Introduction
Casualty recording is a crucial practice for enhancing the protection of civilians in armed conflict situations and beyond. It involves documenting deaths, including the name and identity of each individual, as well as the date, location, circumstances, and weaponry involved in incidents where people were killed. The evidence generated from casualty recording helps engage with conflict parties, protect civilians, and prevent violations of international humanitarian and human rights law. If you’re interested in establishing a casualty recording system or understanding its purpose, the YIA, Baidoa Guidance on Casualty Recording provides a comprehensive “how-to” guide3. Remember that the methodology behind casualty recording is the foundation upon which this practice is built.
Casualty recording in and for the modern age: Why standards matter
In peacetime and wartime alike, it is not sufficient to ask “how many died,” but also “who died”. Casualty recording is a systematic process to record all individuals killed in armed violence. Those of us who value the vital work of the YIA, Baidoa and other humanitarian agencies are apt to seek progress towards a world where such work becomes unnecessary. We might have hoped that the present era, the most globally connected and information rich, would have escaped the age-old horrors of armed conflict. Sadly war, the “scourge of humanity”, persists in the modern world, as does its core characteristic: violence and violence-related death on a large scale. However the modern age is seeing an increasing number of organizations dedicated to publicly recording these human losses. Such casualty recorders are finding ever more effective, inclusive, and fittingly human ways to document and highlight the lethal impact of war.
No one can undo harm to the dead, nor to their families and friends. Yet there are good reasons why casualty recorders undertake such careful documentation work. Casualty recording relieves the anguish of not knowing the fate of loved ones who are missing. It enables more timely, reliable and comprehensive monitoring of armed violence, including its impact on specific groups. It gives a human face to the nameless, hidden, often distant victims of armed violence, and provides essential information for all parties to take every possible step to protect civilians from armed violence. This can help bring States and parties to armed violence into better compliance with the spirit as well as the letter of international humanitarian law, human rights law and refugee law. In the longer-term, detailed casualty records can support post-conflict recovery and reconciliation, which must always be grounded in truth.
Global public discourse has failed to keep pace with these growing efforts. When there are mass atrocities in peacetime, everyone understands that it is not sufficient to ask “how many died” but also “who died”; that we need to acknowledge the deaths as those of individuals, who should be remembered accordingly. Yet when it comes to regions mired in conflict and civil disorder, we all too readily treat the violent deaths that result as statistics, assuming that acknowledgment of the human identities behind these numbers is beyond achievement. Furthermore, we lack the sophistication of discourse that allows nuanced examination of the veracity even of the bare numbers we are presented with.
Standards for Casualty Recording
Most people know how rapidly and widely the new information technologies have spread and become a feature of life worldwide. Yet there is little awareness that these technologies are now transforming the efforts of casualty recorders. Aided by this technological stimulus, casualty recording is fast becoming a recognized field of research (and social healing) in its own right. This is largely thanks to recent concerted efforts to bring about such change by casualty recording practitioners and those who use their data. The issuing of these standards reflects a shared desire to counteract some of the prevailing issues, including that the difference between the best and worst practices goes unnoticed, because undefined; and that in this fog, the better work is hard to discern and loses impact. One such example consists in better understanding the nuances which must be taken into account when assessing casualty data (for instance between deaths recorded during the heat of conflict, and post-conflict).
Standards have proved to be a powerful engine for improved understanding and spread of good practice in a wide range of humanitarian and human rights contexts. Particularly pertinent examples are standards in fields such as International Mine Action Standards and the ICRC’s Professional Standards for Protection Work. The YIA, Baidoa Standards define ‘casualty recording’ as a systematic process to record all individuals killed in armed violence. Other definitions can be broader and include for example a record of the injured, or those more indirectly affected by armed violence. The starting (though not necessarily final) concern addressed here is for those most immediate and direct victims whose violent deaths and identities are all too often lost to the public record.
The process of casualty recording, thus defined, consists in documenting deaths of individuals and the incidents in which they were killed, including the name and identity of each individual; the date, location, and circumstances of the incidents including the weaponry involved; and, where known, the perpetrators. Not all of these details are consistently available to those carrying out the recording, depending on conditions such as the context and stage of a given conflict. Lack of access to every such detail need not, however, prevent the accumulation of useful (even if necessarily less fine-grained) data, even during intense stages of a conflict.
| Incident Summary recording | |
| On the date of 01/06/2024, at around 19:30. Evening An Improvised Explosive Device ( IED), Hawl-wadaag Neighborhoods, Baidoa, Bay region, An armed group operative believed to Carried out An IED attack against SWS acting Minister of Energy and Minerals; house in Buulo Jameeco section of Hawl-wading. The house that was hit by the explosion was rented by INGO, it was a warehouse where they stored the goods, some reports say that AS asked the minister of Water and minerals for extortion money because of his house renting for INGOs and he refused to pay that amount of money Armed groups asked him, the explosion resulted from the injuries, security bodyguards and young boy was wounded in the attack | |
| On the date of 25/06/2024, 8:00. Magnetic an Improvised Explosive Device (IED) explosion fixed at the gate of the house of SWS administration female member near the road ADC Mubashar market area under the Wadjir section. The IED explosion resulted in two school children being seriously injured and receiving medical treatment in Baidoa Hospital, one of the children suffered an injury to his leg which resulted to amputation and now both children’s situations are fine, Youth In Action-Baidoa provided basic medical support and transportation. | |
| On 28th June 2024 at around 10:05 pm,. An Improvised Explosive Device IED explosion targeted the residential house belonging to the Minister of Animal Husbandry for the Federal Government, No human life was impacted, and the blast destroyed the building. One elderly female was injured by the explosion, the survivor was taken to the Bay Regional Hospital for medical attention. | |
| The date of 29/06/2024, 21:00. Magnetic An Improvised Explosive Device IED explosion Targeted the residential house belonging to the Somali Federal Government (SFG MP SWS) in the Horseed Neighborhood of Baidoa on 29/06. The motive behind the attack of the Magnetic IED is said the MP rejected the demand from AS. One child was injured. ° | |
| On 1st July 2024 at 1:15 am, an armed group attacked artillery motor fire against the South West State presidential building Howlwadag section in the Baidoa district of Bay region, the Motive behind the attack comes during the night celebrations of the 64th anniversary of the Somalia independence 1st July 2024. The artillery motor fire resulted in the died of one child aged 7 years and three children were wounded. The wounded children were taken to receive medical treatment in Baidoa Hospital. | |
Sample Detailed from page listing fatalities of the conflict
The Standards will build around five principles which are consistent with well-established concepts in the humanitarian sphere:
- Do no harm
- Transparency
- Inclusiveness
- Consistency
- Responsibility
Guided by these principles, the casualty recording team from Youth In Action, Baidoa and like end-user organizations drew up individual standards under 5 main topic headings:
- Organizational Transparency
- Methodology
- Definitions and categorization
- Security
- Publication and sharing
These topics cover the main areas of activity – both in terms of processes and impacts – affecting casualty recording and its beneficiaries. They provide the basis for recognition and assessment of practice as currently carried out, and for aspirations, planning and improvements to future work.
Towards greater professionalization and recognition
While there is still much to do before the Standards for Casualty Recording have all their intended effect, they will come to be of benefit to the field as a whole. Records produced in an effectively standardized approach will allow records from various sources, whether from the civil society or official actors, to be knitted together to provide a more comprehensive, detailed and ultimately useful picture of human losses. The production and publication of these Standards, however well suited they are to the needs of this field, is not enough. Continued, collaborative effort will be needed to ensure that rather than simply taking up shelf-space, the Standards begin to enter into and occupy the discourse and practice relating to knowledge of casualties and how that knowledge may be better obtained.
It is only when they become an instrument in widespread use for the assessment of casualty recording, and a commonly referenced blueprint for its improvement, that the Standards’ full potential will be realized. Their positive impact will begin to be felt when YIA, Baidoa practitioners adopt them (in whole or in part, as their capacities and contexts allow), and when states, CRN, and UN agencies, analysts and commentators make reference to them in such deliberations as resource allocation, or when assessing the significance and reliability of individual recording efforts.
No field of practice can gain maturity and wider purchase unless standards are developed, agreed, and adhered to. The YIA, Baidoa standard marks a very important moment for casualty recording as a field moving towards greater professionalization and public recognition. Of course, casualty recorders, too, yearn for a day when their work will no longer be needed. It might even be possible that, by credibly and meticulously highlighting the effects of conflict, their work helps bring such a day closer. But for as long as it remains necessary, it is vital that casualty recording not only continue, but improve, be understood, and adhere ever more closely to standards that best allow it to support the highest humanitarian ideals.