scholarly journals Robust Peacekeeping? Panacea for Human Rights Violations

2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kofi Nsia-Pepra
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Negative Binomial ◽  
Policy Implications ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
Major Power ◽  
Host State ◽  
Peacekeeping Operations ◽  
Un Peacekeeping ◽  
Structural Variables ◽  
Key Factor

This paper examines the conviction that robust peacekeeping—a strong and forceful peacekeeping force—works better than traditional UN peacekeeping mechanisms in reducing human rights violations, specifically, civilian killing, in areas of deployment. I seek to analyze both the operational and internal characteristics of UN peacekeeping operations in an effort to understand the hindrances to achieving the objective of protecting human rights. Specifically, the study examines the contributions of key structural variables, including the mission type, weapon type, rules of engagement, mission strength, and major power participation controlling for other intervening variables using negative binomial and logit regression models. The empirical results indicated that the core variable ―robust peacekeeping‖ has impact on civilian killings, namely that it lowers civilian killings. The key factor seems to be strength of mission size associated with lower numbers of civilian killings. Great power participation, peacekeeper diversity and affinity with the host state, along with identity conflicts and at least proto-democratic status of the host state appear to be harbingers of potentially higher deliberate civilian killing totals. The findings thus have both theoretical and policy implications in the field of peacekeeping.

scholarly journals In Search of Due Diligence Obligations in UN Peacekeeping Operations

2020 ◽  
Vol 23 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 203-225
Author(s):  
Nigel D. White
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Due Diligence ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Peacekeeping Operations ◽  
Un Peacekeeping ◽  
International Human ◽  
Failure To Protect

Abstract It is argued in this article that due diligence, grounded on positive duties under international human rights law, is a standard against which to measure the performance of UN peacekeeping forces. Its adoption by the UN will improve accountability, but in a controlled and principled way. A requirement that the UN act diligently to prevent human rights violations would not impose over-onerous obligations. For responsibility to be incurred an organisation must have clearly failed to take measures that were within its power to take. It is argued that the UN not only should be bound by norms of due diligence but is in fact bound by positive obligations derived from customary international human rights law. The development of some due diligence-type measures by the UN to prevent sexual abuse by peacekeepers and to protect civilians within areas of peacekeeper deployment, and the adoption of an explicit due diligence policy to delineate its relationship with non-UN security actors, are positive signs. However, the article demonstrates that the UN needs to further internalise and develop its due diligence obligations if it is to limit human rights violations committed under its watch. Furthermore, it needs to create accountability mechanisms to ensure that it develops the rather limited measures taken thus far, including provision for victims to be able to hold the organisation to account for failure to protect them from human rights violations. Only by accepting its responsibility and liability to such victims will be the UN be driven to improve its due diligence when mandating, preparing, training, deploying and directing peacekeeping operations.

scholarly journals Delivering Justice for Women Victims of Conflicts: How Judicial Mechanisms Perpetuated Gender Inequality in Timor-Leste

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 105-123
Author(s):  
Sorang Saragih ◽  
Mita Yesyca
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Women Victims ◽  
Gender Inequality ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
Peacekeeping Operations ◽  
Long Period ◽  
Success Stories ◽  
Serious Crime ◽  
Un Peacekeeping ◽  
Timor Leste

Abstrak: Timor-Leste adalah salah satu kisah sukses operasi perdamaian Perserikatan Bangsa-Bangsa (PBB) terlepas dari lamanya operasi tersebut dilakukan. Intervensi PBB di Timor-Leste bersifat khusus karena PBB menetapkan dua mekanisme peradilan selama operasi perdamaian berjalan, yaitu Serious Crime Unit (SCU) atau Unit Kejahatan Serius dan Komisi Kebenaran (CAVR). Baik SCU maupun CAVR memiliki mandat yang berbeda dengan tujuan bersama untuk mengatasi pelanggaran HAM yang terjadi di Timor-Leste. Tulisan ini bertujuan untuk mengkritik kedua mekanisme tersebut, khususnya mengenai bagaimana inisiatif ini mengusahakan keadilan bagi perempuan korban konflik di Timor-Leste. Kritik berfokus pada mandat, tindakan dan otoritas mereka. Berdasarkan ketiga aspek ini, kesimpulan yang dihasilkan adalah mekanisme –mekanisme ini gagal memberikan keadilan bagi para perempuan korban di Timor-Leste. Kata Kunci: Timor-Leste, operasi perdamaian PBB, pelanggaran HAM, mekanisme peradilan, SCU, CAVR, perempuan korban Abstract: Timor-Leste is one of few success stories of the United Nations (UN) peacekeeping operations despite its long period. The UN intervention in Timor-Leste is unique because it established two justice mechanisms during the peacekeeping operations, namely the Serious Crime Unit (SCU) and the Truth Commission (CAVR). Both SCU and CAVR have different mandates with a common objective to address human rights violations committed in Timor-Leste. This paper tries to criticize these two mechanisms, particularly on how these initiatives delivered justice for women victims of conflict in Timor-Leste. The critique focuses on their mandate, performance, and authority. Based on these three aspects, it is concluded that these mechanisms failed to deliver justice to women victims in Timor-Leste. Key Words: Timor-Leste, UN peacekeeping operation, human rights violations, justice mechanism, SCU, CAVR, women victims

scholarly journals United Nations Peacekeeping, Human Rights, and the Protection of Civilians

2020 ◽  
pp. 81-99
Author(s):  
Ibrahim J. Wani
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Internal Displacement ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
Peace Operations ◽  
Peacekeeping Operations ◽  
Un Peacekeeping ◽  
Independent Panel ◽  
Regional Engagement ◽  
High Level

Abstract Drawing on lessons from United Nations (UN) led peacekeeping operations in Africa, this chapter discusses the background and evolution of peacekeeping engagement on issues related to human rights, refugees, and internal displacement; the array of norms and institutions that have developed to formalize the mandate in the UN peacekeeping framework; and the experiences, lessons, and challenges in its implementation. Due to escalating challenges around protecting civilians and human rights violations, the chapter argues that UN peacekeeping must move beyond rhetoric. A genuine commitment to implement the recommendations of the United Nations High-Level Independent Panel on Peace Operations (HIPPO) is a necessary first step. Enhanced mechanisms to compel host states to protect human rights within their borders and more regional engagement on thwarting “spoilers” are among several key follow-on measures.

The Involvement of UN in Palestine and the Possibility of a Global Protection Force

2021 ◽  
pp. 105-112
Author(s):  
Kainat Kamal
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Peacekeeping Operations ◽  
Security Environment ◽  
Sustainable Peace ◽  
Un Peacekeeping ◽  
Peace And Security ◽  
Peacekeeping Missions

The United Nations (UN) peacekeeping missions are mandated to help nations torn by conflict and create conditions for sustainable peace. These peacekeeping operations hold legitimacy under international law and the ability to deploy troops to advance multidimensional domains. Peacekeeping operations are called upon to maintain peace and security, promote human rights, assist in restoring the rule of law, and help conflict-prone areas create conditions for sustainable peace ("What is Peacekeeping", n.d.). These missions are formed and mandated according to individual cases. The evolution of the global security environment and developing situations in conflictridden areas requires these missions to transform from 'traditional' to 'robust' to 'hybrid', accordingly (e.g., Ishaque, 2021). So why is it that no such model can be seen in restoring peace and protection of Palestinian civilians in one of the most protracted and deadly conflicts in history?

Part 3 The United Nations: What it Does, 27 Peacekeeping and other Peace Operations

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Higgins Dame Rosalyn, DBE, QC ◽  
Webb Philippa ◽  
Akande Dapo ◽  
Sivakumaran Sandesh ◽  
Sloan James
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Military Personnel ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
Peace Operations ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Legal Requirement ◽  
Host State ◽  
Peacekeeping Operations ◽  
Un Peacekeeping ◽  
The Future

This chapter examines the UN’s peacekeeping operations. A peacekeeping operation may be defined as a UN-authorized, UN-led force made up of civilian and/or military personnel donated by states or seconded by the Secretariat, physically present in a country or countries with a view to facilitating the maintenance of peace, generally after a conflict has ceased. Many consider that for an operation to be peacekeeping, it must take place with the consent of the host state. However, this may or may not be a legal requirement, depending on the constitutional basis of the operation. The chapter discusses the fundamental characteristics of peacekeeping; categories of peacekeeping; legal basis for peacekeeping; peacekeeping and consent; peacekeeping and the use of force; peacekeeping and impartiality; functions of peacekeeping operations; UN Transitional Administrations; and the future of UN peacekeeping.

Beyond UN Accountability for Human Rights Violations

2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 68-104
Author(s):  
Frédéric Mégret
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
Peace Operations ◽  
State Dependency ◽  
Host State ◽  
The United Nations

The overarching focus on the United Nations and its agents for human rights violations and abuses they may have committed, as well as the attention to troop contributing states and even ‘victims’, has broadly shifted attention away from the role of the host state in peace operation. This article seeks to unpack that omission and suggests that it is far more problematic than commonly thought, in particular because it tends to reproduce some of the problematic features of the political economy of peacekeeping that are the background of rights abuses in the first place. Instead, as part of a tradition of thinking of human rights in terms of sovereign protection, the article makes the case for taking much more seriously the role that the host state can and should have in order to address abuses by international organizations. It emphasises how international legal discourse has tended to ‘give up’ on the host state, but also how host states have themselves been problematically quiescent about violations occurring on their territory. This has forced victims to take the improbable route of seeking to hold the UN accountable directly, bereft of the sort of legal and political mediation which one would normally expect their sovereign to provide. The article contributes some thoughts as to why host states have not taken up their citizens’ cause more forcefully with the United Nations, including governmental weakness, a domestic culture of rights neglect, but also host state dependency on peace operations. The article then suggests some leads to rethink the role of the host state in such circumstances. It points out relevant avenues under international law as well as specifically under international human rights law, drawing on the literature developed to theorise the responsibilities of states in relation to private third-party non-state actors within their jurisdiction. It argues that there is no reason why the arguments developed with private actors, notably corporations, in mind could not be applied to public actors such as the UN. Finally, the article suggests some concrete ways in which the host state could more vigorously take up the cause of rights abuses against international organizations including by requiring the setting up of standing claims commissions or making more use of its consent to peace operations, as well as ways in which it could be forced to do so through domestic law recourses. The article concludes by suggesting that reinstating the host state within what should be its natural prerogatives will not only be a better way of dealing with UN abuses, but also more conducive to the goals of peacekeeping and state construction.

The protection of civilians mandate in UN peacekeeping operations: reconciling protection concepts and practices

2013 ◽  
Vol 95 (891-892) ◽  
pp. 517-538 ◽  
Author(s):  
Haidi Willmot ◽  
Scott Sheeran
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Relations ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Critical Role ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
Physical Protection ◽  
Peacekeeping Operations ◽  
Un Peacekeeping ◽  
The Common

AbstractThe ‘protection of civilians’ mandate in United Nations (UN) peacekeeping operations fulfils a critical role in realising broader protection objectives, which have in recent years become an important focus of international relations and international law. The concepts of the ‘protection of civilians’ constructed by the humanitarian, human rights and peacekeeping communities have evolved somewhat separately, resulting in disparate understandings of the associated normative bases, substance and responsibilities. If UN peacekeepers are to effectively provide physical protection to civilians under threat of violence, it is necessary to untangle this conceptual and normative confusion. The practical expectations of the use of force to protect civilians must be clear, and an overarching framework is needed to facilitate the spectrum of actors working in a complementary way towards the common objectives of the broader protection agenda.

The Slippery Slope of UN Peacekeeping: Offensive Peacekeeping in Congo and Beyond

2016 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 100-141 ◽  
Author(s):  
Diana Kearney
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Security Council ◽  
Slippery Slope ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
Military Operations ◽  
Member States ◽  
Un Peacekeeping ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
Self Defence ◽  
The Way

Fed up with the decades-old violence plaguing the DRC, the UN Security Council broke new ground by granting peacekeepers an offensive mandate to pursue rebels rather than waiting to react in self-defence. This transformation in UN military operations alarmed several States, concerned over a perceived loss of sovereignty and a weakening of the principle of non-intervention. To allay these fears, Resolution 2098’s drafters incorporated a provision expressly assuring Member States that offensive peacekeeping tactics in the DRC would not generate precedent for future UN action. However, examining past UN practice and ‘slippery slope’ theory alike reveals that explicit disavowal of precedent cannot guarantee that offensive peacekeeping will not be used as a template for future UN action. In fact, the incorporation of such language may foster the generation of a slippery slope in UN peacekeeping, ultimately paving the way for increased scope of UN intervention in situations of gross human rights violations. The article concludes by proposing a framework for how actors can manipulate slopes to generate or slow precedent for future UN action.

Due Diligence, the UN, and Peacekeeping

2020 ◽  
pp. 217-233
Author(s):  
Nigel D. White
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Due Diligence ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Peacekeeping Operations ◽  
Un Peacekeeping ◽  
Meaning And Purpose ◽  
Human Rights Due Diligence

This chapter focuses on the application, acceptance, and implementation of human rights due diligence obligations in UN peacekeeping operations. It points to growing, but uneven, evidence of the development of standards and measures by the UN that would fit the meaning and purpose of due diligence, although there are very few instances of due diligence being used as a term within the UN. The chapter argues that due diligence obligations are applicable either through customary human rights law, or the internal law of the UN, or both due to the fact that the UN’s principles of peacekeeping are themselves based on general principles of international law. The chapter stresses that the UN should have due diligence obligations especially as there is a gap between the commissioning of peacekeeping operations by the UN and the day-to-day control of peacekeepers by the UN.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document