University of Nottingham
Human Rights Law Centre
Seventh Student Conference
The Security Council, civilians affected by armed conflict, and human rights
Drawing comparisons between UN Panel of Experts in Democratic Republic of
Congo and the International Commission of Inquiry on Darfur as a means of
addressing grave human rights violations: Jernej Letnar Černič, School of Law,
King’s College, University of Aberdeen, Scotland
In June 2000 the United Nations Security Council established a five-member Panel of
Experts on the Illegal Exploitation of Natural Resources and Other Forms of Wealth
of the Democratic Republic of Congo as a fact-finding body as a response to the
explicit connection between the exploitation or of the DRC’s natural resources and the
continuation of the conflict, which has led to grave human rights atrocities. Similarly,
in 2004 UN Security Council Resolution 1564 requested the UN Secretary-General to
establish the Commission of Inquiry in order to investigate reports of violations of
international humanitarian law and human rights law in Sudanese region of Darfur, to
determine whether or not act of genocide have occurred and to identify the
perpetrators of such violations with a view to ensure that those responsible are held
accountable. The Commission delivered a conclusion that the crimes against
humanity and war crimes had been committed in Darfur and also identified a number
of likely suspects. It proposed the Security Council to prosecute the perpetrators of the
crimes committed and to provide compensation to the victims of abuses. On the basis
of the report the Security Council adopted Resolution 1593 (2005), which describes
the situation in Sudan as threat to international peace and security. On the other hand,
Panel of Experts in DRC was authorized with the mandate to follow up on reports and
collect information on all activities of illegal exploitation of natural resources and
other forms of wealth in the DRC and, most importantly, to research and analyse the
relationship between this exploitation and the prolongation of the war. The experts
confirmed the systematic and systemic exploitation of Congolese minerals by various
state-like and non-state actors and proved link to grave human rights violations in the
country.
It is submitted that both UN Panel of Experts in Democratic Republic of Congo and
Darfur Commission play a central role in addressing and precluding human rights
violations in the conflict-thorn regions. They have also been both set up on the basis
of SC Resolutions. Both groups are examples of setting up an international inquiry
group to undertake fact-finding, which is a technique that has long been used in the
framework of United Nations. Whereas the findings and report of Darfur Commission
served as basis for the referral of the situation to the International Criminal Court, the
reports of Un Panel of Experts in DRC remained without legal consequences for all
state and non-state actors involved. The Commission such as one in Darfur may also
serve to expand the connections between the UN Commission of Human Rights and
the UN Security Council. It also may contribute to promoting transparency and
accountability in the work of the Security Council, since the Council, when
determining whether or not to take action in a human rights situation, has to respond to
a well researched and a well argued report (see P. Alston, JICJ, pp. 600-607, 2005).
The paper tries to present strengths and weakness of both types of international fact-
finding in case of gross human rights violations. It also argues for uniform approach
in UN SC fact-finding missions and a strict observance of reports of these fact-finding
bodies by members of the UN Security Council when adopting resolutions on the
basis of chapter 7 of UN Charter.
Jernej Letnar Cernic, LL.M, LL.M
doctoral candidate
School of Law, King's College, University of Aberdeen
Scotland, United Kingdom
jernej.letnar@abdn.ac.uk
00 44 (0) 1224 273016