UN Security Council Resolutions 1325 and 1820: constructing gender in armed conflict and international humanitarian law

2010 ◽  
Vol 92 (877) ◽  
pp. 221-234 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amy Barrow
Keyword(s):  
Security Council ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Geneva Conventions ◽  
Peace And Security ◽  
Recent Developments

AbstractWhile the Geneva Conventions contain gender-specific provisions, the reality of women's and men's experiences of armed conflict have highlighted gender limitations and conceptual constraints within international humanitarian law. Judgements at the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) ad hoc tribunals have gone some way towards expanding the scope of definitions of sexual violence and rape in conflict. More recent developments in public international law, including the adoption of Security Council Resolutions 1325 and 1820 focused on women, peace and security, have sought to increase the visibility of gender in situations of armed conflict. This paper highlights important developing norms on women, peace and security. Although these norms are significant, they may not be radical enough to expand constructions of gender within international humanitarian law. This leaves existing provisions open to continued scrutiny.

Jurisdiction of the ad hoc Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda over crimes against humanity and genocide

1997 ◽  
Vol 37 (321) ◽  
pp. 651-664
Author(s):  
Marie-Claude Roberge
Keyword(s):  
Security Council ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Major Step ◽  
Clear Signal

The International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) were established on 11 February 1993 and 8 November 1994 respectively by the Security Council to prosecute persons responsible for flagrant violations of international humanitarian law. The aim of the Security Council was to put an end to such violations and to contribute to the restoration and maintenance of peace, and the establishment of the ad hoc tribunals undoubtedly represents a major step in that direction. Moreover, it sends a clear signal to the perpetrators and to the victims that such conduct will not be tolerated.

I. Co-operation with the International Criminal Tribunal for Yugoslavia

1996 ◽  
Vol 45 (4) ◽  
pp. 947-954
Author(s):  
Colin Warbrick ◽  
Dominic McGoldrick ◽  
Colin Warbrick
Keyword(s):  
Security Council ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
International Peace ◽  
Peace And Security ◽  
Domestic Law

The Security Council established the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (the Tribunal) by Resolution 827.1 It “determined” that the widespread and flagrant violations of international humanitarian law in the territory of the former Yugoslavia constituted a threat to international peace and security. Resolution 827 is a Chapter VII resolution. The Council “decided” that all States shall co-operate fully with the Tribunal and its organs and that they shall “take any measures necessary under their domestic law” to give effect to the resolution and obligations which arose under the Statute of the Tribunal.

scholarly journals Le tribunal pénal international pour le Rwanda - La justice trahie (Note)

2005 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 827-840
Author(s):  
John Philpot
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Military Intervention ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Legal Requirements ◽  
Real Issue ◽  
Set Up

On November 8,1994, the Security Council of the United Nations adopted Resolution 955 creating an ad hoc international criminal tribunal to judge individuals responsible for violations of international humanitarian law committed in Rwanda between January 1, 1994 and December 31, 1994. In its form and structure, the Tribunal does not respect basic legal requirements required of a tribunal set up in international law. Us mandate - limited in time, in scope of potential indictment, and in jurisdiction to violations of international humanitarian law - mil prevent any light from being shed on the real issue raised by the Rwandan conflict, namely that of armed military intervention in Rwanda from Uganda. It will likely lead to the reinforcement of a one-sided view of the crisis in Rwanda and legitimate further unilateral interventionist policies in Africa and elsewhere. The Tribunal will institutionalize the de facto impunity for the members and supporters of the present government of Rwanda who undoubtedly committed many serious crimes between October 1, 1990 and the present.

New Mechanisms for the Enforcement of International Humanitarian Law

2001 ◽  
Vol 95 (4) ◽  
pp. 934-952 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daryl A. Mundis
Keyword(s):  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
International Community ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals ◽  
Domestic Courts

The international criminal court (ICC) will serve as a permanent institution dedicated to the enforcement of international humanitarian law sixty days after the sixtieth state has deposited its instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval, or accession to the Treaty of Rome with the Secretary-General of the United Nations.1 Pursuant to Article 11 of the ICC Statute, however, the ICC will have jurisdiction only with respect to crimes committed after the treaty comes into force.2 Consequently, when faced with allegations of violations of international humanitarian law in the period prior to the establishment of the ICC, the international community has five options if criminal prosecutions are desired.3 First, additional ad hoc international tribunals, similar to those established for the former Yugoslavia (International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, ICTY) and Rwanda (International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, ICTR) could be established.4 Second, "mixed" international criminal tribunals, which would share certain attributes with the ad hoc Tribunals, could be created.5 Third, the international community could leave the prosecution of alleged offenders to national authorities, provided that the domestic courts are functioning and able to conduct such trials. Fourth, in those instances where the national infrastructure has collapsed, international resources could be made available to assist with the prosecution of the alleged offenders in domestic courts. Finally, the international community could simply do nothing in the face of alleged violations of international humanitarian law.

scholarly journals International Legal Problems of Qualification of Armed Conflicts

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (68) ◽  
pp. 735-757
Author(s):  
Mykhaylo Buromenskiy ◽  
Vitalii Gutnyk
Keyword(s):  
Armed Conflict ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
International Treaties ◽  
Legal Doctrine ◽  
International Agencies

The article addresses the qualification problems of armed conflicts. The study was conducted through the analysis of international legal doctrine, international treaties, decisions of international organizations. Attention is paid to the jurisprudence of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia and the International Criminal Court. It is noted that International Humanitarian Law has been in place since the beginning of the armed conflict. Therefore, the application of International Humanitarian Law does not require any recognition of the existence of armed conflict (international or non-international); this conflict exists because of armed clashes. It is emphasized that the need to classify the conflict arises in view of domestic and international legal factors (to bring to international criminal justice those who have committed war crimes; state responsibility for internationally wrongful acts, etc.). Attention was paid to the non-existence of a single body, which was empowered to determine the existence of an armed conflict. Different international agencies may have different qualifications for the same armed conflict. It is concluded that it is necessary to establish a Committee of Experts under the UN Secretary-General, to avoid different qualifications from the same armed conflict.

The Involvement of the Security Council in Maintaining International Humanitarian Law

1994 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 137-152 ◽  
Author(s):  
Th.A. van Baarda
Keyword(s):  
Security Council ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
The Other ◽  
Clear Distinction ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Relief ◽  
International Peace ◽  
Peace And Security ◽  
The One

In this article the author discusses the growing involvement of the Security Council in humanitarian protection and assistance in armed conflict. Given the fact that the Security Council is apolitical body par excellence, its involvement in the humanitarian relief effort may prejudice the neutrality and independence of the latter. He finds himself in agreement with the ICRC, which has proposed that the UN should make a clear distinction between encouraging respect for humanitarian law on the one hand, and the effort to maintain international peace and security on the other.

The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda: Its role in the African context

1997 ◽  
Vol 37 (321) ◽  
pp. 685-693
Author(s):  
Djiena Wembou
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Security Council ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
International Community ◽  
United Nations Security Council ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
The Face ◽  
African Context

In the face of the atrocities committed in Rwanda between April and July 1994, the international community committed itself to ensuring respect for international humanitarian law and trying those responsible for breaches of it. Thus, on 8 November 1994, the United Nations Security Council adopted resolution 955 creating the International Criminal Tribunal for the prosecution of persons responsible for genocide and other serious violations of international humanitarian law committed in the territory of Rwanda and of Rwandan citizens responsible for such acts committed in the territory of neighbouring States.

The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda

1997 ◽  
Vol 37 (321) ◽  
pp. 675-683
Author(s):  
Cécile Aptel
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Security Council ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
United Nations Security Council ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
National Reconciliation

The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda was created on 8 November 1994 by the United Nations Security Council, of which it is a subsidiary body. Its task is to help restore and maintain peace and bring about national reconciliation by trying persons allegedly responsible for acts of genocide and other grave breaches of international humanitarian law committed in Rwanda and Rwandan citizens suspected of committing such acts and violations in the territory of neighbouring States between 1 January and 31 December 1994.

When is a conflict international? Time for new control tests in IHL

2016 ◽  
Vol 98 (903) ◽  
pp. 1019-1041
Author(s):  
Djemila Carron
Keyword(s):  
Armed Conflict ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Armed Group ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court

AbstractThis article clarifies the control a State should have over an armed group for the triggering act of an international armed conflict and for the internationalization of non-international armed conflicts in international humanitarian law. It explains the reasons for the distinction between these two types of attribution and details the specificities of each test, with an innovative approach. The author proposes new control tests for both triggering and internationalization, rejecting the effective and overall control tests regarding internationalization proposed by the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. For instance, regarding the internationalization of a non-international armed conflict, a general and strict control test is proposed. Finally, this article addresses specific issues like the difficult question of the control required for an occupation through an armed group.

Foreword by the President of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda

1997 ◽  
Vol 37 (321) ◽  
pp. 603-604
Author(s):  
Laïty Kama
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Red Cross ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
International Review ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals ◽  
Set Up

The decision to devote an issue of the International Review of the Red Cross to a series of articles on the two ad hoc International Criminal Tribunals set up by the United Nations to prosecute persons responsible for serious violations of international humanitarian law in the former Yugoslavia and in Rwanda reflects the increasing importance of these courts both for the general public and for legal experts.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document