The following situations have raised concerns from civil society, media and governments as to the extent to which crimes on the ground have reached a widespread and systematic level, arguably a determining factor for whether the RtoP threshold for an international response has been met. Some of the following crises have spurred debates as to whether RtoP was applicable to these particular instances.  
 

 

 

 

The reaction by the international community to reach a political solution entailed significant pressure and involvement by international and regional bodies and foreign governments, in opposition to the violence and violations of human rights. The AU mandated efforts included a mediation team of eminent Africans led by Kofi Annan, which was able to help bring about a power-sharing solution to the crisis, supported by the UN, the EU and foreign governments. The rapid and coordinated reaction by the international community has been praised as ‘a model of diplomatic action under the Responsibility to Protect’.

 

In contrast to the crises in Rwanda in 1994 and Darfur in 2003, Desmond Tutu, an Anglican archbishop emeritus of Cape Town and chairman of The Elders said that "[they saw] in Kenya the formation of an international consensus that it is unacceptable to ignore violence of the kind that has occurred (…) or to consider the crisis as purely an internal matter of the state". He explained that the international community has moved far faster in addressing this conflict and mediating with Kenyan leadership than it has in similar situations elsewhere. While much remains to be done, not only to resolve the political deadlock but also to ensure the security of civilians, Desmond Tutu assures that "what we are seeing in Kenya is action on a fundamental principle - the Responsibility to Protect". Click here for Desmond Tutu on Kenya and RtoP.

 

Gareth Evans, author of The Responsibility to Protect Ending Mass Atrocity Crimes Once and For All, has described the violence in Kenya as a “classic R2P” situation. The situation was only labeled an RtoP situation retrospectively, and Don Steinberg, Deputy President of the International Crisis Group has suggested in his Op-ed, Responsibility to Protect in the Real World: From Rwanda to Darfur to Kenya, that at the time, “given the backsliding and buyer’s remorse in the international community regarding the R2P norm, it is perhaps fortunate that no one labeled this as an R2P situation”. However, both Gareth Evans and Don Steinberg point out that the political will of the international community to quell the violence. The early response and the outcomes demonstrated how timely preventive and reactive measures under the RtoP toolbox can be implemented to react to crimes reaching the RtoP threshold.  

 

Since the end of the crisis, others have pointed to the responsibility of the international community to maintain pressure and commitment in the rebuilding phase to prevent any re-occurrence of violence. Human Rights Watch in its March 2008 report Ballots to Bullets: Organized Political Violence and Kenya's Crisis of Governance,called on the duty of foreign governments, neighbors and institutions, to “keep all diplomatic mechanisms on the table and to provide all necessary assistance in order to ensure that the agreement to share power works and delivers on promises to address long-running human rights violations”. The report mentions that this involved “financial support for compensation funds, including land (…), technical support to the police and to the Independent Review Committee on the elections; the Truth, Justice and Reconciliation Commission; the Commission of Inquiry into the violence; and any other bodies set up as a result of the mediation”.

 

More information on the crisis in Kenya 

 

 

References to RtoP and humanitarian intervention were expressed in the context of the August 2008 Russian – Georgia crisis, raising concern as to whether the RtoP norm as codified in the World Summit Outcome Document was applicable to Georgia, and whether the degree of threat to Russians in Georgia represented actual or imminent mass atrocities to the scale pertinent to the RtoP norm.

 

Russian Minister of Foreign Affaires Sergey Lavrov’s invoked the Responsibility to Protect as one of the justifications for Russia’s military intervention to protect Russian citizens in South Ossetia. In addition, Prime Minister Vladimir Putin and UN Ambassador Vitaly Churkin described Georgia’s actions against populations in South Ossetia as “genocide”.

 

Russia’s invocation of RtoP was misapplied because Russia has a responsibility to protect its populations within its own borders. In cases of mass atrocities outside its borders, the responsibility to protect falls upon the international community, strictly as a collective response through the United Nations. It is unclear whether the degree of threat to Russians in Georgia represented actual or imminent mass atrocities to the scale pertinent to the R2P norm and also whether military force was the appropriate response.

 

 

 

 

A breakdown of the cease-fire and a military offensive between Israel and Hamas sparked a crisis in which both sides were accused of violating human rights law and international humanitarian law. Once more, civilians were the vast majority of casualties and according to the UN the crisis claimed over 1,300 lives, 412 of them children, and wounded more than 5,450 people, 1,855 of them children, as well as causing widespread destruction and suffering. According to Human Rights Watch report, “Deprived and Endangered: Humanitarian Crisis in the Gaza Strip,” Gaza civilians faced dire shortages of food, water, cooking gas, fuel and medical care; electricity, water and sewage infrastructure. Amnesty International researchers in Gaza reported many cases of “unwarranted attacks on defenseless civilians, many of them children.” Months after the end of the military offensive, the humanitarian situation continued to be worrying.  According to Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon, nearly 5 months after the end of the conflict, nothing beyond basic needs such as food and medicine was allowed into Gaza. Essential recovery efforts and long-term development initiatives are impossible in these conditions. 

 

 

The escalation of violence in Gaza has raised serious questions about using the Responsibility to Protect to urge international action to protect civilians in the conflict. RtoP has been referred to, notably by Richard Falk, UN Special Rapporteur on the Occupied Palestinian Territories, but also by others who claim that crimes committed in Gaza  have reached the threshold of RtoP crimes. Indiscriminate killings of civilians and the use of civilians as human shields have led several governments and civil society organizations to accuse both Israel and Hamas of committing war crimes. There remain questions as to the extent to which these crimes were widespread and systematic, arguably a determining factor for whether the RtoP threshold for an international response was met. In addition, questions remained as to whether invoking RtoP would have brought the desired changes to protect civilians in this deeply politicized situation.

 

As Paragraphs 138-139 of the World Summit Outcome Document outline, States have the responsibility to protect their populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. Israel, as an occupying power, does carry this responsibility to protect. Most important, however, is to note that both parties have clear obligations to protect civilians under international humanitarian law, notably the Geneva Conventions, which prohibit many acts currently being committed. Israel, as an occupying power, has additional obligations to protect its populations under Geneva Convention IV.

 

For more analysis of articles, statements and reports from civil society on the crisis in Gaza and RtoP, please see our 16 January News Update.

 

 

The humanitarian crisis prompted various independent investigative committees. The Independent Fact Finding Committee on Gaza was established in February 2009 and presented its report to the Arab League of States on 30 April 2009. The report entitled “On Gaza: No Safe Place,” found that “members of the IDF committed war crimes, crimes against humanity and, possibly, genocide in the course of operation Cast Lead.” It also asserted that, “Hamas may be held responsible for violations of international humanitarian law attributed to it.” Among a myriad of other recommendations involving Organs of the UN, the ICC, the League of Arab States, etc, the committee recommended that “the League of Arab States should request the Security Council, failing which, the General Assembly, to exercise its Responsibility to Protect, affirmed in the Summit Outcome Document of 2005 in respect of Gaza.”

 

In addition, a four-member UN Board of Inquiry, led by Ian Martin, a human rights activist who had previously held multiple positions in the UN, examined incidents involving death and damage at the United Nation’s premises in Gaza during Israel’s military operation. The summary of the UN report, commissioned by the UN secretary general, Ban Ki-moon, “censured the Israeli government for causing death, injuries and damage to UN property in seven incidents involving action by the Israeli Defence Force (IDF)”; it emphasized that “UN premises are inviolable, and that inviolability cannot be set aside by the demands of military expediency”. However, Ban decided against further investigation despite the report’s call for a full impartial inquiry.

 

On 22 January 2009, Dr. Khashan, Minister of Justice of the Palestinian National Authority briefed Prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo on the situation in Gaza and lodged a referral, with the Registrar of the Court, for the situation in Gaza. (For more information) Prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo disclosed that he has been “examining the case for Palestinian jurisdiction over alleged crimes committed in Gaza.”

 

 

On 15 September 2009, the UN Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict released its report on the investigation of crimes committed in Gaza from 27 December 2008 to 18 January 2009. The mission, mandated by the President of the Human Rights Council in April 2009 and headed by Justice Richard Goldstone, found evidence of serious violations of international human rights and humanitarian law committed by Israel during the Gaza conflict, which amounted to war crimes, and possibly crimes against humanity. The fact-finding mission also found evidence that Palestinian armed groups committed war crimes, as well as possibly crimes against humanity, in their repeated launching of rockets and mortars into Southern Israel.

 

Justice Goldstone presented the report to the UN’s Human Rights Council in Geneva on 29 September 2009. The report recommended that the UN Security Council pass a resolution requiring Israel and Hamas to launch domestic investigations into these crimes and report on both the findings of these investigations and the prosecutions of the perpetrators. The report also recommended that if investigations are not underway in either Israel or Hamas six months after the passage of the recommended resolution, the Security Council should refer the situation to the International Criminal Court (ICC).

 

 

Follow this link to our listserv and media responses around the report. 

 

 

In Somalia, according to the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), insecurity is still growing with escalating clashes between Ethiopian/Transitional Federal Government (TFG) forces and anti-government elements. Both are responsible for a variety of attacks against civilians. In 2007, each party to the armed conflict has committed serious violations of international humanitarian law, in some cases, amounting to war crimes. Thousands have been killed by indiscriminate bombings and attacks, and thousands more have been injured, assaulted, raped, and looted of all their property as they fled the violence in Mogadishu. Moreover, Human Rights Watch estimates that in 2007, up to 700,000 people were displaced from Mogadishu alone. There are more than a million IDPs in south-central Somalia representing at least 10 percent of the entire population. This situation requires continued monitoring. 

 
back to top