A/HRC/44/38 7. Seventy-two hours after their attacks, the Iranian authorities also confirmed that an Iranian missile had struck down “by mistake” Ukraine International Airlines Flight 752 en route from Tehran to Kiev shortly after take-off. All 176 passengers and crew were killed, including 82 Iranians, 55 Canadian citizens and 30 Canadian permanent residents, 11 Ukrainians, 10 Swedes, 4 Afghans, and 3 British nationals. 8 The authorities insisted that the strike was a “mistake” of missile operators who had confused the civilian aircraft for a US missile or a plane. A safety investigation, led by Iran, was initiated shortly after the strike, supported by accredited representatives and experts from the affected countries. The investigation has, however, experienced delays due to the Covid19 pandemic 9. 8. In the months before the events of January 2020, Iran, what the US deemed “Iransupported militias”, and the US had engaged in a series of attacks and counter-attacks. US “interests in the Middle East region” 10 were allegedly targeted, to which the US had responded.11 In addition, on 27 December, a rocket attack reportedly by Kata’ib Hezbollah, occurred in Kirkuck. On 29 December, a US strike against five facilities in Iraq and the Syrian Arab Republic controlled by Kata’ib Hezbollah killed allegedly 24 people and wounded 50.12 Despite these incidents, it appeared both Iran and the US wished to avoid a “full-out conventional war.”13 9. These late 2019 attacks took place against a backdrop of very large popular demonstrations against the high levels of unemployment and corruption in Iraq, beginning in November and directed to the Government. The protests were met with lethal force by Iraq’s security forces and armed non-State groups, resulting in hundreds of deaths, thousands wounded and multiple disappearances of activists.14 II. The international legal framework applicable to a drone targeted killing 10. To be lawful, a targeted killing, including by way of a drone strike, must be legal under all applicable legal regimes. The relevant regimes are the jus ad bellum, the jus in bello and international human rights law: (a) Jus ad bellum is laid out in the UN-Charter and encompasses the right to use force. However, as a general rule, Art. 2.4 UN Charter forbids the use of force (or the threat to use force) between UN members with the exception, laid out under Art. 51, that gives States an inherent right to self-defense against an armed attack, as derived from customary international law. Over the last few decades, some States and commentators have attempted to expand the notion of imminent attack by suggesting that imminence is no longer defined temporally.15 (b) The second legal regime applicable in the case of a targeted killing, including by drone, is jus in bello or international humanitarian law. The legality of a war (the question of jus ad bellum) is not the focus of jus in bello, which is concerned instead with the protection of persons from the implications of warfare. The applicability of international 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 24 https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/iran-ukraine-air-crash-canadians-tehran-1.5418610; Canadian passengers were named here: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-students-doctorschildren-ukrainian-airliner-crash-victims-had/. Some passengers were dual nationals. The strike against Flight 752 is the object of another inquiry by the Special Rapporteur. It is not completed at the time of publishing this report. https://www.justsecurity.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/united-states-article-51-lettersoleimani.pdf. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/23/us/politics/trump-iran-cyber-shadow-war.html; The NYT quoting an Hezbollah spokesperson: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/29/world/middleeast/us-airstrikes-iran-iraq-syria.html. See, e.g., https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/23/us/politics/trump-iran-cyber-shadow-war.html. See communications from Special Rapporteurs to the Government of Iraq: https://spcommreports. ohchr.org/TMResultsBase/DownLoadPublicCommunicationFile?gId=25020. See, e.g., David Bethlehem, Principles Relevant to the Scope of a State’s Right of Self-Defense against an Imminent or Actual Armed Attack by NonState Actors, 2012, https://www.un.org/law/counsel/Bethlehem%20-%20Self-Defense%20Article.pdf.