Individual Responsibility in International Law for Serious Human Rights Violations. By Lyal S. Sunga. (International Studies in Human Rights.) [Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff. 1992. xxii + 227 pp. ISBN 0-7923-14530. Dfl.140/$82·50/£48]

AbstractHaving established that massive human rights violations in armed conflict constitute a threat to peace and that women are the most severely affected by the scourge of war, the Security Council has since 1999 adopted a number of resolutions intended specifically for this group. These instruments contribute to the development of humanitarian law applicable to women and acknowledge the value of active participation by women in peace efforts. The following article first analyses the foundations on which the Council has been able to assume responsibility for protecting women in situations of armed conflict, and then considers the actual protection it provides. It concludes that the Council has had varying success in this role, pointing out that the thematic and declaratory resolutions on which it is largely based are not binding and therefore, they are relatively effective only as regards their provisions committing United Nations bodies. The author proposes that the Council's role could be better accomplished through situational resolutions than through resolutions declaratory of international law.

Download Full-text

Is the Responsibility to Protect an Accepted Norm of International Law in the post-Libya Era?

Groningen Journal of International Law ◽

10.21827/5a86a6f8d93bb ◽

2018 ◽

pp. 11

Author(s):

Jeremy Sarkin

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

International Law ◽

Transitional Justice ◽

Building Blocks ◽

Responsibility To Protect ◽

Human Rights Violations ◽

One Dimensional

This article explores the Responsibility to Protect (RtoP) in the post-Libya era to determinewhether it is now an accepted norm of international law. It examines what RtoP means intoday`s world and whether the norm now means that steps will be taken against states thatare committing serious human rights violations. The building blocks of RtoP are examined tosee how to make the doctrine more relevant and more applicable. It is contended that theresponsibility to react should be viewed through a much wider lens and that it needs to bemore widely interpreted to allow it to gain greater support. It is argued that there is a need tofocus far more on the responsibility to rebuild and that it ought to focus on the transitionallegal architecture as well as transitional justice. It is contended that these processes ought notto be one-dimensional, but ought to have a variety of constituent parts. It is further arguedthat the international and donor community ought to be far more engaged and far moredirective in these projects.

Download Full-text

Disparity in Human Rights Violations: A Political and International Law Perspective

Hasanuddin Law Review ◽

10.20956/halrev.v2i3.697 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 2 (3) ◽

pp. 349

Author(s):

Aidir Amin Daud

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

International Law ◽

Rational Solution ◽

Double Series ◽

Mass Murder ◽

The State ◽

Human Rights Violations ◽

Natural Right ◽

International Court ◽

Political Interests

Right to life is non-derogable rights. A natural right that should not be revoked arbitrarily by anyone, including the state. A mass murder in events 1 October 1965 and Timor-Timor is a double series of states’ failure in protecting the rights of Indonesian peoples. Moreover, these two events get different treatment in its handling. The disparity in treatment between two cases is a big question related to the consistency of human rights enforcement in Indonesia. This study is a descriptive-qualitative research. While, to prove the truth, this study will use a comparative study. The findings show that the attitude of the United Nations that treat serious human rights violations in Timor-Timor and the events of 1965 in Indonesia, cannot be answered differently in the perspective of international law. Since it has a weakness where the political interests of ruling is very strong in influencing the decisions of the UN. The disparity in law enforcement in the event of serious human rights violations in 1965 and Timor-Timor due to the dynamics of international politics when it does not allow for the demands of human rights violations to the UNs’ International Court due to advantage for a certain state after the event. In order to reduce disparities in human rights violations, reconciliation is the most rational solution at this time compared remains demand the state for the violations. Besides, many human rights violations in certain countries that have successfully resolved through reconciliation approach.

Download Full-text