MODERN MERCENARIES: THE WAGNER GROUP IN CENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC

Background

Since late 2012, the Central African Republic (CAR) has been under a protracted crisis triggered by the Muslim Seleka rebels’ military campaign against the government. By early 2013, the Seleka rebels took control of Capital city, Bangui by overthrowing then President Francois Bozizé. This resulted in the renewal of clashes between the various armed factions, and reports of widespread human rights abuses, including indiscriminate killings of civilians.  

In response, by mid-2013, Christian and animist anti-balaka militias began organising to combat the Seleka rebels. However, these groups associated the Seleka with being Muslim and consequently carried out extensive reprisal attacks against Muslim civilians in Bangui and western regions of the country. By early 2014, the African Union and French forces successfully ousted the Seleka rebels from Bangui. The MINUSCA, the UN peacekeeping mission to CAR, took over the African Union’s mission by September 2014. Despite these interventions, violence and assaults on civilians persisted and the Seleka factionalised.  

In 2016, Faustin-Archange Touadéra was elected as the President of CAR. Despite the presence of French troops and UN forces, he struggled to defeat the rebel forces. In 2018, an agreement was signed between the government of CAR and Russian authorities, outlining the training of their forces by Russian “specialists”, composed of primarily former military officers.  

The UN, EU, US and France have reported the presence of the Wagner Group in CAR. According to the former Prime Minister of CAR, there was no contract between CAR and a Russian private security company but only a military cooperation agreement with Russia. 

The Wagner Group is one of Russia’s most prominent PMCs and functions as “an unofficial (albeit nominally illegal) tool of Russian foreign policy”. It is an umbrella organisation with multiple entities and operations in different parts of the world, often described as Russia’s proxy military force playing a key role in Russia’s war with Ukraine.  In January 2023, the US Treasury Department stated that the Group will be designated as a transnational criminal organisation (TCO). In September 2023, a draft order was laid before the UK Parliament to declare the Wagner Group as a terrorist organisation, under the Terrorism Act 2000. 

The Wagner Group has protected the leadership of CAR through security enforcement, military training, shipments of weapons and propaganda campaigns for years. In exchange, it gained profitable mining concessions for gold, diamond and timber. In 2023, hundreds of soldiers from the Wagner Group arrived in CAR to “enhance security measures ahead of the country’s upcoming constitutional referendum”. This deployment was reportedly announced by the Officer’s Union for International Security (COSI), a group which has been linked to the PMC. This group has been labelled by the US as a front company for the Wagner Group’s operations in CAR.  

Propaganda and misinformation campaigns have been a tactic employed by Wagner Group to “delegitimise opposition movements and create confusion among the public”. To control the emerging narrative, the Group funded the creation of radio station Lengo Songo which through its broadcasts, advances Russia’s views and ‘legitimises’ Wagner activities in the eye of the local public opinion. Furthermore, through its funds, the Group sponsored and produced films, including a cartoon framing Russian involvement in the CAR as constructive cooperation which showed a “friendly bear helping a lion fight off a group of hyenas” and an action movie filmed in the CAR depicting “Wagner personnel protecting the country from rebels”.  

 

The Incidents

According to UN experts, instructors from the Wagner Group have been intimidating and harassing the civilians, peacekeepers, aid workers and minorities in CAR. UN experts believe that the Wagner Group, along with the local forces, are committing torture, arbitrary detention, summary execution, and more. There have been reports about alleged rape and sexual violence against both men and women. Multiple reports have been made of arbitrary detention and torture. For instance, one of the victims told UN investigators that he was held by a group of Russians, who beat him and cut off one of his fingers.    

Human Rights Watch (HRW) first documented cases of abuse by the Russia-linked forces in 2019. According to interviews conducted by the HRW, over 12 civilians mentioned an incident in July 2021, where at least 12 unarmed men were killed by Russian speaking weapon bearers. In another incident, a group of men was accused of being rebels and unlawfully detained by CAR armed forces in inhumane conditions in an open pit at a military base. It was reported that both Russian speaking weapon bearers and CAR soldiers beat five of the detained men.   

In May 2023, residents in one of the subdivisions of Bangui went on strike against the “continuous harassment, kidnappings, torture, and intimidation” of the people living in the quarter and the country as a whole by Russian mercenaries of the Wagner security group”. 

Human rights violations also occur in other Wagner operating zones including Mali and Sudan. In Mali, women have continuously been targeted by Malian troops and members of foreign security partners. A UN report found that “sexual violence is being used as a war tactic and in a systemic manner” and accused Malian troops and their foreign security partners suspected of including Wagner personnel to have executed 500 people, engaged in sexual violence and torture during an operation in the village of Moura. Additionally, French forces reported Wagner fighters digging and burying bodies in a mass grave. Although they were caught on video, Wagner Group edited the footage with hopes of altering the narrative, wrongfully accusing the French military of the incident and advancing the “anti-French and anti-Western sentiment in Mali”.  

Sudan also faces challenges considering the presence of the Group in its rich gold mines. Survivors of the attack reported that miners were killed in a gold mine located between the border of Sudan and CAR while Wagner looted the mine for its resources. Claims state the Wagner troops shot “indiscriminately” killing more than 70 in that single incident.   

 

Legal Aspects

Investigations

Despite the allegations made, there has been no prosecution of any Russian linked forces in CAR. In 2021, a Special Commission of Inquiry was set up by the CAR government. The Commission found that there have been violations of human rights and international humanitarian law, including by these Russian instructors.   

In 2022, the UN announced that it would be investigating the allegation of the massacre of 10 civilians by Russian mercenaries and CAR army officers in Gordile and Ndah villages.  

The question of whether the Wagner Group meets the definition of a PMSC under the Montreux Document or a PSC under the ICoC remains contested. Furthermore, its employees could qualify as mercenaries, under the definition of international humanitarian law. Wagner Group is itself “nebulous because the actors themselves assume amorphous forms”. Wagner Group operates in a grey zone, fluctuating between the two, hence why it is challenging to regulate their conduct and flag observed violations since they engage in such a diverse range of activities.  

Although transnational regulations and voluntary industry codes of conduct like the ICoC exist and provide a regulatory framework and mechanism, they also have limits when attempting to regulate actors operating “with significant state backing and secrecy”. Although complicated to define under international law, Wagner may become a model for others, with a continuing emergence of similar groups that stand in this grey zone. However, members of such groups are not immune from prosecutions for war crimes and other international crimes. There are a few ways to address possible crimes perpetrated by such groups, including prosecuting individuals for the commission of international crimes and/or designating the Group as a TCO or terrorist organisation.  

The International Code of Conduct

The International Code of Conduct requires that Personnel of Member and Affiliate companies take all reasonable steps to avoid the use of force, and if force is used, it should be proportionate to the threat and appropriate to the situation. (Rules for the Use of Force: paragraph 29, Use of Force: paragraph 30-32)

Resources on Use of Force

Additionally, security personnel are only allowed to apprehend persons to defend themselves or others against an imminent threat of violence following an attack or crime against Company Personnel, clients, or property under their protection. Apprehension and detention must be consistent with international and national law, and all apprehended and detained persons must be treated humanely and consistent with their status and protections under applicable human rights law and international humanitarian law. (Detention: paragraph 33)

Resources on Apprehending Persons

Resources on Detention

Under the International Code of Conduct companies cannot allow their personnel to engage in or benefit from sexual exploitation, abuse, or gender-based violence or crimes. Security companies must require their personnel to remain vigilant for all instances of sexual or gender-based violence, and report these instances to competent authorities. (Sexual Exploitation and Abuse (SEA) or Gender-Based Violence (GBV): paragraph 38)

Guidelines on Preventing and Addressing Sexual Exploitation and Abuse

Resources on Preventing Sexual Exploitation and Abuse

The Code requires stringent selection and vetting of personnel, assessment of performance and duties (paragraphs 45 to 49), and training of personnel of the Code and relevant international law, including human rights and international criminal law (paragraph 55).

Resources on working conditions

The Code also requires that incident reports are to be made for any incident involving its personnel and the use of weapons, criminal acts, injury to persons, etc. (paragraph 63). It also mandates the establishment of a Grievance, Whistleblowing and related procedures to address claims brought by personnel or of third parties regarding the failure of the Company to respect the principles mentioned in the Code (paragraph 66-67).

Meeting the requirements of the Code of Conduct can help private security companies and their clients ensure that private security personnel are qualified, trained, supported, informed, and responsible.

See also: The Montreux Document On pertinent international legal obligations and good practices for States related to operations of private military and security companies during armed conflict; Article 47 of the First Additional Protocol to the Geneva Conventions; United Nations International Convention against the Recruitment, Use, Financing and Training of Mercenaries, 2001; Organisation of African Unity Convention for the Elimination of Mercenarism in Africa, 1977. 

Impact

The US Treasury Department has imposed sanctions on eight individuals and entities that it believes are responsible for expanding Russia’s influence in CAR. The EU has also sanctioned individuals that it believes to be involved in the Wagner Group’s activities. In 2021, the EU said that it would no longer train CAR soldiers due to their links to the Wagner Group. In April 2022, the Human Rights Watch wrote to the Russian foreign minister and the government of CAR seeking information on the presence of Wagner Group in the country and the status of forces agreement between Russia and CAR. 

Following the death of its two main leaders, Yevgeny Prigozhin and Dmitry Utkin in 2023, the Group has morphed into a new entity named Africa Corps led by Wagner veteran Anton Yelizarov. Although its affiliations to Russia was ambiguous under the former guise of Wagner, Africa Corps has been clearly presented as a subsidiary paramilitary organisation of the Russian Federation under the pretence of defending its people and its interest. Russia’s direct involvement in the Africa Corps operations could be an attempt to avoid allowing the Group to grow in autonomy and power and challenge the Russian authorities again, as it did during Prigozhin’s mutiny in June 2023. Africa Corps also drives Russia’s foreign policy, meaning the advancement of the country’s military strategy in the African continent. Moreover, experts say that because Africa Corps report to Russia’s Defence Ministry, there exists a possibility for them to be held accountable by Russia for violations perpetrated by troops during military operations.  

Discussion

What is the definition of a PMSC? Of a PSC?  Does the Wagner group meet this definition? Does the Group under its new name of “Africa Corps” meet this definition? 

Do the military advisors employed by Wagner qualify as mercenaries under international law? 

How can members of private security companies can be held accountable for their alleged crimes? 

What are the implications when a private security company is contracted to work in a volatile and complex environment like CAR?  

Discuss the importance of conducting human rights due diligence when outside contractors are introduced to a complex conflict-ridden setting. 

 

Sources

 

 

 

 

This case was prepared by Anyssa Boyer, Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies. 

TORTURE AT THE ABU GHRAIB FACILITY

Background

The Abu Ghraib facility is a large prison complex in Baghdad, Iraq. During the regime of Saddam Hussein, it was infamous for the detainment and torture of political prisoners. The prison was reopened in 2003 by the US military after the invasion of Iraq by the US and its allies. In 2003, the Associate Press published the first press report focusing on the mistreatment of detainees under U.S. control at the Abu Ghraib facility. By 2004, images of abuse and torture taking place at the facility emerged as part of CBS’s “60 Minutes 2” program, leading to a scandal for the then US President George W. Bush’s administration.

A report from the US army’s internal investigation carried out in 2004 under Army General Antonio Taguba, detail the shocking practices that were followed. One gruesome image that quickly became well publicized was of US Army specialists giving a thumbs-up and posing next to the dead body of Manadel al-Jamadi who was clearly tortured and died of asphyxiation.

CACI International Inc. was a defense contractor hired by the US to provide interrogation services at Abu Ghraib. The company L-3 Services (formerly called Titan Corporation) was the contractor responsible for translation services. They were hired as the US military lacked enough trained interrogators to fully staff the Abu Ghraib facility. The employees and managers of CACI have been accused of directing or/and encouraging torture and of covering it up.

In 2008, four plaintiffs who were formerly detained at Abu Ghraib filed a lawsuit against these defense contractors for their complicity in torture. In November 2024 US  jury found CACI liable for abusing the prisoners.

The Incidents

Detainees were physically and sexually abused, inflicted electric abuse and mock executions. The report by Taguba include incidents of rape, photographing and videotaping nudes of male and female detainees, use of extreme force against them and more. Torture was not limited to just physically but emotionally and psychologically as well. For instance, in one incident a prisoner was coerced into thanking Jesus for his life.

According to one of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit field in 2008, he was subjected to electric shocks, deprivation of food, kept naked, etc. Another plaintiff recounted how he was forcibly subjected to sexual acts and forced to witness the rape of another female prisoner. Other incidents include, sensory deprivation, solitary confinement, assault, being forced to be in stress positions for long periods of time, having their genitals beaten and more.

Legal Aspects

Court Cases

On 9 June 2004, a group of 256 Iraqis, who were former detainees at the Abu Ghraib facility, filed a case against CACI and L-3 Services. The defendant companies argued that the subject matter of the claim constituted a political question and so cannot be decided by the courts. They also claimed their immunity as government contractors. The court dismissed the companies’ motion to dismiss the compliant in June 2006. In September 2009, the courts ruled in favor of the defendant companies. Though the plaintiffs filed a petition for an appeal in April 2010, in June 2011 the US Supreme Court announced that it would not hear an appeal in this case.

On 30 June 2008, four other plaintiffs filed a separate case against CACI International Inc. for directing their torture at Abu Grahib prison. The lawsuit does not allege that CACI employees themselves carried out the abuses but that they instructed the soldiers to ‘soften’ up the detainees, so that they would more easily reveal information, even though CACI knew this ‘softening up’ would lead to torture.  In addition to CACI, the lawsuit also filed against L-3 Services Incorporated and against a former employee of CACI, Timothy Dugan.

The plaintiffs are Iraqi civilians who were detained at the Abu Ghraib prison and later released without being charged for any crime. It was filed on the behalf of the plaintiffs by the Center for Constitutional Rights. The case was filed under the 1789 US law Alien Tort Statute (ATS) which can be used to pursue legal claims over alleged human rights abuses and violations of US and international law including torture, assault, sexual assault and battery, negligent hiring and supervision, etc.

CACI has claimed the lawsuit to be baseless. Since the case was first filed in 2008, CACI has attempted 18 times to have the case dismissed. Both L-3 Services and Timothy Dugan were dismissed as defendants in the case in 2008. In 2019, CACI appealed against the 2019 decision of a lower court’s that favored the plaintiffs. In June 2021, US Supreme Court judges declined to hear CACI’s appeal, putting them a step closer to facing a lawsuit by the plaintiffs.

A new trial for this lawsuit was set to begin on April 2024 in the District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. In November 2024, over two decades after the events occurred, a jury awarded $42 million to three former Abu Ghraib detainees after finding CACI liable for collaborating with military police to perpetrate abuse against the prisoners.

The International Code of Conduct

The International Code of Conduct requires that Personnel of Member and Affiliate companies take all reasonable steps to avoid the use of force, and if force is used, it should be proportionate to the threat and appropriate to the situation. (Rules for the Use of Force: paragraph 29, Use of Force: paragraph 30-32)

Resources on Use of Force

Additionally, security personnel are only allowed to apprehend persons to defend themselves or others against an imminent threat of violence following an attack or crime against Company Personnel, clients, or property under their protection. Apprehension and detention must be consistent with international and national law, and all apprehended and detained persons must be treated humanely and consistent with their status and protections under applicable human rights law and international humanitarian law. (Detention: paragraph 33)

Resources on Apprehending Persons

Resources on Detention

Under the International Code of Conduct companies cannot allow their personnel to engage in or benefit from sexual exploitation, abuse, or gender-based violence or crimes. Security companies must require their personnel to remain vigilant for all instances of sexual or gender-based violence, and report these instances to competent authorities. (Sexual Exploitation and Abuse (SEA) or Gender-Based Violence (GBV): paragraph 38)

Guidelines on Preventing and Addressing Sexual Exploitation and Abuse

Resources on Preventing Sexual Exploitation and Abuse

Further, the International Code of Conduct requires stringent selection and vetting of personnel, assessment of performance and duties, and training of personnel of the Code and relevant international law, including human rights and international criminal law.

Meeting the requirements of the Code of Conduct can help private security companies and their clients ensure that private security personnel are qualified, trained, supported, informed, and responsible.

See also: The Montreux Document On pertinent international legal obligations and good practices for States related to operations of private military and security companies during armed conflict

Impact

In 2004, in an attempt to undo the damages, the Justice Department stated that it would rewrite its legal advice on how interrogations are to be conducted. The same year, the CIA also stated that it would suspend its use of interrogation techniques at detention facilities until a rule was made on what was permissible. In 2009, torture was banned under the Obama administration. A new legal framework was also created, so that perpetrators could be held liable, irrespective of their status as the employee of a government or military contractor. In 2006, the prison was handed over to Iraqi authorities and in 2014 it was shut down.

A limited settlement was provided by the private security firm responsible for offering translation services to some of the survivors of the abuse at the Abu Ghraib facility. Though 11 soldiers were convicted for their actions, the US military itself has not paid any compensation to any of the detainees.

CACI continues to be a defence contractor for the US government, with the company recently gaining a contract worth 382 million dollars in 2024.

Discussion

Would better training of the employees of CACI in international law and human rights law have had any impact in mitigating the abuse and torture at Abu Ghraib?

Related incidents

Sources

 

 

This case was prepared by Shilpa Suresh, Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies.