Search

Begin New Search Topic Genocide Publishing Institution The Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect Publication Year within 10 Years

1. Responsibility to Protect and the World in 2020

Author:
Simon Adams
Publication Date:
02-2020
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
The Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Abstract:
This year the world will celebrate the 75th anniversary of the adoption of the Charter of the United Nations. But celebrations recognizing this historical landmark will occur at a time when the entire post-1945 structure of human rights, humanitarianism and multilateral diplomacy are under threat. Not since the UN was first formed have so many people been displaced by persecution, conflict and war. Not since the peak of the Cold War has the UN Security Council appeared so bitterly divided and incapable of decisive action. And as a new decade begins, there are renewed threats to international peace and security, and fresh assaults on human dignity.
Topic:
Genocide, Human Rights, Social Movement, Refugees, Syrian War, Responsibility to Protect (R2P), and UN Security Council
Political Geography:
China, Yemen, United Nations, Syria, Chile, Myanmar, Global Focus, and Xinjiang

2. R2P Monitor, Issue 49, 15 January 2020

Author:
Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Publication Date:
01-2020
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
The Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Abstract:
R2P Monitor is a bimonthly bulletin applying the atrocity prevention lens to populations at risk of mass atrocities around the world. Issue 49 looks at developments in Afghanistan, China, Myanmar (Burma), Syria, Yemen, Cameroon, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Mali and Burkina Faso, Central African Republic, Iraq, Libya, Nigeria, South Sudan and Venezuela.
Topic:
Genocide, Human Rights, Conflict, Responsibility to Protect (R2P), and Atrocities
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, China, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Syria, Venezuela, Nigeria, Mali, Myanmar, South Sudan, Cameroon, Central African Republic, and Burkina Faso

3. R2P Monitor, Issue 48, 15 November 2019

Author:
Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Publication Date:
11-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
The Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Abstract:
R2P Monitor is a bimonthly bulletin applying the atrocity prevention lens to populations at risk of mass atrocities around the world. Issue 48 looks at developments in Afghanistan, China, Myanmar (Burma), Syria, Yemen, Cameroon, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Mali and Burkina Faso, Burundi, Central African Republic, Libya, South Sudan and Venezuela.
Topic:
Genocide, Human Rights, International Law, Conflict, Responsibility to Protect (R2P), and Atrocities
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, China, Libya, Yemen, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Syria, Venezuela, Burundi, Mali, Myanmar, South Sudan, Cameroon, Central African Republic, and Burkina Faso

4. Q&A: The International Court of Justice & the Genocide of the Rohingya

Author:
Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Publication Date:
11-2019
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Abstract:
FACTSHEET | NOVEMBER 2019: Starting in October 2016 and then again in August 2017, Myanmar’s security forces engaged in so-called “clearance operations” against the Rohingya, a distinct Muslim ethnic minority, in Rakhine State, Myanmar. The operations, in particular those that started in August 2017, were characterized by brutal violence and serious human rights violations on a mass scale. Survivors report indiscriminate killings, rape and sexual violence, arbitrary detention, torture, beatings, and forced displacement. Reports have also shown that security forces were systematically planning for such an operation against the Rohingya even before the purported reason for the violence — retaliation for small scale attacks committed by the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army (ARSA) — occurred. As a result, an estimated 745,000 people — mostly ethnic Rohingya — were forced to flee to Bangladesh. According to the UN Human Rights Council-mandated Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on Myanmar (FFM), the treatment of the Rohingya population during the “clearance operations” amounts to genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes, the commission of which evokes specific obligations and responsibility under international law. In its final report, published in September 2019, the FFM concluded that “the State of Myanmar breached its obligation not to commit genocide” and found that Myanmar “continues to harbor genocidal intent” towards the Rohingya. On November 11, 2019, The Republic of The Gambia filed suit against Myanmar in the International Court of Justice (“ICJ”) for violating the Genocide Convention. This momentous lawsuit brings a critical focus to Myanmar’s responsibility as a state for genocide and compliments ongoing investigations into individual accountability. This fact sheet answers fundamental questions about the ICJ case, and seeks to clarify available avenues for justice for the crimes committed against the Rohingya population.
Topic:
Genocide, Human Rights, International Law, United Nations, State Violence, Atrocities, and International Court of Justice (ICJ)
Political Geography:
Asia, Southeast Asia, and Myanmar

5. R2P Monitor, Issue 46, 15 July 2019

Author:
Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Publication Date:
07-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
The Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Abstract:
R2P Monitor is a bimonthly bulletin applying the Responsibility to Protect lens to populations at risk of mass atrocities around the world. Issue 46 looks at developments in Afghanistan, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Myanmar (Burma), Syria, Yemen, Cameroon, Mali and Burkina Faso, Sudan, Central African Republic, Libya, Nigeria, South Sudan and Venezuela.
Topic:
Genocide, Human Rights, International Law, United Nations, Ethnic Cleansing, Responsibility to Protect (R2P), and Atrocities
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, Sudan, Libya, Yemen, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Syria, Venezuela, Nigeria, Mali, Myanmar, South Sudan, Cameroon, Central African Republic, and Burkina Faso

6. “If Not Now, When?”: The Responsibility to Protect, the Fate of the Rohingya and the Future of Human Rights

Author:
Simon Adams
Publication Date:
01-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Abstract:
In this occasional paper from the Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect, Dr. Simon Adams tests the resilience of the international community’s commitment to defending human rights and upholding its Responsibility to Protect populations from genocide, ethnic cleansing, crimes against humanity and war crimes. The paper highlights the failure to respond to patterns of discrimination that eventually led to a genocide in Myanmar (Burma) during 2017. But it also draws attention to other recent situations, such as in the Gambia, when the international community seized the moment to respond in a timely and decisive manner to an emerging threat of devastating conflict. In doing so, Adams emphasizes that even when bodies such as the UN Security Council appear paralyzed and inert, a mobilized international community can still act to prevent atrocities, protect vulnerable populations, and hold the perpetrators accountable.
Topic:
Genocide, Human Rights, International Law, Ethnic Cleansing, International Community, Responsibility to Protect (R2P), UN Security Council, and Atrocities
Political Geography:
Asia, Southeast Asia, and Myanmar

7. The UN Security Council’s Implementation of the Responsibility to Protect: A Review of Past Interventions and Recommendations for Improvement

Author:
Jared Genser
Publication Date:
09-2018
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Abstract:
When it was adopted by the United Nations (UN) system in 2005, the doctrine of the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) was meant to provide an implementation mechanism for the international community to respond to governments that were perpetrating the mass atrocity crimes of genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity. As R2P is now in its second decade of existence, it is important to evaluate past implementation of R2P by the UN Security Council — the UN body charged with taking collective action when all other preventive efforts have failed and atrocity crimes are being committed or are imminent. This briefing paper is a summary of a more detailed law review article recently published in the University of Chicago Journal of International Law.
Topic:
Genocide, War Crimes, Ethnic Cleansing, International Community, Responsibility to Protect (R2P), UN Security Council, and Crimes Against Humanity
Political Geography:
United Nations and Global Focus

8. Defining the Four Mass Atrocity Crimes

Author:
Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Publication Date:
08-2018
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Abstract:
During the 2005 United Nations World Summit, heads of state and government accepted the responsibility of every state to protect its population from four crimes: genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing. The first three crimes are legally defined in various international legal documents, such as the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, the 1949 Geneva Conventions and their 1977 Additional Protocols, and the 1998 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Their status as international crimes is based on the belief that the acts associated with them affect the core dignity of human beings, both in times of peace and in times of war.
Topic:
Genocide, War Crimes, Ethnic Cleansing, and Crimes Against Humanity
Political Geography:
United Nations and Global Focus