百家争鸣
郭国汀律师专栏
[主页]->[百家争鸣]->[郭国汀律师专栏]->[政府不得滥杀和平请愿公民的最新国际公约]
郭国汀律师专栏
·奸淫幼女案辩护词
·受贿案辩护词
·为境外非法提供国家秘密案刑事上诉状
·谢某受贿案刑事申诉状
·张春“双规”屈打成召刑事申诉状
***(7)经典商事合同民事案
·一起重大善意取得争议案重审代理词
·网络电子邮件名誉侵权争议案
·外观专利设计争议案代理词
·福建省首例著作权争议案代理词
·果园承包合同纠纷案代理词
·借贷纠纷上诉案代理词
·借款纠纷上诉案代理词
·“天下第一剑”商标侵权争议案代理词
·析产争议案代理词
·不当得利争议案起诉状
·不当得利争议一审代理词
·不当得利争议案上诉状
·不当得利争议案上诉状
·不当得利重审案代理词
·出租车乘客伤害应向谁索赔?
·服务合同争议案代理词
·“权利质押借款合同”争议案代理词
·涉外商品房屋买卖合同质品争议案代理词
·抚恤金争议案上诉审代理词
·劳动争议(运钞车被劫)争议仲裁代理词
·航空货运代理合同争议案答辩状
·航空货运代理合同争议案代理词之二
·航空货运代理合同争议案代理词
·运输费争议案代理词
·租赁合同争议案代理词
·房屋预售合同(债权转让)争议案代理词
***(8)海事海商名案要案
·“国鸿”轮光船租赁合同争议仲裁案代理词
·船舶碰撞侵权争议案代理词
·Ocean Glory轮碰撞争议案代理词
·海上货运保险合同(代位权)争议案代理词
·安泰轮船舶保险合同上诉案情代理词
·安泰轮船舶保险合同争议上诉审代理词(正)
·翻船货损代位追偿案初步法律意见
·扣押船舶申请书
·海上货运合同争议案初步法律意见
·船舶保险合同争议案上诉状 郭国汀
·安泰轮船舶保险合同争议案代理词
·船舶买卖合同争议上诉案代理词/郭国汀
·造船合同争议案上诉审代理词/郭国汀
·安泰轮船舶保险合同争议案上诉答辩状/郭国汀
·安泰轮船舶保险合同争议上诉审代理词/郭国汀
·海上货物运输货损争议案代理词/郭国汀
·海上货物运输运费争议案代理词/郭国汀
·无单放货争议案上诉代理词/郭国汀
·新世纪轮船舶保险合同争议上诉案代理词/郭国汀
·航空货运代理合同争议案代理词/郭国汀
·海上货运合同争议案代理词/郭国汀
·船舶碰撞争议案代理词/郭国汀
·安泰轮船舶保险合同争议案代理词/郭国汀
·海上货运货损代位追偿案代理词/郭国汀
·越权放行提单争议案代理词/郭国汀
·海上货物运输运费争议案代理词/郭国汀
·放行提单侵权争议听证代理意见书
·诉前还船海事强制令申请书/郭国汀
·渔业船舶碰撞侵权争议案代理词/郭国汀
·关于“8•5”油污染事故损害赔偿的初步法律意见/郭国汀
·关于新世纪轮船舶保险合同纠纷上诉案代理词之二
·强制执行令复议申请书/郭国汀
·诉前海事强制令听证代理意见书/郭国汀
·诉前还船海事强制令申请书/郭国汀
·沉船货损索赔争议案重审代理词/郭国汀
·关于进口货物货方要求签发两套提单有何风险的法律意见/郭国汀
·进口鱼粉自燃货损争议案代理词/郭国汀
·海上货物运输货损争议案起诉状/郭国汀
·清风洲轮货损争议案代理词/郭国汀
·航空货运运费争议案析/郭国汀
·上海亚通股份有限公司不服行政行为纠纷案代理词/郭国汀
·货代合同争议案上诉答辩状/郭国汀
·船舶保险合同争议上诉状/郭国汀
·涉外航空运输侵权争议案代理词/郭国汀
·苏东台渔02051与苏赣鱼02981船舶碰撞案情分析/郭国汀
·华亭进出口公司无单放货案代理词/郭国汀
·提单丢失应如何处理?郭国汀
·无单放货(记名提单)案评析/郭国汀
·五矿国际货运福建公司与厦门外轮代理有限公司保函争议再审案/郭国汀
·“新世纪”轮船舶保险合同(固定物、浮动物? )争议案的反思/郭国汀
·新世纪轮船舶保险合同争议上诉案代理词/郭国汀
·修船作业火损争议上诉案代理词/郭国汀
·海上货物运输合同争议案代理词/郭国汀
·一起重大船舶保险合同(告知义务)争议案之代理词/郭国汀
·浙江金纺诉日本川崎汽船株式会社无单放货争议案代理词/郭国汀
·中钢轮沉船货损争议案代理词/郭国汀
·中钢轮沉船货损争议上诉案代理词/郭国汀
·海上货运保险合同争议仲裁案代理词/郭国汀
***(9)财产保险,船舶保险,海上保险经典名案
·建达轮船舶保险合同争议上诉案代理词
·船舶保险合同争议案补充代理词
·海上货运保险合同争议案仲裁代理词
[列出本栏目所有内容]
欢迎在此做广告
政府不得滥杀和平请愿公民的最新国际公约

2005年联合国在世界峰会上通过决议:各成员国有义务防止群体屠杀,战争罪,种族清洗及反人类罪行,国际社会有义务协助成员国履行上述责任,国际社会原则上应采取适当的处交和人道及其他和平方式防止上述罪行,若成员国未能履行上述责任或事实上该国本身犯有上述罪行,则国际社会应准备采用强硬措施,包括通过联合国安理会联合采取武力制止上述罪行。政府滥杀和平请愿示威民众的行为,即属反人类罪的一种。事实上,利比亚及叙利亚在阿拉伯之春革命中,均由于滥杀和平抗议示威民众,导致联合国安理会通过决议制裁之。对叙利亚的安理会决议,由于俄国和中国行使否决权未果。

   

   An Introduction to the Responsibility to Protect

   

   Recognizing the failure to adequately respond to the most heinous crimes known to humankind, world leaders made a historic commitment to protect populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity at the United Nations (UN) 2005 World Summit. This commitment, entitled the Responsibility to Protect, stipulates that:

   1. The State carries the primary responsibility for the protection of populations from genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing.

   

   2. The international community has a responsibility to assist States in fulfilling this responsibility.

   

   3. The international community should use appropriate diplomatic, humanitarian and other peaceful means to protect populations from these crimes. If a State fails to protect its populations or is in fact the perpetrator of crimes, the international community must be prepared to take stronger measures, including the collective use of force through the UN Security Council.

   

   

   In this section, you will find the following topics:

   1. International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS)

   2. Secretary-General Kofi Annan Promotes RtoP

   3. The AU's Constitutive Act and the Ezulwini Consensus

   4. The 2005 World Summit

   5. Developments at the United Nations Since 2005

   6. The report of the Secretary General: Implementing the Responsibility to Protect

   7. UN General Assembly Resolution A/RES/63/308 on the Responsibility to Protect

   8. UN General Assembly Debate and Dialogues on RtoP

   

   Since the end of the Second World War, an international effort has been undertaken to protect civilians in armed conflict and prevent genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. In 1948 the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide was adopted by the United Nations, and entered into force three years later. The Convention was the steppingstone in the international community’s attempt to ensure the horrors witnessed during the Holocaust would never occur again. However, the resounding promise of “Never Again” would prove to be hollow.

   

   The end of the 20th Century marked a change in the nature of armed conflict: large inter-state wars were replaced by violent internal conflicts, where the vast majority of casualties are now civilians. The genocides in Cambodia, Rwanda, and Bosnia demonstrated massive failures by the international community to prevent mass atrocities. Thus, near the end of the 1990’s there was a recognized need to shift the debate about crisis prevention and response: the security of the community and the individual, not only the state, must be priorities for national and international policies.

   1. International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS)

   The term Responsibility to Protect was first presented in the report of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS) in December 2001. The Commission had been formed in response to Kofi Annan's question of when the international community must intervene for humanitarian purposes. Building on Francis Deng's idea of sovereignty as responsibility, the Commission addressed the question of when state sovereignty - a fundamental principle of international law - must yield to protection against the most egregious violations of humanitarian and international law, including genocide, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. View a Summary of the ICISS Report.

   

   The timing of this reports' release in December 2001 was devastating to its initial reception. After the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, the international debate shifted away from consideration of measures to prevent genocide and mass atrocity toward measures for the prevention and preemption of terrorist activities and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. Moreover, the invasion of Iraq in 2003, premised in part on an argument of humanitarian intervention, was even more destructive to the advancement of the RtoP agenda. The invasion heightened concerns that RtoP would be used to further erode the sovereignty of smaller developing countries.

   

   However, although support for RtoP was limited in the initial period after the release of the ICISS report, ongoing humanitarian disasters, including the failure to protect the people of Darfur, signaled that more needed to be done by the international community as a whole to respond to genocide and other threats against populations.

   

   2. Secretary-General Kofi Annan Promotes RtoP

   In September 2003, the Secretary-General called for Member States to strengthen the UN to better advance development, security, and the protection of human rights. In recognition of the urgent need to address the UN's failures to respond to genocide, the Secretary-General challenged Member States to include protection from genocide as part of this UN reform agenda. The Secretary-General then formed the High-level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change to report on how the UN should confront the greatest security threats of the 21st century. In December, 2004, the High-level Panel released its report, A More Secure World: Our Shared Responsibility. Included in the report's 101 recommendations on strengthening the international security framework was an endorsement of an international responsibility to protect populations from grave threats.

   

   After consultations with governments and UN officials, and with input from many civil society organizations, the Secretary-General published his own report entitled In Larger Freedom: Towards Development, Security and Human Rights for All. Similar to the High-level Panel, the Secretary-General emphasized the need of governments to take action against threats of massive human rights violations and other large scale acts of violence against civilians. He called on governments to embrace the Responsibility to Protect, emphasizing that while it is first and foremost the individual governments responsibility to protect its population, the responsibility shifts to the international community when the state is unable or unwilling to protect their citizens. He also emphasized that the international community must use a range of measures to protect populations, which could include diplomatic and humanitarian efforts, and as a last resort may include the use of military force.

   

   3. The AU's Constitutive Act and the Ezulwini Consensus

   Meanwhile, in 2000, African nations were working to enshrine the principles of R2P within the founding Charter of the African Union (AU). First, the Constitutive Act defines the promotion of peace, security and stability and the promotion and protection of “human and peoples’ rights” as core obejective of the Union. Second, it identifies “respect for democratic principles, human rights, the rule of law and good governance”, "respect for the sanctity of human life”, and “condemnation and rejection of impunity” among its core values. Most significantly, Article 4(h) of the Constitutive Act states that it is the “right of the Union to intervene in a Member State pursuant to a decision of the Assembly in respect of grave circumstances, namely war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity.” This important clause conveys one end of the full R2P spectrum - military intervention - but the Charter shows the commitment of African Nations to protecting populations from atrocity, even if infringement on the sovereignty of its members is required.

   

   The report, known as the ”Ezulwini Consensus”, was expressed at the African Union’s 7th Extraordinary Session of the Executive Council of 1-8 March 2005, in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. In its report, the AU embraced the Responsibility to Protect and recognized the authority of the Security Council to decide on the use of force in situations of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and ethnic cleansing. It also insisted on the need for an empowerment of regional organizations to take action in such cases. In 2005, with RtoP as part of the proposed recommendations for improving the UN, the African Union responded by its own evaluation of th proposed reforms.

[下一页]
blog comments powered by Disqus

©Boxun News Network All Rights Reserved.
所有栏目和文章由作者或专栏管理员整理制作,均不代表博讯立场