The International responsibility of States and the UN for the breach of
the obligation to prevent and suppress genocide and its legal
consequences vis-à-vis the victims of genocide.
Research context
On 6 April 1994, the airplane of the Rwandan president exploded in the skies above
Kigali. Belgian peacekeepers reported seeing two rockets fired toward his plane from the
vicinity of a camp belonging to the Rwandan Presidential Guard and army commandos.
Within hours of the plane crash, the Presidential Guard, the army, the Interahamwe, and
the Impuzamugambi mounted roadblocks and killings spread quickly throughout the
whole county, ordered and commanded by the Government through its army,
Gendarmerie, militias, and individuals.
Ever since the so-called revolution of 1959 has happened, there had been propaganda
against the Tutsi population. It increased in 1990 with the invasion of the RPF. The
propaganda against Tutsis increased much more in the 1993 by the “Radio-television
Libre de Milles Collines” (RTLM) whose shareholders included the President
Habyarimana as the largest one.1 This Radio began broadcasting shortly before the
signing ceremony of Arusha Accords between the then government and the Rwandese
Patriotic front. Some other weekly newspapers like Kangura supported by the
government and military figures carried open hate-propaganda against Tutsis. It had
published in 1990 the famous ten Hutu commandments which were instructions to
mistreat and discriminate Tutsis, and later in December 1993, the same Kangura
newspaper, predicted that President Habyarimana would be assassinated not by a Tutsi
but by a Hutu.2
The international community was early informed by some reliable persons such as the
Special Raporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary and Arbitrary Executions in March 1993.
1
Melvern, L., A people betrayed: the role of the west in Rwanda’s Genocide, 2nd ed, Zed Books, London
and New York, 2000, p. 71
2
Idem, p. 72
1
He reported that genocide against Tutsi population was being prepared. 3 Furthermore,
four months prior to the real beginning of the massacres, on 11 January 1994, the
commander of United Nations Mission for Rwanda (UNAMIR), Canadian General
Romeo Dallaire, sent a coded cable to the Peacekeeping Operations department of the
Secretariat warning of a plan for the extermination of the Tutsi population. 4 Dallaire
mentioned that he suspected that the lists of Tutsis which were established were for their
extermination.
An example he gave was that in twenty minutes the personnel of
President Juvenal Habyarimana could kill up to a thousand Tutsis.5 He also reported that
arms had been stockpiled in secret locations including pistols, rifles, a half million
machetes and hundreds and thousands of hoes, axes, hammers and razor blades.
Documents prove that the machetes came from China, supplied between 1992 and 1994
by a company called Oriental Machinery.6 By the time the genocide began, 85 tons of
munitions are thought to have been distributed, one machete being given to every third
adult Hutu male.7 These arms were the ones which were used to exterminate Tutsi four
months later.
When the genocide began, an operation named ‘amaryllis’ was launched French
government had decided to fly in a well-equipped armed force of paratroopers Operation
Amaryllis with the sole objective of evacuating French their people from Rwanda,
namely French and other westerners, members of Habyarimana’s family as well as the
orphans of the Saint Agathe orphanage sponsored by the wife of the head of State. This
orphanage had a specialty of receiving orphans of Rwandan army soldiers killed in
combat.
At that time, the number of the UN peacekeeping force was 2548, and General Dallaire
made a request of reinforcement of UNAMIR to put an end to the genocide which would
require the Security Council to give him the enforcement power under Chapter VII of the
3
Schabas, W A., Genocide in International Law: the Crimes of Crimes, Cambridge University Press ,
Cambridge, p. 22
4
Idem, p. 475
5
Ibidem
6
7
Melven, L., op.cit. p. 64, 65.
Ibidem
2
Charter to stop the genocide and to increase the number of UNAMIR troops, but the SC
decided against it.8 Instead, the Security Council, at the urging of the United States,9
decided in the Resolution 912 of 21 April 1994,10 to withdraw 90 percent of the
UNAMIR troops, and the remaining 270 were to be used only for the evacuation of
foreigners and to act as intermediary between the parties in an attempt to secure their
agreements.11 Some of those foreigners have been evacuated by French, Italian and
Belgian soldiers,12 leaving Rwandans who were hiding with them to their fate.
After ten of Belgian troops had been killed by the Rwandan army, but before the
reduction of the UNAMIR troops by the Security Council, the Belgian government
decided to pull out his 450 troops from UNAMIR and Rwanda. By that time, ninety of
the Belgian soldiers commanded by Lieutenant Luc Lemaire were at “Ecole Technique
Officielle” of Kicukiro in Kigali.13 In this school, there were more than two thousands
people who had fled the killings from 8 April. They sought the protection from the
Belgians, that they got until 11 April, when, at 13. 45 p.m, the last Belgian soldier pulled
out.14 This Belgian contingent abandoned those people, knowing that the place was
surrounded by Hutu extremists, waiting for their departure to kill all those unarmed
refugees who,15 before the departure of those Belgian troops, had begged them to shoot
them, rather than to be hacked to death later by the extremist Hutu militias. 16 They were
telling them that a bullet was preferable than being cut to pieces with machete, hammers,
knives and spears.17 These people were immediately exterminated after the departure of
the Belgians.
8
Kenneth J. C., Genocide and the Global Village, Palgrave, New York, 2001, p. 78.
9
Ibidem
10
Security Council Resolution 912 of April 21, 1994, at WWW <http://www.un.org>
11
Kenneth J. C., op.cit., p. 78.
12
Heidenrich G. J., How to prevent Genocide: A guide for Policymakers, Scholars, and Concerned Citizen,
Westport, Connecticut London: Praeger, 2001, p.199
13
Melvern, L., op.cit., p. 2.
14
Idem, pp. 1-3.
15
Ibidem
16
Kenneth J. C., op.cit., p. 75.
17
Melvern, L., op.cit., pp. 2, 4.
3
General Dallaire sought the UN to ask the US to shut down the radio RTLM which was a
direct instrument of genocide. But after a study of the request by the Pentagon, it was
recommended against, because of the cost -$ 8.500 an hour for a jamming aircraft over
the country, and the legal argument that jamming a national radio station would violate
international law principle of sovereignty of States.18
Schabas mentioned that, with a proper mandate, the United Nations peacekeeping forces
could have prevented genocide in Rwanda. General Dallaire claimed that with an
appropriately equipped force of 5,000 soldiers he could have stopped the Genocide.19
This assessment was also confirmed by United States military experts.20
As a result of the plan and perpetration of the Genocide by the Government of Rwanda,
and of the absence of any international military action to prevent or stop it, one million
lives were lost in only one hundred days before it was stopped by the Rebellion
Movement: the Rwandese Patriotic Front (R.P.F). It is the fastest and most vicious
genocide yet recorded in human history.
Boutros Boutros-Ghali, the then UN Secretary General challenged the Security Council,
saying it was afraid to use the word ‘‘genocide’’ in presidential statements and resolution
because this would require it to prevent the crime being committed.21 Kofi Annan went to
Rwanda in 1998 to acknowledge that the international community and the UN failed
Rwanda at the time of evil.22
The US and Belgium later presented their mea culpa acknowledging their failure to do
something to prevent or stop that tragedy. Indeed, in 1998 President Clinton visited
Rwanda, and he issued something of an apology. He said: “We in the United States and
18
Dallaire, R., Shake hands with the devil, the failure of humanity in Rwanda, Arrow Books, London,
2004, p. 375.
19
Schabas W.A., Genocide in International Law: the Crimes of Crimes, Cambridge University Press ,
Cambridge, p. 475, p. 477
20
Scott R. Feil, cited by Schabas W.A, Genocide in International Law: the Crimes of Crimes, Cambridge
University Press , Cambridge, p. 477
21
Schabas W.A, op.cit. p. 477
22
Barnett, M., Eyewitness to a genocide, the United Nations and Rwanda, Cornell University Press, Ithaca
and London, 2002, p.154
4
the world community did not do as much as we could have done to try to limit what
occurred. It may seem strange to you here, but all over the world there were people like
me sitting in offices, day after day after day, who did not fully appreciate the depth and
the speed with which you were being engulfed by this unimaginable terror”.23 The
Belgian Prime Minister did also apologize first in 2000 and in 2004 for the second time.
He acknowledged that Belgian conduct caused the loss of many human lives.24
The genocide against the Tutsi in Rwanda was taken in this introduction as an example
but it is not the only genocide that has happened up to now. For instance in Bosnia it
happened and similarly to what happened in Rwanda, while the genocide in Srebrenica
was taking place, the Dutch peacekeeping troops failed to stop the massacre of more than
8,000 men and boys at Srebrenica .The Dutch troops were in the Balkans as part of the
UN Protection Force, UNPROFOR, to shield civilians during the bloody wars that pitted
Bosnian Serbs against Bosnian Croats and Muslims. This peacekeeping force at
Srebrenica, which was composed of nearly 400 men, was meant to protect the refugees
and residents of that Bosnian town, designated a safe haven by the UN in 1993. However,
they offered little or no resistance to the Serb attack.25
The genocide against the Tutsi in Rwanda as well as that of Srebrenica and some other
genocides happened while the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of
Genocide and other international legal instruments were in force. Yet, as it was later
stressed by the ICJ, this Genocide Convention was manifestly adopted for a purely
humanitarian and civilizing purpose since its object was on the one hand to safeguard the
very existence of certain human groups and on the other to confirm and endorse the most
elementary principles of morality.26 It is in this context that this convention imposed to
23
Power S., ‘‘A problem from hell’’: America and the Age of Genocide, Basic Books, New York, 2003, p.
386
24
25
WWW <http://www.aidh.org/rwand/hirond03.htm>, (Consulted August 19 2009).
Institute for War and Peace reporting,
Dutch Peacekeepers to return to Srebrenica, at WWW <
http://iwpr.net/?p=tri&s=f&o=325295&apc_state=henh>, (Consulted August 2009)
26
Reservations to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Advisory
Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1951, p. 23, quoted in International Court of Justice, Case concerning the
5
all contracting parties, the obligation to prevent genocide. In explaining the scope of this
convention and particularly its article I, the ICJ clarified that “Article I does impose
distinct obligations over and above those imposed by other Articles of the Convention. In
particular, the Contracting Parties have a direct obligation to prevent genocide”.27
However, while this Genocide Convention imposes the obligation on contracting parties
the direct obligation to prevent genocide it did not provide mechanisms to implement this
obligation. In fact, this Genocide Convention was adopted three years after the adoption
of the UN Charter. Article 2(4) of this UN Charter states that: “All members shall refrain
in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial
integrity or political independence of any state, in any other manner inconsistent with the
purposes of the United Nations.”28
One year after the adoption of the Genocide Convention, the UN General Assembly
adopted Resolution 375 (1949) on the right and duties of states in which it is stated that:
“Every state has the duty to refrain from intervention in the internal affairs of any other
state…”29 A similar provision was included in Resolution 2131(1965) on the
inadmissibility of intervention: “No state has the right to intervene, directly or indirectly,
for any reason whatever, in the internal or external affairs of any other state”.30
The UN General Assembly Resolution 2625 (1970) on Friendly Relations followed and
repeated article 2(4) but also prohibited the intervention in internal affairs by stating that:
“No State or group of States has the right to intervene, directly or indirectly, for any
reason whatever, in the internal or external affairs of any other State. Consequently,
application of the convention on the prevention and punishment of the crime of genocide, (BosniaHerzegovina v. Serbia- Montenegro), (Case No. 91) Judgment, 26 February 2007, para. 161.
27
International Court of Justice, Case concerning the application of the convention on the prevention and
punishment of the crime of genocide, (Bosnia-Herzegovina v. Serbia- Montenegro), (Case No. 91)
Judgment, 26 February 2007, para. 162.
28
Charter of the United Nations of June 26,1945 at WWW, < http://www.un.org/>,(Consulted on 18
August 2009)
29
UN General Assembly Resolution 375 (1949) of 6 December 1949 on the rights and duties of states at
WWW < http://www.un.org>, (Consulted on 18 August 2009)
30
UN General Assembly Resolution 2131(1965) of 21 December 1965 on the inadmissibility of
intervention at WWW < http://www.un.org>, (consulted, September 09, 2009)
6
armed intervention and all other forms of interference or attempted threats against the
personality of the State ….are in violation of international law”. 31 This was confirmed by
the ICJ in Nicaragua case: “The principle forbids all states or groups of states to intervene
directly or indirectly in internal or external affairs of other states.”32 This leads to the
main question in this work as formulated in the next list of questions.
Main question
What does the obligation to prevent and suppress genocide entails to States and the UN
and what are the legal consequences of its breach vis-à-vis the victims of genocide, under
international law ?
To find answers to this main question a number of sub questions will need to get answers.
Those are:
-
-
-
-
-
31
To whom does a sovereign State owe the duty to protect its people against
genocide? Does the duty to prevent genocide imply the duty not to
commit genocide?
Does international law allow States to take military action to save people
against whom genocide is being prepared or committed?
What actions not implying the use of force, are permitted or required in
international law for States to prevent genocide in another State in order
to comply with their duty to prevent genocide?
Can the responsibility of third states be established when their acts and/or
omission to prevent genocide cause damage to the population against which
a genocide is committed?
Who can invoke the responsibility of the state which commits genocide
and/or the state which did not comply with the obligation to prevent and
before which court?
Does the UN (Security Council) have any duty to prevent and/or
suppress genocide under international law?
UN General Assembly res.2625, 24 October 1970 on principles of international law concerning friendly
relations and co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the UN, at WWW <
http://www.un.org>, (Consulted, September 09, 2009)
32
International Court of Justice, Case concerning the military and paramilitary activities in and against
Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America), Merits, Judgment, 27 June 1986, para 205, at WWW
<http://www.icj-cij.org>, (Consulted, September 09, 2009)
7
-
-
Can the responsibility of the UN be established when the acts and/or omissions
by the UN Security Council and UN peace-keepers cause damage to the
population against which a genocide is committed?
Who can invoke the liability of the UN and before which court? And
what are the mechanisms for mise–en-oeuvre?
What might be the best form of preventing genocide in the future?
Interest in this work
These questions arise on the basis of the sad experiences in some places in the world. In
different places, there have been plans by states to destroy people on the ground of race,
ethnicity, religion or nationality. This is a crime of crimes which shocks the human
conscience. Thus, it is worth investigating the role of international law in attempts to
efficiently prevent this crime. It is in this context that these questions were formulated
and if answers to them can be provided it will contribute to the advancement of
international law as far as the prevention and suppression of genocide are concerned. This
work will help to establish whether or not States and/or international organizations can be
held responsible for the omission to prevent/suppress genocide. This investigation aims
therefore at contributing to avoid such tragedies in the future and to bring justice to the
victims of mass violations of human rights. More clearly, this work is undertaken for the
purpose of promoting the cause of humanity in general and the human rights in particular.
Subdivision of the work and the Methodology
In searching for legal answers to these questions, this work has been divided in 5
chapters.
The first chapter will examine the meaning and scope of relevant legal
provisions on the prevention and suppression of genocide.
While the second chapter will examine the responsibility of States for the commission of
genocide and for the breach of the obligation to prevent genocide, the third chapter will
investigate the responsibility of international organizations, in particular the UN.
In investigating the responsibility of states and International Organizations, the aim is not
only to know who is responsible for the crime of genocide, but also whether international
8
law contains a right of reparation that can be exercised by victims of that genocide. The
legal issues on the reparation as well as the invocation of the responsibility before the
Court and the enforcement of Court’s decisions will be dealt with in chapter four.
Finally, recognizing the crucial weight of the prevention of genocide in the whole work,
chapter five will propose mechanisms for future and better prevention of genocide. Those
mechanisms are either those not implying the use of force or those implying it.
As far as the methodology is concerned, in this research the appropriate method is the
analysis through legal materials. Indeed, in order to know the scope of the Genocide
Convention as far as the prevention and suppression of genocide is concerned, an analysis
of that convention as well as other related legal materials will be investigated in order to
know the ‘ratio legis’ of the Genocide Convention.
And in order to investigate on the establishment of the responsibility of States and the
UN, it will be necessary to analyze International treaties in relation with this field as well
as customary international law as regards with the possibility for a state to comply with
its obligation to prevent and /or suppress genocide. Case-laws will be used to know how
those International Legal Instruments have been interpreted and applied by Courts. More
specifically, the case Serbia-Montenegro v. Bosnia-Herzegovina will occupy the most
important place since the Court ruled on many legal questions about the application of the
Genocide Convention.
9
Research plan
Topic: The International responsibility of States and the UN for the
breach of the obligation to prevent and suppress genocide and its legal
consequences vis-à-vis the victims of genocide.
Introduction
Chapter 1: The obligation to prevent and suppress genocide under
International Law.
1.1. Origin and definition of genocide.
1.2: The scope of the convention with regards to the prevention and suppression of the
Crime of Genocide
1.2.1. Meaning and scope of article I
1.2.2. Preventive actions not implying the Use of force
1.2.3. Preventive actions implying the use of force
1.2.3.1. Intervention by a state in another state to prevent genocide: a right or an
obligation under the genocide convention?
1.2.3.2 The prohibition of use of force, the principle of non-intervention v. the duty to
prevent genocide
1.2.3.3. Humanitarian intervention: a means for the prevention of genocide?
1.2.3.4. Potential legal justification: humanitarian intervention towards the responsibility
to protect.
1.3. The meaning and scope of article VIII of the Genocide Convention.
Completion: From September 2009 –SEPT 2010
Chapter 2. State responsibility for the breach of the obligation to
prevent/suppress genocide
2.1. State obligation not to commit genocide vs. the obligation to prevent it
2.1.1. The State obligation not to commit genocide
10
2.1.1.1. The state responsibility for commiting genocide agaisnt its population
2.1.1.2 The state responsibility for committing genocide beyond its territory
2.1.1.3. The state responsibility for Aid or assistance in the Genocide
2.2. State responsibility for breach of the obligation to prevent genocide
2.2.1 The number of victims required for a state to take measures in conformity of its
duty to prevent
2.2. 2. Permitted states’ legal mechanisms to prevent genocide
2.3. The obligation to prevent genocide vis-à-vis some practical cases
2.3.1. Serbia-Montenegro in Srebrenica
2.3.2. The Netherlands in Srebrenica
2.3.3. Belgium in Rwanda
2.3.4. France in Rwanda
2.3.5 Other countries
2..4. The justiciability of State in case of Genocide
2.4.1. Who can invoke the responsibility of a state which committed genocide against its
own population?
2.4.2. Who can invoke the responsibility of a state which committed genocide outside its
territory?
2.4.3. Who can invoke the responsibility of a state for the breach of its obligation to
prevent genocide?
Completion: From September 2010- September 2011
Chapter 3. The responsibility of International Organizations for the breach of the
obligation to prevent Genocide
3.1. Responsibility of International Organizations under International law
3.2. The UN and the Genocide Convention
3.3. The relationship between the Genocide Convention and the UN Charter
3.3.1. Article I of The Genocide Convention and art 2(4) of the UN charter
4.3.2. Article VIII of the Genocide Convention and article 39 and 42 of the UN Charter
11
3.3.3 Does the UN have an implicit obligation to prevent/suppress genocide under the
Genocide Convention?
3.4. The responsibility of the UN for its acts or omission and acts and omission by
UN Forces during genocide.
3.4.1. Acts and omissions by the United Nations through the SC during genocide
3.4.2. The acts and omissions of UN forces operating in a State during genocide
3.5. The notion of “non-assistance d’une personne en peril” in International Law
3.5.1. Definition of the principle
3.5.2. The “non-assistance d’une personne en peril” in Romano-gemanic law family
3.5.3. The “non-assistance d’une personne en peril” in Common law
3.5.4. Is the principle recognized as a general principle of law?
3.5.5 . Is the principle recognized as a rule of customary law?
3.6. The Justiciability of the United Nations
Completion: From September 2011- September 2012
Chapter 4. Reparation for victims of genocide as consequence to the breach of the
obligation to prevent
4. 1 Notion and modes of reparation in international law
4. 2 Reparation to victims of gross and systematic violations: quantitative aspect of
victims
4.3.
The reparation by the state responsible for genocide
4.4. The reparation by state responsible for the breach of the duty to prevent/suppress
genocide
4.5
Reparation by the United Nations. Which Court is competent and who can sue the
UN?
4. 6
Proposed adequate modes for reparation of gross and systematic violations of
human Rights
Chapter 5. Mechanisms for better prevention of genocide in future
5.1. Mechanisms not implying force
12
5.1.1. Anti-eliminationism mechanisms (Find and use the book on : Genocide, worse than war)
5.1.2. The reinforcement of International human rights instruments (amendment of genocide
convention, charter….)
5.1.3. The anti-genocide educational program in all schools
5.1.4. Improvement of the life of citizens and raise their intellectual capacity
5.1.4. Creation of an Anti-genocide strong body under the UN and at national levels and reporting
system
- Developing and putting in place early warning capability and plans to act effectively
5.1.5. Creation of a fund to make the prevention of genocide possible and effective
5.1.5. The reinforcement of the role of the ICC in the prevention by punishing: branches in each
region of high risk
5.1.6. The reglementation and reinforcement of the principle of universal jurisdiction in case of
genocide (an international convention regulating this)
5.1.6. The reinforcement of the role of the ICJ (if not competent for UN then create a court on
this)
5.1.7. Creation and enforcement of a strong compensatory mechanism for victims of genocide
5.2. Mechanisms related and/or implying force
5.2. 1. Enhancing the UN bodies with the capabilities to forcibly prevent genocide
5.2.2. The Humanitarian intervention as a principle of last resort but in right time
5.2.3. A strong UN mechanism of sanctions against the non- respect of the limits of humanitarian
intervention
5.2.4. Enhancing and supevising regional bodies for a prompt and effective intervention to
prevent genocide
Conclusion
Completion: From September 2012 – September 2013
13
Literatures:
I.
Legal Instruments
1. Charter of the United Nations of June 26, at WWW < http://www.un.org>,
(Consulted 09 July, 2009)
2. Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, adopted
by Resolution 260(III)A of the United Nations General Assembly on 9 December
1948, at WWW < http://www.un.org> (consulted 12 July 2009).
3. Draft Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Act
adopted by the International Law Commission at its fifty-third session (2001), at
WWW < http://www.un.org>, (Consulted 14 September 2009)
4. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 19 December 1966, UNTS
Vol. 999, p. 171.
5. Statute of the International Court of Justice of 26 June 1945, UNCIO vol.15, p.
355.
6. Statute
of
the
International
Criminal
Court,
at
WWW
<
http://www.un.org/law/icc/statute/romefra.htm>, (Consulted 26 June 2007).
7. Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda at WWW <
http://www.ictr.org/> (Consulted 20 September 2009).
8. Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties of May 23, 1969, at WWW <
http://www.un.org/> (Consulted 20 September 2009).
9. Loi no 1867-06-08/01 du 8 Juin 1867 portant code penal Belge telle que modifiee
en ce jour, publiee le 9 Juin 1867 et entree en vigueur le 15 Octobre 1867.
10. Loi Belge no 1993-06-16/36 du 16 Juin 1993 telle que modifiee en ce jour,
relative a la repression des violations graves du droit international humanitaire,
Publie en Belgique le 05-08-1993 et entrée en vigueur le 15-08-1993.
11. Security Council Resolution 688 of April 5, 1991, at WWW
<http://daccessdds.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N95/771/25/PDF/N9577125.pdf?O
penElement> (consulted on 15 September 2009).
12. Security Council Resolution 692 of 20 May 1991, at WWW
<http://www.fas.org/news/un/iraq/sres/sres0687.htm > (Consulted 26 July 2009).
13. Security Council resolution 812 of March 12, 1993, at WWW<
http://daccessdds.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N93/146/16/IMG/N9314616.pdf?Op
enElement> (Consulted 18 September 2009).
14
14. Security Council Resolution 872 of October 5, 1993, at WWW
<http://daccessdds.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N95/771/25/PDF/N9577125.pdf?O
penElement> (consulted on 20 September 2009).
15. Security Council Resolution 912 of April 21, 1994, at WWW
<http://daccessdds.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N95/771/25/PDF/N9577125.pdf?O
penElement> (consulted on 20 September 2009).
16. Security Council Resolution 918 of May 17, 1994, at WWW
<http://daccessdds.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N95/771/25/PDF/N9577125.pdf?O
penElement> (consulted on 20 September 2009).
17. Security Council Resolution 929 (1994) “Rwanda” (22 June 1994), at WWW
<http://daccessdds.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N94/260/27/PDF/N9426027.pdf?O
penElement> (consulted on 22 September 2009).
18. Security Council Resolution 955(1994) “Rwanda”, (9 November 1994) at WWW
<http://daccessdds.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N94/260/27/PDF/N9426027.pdf?O
penElement> (Consulted 20 September 2009).
19. Universal Declaration of Human Rights, General Assembly resolution 217 A(III)
of 10 December 1948, at WWW < http://www.un.org/> (Consulted 20 October
2009).
20. UN G.A Resolution 96(I) of11 December 1946 on the Prevention and Punishment
of the Crime of Genocide.
21. UN General Assembly Resolution 377 A (V) “Uniting for peace” (3 November
1950), in T.M.C ASSER INSTITUUT, Elementair Internationaal Recht, T.M.C
ASSER PRESS, 2005, p. 205.
22. UN General Assembly res. 2625, 24 October 1970 on principles of international
law concerning friendly relations and co-operation among States in accordance
with the Charter of the UN, in T.M.C ASSER INSTITUUT, Elementair
Internationaal Recht, T.M.C ASSER PRESS, Den Haag, 2005, p. 94.
15
II.
Case-Law
1. International Court of Justice, Case concerning the application of the convention
on the prevention and punishment of the crime of genocide, (Bosnia-Herzegovina
v. Serbia- Montenegro), (Case No. 91) Judgment, 26 February 2007, at WWW
http://www.icjcij.org/docket/files/91/13685.pdf?PHPSESSID=28591d31fe7a973b1a01c4431fb6
30ec (Consulted 18 May 2007).
2. International Court of Justice, Reservations to the Convention on the Prevention
and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports
1951.
3. International Court of Justice, Case concerning the military and paramilitary
activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America),
Merits,
Judgment,
27
June
1986
at
WWW
<http://www.icjcij.org/docket/index.php?sum=367&code=nus&p1=3&p2=3&case=70&k=66&p3
=5> (Consulted 25 May 2009).
4. International Court of Justice, Case concerning armed activities on the Territory
of the Congo (New application: 2002) Republic of the Democratic of Congo v.
Rwanda), (Case No 126), Judgment, 3 February 2006, para. 64, at WWW <
http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/126/10435.pdf> (Consulted 12 June 2009).
5. International Court of Justice, Reparation for injuries suffered in the service of the
United Nations, Advisory Opinion, 1949, at WWW <http://www.icjcij.org/docket/index.php?p1=3&p2=4&k=41&case=4&code=isun&p3=5>
(Consulted June 18, 2009).
6. International Criminal Tribunal for Former Yugoslavia, Prosecution v. Tadic
(Case No.IT-94-1-T), Opinions and Judgment, 7 May 1997, para. 655, at WWW
<http://www.un.org/icty/tadic/trialc2/judgement/tad-tsj70507JT2-e.pdf>
(consulted 16 May 2009).
7. International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, Prosecution v. Kayishema and
Ruzindana (Case No. ICTR-95-1-T), Judgment, 21 May 1999, para. 94, at WWW
<http://www.ictr.org/ 69.94.11.53/default.htm> (consulted 16 May 2009).
8. International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, Prosecution v. Jean Kambanda (Case
No. ICTR-97-23-S), Judgment, 04 September 1998, para. 39, at WWW
http://www.ictr.org/ 69.94.11.53/default.htm (consulted 16 May 2009).
9. European Court of Human Rights, Behrami and Behrami v. France; (71412/01),
16
decision of 31 May 2007 on admissibility, in Annual report –Grand Chamber,
2007, available at WWW <http://www.echr.coe.int/echr/Homepage_EN
>(Consulted on 08 March 2010).
10. European Court of Human Rights, Saramati v. France, Germany, and Norway
(78166/01), decision of 31 May 2007 on admissibility, in Annual report –Grand
Chamber, 2007, available at WWW http://www.echr.coe.int/echr/Homepage_EN
(Consulted on 08 March 2010).
11. District Court in The Hague, Civil Law section, H.N (Claimant) v. The State of
the Netherlands (Ministry of Defence and Ministry of Foreign Affairs)
(respondent), (Case No 265615/HA ZA 06-1671, Judgement of September 10,
2008,
available
at
WWW
<http://zoeken.rechtspraak.nl/resultpage.aspx?snelzoeken=true&searchtype=kenm
erken&vrije_tekst=srebrenica> (Consulted on 03 March 2010)
12. District Court in The Hague, Civil Law section, M..M.-M, D.M, A.M (Claimants)
v. The State of the Netherlands (Ministry of Defence and Ministry of Foreign
Affairs) (respondent), (Case No 265618/HA ZA 06-1672, Judgement of
September
10,
2008,
available
at
WWW
http://zoeken.rechtspraak.nl/resultpage.aspx?snelzoeken=true&searchtype=kenme
rken&vrije_tekst=srebrenica (Consulted on 03 March 2010)
13. International Court of Justice, Effects of Awards of Compensation made by the
United Nations Administrative Tribunal, Advisory Opinion, July 13, 1954, at
WWW <http://www.icj-cij.org/ > (Consulted March 18, 2010).
Articles
1. Bardo Fassbender, Quis judicabit? “The Security Council, Its powers and its
Legal Control”; II European Journal of International law(2000)219-232.
2. Beres, L.R. (1988). Justice and realpolitik: International law and the prevention of
genocide. American Journal of International Law, 33, 123-159
3. Cassese Antonio, The Nicaragua and Tadic TestsRevisited in light of the ICJ
judgment in Bosnia, the European Journal of International law Vol.18 no 4 c EJIL
2007 available at http:ejil.oxfordjournals.org(visited on 07th September 2009
4. Chandler David, From Kosovo to Kabul,Human Rights and international
Intervention in European Journal of International Law EJIL 15 (2004) 1055-1071
available at http:ejil.oxfordjournals.org(Visited on 15th September 2009)
5. Cina, Jonathan,Genocide:Prevention or indifference? in Journal of conflict and
Security, June 1996; 1: 59-80 available at http://jcsl.oxfordjournals.org (Visited
on 15th September 2009);
17
6. Dapko Akande, The International Court of Justice and the Security Council: Is
there a room for for judicial control of decisions of the Political Organs of the
United Nations? 46 The International and Comparative Law Quarterly (1997),
309-343.
7. Focarelli Carlo, The responsibility to protect doctrine and humanitarian
intervention: Too many ambiguities for a working doctrine, in Journal of conflict
and Security Law 2008 13(2):191-213, published on August 13, 2008 available at
http://jcsl.oxfordjournals.org/(visited on 21 September 2009).
8. Friberg Erik, Genocide prevention and the UN: The potential of the Special
Advisor to the Secretary-General, in Human Rights Tribune, Volume 11, No 2
available at http://wwww.hri.ca (visited on September 21, 2009)
9. Gattini Andre, Breach of the Obligation to Prevent and Reparation Thereof in the
ICJ's Genocide Judgment, in the European Journal of International law Vol.18 no
4 c EJIL 2007 available at http:ejil.oxfordjournals.org(visited on 07th September
2009)
10. Gibney Mark, Genocide and State Responsibility in Human Rights Law Review
7:4(2007), 760-773, Published by Oxford University Press, October 2007.
11. Gray, Christine Peace Keeping after the Brahimi report: Is there a crisis of
credibility for the UN? in Journal of conflict and Security Law(2001), Vol. 6 No.
2, 267- 288 available at http://jcsl.oxfordjournals.org(visited on 16 September
2009)
12. Goldhagen Daniel Jonah, Worse than War, Genocide, Eliminationism and the
ongoing assault on humanity, Little, Brown, London, 2010 ( To find it in the
Library and copy some pages for my last chap)
13. H.Jones David, On the prevention of Genocide: the Gap between research and
education in International journal on war crimes, genocide and crimes against
humanity, available at http://www.war-crimes.org/ (visited on 18 September
2009);
14. Iona Petculescu, The Review of the United Nations Security Council Decisions by
the International Court of Justice, 52 Netherlands International law
Review(2005)167-195;
15. Janssen,Dieter (2008) ‘Humanitarian intervention and the prevention of
genocide’, Journal of Genocide Research, 10: 2,289-306 available at
http://www.redwoods.edu.(visited on 09th September).
16. Jose E. Alvarez, Judging the Security Council, The American Journal of International
Law, Vol. 90, No. 1 (Jan., 1996), pp. 1-39 Published by: American Society of
International Law Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2203749 Accessed:
09/03/2010 05:09
17. Ige F. Dekker, Illegality and legitimacy of Humanitarian Intervention: Synopsis of
and comments on a dutch report in Journal of conflict and Security Law (2001),
Vol. 6 No 1 115-126 available at at http://jcsl.oxfordjournals.org ( visited on 16
September 2009)
18. Karagiannakis Magdalini, The definition of Rape and its characterization as an
act of genocide- A review of the jurisprudence of the International Criminal
Tribunals for Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia, in International Journal of law
in context, available at http://journals.cambridge.org (visited on 22 September
2009);
18
19. Karl, Zemanek, Is the Security Council the Sole Judge of its own Legality? “A
Re-examination”, in A Reinisch and U. Kriebaum(eds), The Law of International
Relations- Liber Amicorum Hanspeter Neuhold(2007)483-505.
20. Klaus KreB, The International Court of Justice and the Elements of the Crime of
genocide, in European journal for international law, 2007, Vol. 18, No 4 EJIL
available at http:ejil.oxfordjournals.org (visited on September 21, 2009).
21. Kissi Edward, Holocaust as a guidepost for genocide detection and prevention in
Africa, available at http://www.un.org (visited on 22 September 2009);
22. L.C Green, Enforcement of International Humanitarian Law and threats to
national sovereignty in Journal of conflict and Security Law (2003), Vol. 1 101131 krg 008 available at http://jcsl.oxfordjournals.org( visited on 17 September
2009)
23. Lemkin Raphael, Geocide, American Sholar, Volume 15, no. 2(April 1946),
p.227-230) available at http://www.preventgenocide.org/ ( visited on 16
September 2009)
24. Manusama M. Kenneth, TheHigh Level Panel Report on Threats, Challenges and
Change and the Future Role of the United Nations Security Council, Leiden
Journal of International Law, 18 (2005), pp. 605–620 available at
http://journals.cambridge.org (visited on 10 Decembe 2009).
25. Marco Divac Oberg, The legal effects of Resolutions of the UN Security Council
and General Assembly in the Jurisprudence of the ICJ, in European journal for
international law 2006, vol. 16, No 5. EJIL available at
http:ejil.oxfordjournals.org (visited on 21 September 2009)
26. Marko Milanovic, State Responsibility for Genocide, in European journal for
international law 2006, vol. 17, No 3. EJIL, available at
http:ejil.oxfordjournals.org (visited on September 21, 2009)
27. Marko Milanovic, State Responsibility for Genocide, A follow-up, in European
journal for international law, 2007, Vol. 18, No 4 EJIL available at
http:ejil.oxfordjournals.org (visited on September 21, 2009).
28. McClean Emma, The responsibility to protect: The role of International Human
Rights Law, , in Journal of conflict and Security Law 2008 13(1):123-152,
available at http://jcsl.oxfordjournals.org/( visited on 21 September 2009);
29. Nicholas Tsagourias, Consent, Neutrality/impartiality and the use of force in
peacekeeping: Their constitutional dimension in Journal of conflict and Security
Law 2006 11(3):465-482 published on January 25, 2007 available at
http://jcsl.oxfordjournals.org/( visited on 18 September 2009);
30. Nigel D. White, Commentary on the Report of the panel of the United Nations
peace operation(The Brahimi report) in Journal of conflict and Security
Law(2001), vol 6 No I, 127-146 available at http://jcsl.oxfordjournals.org/(
visited on 18 September 2009);
31. Otto Triffterer, Genocide, its particular intent to destroy in whole or in part the
group as such; in International Journal of Law in context, 2001, available at
http://journals.cambridge.org (visited on 22 September 2009);
32. Oliver J. Lissitzyn, Effect of Awards of Compensation made by the United
Nations Administrative Tribunal, The American Journal of International Law,
19
Vol. 48, No. 4(October., 1954), pp. 655-660, published by the American Society
of International Law, available online at http://www.jstor.org/stable/2195037;
33. Paola Gaeta, On what conditions can States be held responsible for genocide in
European Journal of International Law EJIL 2007 18(4):631-648;
doi:10.1093/ejil/chm037 available at http:ejil.oxfordjournals.org(Visited on 15th
September 2009);
34. Payam Akhavan, The Crime of Genocide in the ICTR Jurisprudence, in Journal of
International Justice 3(2005),989-1006, published by Oxford University Press,
2005;
35. Reinisch August, The Immunity of International Organisations and the
Jurisdiction of their Administrative Tribunals, Chenese Journal of International
Law(2008), Vol 7, No 2, 285-306, published by Oxford University Press, May
2008.
36. Reinisch August, Should Judges Secon-Guess the UN Security Council?, in
International Organizations Law Review 6(2009), 257-291.
37. Sivakumaran, Sandesh; Villalpando, Santiago, Application of the convention on
the prevention and punishment of the crime of genocide(Bosnia and Herzegovina
v. Serbia and Montenegro), an introduction, In Leiden Journal of International
law, vol. 21, afl. 1, pag 63-64/2008 available at http://journals.cambridge.org
(visited on 25 September 2009);
38. Suzan C. Breau, The impact of the responsibility to protect on peacekeeping in
Journal of conflict and Security Law 2006 11(3):429-464 available at
http://jcsl.oxfordjournals.org/( visited on September 21, 2009);
39. T. Fussell James, “A crime without name” Winston Churchill and Raphael
Lemkin and the World War II origins of the word “genocide” at
http:www.preventgenocide.org ( visited on 16 September 2009)’
40. Wittich Stephan, Permissible derogation from mandatory rules? The problem of
Party status in the genocide case in European Journal of International Law EJIL
2007
18(4):591-618;
doi:10.1093/ejil/chm036
available
at
http:ejil.oxfordjournals.org (Visited on 15th September 2009);
41. Schabas William, Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of
Genocide, in Audiovisual Library of International Law, available at
http://untreaty.un.org (visited on 22 September 2009);
42. Schabas William, Preventing genocide and mass killing from a culture of reaction
to prevention, available at http: //www.thefreelibrary.com (visited on 10
December 2009).
43. Thomas Franck, The Power of appreciation: Who is the ultimate Gurdian of UN
Lagality?, 86 American Journal of International Law (1992)519-523
20
II. Books
1. Amerasinghe C.F, Principles of the Institutional law of international
Organizations, Second revised Edition, Cambridge University Press; Cambridge,
2005.
2. Amerasinghe C.F, Local Remedies in International Law, Cambridge: Grotius,
Cambridge, 2005.
3. Anglin, Douglas, Confronting Rwandan Genocide: The military options: What
could and should the international community have done? Canadian
Peacekeeping Press, 2002.
4. Barnett, M., Eyewitness to a genocide, the United Nations and Rwanda, Cornell
University Press, Ithaca and London, 2002.
5. Bhatia, M. V., War and Intervention, Issues for contemporary peace operations,
Kumarian Press, inc., USA, 2003.
6. Braeckman, Colette, Rwanda: histoire d’un genocide, Fuyard, 1994.
7. Crawford, J., The international Law Commission’s Articles on State
Responsibility, Introduction, Text and commentaries, Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge, 2002.
8. Chesterman, S. Just War or Just Peace? Humanitarian Intervention and
international law, Oxford University Press, New York, 2001.
9. Cooper, John, Raphael Lemkin and the struggle for the Genocide Convention,
Palgrave MacMillan , 2008;
10. Coret, Laure, L’horreur qui nous prend au visage: l’Etat Francais et le genocide:
rapport de la Commission d’Enquete Citoyenne, Karthala, 2005 ;
11. Cortright, David, The price of peace : Incentives and international conflict
prevention, Rowman & and Littlefield, New York,1997.
12. Cot Jean Pierre et Pellet Alain, La charte des Nations Unies, commentaire article
par article, Economica, Paris, 1985.
13. Dallaire, R., Shake hands with the devil, the failure of humanity in Rwanda,
Arrow Books, London, 2004.
14. De Feyter, K., Out of ashes: reparation for victims of gross and systematic human
rights violations, intersentie, 2005.
15. Des Forges, Alison, Leave none to tell the story: Genocide in Rwanda, Human
Rights Watch, 1999.
16. Durn, A. Walter, Preventing the bloodbath: Could the UN have predicted and
prevented the Rwandan Genocide? (Cornell University, Peace studies
Program/1999.
17. Ferstman, Carla, Reparations for victims of genocide, war crimes and crimes
against humanity: systems in place and systems in the making, Nijhoff, 2009
18. Gray Ch., International Law and the Use of Force, 2nd ed., Oxford University
Press, Oxford, 2000.
19. Gleditsch, N., P., Conflict and the Environment, Kluwer Academie Publishers,
Dordrecht, 1997.
21
20. Gourevitch, P., We wish to inform you that tomorrow we will be killed with our
families, Stories from Rwanda, 1rst ed, Farrar Straus and Giroux, New York,
1998.
21. Gouteux, Jean Paul, Un genocide sans importance: La Francafrique au Rwanda, /
(2e ed.) Ed. Tahir Party/2001.
22. Gouteux, jean Paul, Un genocide secret d’Etat, la France et le Rwanda, 19901997, editions Sociales, 1998.
23. Halloran J. P., Humanitarian Intervention and the Genocide in Rwanda,
published by Research Institute for the Study of Conflict and Terrorism, London,
1995.
24. Heidenrich G. J., How to prevent Genocide: A guide for Policymakers, Scholars,
and Concerned Citizen, Westport, Connecticut London: Praeger, 2001.
25. Hirsch Herb, The prevention of genocide: ideas from international politics and a
symposium on international law, University of Toronto Press/2007.
26. Hoogh André de, International law 2, cases, opinions, and documents, University
of Groningen, Faculty of Law, Academic year 2006-2007, p. 110, unpublished
27. Hoogh, André de, Obligations erga omnes and international crimes : a
theoretical inquiry into the implementation and enforcement of the international
responsibility of states, Kluwer Law International, 1996
28. International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS), The
Responsibility to protect, Research, Bibliography, Background, Supplementary
Volume to the Report of the ICISS, December 2001.
29. Jørgensen, Nina H.B The responsibility of states for international crimes. / [New
enl. ed.] / Oxford University Press / 2003
30. Kayimahe, Venuste, France- Rwanda : Les coulisses d’un genocide: Temoignage
d’un rescape, Dagorno, 2001.
31. Kenneth J. C., Genocide and the Global Village, Palgrave, New York, 2001.
32. Kuper, Leo The prevention of genocide Yale University Press , 1985
33. Kuperman, A. The limit of Humanitarian intervention: Genocide in Rwanda,
J./Brookings institution Press, 2001.
34. Kurt, Jo-nassohn, Genocide and gross human violations: in comparative
perspective, Transaction, 1988.
35. Lemkin, R. Axis rule in occupied Europe: laws of occupation: analysis of
Government: Proposals for redress, Carnergie Endowment for International
Peace, Washington, 1944.
36. Lippman Matthew, the convention on the prevention and punishment of the
crime of genocide, fifty years later, In Genocide and Human Rights, ed. By Mark
Lattimer, ISBN 075462448X, 2007
37. Magnarella, P., Justice in Africa: Rwanda’s genocide, its courts and the UN
Tribunal, Ashgate, 2000.
38. Melven, Linda, A people betrayed: the role of the west in Rwanda’s Genocide, 2nd
ed, Zed Books, London and New York, 2000.
39. N. Rosecranc, Richard and E.Brown Michael, The costs of conflict : prevention
and cure in the global arena, Rowman & and Littlefield, New York, 1999;
40. Nations Unies, Departement de l’information, Qu’est ce que le Genocide? Une
convention des Nations Unies, Nations Unies, 1956.
22
41. Nina, H.B. Jorgensen, The responsibility of states for international crimes,
Oxford University Press, New York, 2000.
42. Personnaz J., La reparation du prejudice en Droit International Public, Sirey,
1938.
43. Power S., ‘‘A problem from hell’’: America and the Age of Genocide, Basic
Books, New York, 2003.
44. Randelzhofer, Albrecht, State responsibility and individual: Reparation in
instances of grave violations of Human Rights, Nijhoff, 1999.
45. Ratner, Steven R, Accountability for human rights atrocities in international Law
beyond : beyond the Nuremberg legacy, Clarendon Press, 1997.
46. Reif, Mark R., Punishment, compensation and Law: a theory of enforceability,
Cambridge University Press, 2005.
47. Robert A., The Penguin Concise Dictionary, penguin books, London, 2004.
48. Sage, Convention on the prevention and punishment of the crime of genocide, ed.
By Adam Jones, ISBN 9781847870223; vol. 1 / 2008;
49. Schabas A. W., Genocide in International Law: the Crimes of Crimes, Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, 2000.
50. Scherrer P.C., Genocide and Genocide prevention: General Outlines Exemplified
with the Cataclysm in Rwanda 1994, Copenhagen Peace Research Institute
(COPRI), 1999.
51. Scherrer, Christian P. Genocide and Genocide prevention: general outlines
exemplified with the cataclysm in Rwanda 1994: the contribution of comparative
research towards a theory of modern genocide and ways to prevent mass murder,
definitions, typologies, key elements, patterns, a comparison of the Holocaust with
Rwandan Genocide, and preventive measures, Copenhagen peace research
Institute, 1999.
52. Tams J. Christian, Enforcing Obligations Erga Omnes in International Law,
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2005 (find it law library RUG No 13.010
44
53. Theo Van Boven… (et al.), Seminar on the right to restitution, compensation and
rehabilitation for victims of gross violations of human rights and fundamental
freedoms, Maastricht, 11-15 March 1992.
54. Thakur, Ramesh The United Nations, peace and security : from collective
security to the responsibility to protect, Cambridge University Press , Cambidge,
2006
55. Vandeginste Stef, La reparation pour le victimes de genocide, des crimes contre
l’humanite et des crimes de guerre au Rwanda, publie dans REYNTJENS F., et
MARYSSE, S (eds), L’Afrique des Grands Lacs- Annuaire 2000-2001, Paris,
l’Hamattan, 2001.
56. Vasselliere, Ch., La reparation des dommages de guerre en Droit International,
Paris, 1920.
57. Verschave, Francois-Xavier, La complicite de genocide? La politique de la
France au Rwanda, editions La Decouverte, 1994.
58. Wallis, Andrew, Silent accomplice: The untold story of France’s role in
Rwandan Genocide, I. B Tauris, 2006.
59. Warren, F., Genocide: A people’s will to live, William S. Hein & Co.Inco.,
Buffalo New York, 1992.
23
60. Weis Thomas G., Halting Genocide: Rhetoric versus reality in the prevention of
genocide: Ideas from International politics and International law, University of
Toronto Press, 2007
61. Zegveld, L., Remedies for victims of international humanitarian law, article
published in IRRC, September 2003, vol.85, No 851.
62. Zwanenburg, Marten, Accountability for peace support operations, Nijhoff,
2005 (recommended by Prof Brus: I will find the full reference).
Reports
1. International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty, The
responsibility to protect, 2001, available at http://www.un.org (visited on 10
December 2009);
2. Schabas, William, Preventing Genocide and mass killing: the challenge of UN, A.
Minority Rights Group International, 2006;
3. United Nations, Report of the High-level Panel on Threats,Challenges and
Change, 2004, available at http://www.un.org (visited on 10 December 2009);
24