60 years after the UN Convention - Dag Hammarskjöld Foundation

More documents

Recommendations

Info

234 development dialogue december 2008 – revisiting the heart of darkness tionally causing great suff ering, or serious injury to body or to mental or physical health’. Forcibly depriving hundreds of thousands of people of their livelihoods, destroying their only shelter, throwing them into the open in the winter, making it impossible for them to go to school or to access health provision, violently removing them from places of sanctuary and dumping them in other places where there is no shelter or food, with the result that substantial numbers die, surely qualifi es as a crime against humanity. 15 International law in general and the Statute of the International Criminal Court in particular provide that individuals involved in such crimes, whether they be the planners or the implementers, those giving orders or those following orders, are all liable to prosecution and punishment. While there has been some argument as to whether Zimbabweans are indictable under the Statute, since the government has never ratifi ed it, others, including the executive director of the International Bar Association, have argued that they are. 16 Murambatsvina is not over, and continues up to now. Traders are arrested, homes are destroyed, and the inhabitants dumped at Hopley Farm. In fact, Zimbabweans were shocked by a report in early November 2006 that the minister for local government and housing stated that ‘the spirit of Murambatsvina must not die’. He has not denied it. No one has been called to account, been made to answer or been punished for the atrocities that have been committed, just as no one has been made to answer for Gukurahundi. International responsibility After World War II international law abandoned its respect for national state sovereignty in the face of the massive human rights abuses of Nazi Germany. It recognised that populations living under tyrannical regimes cannot protect themselves against the violence of their governments. The Convention against Genocide, the establishment of the tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and for Rwanda, and the constitution of the International Criminal Court signalled to abusive 15 The Zimbabwe Human Rights NGO Forum concluded in its third report (2006: 45) that it was a crime against humanity. 16 Mark Ellis in an article in the International Herald Tribune (27.12.05) entitled ‘Indict Zimbabwe’s Demagogue’.
mass violence in zimbabwe 2005 – murambatsvina 235 governments that they would be answerable in international law if not their own laws. Sadly, political will to bring perpetrators to book has been notably lacking. And the rare cases where perpetrators (for example, some of the Rwandan and Serbian genocidaires, and now a Congolese warlord) have been prosecuted have evidently not yet been suffi cient to deter others from committing the same types of abuse. The ‘Responsibility to Protect’ doctrine accepted recently by the United Nations is yet to make its mark. 17 The international community is reluctant to intervene and, when it does, usually it is too late to prevent catastrophe and only in time to provide humanitarian assistance to the survivors. Atrocities continue in many parts of Africa, in Sudan, in Ethiopia, in Zimbabwe. Does it have to be this way? Is there nothing that can be done? What can we learn from Zimbabwe’s experiences? At the very least we should have learned the following: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Such atrocities take place in conditions where there is a lack of respect for the rule of law, and inadequate systems of accountability either through the courts, a human rights commission or the ballot box. State perpetrators of crimes against their own people will not stop of their own accord. The lesson of Zimbabwe must surely be that if you allow a Gukurahundi to pass with impunity, you will eventually arrive at a Murambatsvina. And beyond Murambatsvina there may well lie more atrocities on a large scale. A regime which has committed crimes will not allow itself to be removed from power by peaceful means, and will continue to commit crimes in order to remain in power. It is extremely important to ensure that, whenever possible, governments that commit such atrocities are brought to justice as soon as possible. However, we also have learned that the international community is slow to act and rarely acts purely on humanitarian grounds; there must be other interests at stake, and if these are in favour of the perpetrating government, no action will be taken. The South African response to Zimbabwe’s travails is evidence of this. 17 The report of the International Commission of Intervention and State Sovereignty published in 2001 took this as a title, and proposed that ‘where a population is suff ering serious harm…and the state in question is unwilling or unable to halt or avert it, the principle of non-intervention yields to the international responsibility to protect’. The principle was adopted by the General Assembly in the Summit Outcomes Document in 2005 and by the Security Council in Resolution 1674 in 2006.
Page 1 and 2:
no. 50 | december 2008 Revisiting t
Page 3 and 4:
Revisiting the heart of darkness -
Page 5 and 6:
Acknowledgements The larger part of
Page 7:
Dennis Brutus, born 1924 in then Rh
Page 10 and 11:
8 development dialogue december 200
Page 12 and 13:
Page 14 and 15:
Page 16 and 17:
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21:
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
Page 50 and 51:
Page 52 and 53:
Page 54 and 55:
Page 56 and 57:
Page 58 and 59:
Page 60 and 61:
Page 62 and 63:
Page 64 and 65:
Page 66 and 67:
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71:
Page 72 and 73:
Page 74 and 75:
Page 76 and 77:
Page 78 and 79:
Page 80 and 81:
Page 82 and 83:
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104 and 105:
Page 106 and 107:
Page 108 and 109:
Page 110 and 111:
Page 112 and 113:
Page 114 and 115:
Page 116 and 117:
Page 118 and 119:
Page 120 and 121:
Page 122 and 123:
Page 124 and 125:
Page 126 and 127:
Page 128 and 129:
Page 130 and 131:
Page 132 and 133:
Page 134 and 135:
Page 136 and 137:
Page 138 and 139:
Page 140 and 141:
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148 and 149:
Page 150 and 151:
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156 and 157:
Page 158 and 159:
Page 160 and 161:
Page 162 and 163:
Page 164 and 165:
Page 166 and 167:
Page 168 and 169:
Page 170 and 171:
Page 172 and 173:
Page 174 and 175:
Page 176 and 177:
Page 178 and 179:
Page 180 and 181:
Page 182 and 183:
Page 184 and 185:
Page 186 and 187: 184 development dialogue december 2
Page 262 and 263: In short, both the understanding of
Page 273 and 274: Behind most mass violence lurk econ
Page 275 and 276: ehind most mass violence lurk econo
Page 281 and 282: Is there a south perspective on gen
Page 283 and 284: is there a south perspective on gen
Page 285 and 286: is there a south perspective on gen
Page 287 and 288:
is there a south perspective on gen
Page 289 and 290:
Page 291 and 292:
Page 293:
Page 296 and 297:
Page 299:
The Voksenåsen Statement Genocides
Page 302 and 303:
Page 304:
Page 308:
This Development Dialogue is publis
show all

60 years after the UN Convention - Dag Hammarskjöld Foundation

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?