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
·感受如诗如画的世外桃源美景
·观光布鲁塞尔
·风景如画的莱茵河畔
·郭国汀律师出席布鲁塞尔第二届全球支持亚洲民主化大会留影
·郭国汀律师在德国法郎克福
·郭国汀律师在德国法郎克福
·郭国汀律师在德国法郎克福留莲忘返
***(58)郭国汀律师名案要案抗辩实录
***(一)郭国汀律师为清水君抗辩
·郭国汀我为什么为清水君辩护?
·律师郭国汀对黄金秋(清水君)颠覆国家政权案辩护大纲
·清水君网上组党案刑事上诉状
·江苏高院强行书面审判清水君上诉案
·黄金秋(清水君)颠覆国家政权上诉案辩护词纲要
·清水君案上诉辩护词附件
·清水君案江苏高院驳回上诉维持原判
·中共伪法官评黄金秋颠覆国家政权案
·郭国汀律师清水君颠覆国家政权案研究
·郭国汀归纳清水君思想论点主旨言论集
·郭国汀就黄金秋颠覆国家政权上诉案致江苏省高级法院院长函
·郭国汀致狱中清水君函
·郭国汀律师第五次会见清水君
·狱中会见清水君手记
·郭国汀就清水君案上诉审江苏高级法院刑一庭王振林法官函
·作家黄金秋被无罪判重刑十二年辩护律师郭国汀谴责中共司法不公
·我为留学生英雄清水君抗辩
·清水君近况
·清水君其人其事辩护律师答记者问
·清水君:开庭日
·清水君:我的最后陈述
·清水君狱中诗草
·告诉你一个真实的清水君─黄金秋自述
·狱中诗草-短诗赠郭兄雅正
·赠黑眼睛等诸友
·南郭/清水君自我辩护感人至深
·南郭/中国人决不能忘记清水君!
·南郭/清水君是当代中国英雄
·南郭/清水君在狱中受到中共监狱毫无人性的虐待!
***(二)郭国汀律师为法轮功抗辩
***(1)中共极权暴政的最新反人类罪:活体盗卖法轮功学员人体器官专栏
·郭国汀 中共活摘器官是真的!
·中共为何纵容活体盗卖法轮功信徒的人体器官Why the CCP Harvests the Living Falun Gong
·BLOODY HARVEST Organ of Falun Gong
·活体盗人体器官关健证人调查纪录
·惊天罪孽 铁证如山
·郭国汀:苏家屯事件敲响了中共的丧钟
·郭国汀:苏家屯事件是真实的
·郭国汀:西方媒体报导苏家屯是个时间问题
·西方媒体首次报导苏家屯事件!
·中共活割法轮功学员人体器官主调查人DADID Matas 获Tarnopolsky 2007年人权奖(英文)
***(2)郭国汀律师为法轮功强力抗辩
·Resolution for Falun Gong in Congress of USA
·法轮圣徒瞿延来为何令南郭敬重?答MICRONET有关瞿延来的质疑
·中共为何血腥镇压法轮功?
·诉江泽民案美国依据国际法的义务:是对公共安全的危胁还是种族灭绝?
·值得中国律师学习的起诉书: 诉江泽民\李岚清\罗干\刘京\王茂林损害赔偿两千万加元
·郭国汀论辩法轮功
·我为法轮功说句公道话
·陈光辉监外执行、保外就医申请书
·为争取信仰自由权已绝食抗争七百八十天的瞿延来.
·百无一用是中国律师
·答三项基本原则
·中共必须立即停止镇压法轮功
·我为什么为法轮功辩护? 郭国汀
·我为法轮功抗辩的真实心声
·法轮功真相之我见
·中共才是真正的邪教----中共血腥残暴迫害法轮功的根源
·中共镇压法轮功的国际法分析
·中共滥用教制度镇压法轮功的法理解析
·当代中国的盖世太宝[610办公室]研究(英文)
·有感于对法轮功学员的强制教育
·中共当局必须立即无条件释放刘如平律师!郭国汀
·声援支持杨在新律师!
·郭国汀章天亮曾宁谈425和平上访到千万退党的精神延续
·中共专制暴政一直在杀人----悼念讲真相英雄陈光辉
·FALUN GONG PERSECUTION FACTS HEET
·RELIGIOUS FREEDOM AND FALUN GONG IN CHINA
·2
·Falun Gong Wins Motion in Historic Torture Lawsuit against Former Head of China
·为法轮功抗辩与自由中国论坛部份网民的论战
·Dr Wang Wenyi will be remembered by history as a great courage hero
·法轮功是比中共有过之无不及的一人专制吗?-答谭嗣同先生
·法轮功讲真相无罪
·郭国汀:对法轮功学员的劳教、判刑是非法行为
·郭国汀介绍为法轮功学员打官司的曲折经历
·质疑张千帆教授对法轮功的评价 郭国汀
·宣誓证词Affidavit
·中共一贯谎言连篇是个地道的骗子党!
·中共下达密文奥运成迫害最大借口
·中国著名人权律师从为法轮功辩护看中共践踏法律(图)
·郭国汀律师批评中共奧運前加劇迫害法輪功
·郭国汀律师呼吁台湾政府予吴亚林政治庇护
·郭国汀律师称中共持续非法迫害法轮功及其辩护律师
·答Gavin0919郭国汀是法轮功走狗之指控
[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