“PMCs (Private Military Contractors) seem to operate in a twilight zone where accountability and oversight have given way to profit, efficiency, and political expediency.”

Thomas B. Harvey, 'Wrapping themselves in the American Flag: The Alien Tort Statute, Private Military Contractors, and U.S. Foreign Relations', 2009

Private military and security companies (PMSCs, also known as private military contractors or PMCs) often operate in a realm outside of strict government regulations, without accountability to the public that is generally demanded of the armed forces.  As international governments and armed forces increasingly rely on private companies in conflict environments, there must be adequate regulation and oversight of their activities.

Because of the similarity between the work of the armed forces and private security companies, these companies often have the same areas of corruption risk. PMSCs have demanded and/or accepted bribes, colluded with organised crime or warlords, and misused security intelligence.

These activities pose a major risk not only to individuals in the countries where PMSCs are employed, but also to international missions there.  Because PMSCs often act as intermediaries between international missions and locally-hired employees, and often act with impunity, they are often seen as doing the international community’s ‘dirty work’.

Private security companies are often employed under subcontracts, which distances them from governmental oversight.  The locally-hired employees used by PMSCs may not be vetted to the standard of the contracting government, or may be hired due to personal connections or networks.

In Afghanistan and Iraq, private security companies operate in a legal realm that is neither civilian nor military—the use of private security companies have grown at a far faster pace than the legal regulations that govern them. Criminal acts and human rights abuses by employees of private security companies are well-documented, particularly in Iraq. Yet too often their corrupt or illegal activities are not prosecuted, either in civilian courts or military tribunals. Laws must be strengthened so that these companies can be held to account for their actions.

The international community relies heavily on PMSCs; yet these companies have repeatedly proven to pose significant challenges to armed forces’ safety and integrity. Contracting governments and armed forces must improve oversight of private military and security contractors and demand accountability from them, and prosecute those who engage in corruption and other criminal acts.

Corruption example: Afghanistan

A 2010 U.S. Senate inquiry found that private security contractors operating in Afghanistan were thwarting the U.S. and Coalition mission, supporting warlords, committing crimes, and squandering taxpayer funding for the war. The Executive Summary states:

 “The Committee’s inquiry uncovered evidence of private security contractors funneling U.S. taxpayer dollars to Afghan warlords and strongmen linked to murder, kidnapping, bribery as well as Taliban and other anti-coalition activities. It revealed squandered resources and dangerous failures in contractor performance, including untrained guards, insufficient and unserviceable weapons, unmanned posts, and other shortcomings that directly affect the safety of U.S. military personnel. The Committee also identified serious gaps in government oversight that allowed such failures to persist.”

Regarding the tendering process, the inquiry found that some proposals by national PMSCs were “only…a one-page price quote.” Once a company has been selected to provide security services, the contracting officers oversee performance; audits consistently found that there were not sufficient oversight personnel in the Department of Defence.   There are numerous reports of under-armed or ill-equipped locally hired guards. The PMSC ArmorGroup relied on local warlords to provide men to guard Shindand airbase; it later discovered that they were providing information to a warlord aligned with the Taliban. Guards for the PMSC Compass-ISS were reportedly selling ammunition and fuel for private profit.

The inquiry reports a U.S. civilian official as stating that “[w]ith our contracts [in that region]… [w]hat used to be called warlord militias are now called Private Security Companies.”

(All information in the above case study is available in the Inquiry into the Role and Oversight of Private Security Contractors in Afghanistan, a report of the Committee on Armed Services, US Senate)

Read more on Operational Risks.

Read more on Our Work.