The International Law of Peace

2021 ◽  
pp. 58-76
Author(s):  
Cecilia M. Bailliet
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Human Security ◽  
Responsibility To Protect ◽  
Conflict Prevention ◽  
Peaceful Coexistence ◽  
Jus Post Bellum ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Peace Treaties

Contemporary international law is in a state of flux based on shifts within the geopolitical order. This chapter discusses the normative evolution of the concept of peace international law from peaceful coexistence to the current identification of a right to peace and discusses the interface with the Responsibility to Protect doctrine. It discusses a wide range of dilemmas presented by peace treaties, Jus Post Bellum, and the interface between the umbrella terms of Human Security, Security, and Peace. The chapter suggests that these normative iterations represent a watershed in human rights and international law as non-Western approaches to conflict prevention gain traction.

The ‘Responsibility to Prevent’: A Remit for Intervention?

2009 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 355-380 ◽  
Author(s):  
Natalie Oman
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Human Security ◽  
Great Powers ◽  
Responsibility To Protect ◽  
Legal Concept ◽  
Root Cause ◽  
Liberal Peace ◽  
Political Communities ◽  
Contemporary Account

We are experiencing a transitional moment in international law. What once seemed to be an unstoppable evolution toward cosmopolitan constitutionalism now appears as a fragile and easily reversible trend, threatened both by the imperial disregard of international legality by recent U.S. administrations and by the disinterest or active opposition of a group of states that was classified as ‘uncivilized’ in nineteenth century international law. A powerful account of the differences between these states -- former colonies and satellites of great powers – and the predominantly western states whose publics take for granted human rights culture has captured the imagination of international elites. The contemporary account of the differences between western European-descended political communities and the ‘others’ focuses on democratic governance, human rights, and human security. One important element of this narrative is the emerging international legal concept of the ‘responsibility to protect,’ often promoted as a means of securing the preceding three goods. This paper considers the recommendations of the 2001 report of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS) concerning a subsidiary element of the responsibility to protect termed the ‘responsibility to prevent.’ It argues that the prescriptions associated with the responsibility to prevent rest upon a set of prevailing assumptions about the root causes of threats to human security that are not tenable or not proven, and which both rely upon and reinforce the dualistic narrative of lawful and outlaw states that now dominates international public policy-making in western countries. Further, it shows how the model of legalization of humanitarian intervention proposed by ICISS is susceptible to cooptation by the democracy promotion project frequently associated with the liberal peace thesis. Finally, the paper recommends that only a stripped-down version of the ICISS recommendations, limited to the ‘responsibility to react,’ should be legalized, primarily because of the current absence of a reasonable degree of intercultural agreement on a substantive grounding for a muscular interpretation of a responsibility to prevent that includes root cause prevention.

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

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.

scholarly journals Three Grotian Theories of Humanitarian Intervention

2015 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Evan J. Criddle
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Natural Law ◽  
Humanitarian Intervention ◽  
First Century ◽  
Responsibility To Protect ◽  
Self Defense ◽  
The People ◽  
Hugo Grotius ◽  
Law Of Nations

AbstractThis Article explores three theories of humanitarian intervention that appear in, or are inspired by, the writings of Hugo Grotius. One theory asserts that natural law authorizes all states to punish violations of the law of nations, irrespective of where or against whom the violations occur, to preserve the integrity of international law. A second theory, which also appears in Grotius’s writings, proposes that states may intervene as temporary legal guardians for peoples who have suffered intolerable cruelties at the hands of their own state. Each of these theories has fallen out of fashion today based on skepticism about their natural law underpinnings and concerns about how they have facilitated Western colonialism. As an alternative, this Article outlines a third theory that builds upon Grotius’s account of humanitarian intervention as a fiduciary relationship, while updating Grotius’s account for the twenty-first century. According to this new fiduciary theory, when states intervene to protect human rights abroad they exercise an oppressed people’s right of self-defense on their behalf and may use force solely for the people’s benefit. As fiduciaries, intervening states bear obligations to consult with and honor the preferences of the people they seek to protect, and they must respect international human rights governing the use of force within the affected state. By clarifying the respective responsibilities of the Security Council and individual states for humanitarian intervention, the fiduciary theory also lends greater coherency to the international community’s “responsibility to protect” human rights.

scholarly journals DIREITOS HUMANOS: LIMITE NO CONTEXTO DE SEGURANÇA PÚBLICA

Revista LEVS ◽  
2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marco Antonio ALVES MIGUEL
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Law Enforcement ◽  
International Law ◽  
Public Administration ◽  
Public Safety ◽  
Police Power ◽  
Peaceful Coexistence ◽  
The Public ◽  
Legal Limits ◽  
Power Limits

RESUMO: O presente trabalho tem por escopo demonstrar a relevância dos Direitos Humanos e Poder de polícia como instrumento do Poder da Administração Pública necessários para a convivência pacífica entre os cidadãos de uma comunidade na busca da liberdade, da segurança e da paz. Por meio de uma pesquisa bibliográfica, aliada à experiência do autor, inclusive nos meios acadêmicos, utilizando a metodologia dedutiva e indutiva, demonstrará que, apesar de uma linha tênue nos atos de polícia, mormente de segurança pública, os agentes encarregados da aplicação da lei devem observar limites jurídicos que, se não respeitados, podem causar responsabilização nas esferas administrativas, penal e civil, bem como censura de suas ações perante o Direito Internacional. Por outro viés, os limites são categóricos quando se trata de preservar os direitos dos cidadãos na esfera da segurança pública.Palavras Chaves: polícia, poder, limites, Direitos Humanos. ABSTRACT: This work has the scope to demonstrate the relevance of human rights and police power as Public Administration Branch of the instrument necessary for peaceful coexistence among the citizens of a community in search of freedom, security and peace. Through a literature review, alidade to the author's experience, even in academic circles, using deductive and inductive methodology, demonstrate that despite a fine line in acts of police, particularly public safety, the agents in charge of law enforcement must observe legal limits which, if not respected, can cause accountability in the administrative, criminal and civil, as well as censorship of their actions under international law. For another perspective, the limits are categorical when it comes to preserving the rights of citizens in the public safety sphere.Key Words: Police, power limits, Human Rights.

scholarly journals Scope of State Responsibility Against Terrorism in International Law Perspective; Indonesian Cases

2015 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dian Purwaningrum Soemitro ◽  
Indra Wahyu Pratama
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
International Law ◽  
The State ◽  
Responsibility To Protect ◽  
State Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Offence ◽  
Foreign Nationals ◽  
Global Terrorism ◽  
International Conventions

Abstract: Scope of State Responsibility Against Terrorism in International Law Perspective; Indonesian Cases. The emergence of global terrorism cases within more than a decade, marked by the tragedy of 9/11, making the issue of it being a big problem. The State as one of the subjects of International Law, into the spotlight. One of the problems that developed was the extent of the responsibility of the State towards acts of terrorism that occurred in the region of his sovereignty, which caused casualties both its own citizens or foreign nationals. In the case of terrorism that happened in Indonesia, the State's responsibility to the International Conventions implementation are very insufficient and the efforts from the country by creating a system of criminal justice to the criminal offence of terrorism has not been a maximum. There should be an obligation of the internationally imposed on it. The problem is if the terrorism was occurred will be submitted to the International Law are likely to be open to foreigners intervention. This is of course contrary to the principles of International Law. However, in the development of International Law as it has evolved in the Principle of the Responsibility to Protect and that should be accepted by any countries in order to attract the embodiment of the country against the security and Human Rights Abstrak: Lingkup Pertanggungjawaban Negara Terhadap Terorisme dalam Perspektif Hukum Internasional pada Kasus Indonesia. Munculnya kasus terorisme global dalam satu dekade, ditandai dengan tragedi 9/11 yang menjadi masalah besar. Salah satu masalah yang berkembang adalah sejauh mana tanggung jawab negara terhadap aksi terorisme yang terjadi di wilayah kedaulatannya, yang menyebabkan timbulnya korban, baik warga negaranya sendiri atau warga negara asing. Dalam kasus terorisme yang terjadi di Indonesia, pertanggungjawaban negara terlihat dalam pelaksanaan Konvensi Internasional dan upaya menciptakan sistem peradilan pidana bagi pelaku tindak pidana terorisme. Jika permasalahan terorisme diserahkan kepada Hukum Internasional, maka cenderung akan membuka intervensi asing. Hal ini tentu saja bertentangan dengan prinsip-prinsip Hukum Internasional. Namun, dalam perkembangan Hukum Internasional telah berevolusi dalam Prinsip Tanggung Jawab untuk melindungi, selain adanya keharusan setiap negara untuk menjaga keamanan dan Hak Asasi Manusia  DOI: 10.15408/jch.v2i1.1841

scholarly journals HUMAN RIGHTS IN MODERN INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS: EVOLUTION OF DEVELOPMENT, PROBLEMS AND PROSPECTS

2020 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Relations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Legal Aspect ◽  
Value Orientations ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
Stage Of Development ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
The World

Introduction. At the present stage of development of the world political process, one of the main problems has been to ensure the effective operation of human rights protection mechanisms, both at the national and international levels. The main vocation of legal science in this area is to provide expert assessments of problematic issues and scientifically developed recommendations for improving the mechanisms of human rights protection in modern international relations and especially in crisis situations that have become almost permanent in the life of the world community. The purpose of this publication was to implement a retrospective analysis of the evolution of the development of legal consolidation of human rights at the international level and the thorny problems in this area. Summary of the main research results. Thus, this publication considers the main stages of human rights, highlights the main problems of development, outlines the place of human rights in modern international relations and presents the main characteristics of the challenges facing states in the implementation of cooperation in the field of human rights. Finding the specifics of human rights and identifying mechanisms for their formation is a separate problem for jurists. The legal aspect of enshrining human rights in international legal instruments is important in the context of modern reality. It is through the disclosure of this issue that it is possible to identify the main stages of the evolution of the consolidation of human rights in international law. Conclusions. The development of international legal consolidation of human rights has significantly influenced the evolution of international law as a whole. Under the influence of these processes, national sovereignty, as a basic principle of international law, began to take on new forms, and the individual acquired many features of international legal personality. Thanks to non-state rule-making, the sphere of consolidation and protection of human rights tends to self-development and constant adaptation to the changing needs of society in the social and moral spheres. Human rights are a cultural phenomenon that reflects the system of value orientations of a person rooted in a particular historical epoch and depends on the ideology of the world legal community. The problem of human rights, their protection from external and internal threats requires an immediate solution, making it a priority to consider legal issues among a wide range of global problems of mankind. At the same time, it must be emphasized that the democratic development of modern society and human rights are inextricably linked. This connection also implies that human rights must be recognized as legitimate as a result of democratic procedures, but outside the national legal systems there is a moral justification necessary to convince the subjects of international law that everyone, even outside the national legal system must enjoy all guaranteed rights and freedoms.

Part VI Human Rights and General International Law, Ch.32 Enforcing Human Rights Through Economic Sanctions

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lopez George A
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Economic Sanctions ◽  
Responsibility To Protect ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Counter Terrorism ◽  
Positive Results

This article examines the enforcement of human rights law through economic sanctions. It describes the development of the so-called targeted or smart sanctions and discusses controversies in the applications of these sanctions in the context of the principles of the �protection of civilians� and the �responsibility to protect� and the resort to targeted sanctions for counter-terrorism purposes. This article also suggests that the recent successes of sanctions in Libya, Côte d�Ivoire and Liberia can be extended to other areas and argues that the positive results of imposing targeted sanctions as proactive for human rights are counterbalanced by the ongoing rights controversies with counter-terrorism listing in the 1267 regime.

scholarly journals ESTABLISHING THE STATUS OF RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT (R2P) AS CUSTOMARY INTERNATIONAL LAW AND ITS ROLE IN PREVENTING MASS ATROCITIES

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 55-80
Author(s):  
Sigar Aji Poerana ◽  
Irawati Handayani
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Responsibility To Protect ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Primary Responsibility ◽  
State Practice ◽  
The Status ◽  
General Assembly Resolution ◽  
The One ◽  
Paradigm Shifting

ABSTRACTResponsibility to Protect (R2P) was unanimously adopted and is articulated in paragraphs 138 and 139 of General Assembly Resolution A/Res/60/1. On the one hand, R2P has presumed a new name for humanitarian intervention that is still debatable in international law. On the other hand, R2P attempts to connect State’s sovereignty and responsibility to protect human rights. R2P recognizes State’s sovereignty while bestowing States the primary responsibility to protect human rights and allowing the international community to intervene if States fail to fulfill their obligation. Considering the original idea of R2P is to protect human rights, the essential issue that should be addressed is the position of R2P as source of international law. Suppose States should implement the R2P without a prior commitment to a treaty, which sources of international law that can underlie the legal basis for R2P? This article argues that R2P can fulfill the criteria of customary international law based on the notion of ‘Grotian moment,’ which ‘compensates’ R2P from the traditional burden of state practice and opinio juris since R2P is a paradigm-shifting development in which new rules and doctrines of custom emerge with unusual rapidity and acceptance. Further, this article also highlights the importance of responsibility to prevent, which is one of the pillars of R2P, and argues that commitment to prevent is the “heart” of R2P. It is argued that such responsibility is vital in saving States from avoidable conflicts and from the trouble in responding to mass atrocities and rebuilding the affected population. Keywords: Customary International Law, Grotian Moment, Responsibility to Protect, Responsibility to Prevent, Sources of International Law ABSTRAKResponsibility to Protect (R2P) diadopsi dengan suara bulat dan dicantumkan dalam paragraf 138 dan 139 Resolusi Majelis Umum A/Res/60/1. Di satu sisi, R2P dianggap sebagai nama baru untuk intervensi kemanusiaan yang masih diperdebatkan dalam hukum internasional. Di sisi lain, R2P berupaya untuk menjembatani kedaulatan negara dan tanggung jawab untuk melindungi Hak Asasi Manusia (HAM). R2P tetap mengakui kedaulatan negara dan memberikan tanggung jawab utama kepada negara untuk melindungi HAM, namun mengizinkan masyarakat internasional untuk mengintervensi jika negara gagal memenuhi kewajibannya. Mengingat ide awal R2P adalah untuk melindungi HAM, maka isu penting yang harus ditelaah adalah posisi R2P sebagai sumber hukum internasional. Misalnya, negara harus mengimplementasikan R2P tanpa komitmen terlebih dahulu terhadap suatu perjanjian internasional, sumber hukum internasional manakah yang dapat mendasari pelaksanaan R2P? Artikel ini berpendapat bahwa R2P dapat memenuhi kriteria hukum kebiasaan internasional berdasarkan konsep ‘Grotian moment', yang 'mengkompensasi' R2P dari beban tradisional state practice dan opinio juris karena R2P merupakan perkembangan yang mengubah paradigma yang mengakibatkan aturan baru dan doktrin kebiasaan muncul dengan laju dan penerimaan yang luar biasa. Lebih lanjut, artikel ini juga menyoroti pentingnya tanggung jawab untuk mencegah, yang merupakan salah satu pilar dari R2P, dan berpendapat bahwa komitmen untuk mencegah adalah esensi dari R2P. Tanggung jawab untuk mencegah sangat penting dalam menjauhkan negara dari konflik yang dapat dihindari dan dari kesulitan dalam merespon krisis kemanusiaan dan membangun kembali penduduk yang terkena dampaknya. Kata Kunci: Grotian Moment, Hukum Kebiasaan Internasional, Tanggung Jawab untuk Melindungi, Tanggung Jawab untuk Mencegah, Sumber Hukum Internasional

scholarly journals Responsibility to Protect sebagai Bentuk Perlindungan Hak Asasi Manusia di ASEAN

Lentera Hukum ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 16
Author(s):  
Norilla Norilla ◽  
Eddy Mulyono
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Security Council ◽  
Responsibility To Protect ◽  
Customary Law ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Intergovernmental Organization ◽  
International Court ◽  
The United Nations

Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) established on August 8, 1967 still accords to the principle of non-intervention which has been arranged in the ASEAN Charter. This principle, however, has been debated among ASEAN members, specifically when it is dealt with human rights. While the instutionalization is one of ASEAN’s achievements, human rights become one of pivotal issues in Southeast Asia which subsequently raises questions on the commitment of ASEAN to support the Responsibility to protect at the Summit on 2005. This article revisits the responsibility to protect in international law which is accorded to international customary law of Article 38 paragraph (1) of the Statute of International Court of Justice (ICJ). By using legal research, this article asserts that the responsibility to protect is essentially applicable to be adopted by regional intergovernmental organization like ASEAN, though it was initially only adopted by the Security Council of the United Nations. But, the principle of non-intervention would be the primary barrier to applying it. Therefore, this article recommends to wielding power to the Security Council of the United Nations with respect to solving such problem at the ASEAN level with the following idea to include ASEAN as the UN member. Keywords: Responsibility to protect, Human Rights, ASEAN

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document