute (Neo-LIB)

[altohone]

Someone needs to add up all of the payments made to Iraqi's in compensation for the killing of their relatives.­.. both from contractors and the military. All of it comes out of our pockets and we have the right to know.

News reports regularly mention the payments, yet amounts and numbers go unreported.

[yellowdogSC]

alto,

GREAT point.

Who pays for BW's "tactical errors" (screwups)?

Not that it matters to the families of the victims, but if it's paid by Eric Prince, it WILL change the way BW does business.

Take the money out of the owner's pocket, and watch changes happen.

[oldpotsmuggler]

Do you remember that report recently about how the "books" of DOJ can't be effectively audited because DOJ doesn't do accounting well? The numbers that you want are undoubtedly floating around in the accounting black hole.

[OldKnute]

Humm?

Yes along with a 180,000 AK 47s that got lost, no sireal numbers, 80, thousand pistols and 12,000,000,000 in CASH!

If I recall, we are still paying settlements to the people of Panama.

After the Noriega raid.

We the people, WE the taxpayers.

All the best

Knute (Neo-LIB)

[yellowdogSC]

olposm,

In most organizations it takes more than half an hour for the Peter Principal to kick in.

[oldpotsmuggler]

One reason why the federal government has not gone to greater use of privatized prisons is that the employees of prison contractors are, in many ways, the functional equivalent of federal employees. Their rights and responsibilities with respect to the prisoners is very, very similar to that of any other jailor. And when it comes to prosecution for criminal acts, neither private nor public jailors is allowed to get away with (theoretically) anything that is illegal for you or I.

I also know that The Uniform Code of Military Justice supercedes civilian law in many respects (the military still being subject to the Constitution, and this fact being reflected in much of what they codify). The military also cannot, by contract, make it legal for others to do things that would be illegal for soldiers.

One question, then, seems to be whether the military can make it legal for a contractor to do everything that soldiers are given leeway for under UCMJ. And would even this be enough to protect Blackwater? Could a contract create immunity from suit in the U.S. even if the military, for whatever reason, wanted to try to have civilians treated that advantageously? And why would BUSHCO ever want to use real soldiers at all if the phony variety is able to get away with everything that soldiers can, and also everything that soldiers can't?

Rather than answer any of these questions, Maliki needs to just order all of them to get their asses out of there and be done with it.

[TitaniumAvatar]

Yeah, you'd assume that as a 'sovereign' nation Iraq could just order them out of the country.

Expect a clarification from Iraq allowing Blackwater to remain in country by the end of the week.

[MikeDu]

Done and done.

[yellowdogSC]

TA,

True.

Except that what happened is the US gov't told the Iraqi gov't, "Sorry. All your diplomats are on their own now. Reconsider?"

Seems not to matter that in every comparable circumstance the military does that work.

[Tubby]

Well, look at it this way: You are a famous person (Katie Couric or David Letterman, for example) and need the services of a bodyguard. The assumption going into the deal is that this bodyguard will protect you from physical harm by any and all nuts who would hurt you. With that assumption is the belief that in order for your bodyguard to protect you he carries a gun, and is willing and able to use it in a pinch.
If he can't, what the hell good is a bodyguard?

Blackwater provides the same service, but in a far more dangerous environment.

[gopindrag]

If my bodyguard perceives you to be a threat and uses lethal force, then your family has legal recourse. Unless you're an Iraqi, or you're perceived to be an Iraqi, then you're just a tubby dead Iraqi and what legal recourse will then avail your family?

[yellowdogSC]

So...

which did Blackwater provide,

a "GOOD"

OR

a "SERVICE"?