Military Use of Biometrics Series – Necrometrics and Contextualising Human Remains in Armed Conflict
Editors’ note: This post is part of a series relating to the law applicable to the military use of biometrics. It is drawn from the author’s article-length work, “Biometrics to Necrometrics: What the Dead Can Tell Us About War” appearing in the Journal of International Humanitarian Legal Studies. The introductory post is available here.
“When I am asked what war is, I will answer without hesitation: names.”— Maksym Kryvtsov
Biometrics, a word often associated with armed conflict and human bodies, refers to the use of technical measurements of specific characteristics of the human body and the particularities of its movements and behaviour to gather data on that body, primarily to establish identity. Militarily, this “measuring of life” is mostly used to establish a person’s identity for purposes of access control, targeting, intelligence gathering, and other security needs.
However, such data, when taken from the dead, provides an additional spectrum of information. This information can help in contextualising the dead for a better assessment of the impact of the conflict on all aspects of human security and developing an enhanced understanding and awareness of people’s insecurities in the face of conflict. For this, we need to re-interpret the idea of biometrics as it concerns military operations.
The application of biometric techniques to the gathering of data from the dead poses a challenge inherent in the very core of the word biometrics, a composite of the Greek words for life and measure. Military forces use existing biometric processes to measure reference points associated with living bodies. Yet, measuring death is different. Decomposition and decay change the bodies of the dead and can cause loss of or damage to those reference points that biometric systems need. In addition, measuring movement characteristics is impossible. Lastly, measuring the dead can and should aim to achieve more than identification for security reasons.
Therefore, to clearly distinguish the nature of measurement and use of data from human remains, in our recent article we introduced the term necrometrics. This combines the study of measuring life with that of measuring death, while focusing on the identification and contextualisation of the dead. The collection of data from the dead and of data regarding the manner of their deaths (who they were, but also how they died, where, and when) is what necrometrics is concerned with, for the purpose of assessing the impact of a conflict on civilians within the framework of human security.
Necrometrics incorporate physiological and anatomical data, as well as environmental information from the bodies of the dead of armed conflict. This data allows the military to satisfy legal obligations and engage with the human ecosystem in the conflict area. Focusing on identification, in this post we address the law regarding human remains in armed conflicts, the systematic practice of recording casualties, the principles of human security, the value of memorialisation, and the need for justice.
Identification and the Law Regarding Human Remains
The parties to an armed conflict must identify the dead. Rules 112 and 116 of the International Committee of the Red Cross Customary IHL Study prescribe identification of the dead; human rights mechanisms echo this obligation. Moreover, identification is implied in the rules on the return of remains and personal effects, and on accounting for the missing. For both of these actions, the identification of the dead is a sine qua non.
Yet this is about more than identification and counting the losses alone. International humanitarian law (IHL) places obligations on parties to an armed conflict to account for the dead. The duty to investigate potential violations of international law is well-established under IHL and international human rights law (IHRL). The Geneva Conventions and First Additional Protocol require investigations of grave breaches of IHL, a duty that includes investigation of “the wilful killing of protected persons.” Under IHRL, the conduct of an investigation into unlawful deaths is a key procedural aspect of the right to life and reference is made to the use of DNA, ‘forensic expertise and scientific methods’. While investigations may entail many elements, strong emphasis is placed on investigating the bodies of the dead themselves, who must be accounted for. Accounting for the dead also means re-establishing family connections severed by the conflict and is therefore an essential element of understanding the human environment of war.
Emphasis herein is on identifying the dead through gathered information. The identification process requires a careful examination of the remains of persons, and these data must be meticulously recorded. The Geneva Conventions provide that “The Parties to the conflict shall record as soon as possible, in respect of each … dead person of the adverse Party falling into their hands, any particulars which may assist in his identification.” Necrometrics can assist armed forces to fulfil their obligations of identification under IHL.
New technologies or scientific methods may become the new diligence standard, such as the use of necrometrics in armed conflict to ensure the best possible compliance with IHL and IHRL. States that have the technology and ability to deploy necrometric methods should do so to comply with their legal obligations. However, bodies change with death, while “quality biometrics data collection depends upon the presence and integrity of the structures of the eyes, face, and fingers, which can all be affected by the process of decomposition.” Facial and bodily features get progressively distorted from around 48 hours after death and negatively impact on the dependability of necro-measurements. Scavengers and open-air conditions can also lead to the damage or destruction of human remains.
Therefore, States must ensure the bodies of the dead are in such a condition as to enable reliable necrometric measurements. This means that bodies must be sought out and collected actively, an obligation that already exists in IHL and for example also with regards to missing persons and enforced disappearance, and is now intensified by the technological advancement of necrometrics. States must protect bodies from harm by whatever source, to safeguard necrometric possibilities for identification. Ensuring proper protection and conservation of the dead to maintain their necrometric reliability is in keeping with the principle of good faith, the maxim of international law already cited by Grotius as the “bond of human life,” the requirement to implement an obligation properly, without committing any acts that would defeat its object and purpose.
Identification and Casualty Recording
All casualties of armed conflict must be promptly recorded and correctly identified. Casualty recording is the process of documenting direct deaths from armed violence. “It is crucial for the respect of human dignity, for the sake of surviving family members, and for establishing the facts … . Such records humanise victims, reduce dispute over numbers killed, help societies understand the true human costs of war, and support truth and reconciliation efforts.”
In 2023, pursuant to Human Rights Council resolution 50/11, the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights prepared a comprehensive report on the impact of casualty recording on the promotion and protection of human rights. The report recognises that casualty recording has an impact on “protection, compliance with international law, early warning, prevention, accountability, access to services and reparations.” The work of casualty recorders should be supported by States to ensure that all casualties are identified, and their remains handled respectfully.
NATO’s Approach to Identification and Human Security
The importance of collecting data from human remains and data surrounding the circumstances of an attack that resulted in civilian casualties—necrometrics—can be understood within the context of NATO’s human security approach, regarding human security violations by belligerents and the protection of civilians.
The notion of human security links NATO’s values of individual liberty, human rights, democracy, and the rule of law to NATO practice. A human security approach provides an understanding of conflict and crisis that allows NATO to develop a more comprehensive view of the human environment, be people-centred, and address the differentiated impacts of conflict and crisis on different people in the population.
As per NATO’s Human Security Approach and Guiding Principles, human security at NATO encompasses five areas of work, including the protection of civilians:
– preventing and responding to human security-related violations
– reporting violations and supporting monitoring processes
– educating and training of Allies and partner nations’ forces
– raising awareness of local security forces
– sustaining political dialogue.
At the 2016 Warsaw Summit, NATO leaders endorsed the NATO Policy for the Protection of Civilians. In 2018, NATO adopted a Military Concept on the Protection of Civilians to put the policy into practice. Protection of Civilians (PoC) includes all efforts to avoid and mitigate the negative effects resulting from NATO and NATO-led military operations, missions and activities on the civilian population. PoC is about safeguarding lives, responding to violence, to civilian suffering and civilian deaths. Integrating PoC to operations and missions allows NATO to reduce risks, monitor and mitigate harm to civilians.
To avoid causing harm to civilians by their actions, the military is to exercise caution in operations and activities, and apply civilian casualty management to mitigate negative effects if harm was caused. To prevent or mitigate harm caused by other belligerents’ actions, the military uses influence, within the mission mandate, to prevent, deter, pre-empt and respond to situations where civilians are subject to unlawful violence or are under the threat of it.
The requirement to identify human remains and to record civilian deaths is compatible with NATO’s human security approach, which seeks to prevent and to respond to civilian harm and to the suffering of vulnerable members of the population.
Identification and Memorialisation
Data regarding the dead is valued and used by States in recognition of the victims of hostilities, such as wars and terrorist attacks, both military and civilian. Necrometrics significantly contribute to the memorialisation and honouring of those victims, for the present and for future generations, as part of a patriotic historical narrative and as witness to human suffering and loss.
Remembrance is at the heart of narratives around war victims, war heroes, and war-related human loss. “Lest we forget,” we say; “remember us,” reverberate the voices of the dead through the ages; “say his/her name,” demands national memory. Every patriotic discourse requires the memory of the nation’s dead including their achievements, their sacrifice, their heroism and their suffering.
In the United States, the 9/11 memorial in Manhattan is a tribute to those who died as a direct result of injuries sustained in the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, including the impacts of the planes and the building collapses. 2,977 names are inscribed on the memorial and can also be found online. Efforts are still ongoing to identify human remains.
In the United Kingdom, there are over 100,000 war memorials, some of which can be found in the National Memorial Arboretum in the Midlands, a home to more than 400 memorials set in 150 acres. The Arboretum is a space where lives lost can be remembered and celebrated.
Some commemorations are exclusive. In Padova, northern Italy, via Attilio Galvani is a street that commemorates the death of barber and activist Attilio Galvani at the hands of the fascist paramilitary group Black Brigades (Brigate Nere) on August 10, 1944.
Memorials serve as reminders of the nation’s virtues, triumphs and past moral victories. Patriotic sentiment is crucial to the nation-State in building collective identities, where social remembering and forgetting are informed by heritage. Symbols and representations speak of the nation’s ethos and reputation.
Identification and Justice
As the Russia-Ukraine war continues, Russian soldiers are being charged with war crimes.
Over the past year, Ukrainian law enforcement has identified more than 1,000 service members of Russia’s 234th Air Assault Regiment, part of the 76th Air Assault Division; around 1,000 troops from the tactical group of the 656th Operational Regiment (Military Unit 6720, Rubtsovsk, Altai Krai); about 350 soldiers from the 27th Separate Special Purpose Unit “KUZBASS” (Military Unit 6607, Kemerovo); and around 200 members of consolidated OMON and SOBR riot police units from Belgorod, Vladimir, Kaluga, and Yaroslavl oblasts.
The identification of human remains, a far-reaching obligation under international law, is vital in holding States accountable when they commit crimes against civilians. As well as giving a human face to the victims of armed violence, data from human remains enables reliable and comprehensive monitoring of armed violence, upholds the rights of victims, brings parties into better compliance with IHL and IHRL, and supports post-conflict recovery and reconciliation, both of which must be grounded in truth and founded in justice. Necrometrics can play a key role.
***
Dr Lily Hamourtziadou is Senior Lecturer in International Relations at Birmingham City University, specialising on war and human security, and member of the West Midlands Military Education Committee.
Welmoet Wels is a lecturer and PhD candidate at the University of Groningen in the Netherlands.
The views expressed are those of the authors, and do not necessarily reflect the official position of the United States Military Academy, Department of the Army, or Department of Defense.
Articles of War is a forum for professionals to share opinions and cultivate ideas. Articles of War does not screen articles to fit a particular editorial agenda, nor endorse or advocate material that is published. Authorship does not indicate affiliation with Articles of War, the Lieber Institute, or the United States Military Academy West Point.
Photo credit: President of Ukraine
