On 21 August 2015 the UK carried out a targeted killing of a British citizen in Syria by an RAF drone strike. The question arose whether this was a new departure for the UK: had it adopted the policy of targeted killing outside a hot battlefield? Would it now carry out targeted killings outside armed conflicts to which it was a party? The UK government position was not clear. The UK Joint Committee on Human Rights therefore sought clarification of the UK government's policy and its legal basis. It considered three issues. First, was there a new departure in terms of the UK constitutional convention that the government should consult parliament before carrying out a military operation abroad. Second, was the particular incident a new departure in that it was a targeted killing outside an armed conflict? Third, and most important, had the government now adopted a general policy of targeted killing outside an armed conflict? Was it now part of the government's counter-terrorism strategy to use lethal force against suspected terrorists abroad who posed an imminent threat to the UK? The government denied that it had a policy of targeted killing, but the Joint Committee did not take this at face value. It was nevertheless sympathetic to the government's wide doctrine of self-defence.