The Right to a Remedy for Wrongful European Arms Exports: Minding the Accountability Gap?

Decisions on arms transfers across European jurisdictions are insulated from litigation, thus depriving claimants of access to a remedy for wrongful weapons sales under international human rights law. Concerningly, domestic courts in Europe rely on national law to deny judicial review for arms transfers arguing lack of standing of victims and their representatives, absence of jurisdictional authority, or both. This jeopardizes the right of victims to redress through judicial and administrative review mechanisms recognized in international and regional human rights law. Partially successful cases remain the exception and provide a useful template on how to overcome judicial doctrines that confer excessive deference to the executive’s arms transfer faculties. This article surveys judicial practice across key European jurisdictions, concluding that states fail to align their judicial review procedures for arms exports to international human rights law commitments guaranteeing the right to a remedy. This creates an accountability gap in the event of weapons transfers contributing to serious violations of international human rights and humanitarian law.