|
|
 About |
 |
 |
 |
In the Outcome Document of the 2005 World Summit of the U.N. General Assembly, the nations of the world expressed for the first time a clear acceptance of the existence of a responsibility to protect populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity, by taking prompt and decisive collective action, diplomatically when effective, but even militarily if peaceful means prove inadequate and national authorities are manifestly failing to protect their populations from such crimes. Despite the strong moral underpinnings of such a responsibility, states have historically been reluctant to acknowledge such a principle – powerful states were hesitant because they will be expected to provide the most troops and supplies to stop massive human rights violations, while smaller states have been concerned that acknowledging an international responsibility to intervene in a state’s internal affairs, even in the interest of protecting the rights of its citizens, may lead to an erosion of state sovereignty. Due in large part to a seminal report entitled The Responsibility to Protect, published by Canada’s International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty in 2000, and two U.N. reports on reform produced before the 2005 World Summit, the international community was persuaded to codify an international responsibility to protect populations from massive human rights violations. In April 2006, the principle was reaffirmed in a resolution by the U.N. Security Council.
The responsibility to protect encompasses a general framework of action for members of the international community: to work to prevent crimes against humanity before they occur; to react collectively to grave situations when prevention fails; to attempt a peaceful resolution; and to employ military force if peaceful methods prove ineffective. There remain, however, major challenges ahead in implementing and actualizing the responsibility to protect. Indeed, the Darfur crisis has been cited as a test case for the international community’s commitment the concept, and has demonstrated the many hurdles which still stand in the way of effective intervention to protect civilians caught up in armed conflict. As millions of people remain deprived of their basic human rights every day – particularly in strife-torn places like Darfur – there is a pressing need to vigilantly hold governments to their self-avowed responsibilities. The development of the mechanisms by which this principle will be applied in practice provides a context in which Human Rights First will promote the moral and legal responsibility to protect populations from genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity.
|
|
Home
Browse Resources
Toolkit/Publication: