scholarly journals The African Union and the Responsibility to Protect: Principles and Limitations

2011 ◽  
pp. 213-236
Author(s):  
Ademola Abass
Keyword(s):  
Responsibility To Protect ◽  
African Union

The Role of the United Nations, the African Union and Africa's Sub-Regional Organizations in Dealing with Africa's Human Rights Problems: Connecting Humanitarian Intervention and the Responsibility to Protect

2009 ◽  
Vol 53 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-33 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeremy Sarkin
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Humanitarian Intervention ◽  
Responsibility To Protect ◽  
Genocide Convention ◽  
African Union ◽  
Regional Institutions ◽  
African Context ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Right

AbstractThis article examines the basis for humanitarian intervention (HI) in the United Nations Charter, the African Union (AU) Charter and in a number of African sub-regional institutions. It traces the historical development of HI and argues that, while the right to HI emerged more than 100 years ago, that right also emerges from the Genocide Convention. The article argues that this treaty connects HI to the developing norm of the responsibility to protect (R2P) and examines the extent to which R2P is garnering wider support around the world. It focuses on the UN, and the various AU and sub-regional institutions and instruments that sanction HI. It assesses whether intervention can be authorized even in the absence of a UN Security Council mandate and examines the principles, application and interrelationship of R2P and HI in the African context. It traces the use of these norms in Africa, including in the various sub-regional structures, and evaluates the AU's political will and capability to deal with conflict and human rights abuse.

AFRICAN MULTILATERAL RESPONSES TO THE CRISIS IN ZIMBABWE

2020 ◽  
Vol 39 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick Dzimiri
Keyword(s):  
South African ◽  
Responsibility To Protect ◽  
Government Policies ◽  
Mitigation Measures ◽  
African Union ◽  
Humanitarian Crisis ◽  
Electoral Violence ◽  
Multilateral Institutions ◽  
The Government

The Responsibility to Protect (RtoP) represents one of the key normative developments towards mitigating global human rights violations. Normatively, the RtoP advances the notion of responsible sovereignty by obligating states to protect their people from humanitarian catastrophe and emphasises the residual role of the international community in the event of lack of capacity or the state's unwillingness to protect. It is in this context that this article examines RtoP mitigation measures instituted by the South African Development Community (SADC) and the African Union (AU) as regional multilateral institutions in responding to the crisis in Zimbabwe. The article considers the extent to which the responses have been guided implicitly or explicitly by RtoP principles. The evolution and consolidation of the humanitarian crisis has been considered, with specific focus on the human security impact of government policies, in particular, Operation Murambatsvina (the destruction of what were deemed illegal housing structures in major cities in Zimbabwe in May 2005) and the unprecedented 2008 electoral violence as a result of increased militarisation of governance structures. Debate on the applicability of RtoP to the crisis in Zimbabwe is thus located within the broader framework of the normative theories of international relations that forms the basis of RtoP. The article argues that escalation of the government induced humanitarian crisis was as a result of lack of timeous or effective responses by both the AU and SADC. Again, the AU and SADC responses were significantly influenced by diverse, often mutually exclusive, interpretations of the main causes of the crisis. Another salient finding is the extent to which politicisation of RtoP and lack of political will undermined RtoP operationalisation. 

Special Issue for GR2P: Africa's Responsibility to Protect Introduction

2010 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. 339-352 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeremy Sarkin ◽  
Mark Paterson
Keyword(s):  
International Adoption ◽  
Responsibility To Protect ◽  
African Union ◽  
Weak States ◽  
Special Issue ◽  
Territorial Integrity ◽  
International Obligations ◽  
Regional Organisations ◽  
External Interventions

AbstractThe introduction sketches the recent development of the 'responsibility to protect' norm and emphasises its African roots, both in terms of its conceptualisation and implementation and with particular respect to two tragedies—the genocide in Rwanda in 1994 and the crisis in Darfur since 2003—that have lent urgency to the norm's formulation and widespread international adoption. The number and extent of R2P cases in Africa are outlined and the roles of the African Union and Africa's regional organisations in implementing the norm are briefly considered. The introduction acknowledges the importance of examining R2P through African perspectives. Referencing the justifications and primary principles for action upon which the norm is founded, the authors also assess the relative strengths of competing notions of sovereignty in Africa. The essay further considers how R2P has come to be seen as a mechanism that can bolster the capacity of weak states to fulfil their sovereign responsibilities to their own citizens, and how new international obligations imposed upon states, and particularly those adopted in Africa, have made significant inroads into the old concept of sovereignty as territorial integrity and freedom from external interventions.

The African Union

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kwesi Aning ◽  
Frank Okyere
Keyword(s):  
Responsibility To Protect ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
African Union ◽  
Limited Capacity ◽  
Effective Implementation ◽  
Concrete Action ◽  
Mass Atrocity ◽  
Atrocity Crimes ◽  
Made In ◽  
Hybrid Forms

The African Union has been acclaimed for its effort in adopting policies that seek to protect civilian populations from mass atrocity crimes. It has transited from the principle of non-interference to non-indifference through the adoption of Article 4(h) of the Constitutive Act of 2000, which enjoins it to intervene in respect of war crimes, genocide, and crimes against humanity. Article 4(h) and the responsibility to protect share striking commonalities—both are rooted in the notion of sovereignty as responsibility. However, limited progress has been made in translating these normative principles into concrete action. This chapter notes the lingering issues of sovereignty and limited capacity for enforcement, as well as the state-centric approach to prevention without regard for local sources of resilience. Effective implementation of R2P should address the challenges of cooperation between the AU and other organs, and consider hybrid forms of prevention which exist in many African states.

A Regional Responsibility to Protect? Towards ‘Enhancing Regional Action’ in Africa

2016 ◽  
Vol 8 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 270-293 ◽  
Author(s):  
Obinna Franklin Ifediora
Keyword(s):  
Security Council ◽  
Responsibility To Protect ◽  
Global Politics ◽  
Peace Operations ◽  
African Union ◽  
Popular Participation ◽  
Great Opportunity ◽  
Peaceful Settlement ◽  
Peace And Security ◽  
Governance Architecture

Ten years after its endorsement by the un General Assembly, the operationalisation of the Responsibility to Protect (RtoP) concept faces challenges of consistency and capacity. Too often, global politics at the world’s premier intergovernmental body, the un, hampers effective action. Regional arrangements have a crucial role to play in this regard, however, questions of capacity to live up to this expectation remain. The Peace and Security Council (psc) of the African Union (au), mandated to implement the African Peace and Security Architecture (apsa) has primarily focused on developing the African Standby Force (asf), which the au succeeded in bringing to its ‘Full Operational Capability’ (foc) in December 2015 for implementation. Deploying the asf in deserving cases, for instance in Burundi in 2016, raises issues of sovereign consent, risks and costs. To avoid these complexities, this article argues that regional arrangements under Chapter viii are primarily pacific tools of the Security Council; focusing on harnessing these peaceful mechanisms of conflict prevention offers potential for consistent and effective ‘first responses’ to crises, with fewer complications. Regional arrangements as mediation tools present great opportunity for peaceful settlement of local disputes. Support for mediation is typically by peace operations. This article proposes that mediation support by a ‘preventive arbitration’ tool through ‘popular participation’ under the African Governance Architecture (aga) may have a pivotal role in this respect. Therefore, a regional responsibility to protect, through greater mediation, requires mediating challenges of governance in Africa.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document