Member Sign In
International Coalition for the Responsibility to Protect
PDF Print E-mail
28 March 2013
Facebook: Join us
Twitter: Follow us
1. Kenya: Civil society organizations working in Africa call to end intimidations and hate campaigns against civil society organisations in Kenya
2. Syria: Jon Western and Joshua S. Goldstein, Foreign Affairs - R2P After Syria
3. Syria: Stop the Atrocity Supply Chain - Enablers of Mass Atrocities: Enablers of the Syrian Conflict
4. DR Congo: Human Rights Watch - Warlord Ntaganda at ICC a Victory for Justice
5. Cote d’Ivoire: Amnesty International - Communities Shattered By Arms Proliferation and Abuse in Cote d’Ivoire
1. Sentinel Project for Genocide Prevention - Introducing Hatebase: the world’s largest online database of hate speech
2. Auschwitz Institute for Peace and Reconciliation – Central American Ombudsmen Agree to Establish Early Warning System for Genocide Prevention
3. Asia Pacific Centre for the Responsibility to Protect - AP R2P launches new project on Security and Justice in West Africa
♦ 1 April (Newark, New Jersey) Lecture on Measuring Violence against Women Globally:
The Power of Categories, Center for the Study of Genocide, Conflict Resolution, and Human Rights in partnership with the Division of Global Affairs 
♦ 3 April (Portland, Maine) Panel event: Paving the Way to a Better World: Remembering Rwanda, the Responsibility to Protect and Genocide Prevention University of Southern Maine
♦ 11-12 April (Ljubljana, Slovenia) Conference: Responsibility to Protect in Theory and Practice, Faculty of Law, University of Ljubljana
♦ 18 April (Washington, DC, United States) Round table at the World Bank: Preventing Mass Atrocities Through Development Policies: A Round Table on Economic, Legal and Social Aspects, The Auschwitz Institute, the Bellagio Forum for Sustainable Development and the Budapest Centre for the International Prevention of Genocide and Mass Atrocities 
♦ 10 June (Washington, DC, United States) Advocacy day: Act Against Atrocities, Enough Project
♦ 11 – 12 June (Montreal, Canada) Professional Training Program on the Prevention of Mass Atrocities, Montreal Institute for Genocide and Human Rights Studies

On 27 March 2013, the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU) adopted a Resolution entitled “Enforcing the responsibility to protect: the role of parliament in safeguarding civilians’ lives”. IPU is an international organization that facilitates dialogue between parliamentarians around the world. There are currently 162 parliaments that are members of the IPU as well as 10 parliaments that are associate members. IPU recognizes the important role that parliaments have in influencing their government and strives for “peace and co-operation among peoples”. The Resolution was adopted during the 128th Assembly of the IPU, which convened in Quito, Ecuador, and called on parliamentarians to take a series of actions to prevent and respond to mass atrocities. “Convinced that parliaments around the world should consider ways and means to apply and implement the responsibility to protect in a timely, consistent and effective manner in order to avoid a situation where the international community is deadlocked over whether and how to act to prevent or to stop the massacre of civilians”, the IPU urged parliaments to, “ensure that their governments protect populations, whether or not the nationals of their countries, from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity” and “assist and build the capacity of States to prevent the commission of [the four RtoP crimes]”. Learn more from excerpts below, taken from IPU’s press release on the session.
The Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU) has called for a set of actions enforcing the responsibility to protect civilian lives during conflict on the closing day of its 128th Assembly in the Ecuadoran capital, Quito.
Adopting resolutions on the Syrian refugee crisis and on the role of parliaments in safeguarding civilian lives, the IPU Assembly urged parliaments to ensure governments protected their people from genocide, ethnic cleansing, war crimes and crimes against humanity through legislation, the ratification of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, and by overseeing government action to combat terrorism.
If national authorities fail to safeguard their population, then collective action should be applied in a timely and decisive manner through the Security Council on a case-by- case basis.
Particular focus was put on the need for laws and measures to protect women and children, prevent and criminalize sexual violence and to provide redress for survivors in conflict.
Parliaments should also ensure they support governments in peace-building efforts through the allocation of necessary funds. (…)
See the Canadian Centre for the Responsibility to Protect’s statement on the resolution here.
25 March 2013
The Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide, Mr. Adama Dieng, expresses deep concern at reports of increased violence between Muslim and Buddhist communities in Myanmar.
“The recent episode of violence in Meikhtila in central Myanmar raises concerns that sectarian violence is spreading to other parts of the country,” stated Mr. Dieng. “In the context of last year’s violence between Buddhists and Rohingya Muslims in Rakhine state, there is a considerable risk of further violence if measures are not put in place to prevent this escalation. These measures must address not only the immediate consequences of the current violence but also the root causes of the problem. Failing to do so can have serious future consequences which the international community has solemnly promised to prevent.”
“The Government of Myanmar must clearly demonstrate that it is serious about holding accountable those responsible for the past and present violence, regardless of their religious or ethnic affiliations. The Government must also take measures to protect populations still at risk,” urged Mr. Dieng. As the primary responsibility to protect lies with the State, the Special Adviser called upon the Government of Myanmar to address this situation as a matter of urgency, develop a comprehensive national strategy that upholds international human rights standards and promotes reconciliation and tolerance among Buddhist and Muslim communities in the country.
“I call upon all religious leaders, local leaders and the communities themselves, to promote a culture of respect for diversity and peaceful coexistence that is fundamental in a multi-ethnic and multi-religious society such as the one in Myanmar,” stated Mr. Dieng “As a country that has positively surprised the international community with its recent transformation towards democracy, Myanmar needs to demonstrate that the rule of law will prevail and that all those living within its borders are and will be protected from violence and discrimination, particularly on the basis of religion or ethnicity.” (…)
1. Civil society organizations working in Africa call to end intimidations and hate campaigns against civil society organisations in Kenya
28 March 2013
We, the under signed non-governmental organizations working to promote human rights and good governance in our respective countries and regionally in Africa, are gravely concerned about incidences of intimidations and hate campaigns directed at members of Kenya’s civil society increasingly occurring after the filing of a Civil society representative Petition in the Supreme Court of Kenya on the 16th March 2013, challenging the process and legitimacy of the March 4th 2013 General Elections.
It has come to our attention that social media hate campaigns, which include using human rights activists’ passport photographs and their personal information, are being used to threaten and incite hatred against prominent Kenyan human rights defenders for challenging, the conduct of the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) in the management of the March 4th 2013 General Election in Kenya. These messages of hate and incitement are worrisome because they single out individual members of civil society for either condemnation or reprisals.
We express our grave concerns over these hateful messages being spread in Kenya and at the global level. We find the propagation of the said messages outrageous as the members of civil society who filed the petitions are exercising their constitutionally given right to go to court when they have concerns as provided for in the Constitution of the Republic of Kenya, 2010 and under other national, regional and international instruments protecting electoral rights to which Kenya is party.
We strongly condemn these hateful messages and call upon the groups and/or individuals in Kenya, including those who remain unidentified as of yet, and globally to refrain from issuing such threats and from propagating hatred towards members of the civil society in Kenya.
We further call upon the Kenyan government:
(i) To investigate and prosecute groups and/or individuals intimidating members of civil society in Kenya;
(ii)To protect and guarantee, in all circumstances, the physical and psychological well-being of members of civil society in Kenya in line with the provisions of the Declaration on Human Rights Defenders adopted by the UN General Assembly on December 9, 1998, (…);
(iii) To ensure in all circumstances, the respect for individual rights and fundamental freedoms in the Republic of Kenya in accordance with national, regional and international standards and human rights instruments ratified and domesticated by Kenya. (…)
Read full letter in English and French.
2. R2P After Syria
Jon Western and Joshua S. Goldstein
Foreign Affairs
26 March 2013
In our last Foreign Affairs article (“Humanitarian Intervention Comes of Age,” November/December 2011), we noted that armed conflicts have generally become shorter, less intense, and more localized than they were in the past. (…) Such improvements are partially thanks to the development of international norms about violence, including the UN-approved doctrine of the responsibility to protect (R2P), which holds that the international community is prepared to take action to protect civilians -- by force, if necessary -- when national governments fail to do so. 
The international community has also developed better tools for managing and preventing conflicts. (…)
Every rule, however, has an exception. In this case, it is the bloody, sectarian civil war in Syria, which shows no sign of abating. In the two years since the conflict began, an estimated 70,000 people have died, and more than three million have been displaced from their homes. Each side enjoys the backing of outside powers, and the UN Security Council has failed to pass meaningful resolutions laying out a blueprint for ending the conflict. (…)
Given international disagreement over Syria, some observers argue that little has changed since then, and that R2P is a meaningless doctrine invoked only when the interests of great powers align. In the face of mounting fatalities in Syria, this is an understandable reaction. But such criticism misunderstands the nature of the R2P.
The doctrine is ambitious, but also pragmatic and limited. It calls for military intervention only as a last resort, when the international community is united in its aims and when force stands a good chance of improving a situation. R2P has failed to prevent mass slaughter in Syria and all atrocities against civilians worldwide, but despite its limits, the concept that civilians have a right to protection has gained widespread support. This idea will not go away and R2P will likely be a powerful tool in future contexts, especially those in which regime change is not the goal of the international community.
Libya revealed both the promise and the constraints of R2P. (…) With Libyan forces moving toward the city, the UN Security Council invoked R2P and passed Resolution 1973, authorizing NATO to use force to protect the citizens of Benghazi. China and Russia refrained from vetoing the resolution, allowing the NATO-led military campaign to move forward. (…)
In its final wording, articulated in the 2005 World Summit Outcome Documentall references to the responsibility to rebuild and explicit language regarding an obligation to intervene were cut. (…)
Despite these changes, a number of countries, including China and Russia, remain concerned about the doctrine, fearing that even in its revised form, the West can use it to deceptively gain support for liberal interventions. UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has tried to mitigate such concerns, making clear that the primary responsibility to protect civilians lies with the state they live in, and that the role of the international community should be to help governments develop this capacity. Military intervention should be considered only when all other options have been exhausted, when there is an imminent risk of mass atrocity, when backed by the Security Council, and when there are reasonable prospects of success and little likelihood of making the situation worse. Russia and China have balked at invoking R2P in Syria -- not because they support Bashar al-Assad's regime but because they worry that Washington wants to use the guise of humanitarian intervention to pursue a broader campaign of regime change worldwide. The United States’ demand that Assad step down has only hardened Moscow’s and Beijing’s opposition to taking action in Syria. (…)
To overcome these challenges, the United States and the international community need to decouple regime change from R2P. The doctrine will lose legitimacy if it is seen purely as an instrument of neoimperial adventurism. (…)
In addition, the international community would do well to strengthen the nonmilitary elements of R2P. For example, countries should strengthen watchdog structures, such as the UN Office of the Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide, which coordinates the monitoring of serious human rights violations in conflict zones and issues early warnings reports to the Security Council. (…)
The international community is still figuring out how to prevent and manage violence against civilians. R2P has a mixed record, but that does not mean that it has failed. Taken together with other conflict prevention and management strategies, R2P and its core principle -- that civilians have a right to protection -- remain essential to continuing the trend toward a more peaceful world.
Read a post in response to this article by former ICRtoP Social Media Coordinator and Blogger and current Research Fellow at the Centre for International Governance Innovation, Evan Cinq-Mars, entitled, “R2P: Time to rework the rules, reforge consensus”.
3. Enablers of Mass Atrocities: Enablers of the Syrian Conflict
Stop the Atrocity Supply Chain, a project of Human Rights First
March 2013
The Syrian conflict is a human rights catastrophe. Over the past two years, nearly 70,000 people have died, mostly civilians, including more than 3,700 children, and nearly one million refugees have fled the country. Although both sides of the conflict are responsible for atrocities, the regime of President Bashar al-Assad is responsible for the vast majority. The regime’s security forces have used indiscriminate bombings, intentional mass killings, rape, and torture to kill and brutalize civilians. There is no end in sight.
President Obama has made stopping mass atrocities a “core national security interest” of the United States, which manifestly applies to Syria. As neighboring countries struggle to absorb the nearly one million refugees and regional powers become more involved in the conflict, the possibility of wider violence and instability looms. Yet U.S. efforts to slow or stop the crisis—diplomacy and sanctions against the regime, primarily—have had little effect. Amid calls to arm the rebels, we urge the United States to approach the conflict from the other end: to choke off the flow of arms, resources, and money to Assad. While no single strategy could resolve this crisis, this low-risk, nonviolent one could help stem the bloodshed and put pressure on Assad to stop the bloodshed.
The Syrian regime’s mass atrocities—like all mass atrocities—are complex, organized crimes requiring the support of third party “enablers.” This report provides both a unique overview of Assad’s enablers and a roadmap the U.S. government can follow to crack down on them. A number of countries and commercial entities are knowingly or tacitly enabling Assad’s atrocities. (…)
Together, these enablers form a supply chain that passes through the legal jurisdictions of a number of countries with whom the United States has a relationship. Not only do many of the arms and other resources headed for Syria traverse the territory of U.S. allies; many ships fly the flags of countries that are allied with the United States or otherwise susceptible to American influence. Also, the supply chain includes commercial entities—such as insurance providers, oil firms, and shell businesses designed to conceal the ownership of ships—that are located in countries where the United States has leverage. (…)
The Treasury Department should impose sanctions that prevent U.S. entities from doing business with Assad’s enablers and that limit his ability to repatriate funds from oil exports.
The Commerce Department should amend the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) to secure control over the delivery of information and communications technology to repressive regimes like Syria. The department should also work with the industry to promote its best practices, to prevent such technology from enabling atrocities. (…)
The report expands Human Rights First’s work identifying and tracking the Assad regime’s enablers since 2011. It is based on open source information, which is limited due to the exclusion of most foreign reporters from Syria, the secrecy cloaking intelligence and trade information, and the efforts of enablers to evade detection. The cases documented in this report are representative, not exhaustive.
See more details here and the full report here.
4. DR Congo: Warlord Ntaganda at ICC a Victory for Justice
Human Rights Watch
25 March 2013
The Congolese rebel leader Bosco Ntaganda’s first appearance before the International Criminal Court (ICC) on March 26, 2013, will be a major achievement on the path to ending human rights abuses in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Human Rights Watch said today. Ntaganda was flown to The Hague on March 22 after he unexpectedly and for unknown reasons surrendered to the United States embassy in Kigali, Rwanda on March 18 and requested transfer to the ICC.

Ntaganda’s appearance before the ICC comes almost seven years after the court first issued an arrest warrant against him for war crimes in the Ituri district of northeastern Congo. For years Ntaganda led rebel and government forces involved in killings, rape, torture, use of child soldiers, and pillage.(…)
Ntaganda’s transfer to the ICC may bring to a close a chapter of particularly horrific abuses committed by Ntaganda and his troops, which Human Rights Watch has documented in detail over the past 10 years. The ICC initially charged Ntaganda with the war crimes of recruiting, enlisting, and using children under 15 while a commander for the armed group Union of Congolese Patriots (Union des Patriotes Congolais, UPC) during the Ituri conflict in 2002 and 2003.(…)
Until now, the ICC Office of the Prosecutor has focused its investigations on warlords operating in eastern Congo, Human Rights Watch said. These included Lubanga and Ntaganda as well as their opponents in the Ituri conflict, Germain Katanga and Mathieu Ngudjolo. The ICC acquitted Ngudjolo in December 2012. The court has also issued a warrant for Sylvestre Mudacumura, the military leader of the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR), a largely Rwandan Hutu rebel group, some of whose members participated in the Rwandan genocide. Mudacumura remains at large (…).
With Ntaganda in The Hague, the ICC Office of the Prosecutor should consider opening a new phase in its investigations of war crimes in Congo, Human Rights Watch said. The prosecutor, who is investigating crimes in eight countries, will need additional support from the ICC member countries to obtain the necessary cooperation and funding to undertake this work. (…)
Recently, in two proceedings, the ICC Office of the Prosecutor has suffered setbacks. The acquittal of Ngudjolo and the collapse of one of its cases against a former senior Kenyan official have led to questions about the prosecution’s ability to carry out its difficult mandate. Ten years after the court’s founding treaty entered into force, the ICC, even with performance problems, represents the best hope victims have in many countries when grave international crimes are committed, Human Rights Watch said. The court’s leadership team – including a new chief prosecutor and a new registrar inaugurated within the past year – should draw on experience to date and make needed reforms to deliver effective and meaningful justice.
See the full article here
5. Communities Shattered By Arms Proliferation and Abuse in Cote D’Ivoire
Amnesty International
20 March 2013
Reckless and illegal arms supplies from Europe, Africa and China to the warring parties in Cote d'Ivoire over the past decade continue to fuel grave human rights abuses and violent crime in the country, Amnesty International said in a detailed report launched at the United Nations (UN) headquarters. 

The 33-page report, Communities shattered by arms proliferation and abuse in Cote d’Ivoire, documents how a handful of states and a network of multinational arms traffickers supplied weapons and munitions to both sides in the conflict who committed war crimes and a range of human rights abuses including horrific violence against women and girls. 

The arms transfers took place both before and after the UN Security Council imposed an arms embargo on the country in November 2004. (…)

Amnesty International and the UN Group of Experts investigating violations of the embargo have documented how irresponsible and illegal arms transfers dating back to 2002 have fuelled such atrocities and abuses. These abuses continue. (…)

According to a UN Group of Experts report in April 2012, even after the UN embargo was in place, the Ivorian security forces received illegal arms supplies until 2009. UN investigators found evidence of an elaborate arms-trafficking network involving companies and individuals in several countries, including Senegal, Guinea, Tunisia and Latvia.

Amnesty International has clear evidence that weapons supplied since 2002 not only had an immediate impact on hostilities at the time, but were later used to target civilians when armed conflict again broke out in early 2011. (…)

Any weapons that have been observed in the New Forces’ possession have had their serial numbers removed, making it difficult to draw conclusions about their provenance and supply route.(…)

Among the worst cases of arbitrary killings by the FRCI took place in and around the western city of Duekoue in March 2011, aided by an armed militia of traditional hunters known as the Dozos.

The groups led a manhunt in the city’s Quartier Carrefour area, rounding up ethnic Gueres – suspected of being pro-Gbagbo – and summarily executed hundreds of men of all ages. 

Amnesty International has gathered more than 100 witness statements from residents who survived the massacres in Duekoue and nearby villages – all point to the systematic and targeted nature of the killings carried out by the FRCI and the Dozos. (…)
See the full article here.
20 March 2013
The governments of Switzerland and Tanzania organized a meeting from 18–20 March in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania with the theme “Genocide Prevention and the Responsibility to Protect: Towards a Community of Commitment; Building Common Ground and Strengthening Complementarity.” The meeting explored practical approaches to mass atrocities prevention with an emphasis on lessons learned and good practices as well as processes to build and key elements of national prevention strategies.
In addition to representation from the Swiss and Tanzanian governments, representatives of Argentina, Australia, Costa Rica, and Denmark, the International Conference on the Great Lakes Region (ICGLR), the United Nations Office on Genocide Prevention and the Responsibility to Protect all participated. These governments as well as the ICGLR have led regional and international initiatives on the Responsibility to Protect and genocide prevention. Several civil society organizations also participated in the meeting, including the Auschwitz Institute for Peace and Reconciliation, George Mason University’s School for Conflict Analysis and Resolution, the Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect and the International Coalition for the Responsibility to Protect.
Read blog post on the meeting from the Auschwitz Institute for Peace and Reconciliation.
1. Introducing Hatebase: the world’s largest online database of hate speech
The Sentinel Project for Genocide Prevention
25 March 2013
Predicting genocide is, by definition, an almost impossible task due to the scarcity of early, actionable data. There’s no chi-squared test or Monte Carlo method for reliably distributing societies along a spectrum from homogeneous to homicidal, both because the extermination of entire populations has become a relatively rare occurrence (thanks to the ever-increasing internationalization of human rights, law, media, and trade) and because those societies which do succeed at systematized annihilation are often equally resourceful at hiding evidence of their crimes. (…)
Our second strategy has been to improve the tools with which we parse and prioritize data, whether from the field, from mainstream media or from social networks. To this end, the Sentinel Project recently partnered with my own organization, Mobiocracy, on the development of Hatebase, an authoritative, multilingual, usage-based repository of structured hate speech which data-driven NGOs can use to better contextualize conversations from known conflict zones.
Hatebase is available to casual users through a Wikipedia-like web interface, and to developers through an authenticating API. Although the core of Hatebase is its community-edited vocabulary of multilingual hate speech, a critical concept in Hatebase is regionality: users can associate hate speech with geography, thus building a parallel dataset of “sightings” which can be monitored for frequency, localization, migration, and transformation.
For instance, an organization monitoring several simultaneous theaters of operation might integrate location-based Hatebase data into its monitoring software to assign additional real-time “weight” to specific conflict zones, providing guidance on how to best redeploy limited resources. For genocide monitoring organizations in particular, regional hate speech is a widely recognized indicator of elevated risk.
There are some weaknesses implicit in a solely vocabulary-based approach to linguistic analysis. Innocuous language, when localized, can adopt a sinister secondary meaning (e.g. “cockroaches,” meaning Tutsis in Rwanda), and threats can be communicated without the need for easily identified keywords (“their days are numbered”). Despite these limitations, Hatebase can provide a layer of relevance which complements other context-based information sources, not unlike traffic congestion layered onto a city map.
In the months ahead, we’ll be adding additional data attributes, visualizations, and end-user functionality to Hatebase, with a particular focus on strengthening the API in accordance with our commitment to partnership-based innovation. Our hope is that other individuals, groups and organizations will embrace this collaborative model by leveraging Hatebase data in their own applications.
See the full article here.
2. Central American ombudsmen agree to establish early warning system for genocide prevention
Auschwitz Institute for Peace and Reconciliation
25 March 2013
The Central American Council of Human Rights Ombudsmen agreed to establish an early warning system for genocide prevention during its 46th plenary conference, held March 18–20 in Panama City, Panama.
The early warning system was presented to the Council jointly by the Auschwitz Institute's Latin American Program Coordinator, Christopher Kousouros, and a delegation from the Paraguayan Office of the Ombudsman.
The primary agenda for the conference was policy development on genocide and mass atrocity prevention, and sexual diversity in Central America. Participating were the ombudsmen from Belize, Panama, El Salvador, and Costa Rica.
The ombudsmen agreed to work in cooperation with the United Nations Office on Genocide Prevention and the Responsibility to Protect to establish the early warning system, to participate actively in the Latin American Network for Genocide and Mass Atrocity Prevention ("La Red"), and to inform their governments about the Network and its activities.
An ombudsman is a public official charged with investigating human rights violations. Ombudsmen may be elected democratically or appointed by the government.
All seven member states of the Central American Council of Human Rights Ombudsmen — Belize, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Honduras, El Salvador, Costa Rica, and Panama — agreed to participate in these initiatives, both individually and as a regional body.
3. APR2P launches new project on Security and Justice in West Africa
Asia Pacific Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
March 2013
Entitled ‘Understanding and Working with Local Sources of Peace, Security and Justice in West Africa: an investigation of selected rural and urban environments in Ghana and Liberia’, the project seeks to investigate the nature and scope of non-state actors’ contribution to peace, security and justice in Ghana and Liberia, as well as their interaction with state and international actors and institutions. It will explore the potential for constructive engagement or positive acknowledgement among these different parties, asking whether greater acknowledgement of and linkage with non-state sources (that are actually underpinning local peace) contributes to state formation and to more effective and legitimate security services.
In addition to contributing to research in this domain, the project also aims to stimulate discussion around an issue directly relevant to regional human and political security. It will not only investigate non-state security and justice providers and their interaction with state bodies, but will also bring them together to discuss their relationships. The project will provide AusAID, national policy bodies in Ghana and Liberia and relevant regional organisations with information, policy briefs and opportunities for exchange on the matters addressed.
In particular, researchers will engage with policy-makers at regional arrangements such as the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) and the African Union (AU) through appropriate fora. (…)
The project is a partnership between academics in the School of Political Science and International Studies at the University of Queensland and senior researchers at the Kofi Annan International Peacekeeping Training Centre (KAIPTC) in Accra, Ghana. (…)
The team will also work closely with and provide mentorship for both male and female junior researchers from research institutions in Ghana and Liberia. It is therefore hoped that the project will contribute to the capacity of academic institutions and individual researchers in both locations. Fieldwork will employ a multi-sited case study approach using qualitative, ethnographic research methods in two rural areas and two urban areas of Liberia and Ghana, respectively. (…)
Ultimately, this ADRAS project will explore the interactions of state and non-state providers and investigate how their collaboration in the provision of peace, security and justice might be facilitated by myriad stakeholders to enhance benefit for all, including marginalised members of society. In doing so, it hopes to identify context-sensitive yet pragmatic approaches for engaging effectively with hybridity in the provision of peace, security and justice in sub-Saharan Africa.
See full details of the project here.
1. Lecture on Measuring Violence against Women Globally: The Power of Categories 
Center for the Study of Genocide, Conflict Resolution, and Human Rights in partnership with the Division of Global Affairs 
1 April 2013, 12:00 – 2:00 p.m.
Dana Room, Dana Library, 185 University Avenue, Newark New Jersey
Please join the Center for the Study of Genocide, Conflict Resolution, and Human Rights in partnership with the Division of Global Affairs in the Spring 2013 DGA Colloquium, Gender and Violence.
The event will feature guest speaker Sally Engel Merry of NYU Law School, and Makiko Oku from the Centre for the Study of Genocide, Conflict Resolution and Human Rights will moderate. 

This colloquium is the third of the Gender and Violence Colloquium Series. Dr. Merry will address the issue of violence against women and how different definitions, categories, and measurements of such violence work as a powerful tool for furthering policies and advocacy. 
See more information here.
2. Panel event: Paving the Way to a Better World: Remembering Rwanda, the Responsibility to Protect and Genocide Prevention
University of Southern Maine, Portland, Maine
3 April 2013, 4:00 – 7:00 p.m.
Hannaford Lecture Hall, Abramson Center – University of Southern Maine (Portland campus)
This event aims to commemorate the 1994 genocide in Rwanda and delve into the wide range of issues that led to that atrocity as well as the ensuing dialogue surrounding mass atrocities and the international community’s response to them. The responsibility to protect (R2P), which was formulated in large measure as a reaction to the widespread failures that led to the horrific humanitarian events of the 1990s, will be a central focus of the presentations and panel discussion.
The panel will be comprised of stakeholders and practicioners representing a diverse range of views and perspectives, each bringing a unique set of experiences that will help inform the audience and contribute substantively to the broader discussion taking place around the world. (…)
Claude Gatabuke, a Rwandan genocide survivor, will provide a keynote speech during this event, followed by an expert panel featuring: Jonas Claes, Program Officer – United States Institute of Peace, Kyle Matthews, Senior Deputy Director – Montreal Institute of Genocide and Human Rights, Rachel Shapiro, Associate – International Coalition for the Responsibility to Protect and Ryan D’Souza, Research Analyst – Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect 
(…) It is vital that the victims of the Rwandan genocide never be forgotten and that the real human consequences of inaction and ineptitude in the face of humanitarian crises be grappled with. The focus on R2P will identify a path towards realizing the “never again” vision of a world in which genocide and other atrocities cease to occur. This event aims to engage and educate the public on the related issues as well as advance the progress of R2P as the ideal normative framework for preventing and responding to mass atrocity situations in the 21st century. 
3. Conference: Responsibility to Protect in Theory and Practice
Faculty of Law, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia
11-12 April 2013
“Responsibility to Protect in Theory and Practice” is the first conference devoted exclusively to the concept of Responsibility to Protect (R2P/RtoP) in this part of the world, with the objective to create an opportunity for scholars and practitioners to engage in an interdisciplinary academic debate on the theoretical and practical implications of the concept of Responsibility to Protect (R2P). The conference will be organized as a forum where international legal experts and researchers will have the opportunity to participate in a discourse with international political scientists to advance the scientific research on the issues related to R2P and the applicability of the concept in practice.

More than 90 speakers and poster presenters from almost 40 countries and international institutions will discuss issues regarding R2P in 3 parallel panels each day. 

A meeting of regional R2P focal points will we held in Slovenia a day before the conference (April 10, 2013) and the regional R2P focal points will participate at the conference in a separate panel on the first day (April 11, 2013). (…)
View the conference program. Read more about the event.
4. Preventing Mass Atrocities Through Development Policies: A Round Table on Economic, Legal and Social Aspects
The Auschwitz Institute for Peace and Reconciliation
18 April 2013, 11:00 a.m. – 12:30 p.m.
Room MC C1 – 110, World Bank, Washington, DC
The Auschwitz Institute, the Bellagio Forum for Sustainable Development and the Budapest Centre for the International Prevention of Genocide and Mass Atrocities have organized a session at the International Monetary Fund-World Bank Civil Society Forum entitled, “Preventing Mass Atrocities Through Development Policies: A Round Table on Economic, Legal and Social Aspects”.
The panel will draw upon the expertise of development agencies in the Global South and the Global North and the discussion will be supported by the experience of the Auschwitz Institute’s longstanding governmental partners, complemented by private attorneys familiar with major development projects in the public and private sectors.
The panel will be moderated by James Walker of the Auschwitz Institute for Peace and Reconciliation and will feature speakers: H.E Dr. Francis Deng, Enzo Marla La Fevre (Budapest Centre for the International Prevention of Genocide and Mass Atrocities), Troy Alexander (White & Case LLP) and Emilio Vilano (Bellagio Forum for Sustainable Development).
If you would like to attend the panel session, you must fill out the World Bank accreditation form no later than 8 April. The form can take up to 3 weeks to process.  Final confirmation of accreditation will be sent via email from the address This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it . This must be printed out and brought to the event to receive your badge upon registration.
5. Act Against Atrocities: Enough Project Advocacy Day
The Enough Project
10 June 2013, 8:00 a.m. – 4:00 p.m.
Capitol Hill, Washington DC
Thousands of activists will be coming to Washington, D.C. the weekend of June 8-10 to support a powerful exhibit and event called 'One Million Bones', a visual installation on the National Mall to commemorate past genocides and generate awareness and action on current conflicts in Sudan and the Democratic Republic of Congo.
Join the Enough Project on Monday, June 10th, following the events of the weekend, to meet face-to-face with staff representatives or Members of Congress themselves when possible to inform them about atrocities unfolding in the world’s worst conflicts.
Please note that most meetings will conclude by 2:00 PM, but others may last until 4:00 PM. The Enough Project will also schedule and coordinate all Congressional meetings. Training(s) and materials will be provided for all participants.
For more information and to register see here.
6. Professional Training Program on the Prevention of Mass Atrocities
Montreal Institute for Genocide and Human Rights Studies
11 – 12 June 2013
The Montreal Institute for Genocide and Human Rights Studies will be hosting a two-day, non-credit, professional training program focused on the prevention of genocide and mass atrocity crimes. The event will be held at Concordia University in Montreal from the morning of Tuesday, 11 June to the evening of Wednesday, 12 June 2013.This program is tailored to mid- to senior-level professionals interested in the prevention and interdiction of mass atrocity crimes.
For this special training program, MIGS Distinguished Senior Fellow and Canadian Senator, Roméo Dallaire, and former Canadian Minister of Justice, Irwin Cotler, have already confirmed their participation. Other expert instructors include Simon Adams (Executive Director of the Global Center for the Responsibility to Protect), Colette Mazzucelli (Associate Professor at the Center for Global Affairs, New York University), Allan Thompson (Professor of Journalism at Carleton University), Payam Akhavan (Associate Professor at the Faculty of Law at McGill University), Frank Chalk (Director of MIGS at Concordia University), and Kyle Matthews (Senior Deputy Director of the Will to Intervene Project)(…)
The Professional Training Program on the Prevention of Mass Atrocities is open to any professional with several years of experience in a field relevant to human rights, international affairs, and international development. (…)
For the Professional Training Program on the Prevention of Mass Atrocities, the associated participation fees are: CAN$600 (…)
The intake number for the training program is limited to fifty participants. Applicants to the professional training program will be notified of admission within two weeks of the date their application is received. In the event that your application is accepted, MIGS will send you a link to register and to pay the program fee. To apply, please click on this link and complete the application questionnaire: If you have any questions regarding the professional training program, please contact us at  This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it .  (…)
See more information here.
Thank you to Inara Khan for compiling this listserv.


Browse Documents by Region:

International Coalition for the Responsibility to Protect
c/o World Federalist Movement - Institute for Global Policy
708 Third Avenue, Suite 1715, New York, NY 10017