Pub Date : 2021-12-16DOI: 10.1163/18754112-24030007
Noel M. Morada
This article examines how atrocity prevention efforts have had a limited effect on the violence and atrocities being committed in Myanmar. Myanmar’s military forces, the Tatmadaw, remain free to commit atrocities against vulnerable populations in the country, particularly against the Rohingya minority in Rakhine state. These efforts have been stymied at both the international and regional levels, especially now that the Tatmadaw rule the country following a coup d’etat in February 2021. UN efforts have fallen short as the Tatmadaw refuse to cooperate with the international community due to a lack of trust in UN processes and a subsequent siege mentality over heightened international outrage over the treatment of both the Rohingyas and protesters against the coup. Prevention efforts through asean, of which Myanmar is a member, have also fallen short. This is due primarily to a lack of accountability for erring members, and a long-standing principle of non-interference in members’ domestic affairs. Currently, there are no incentives for the Tatmadaw to negotiate and stop the violence committed against their own people. Indeed, the failure of these prevention efforts and the increased notions of nationalism they foster may be used by the Tatmadaw to continue their current policies of isolation and maintain power.
{"title":"Myanmar","authors":"Noel M. Morada","doi":"10.1163/18754112-24030007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18754112-24030007","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000This article examines how atrocity prevention efforts have had a limited effect on the violence and atrocities being committed in Myanmar. Myanmar’s military forces, the Tatmadaw, remain free to commit atrocities against vulnerable populations in the country, particularly against the Rohingya minority in Rakhine state. These efforts have been stymied at both the international and regional levels, especially now that the Tatmadaw rule the country following a coup d’etat in February 2021. UN efforts have fallen short as the Tatmadaw refuse to cooperate with the international community due to a lack of trust in UN processes and a subsequent siege mentality over heightened international outrage over the treatment of both the Rohingyas and protesters against the coup. Prevention efforts through asean, of which Myanmar is a member, have also fallen short. This is due primarily to a lack of accountability for erring members, and a long-standing principle of non-interference in members’ domestic affairs. Currently, there are no incentives for the Tatmadaw to negotiate and stop the violence committed against their own people. Indeed, the failure of these prevention efforts and the increased notions of nationalism they foster may be used by the Tatmadaw to continue their current policies of isolation and maintain power.","PeriodicalId":38927,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Peacekeeping","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46366995","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-16DOI: 10.1163/18754112-02403011
{"title":"Contents","authors":"","doi":"10.1163/18754112-02403011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18754112-02403011","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":38927,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Peacekeeping","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48651114","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-16DOI: 10.1163/18754112-24030004
Kwesi Aning
Côte d’Ivoire first experienced a civil war in 2002, but the country’s rapid socio-political disintegration after the demise of Félix Houphouët-Boigny in 1993 produced several risk factors that would eventually culminate in atrocity crimes between 2010 and 2011. This article identifies a weak state that only exercised jurisdiction over the south of the country, years of instability driven by horizontal inequalities and an identity crisis, past abuses that had gone unpunished, and election disputes that served as triggers for atrocity crimes. The deeply polarized nature of Ivorian society meant that local mechanisms for resolving disputes and building peace were not wholly effective, even though they helped to resolve disputes and prevent violence in some local communities. Findings from the Ivorian case demonstrate the need to pay closer attention to the structural and proximate factors that underpin conflicts. Côte d’Ivoire also presents lessons on the need for decisive action in the face of unfolding atrocity crimes. There was a need for timely and decisive response in accordance with the principles of R2P. Nonetheless military intervention was delayed for months, resulting in avoidable fatalities.
{"title":"Côte d’Ivoire","authors":"Kwesi Aning","doi":"10.1163/18754112-24030004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18754112-24030004","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000Côte d’Ivoire first experienced a civil war in 2002, but the country’s rapid socio-political disintegration after the demise of Félix Houphouët-Boigny in 1993 produced several risk factors that would eventually culminate in atrocity crimes between 2010 and 2011. This article identifies a weak state that only exercised jurisdiction over the south of the country, years of instability driven by horizontal inequalities and an identity crisis, past abuses that had gone unpunished, and election disputes that served as triggers for atrocity crimes. The deeply polarized nature of Ivorian society meant that local mechanisms for resolving disputes and building peace were not wholly effective, even though they helped to resolve disputes and prevent violence in some local communities. Findings from the Ivorian case demonstrate the need to pay closer attention to the structural and proximate factors that underpin conflicts. Côte d’Ivoire also presents lessons on the need for decisive action in the face of unfolding atrocity crimes. There was a need for timely and decisive response in accordance with the principles of R2P. Nonetheless military intervention was delayed for months, resulting in avoidable fatalities.","PeriodicalId":38927,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Peacekeeping","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42137868","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-05-24DOI: 10.1163/18754112-20210003
Beatrice Lindstrom
After a United Nations peacekeeping mission introduced cholera to Haiti in 2010, victims have struggled for over a decade to obtain remedies from the UN. Their experiences have exposed the extraordinary barriers to justice faced by civilians who suffer injuries caused by UN operations. While the UN has enjoyed absolute immunity from suit in courts where personal injury claims are typically heard, the UN is required to provide civilians harmed by its operations with alternative avenues to seek redress. In practice, however, the UN’s process for resolving such third-party claims is opaque and difficult to access, and allows the UN to be the final arbiter of its own responsibility. Particularly troubling are recent mass tort cases where financial and political interests have improperly influenced the claims process to deny remedies. This article draws on personal insights gained from advocating for victims of cholera for the past ten years, as well as the parallel experiences of Roma, Ashkali, and Egyptian victims who brought claims against the UN for lead poisoning in Kosovo. The article identifies systemic weaknesses in the UN’s third-party claims process and proposes four key reforms to bring the organization’s practice in line with its legal and moral obligations.
{"title":"When Immunity Becomes Impunity","authors":"Beatrice Lindstrom","doi":"10.1163/18754112-20210003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18754112-20210003","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000After a United Nations peacekeeping mission introduced cholera to Haiti in 2010, victims have struggled for over a decade to obtain remedies from the UN. Their experiences have exposed the extraordinary barriers to justice faced by civilians who suffer injuries caused by UN operations. While the UN has enjoyed absolute immunity from suit in courts where personal injury claims are typically heard, the UN is required to provide civilians harmed by its operations with alternative avenues to seek redress. In practice, however, the UN’s process for resolving such third-party claims is opaque and difficult to access, and allows the UN to be the final arbiter of its own responsibility. Particularly troubling are recent mass tort cases where financial and political interests have improperly influenced the claims process to deny remedies. This article draws on personal insights gained from advocating for victims of cholera for the past ten years, as well as the parallel experiences of Roma, Ashkali, and Egyptian victims who brought claims against the UN for lead poisoning in Kosovo. The article identifies systemic weaknesses in the UN’s third-party claims process and proposes four key reforms to bring the organization’s practice in line with its legal and moral obligations.","PeriodicalId":38927,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Peacekeeping","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-05-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47565615","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-05-24DOI: 10.1163/18754112-20210006
Céline Giuliani
The integration of human rights in United Nations peace operations has witnessed remarkable progress during the past fifteen years. This article analyzes the evolution of human rights integration in the peace and security architecture in relation to peace operations, focusing on the achievements and shortcomings of Headquarters-led policies and reforms of the last decade, as well as the impact of recent Security Council dynamics. The article reviews the significant realizations on both the substantive and structural fronts and argues that ownership of the human rights agenda and policies, as well as accountability and leadership for their implementation, warrants a greater commitment of the organization. Such commitment should translate into institutionalizing Headquarters’ cooperation mechanisms, creating further space for human rights in decision-making, allocating adequate resources, and strengthening accountability for risk-mitigation policies, inter alia. A stronger political will is equally required to better articulate human rights issues in relation to conflict analysis, prevention and peacebuilding, in support of political objectives of peace operations.
{"title":"Advancing Peace through Human Rights in UN Peace Operations","authors":"Céline Giuliani","doi":"10.1163/18754112-20210006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18754112-20210006","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000The integration of human rights in United Nations peace operations has witnessed remarkable progress during the past fifteen years. This article analyzes the evolution of human rights integration in the peace and security architecture in relation to peace operations, focusing on the achievements and shortcomings of Headquarters-led policies and reforms of the last decade, as well as the impact of recent Security Council dynamics. The article reviews the significant realizations on both the substantive and structural fronts and argues that ownership of the human rights agenda and policies, as well as accountability and leadership for their implementation, warrants a greater commitment of the organization. Such commitment should translate into institutionalizing Headquarters’ cooperation mechanisms, creating further space for human rights in decision-making, allocating adequate resources, and strengthening accountability for risk-mitigation policies, inter alia. A stronger political will is equally required to better articulate human rights issues in relation to conflict analysis, prevention and peacebuilding, in support of political objectives of peace operations.","PeriodicalId":38927,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Peacekeeping","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-05-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43884845","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-05-24DOI: 10.1163/18754112-20210005
Blanca Montejo, B. Stefanovic
With the launching of the Action for Peacekeeping and its culmination with the Declaration of Shared Commitments in 2018, Secretary-General Antonio Guterres aimed to mobilize all partners and stakeholders to support United Nations peacekeeping, marking its seventieth anniversary and revitalizing a long process of reform which had started with previous Secretaries-General, and in its last phase by Secretary-General Ban Ki Moon. The purpose of this article is to look at the implementation of Commitment 5 of the Declaration of Shared Commitments to realize the objective of sequenced, prioritized and achievable mandates. To do so, this article looks at the process of endorsement and progressive implementation of the Declaration of Shared Commitments by the Security Council, starting with the examination of the conclusions of the High Level Independent Panel on Peacekeeping Operations (hippo report), the subsequent Secretary-General’s report under Secretary-General Ban’s tenure and the passing of the baton to Secretary-General Guterres who continued the process through the launching of the Action for Peacekeeping. The article looks at the definitions available to guide the implementation of sequenced and prioritized mandates and describes and assesses the mandate renewal process in the context of three specific field missions concentrating some of the most recent efforts of the Security Council to apply the principles of the Declaration of Shared Commitments.
{"title":"The Implementation of the Action for Peacekeeping in Context","authors":"Blanca Montejo, B. Stefanovic","doi":"10.1163/18754112-20210005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18754112-20210005","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000With the launching of the Action for Peacekeeping and its culmination with the Declaration of Shared Commitments in 2018, Secretary-General Antonio Guterres aimed to mobilize all partners and stakeholders to support United Nations peacekeeping, marking its seventieth anniversary and revitalizing a long process of reform which had started with previous Secretaries-General, and in its last phase by Secretary-General Ban Ki Moon. The purpose of this article is to look at the implementation of Commitment 5 of the Declaration of Shared Commitments to realize the objective of sequenced, prioritized and achievable mandates. To do so, this article looks at the process of endorsement and progressive implementation of the Declaration of Shared Commitments by the Security Council, starting with the examination of the conclusions of the High Level Independent Panel on Peacekeeping Operations (hippo report), the subsequent Secretary-General’s report under Secretary-General Ban’s tenure and the passing of the baton to Secretary-General Guterres who continued the process through the launching of the Action for Peacekeeping. The article looks at the definitions available to guide the implementation of sequenced and prioritized mandates and describes and assesses the mandate renewal process in the context of three specific field missions concentrating some of the most recent efforts of the Security Council to apply the principles of the Declaration of Shared Commitments.","PeriodicalId":38927,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Peacekeeping","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-05-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49464741","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-05-24DOI: 10.1163/18754112-20210002
M. Khalil
The Chapter seeks to dispel the myth that the immunity of the United Nations amounts to impunity. Accountability is, in fact, required by the applicable law and established policy and practice of the Organization. Immunity and accountability are two co-equal pillars of the 1946 Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations and the Status of Forces Agreement. While the UN does enjoy immunity from legal process, it is obliged to provide appropriate modes of settlement of private law disputes to which it is a party. In the case of Cholera in Haiti, the UN Secretariat, the other UN principal organs and UN Member States all failed to ensure respect for the obligations of the United Nations. If even one of them had fulfilled its role properly, then justice could have been done. Thus far, with the notable exception of the human rights special rapporteurs, all have failed to do so.
{"title":"Immunity Is Not Impunity","authors":"M. Khalil","doi":"10.1163/18754112-20210002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18754112-20210002","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000The Chapter seeks to dispel the myth that the immunity of the United Nations amounts to impunity. Accountability is, in fact, required by the applicable law and established policy and practice of the Organization. Immunity and accountability are two co-equal pillars of the 1946 Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations and the Status of Forces Agreement. While the UN does enjoy immunity from legal process, it is obliged to provide appropriate modes of settlement of private law disputes to which it is a party. In the case of Cholera in Haiti, the UN Secretariat, the other UN principal organs and UN Member States all failed to ensure respect for the obligations of the United Nations. If even one of them had fulfilled its role properly, then justice could have been done. Thus far, with the notable exception of the human rights special rapporteurs, all have failed to do so.","PeriodicalId":38927,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Peacekeeping","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-05-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47465680","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-05-24DOI: 10.1163/18754112-20210004
Thierry Kaiser, Carlijn Ruers
Peacekeepers deployed as part of the United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in Mali (minusma) are operating in an increasingly hostile environment, requiring them to use force regularly in order to defend civilians, themselves and, more generally, minusma’s mandate. Over the last few years, minusma’s mandate has been expanded to enable the Mission to address the growing threat posed by hostile armed groups, including terrorist armed groups, and to provide support to counter-terrorist forces. The frequent hostilities, coupled with the Mission’s enhanced “robust” mandate and the rising number of demands made on minusma by non-UN forces for operational and logistical support, have raised questions concerning the status and legal protection of minusma’s peacekeepers under international humanitarian law, and more broadly the adequacy of the legal framework applicable to modern UN peacekeeping operations deployed in a “no peace to keep” environment. This article argues that a clarification of the application of the legal framework is required in order to afford better protection to Mission personnel and to more accurately capture the situation on the ground.
{"title":"The Application of International Humanitarian Law to Peacekeepers","authors":"Thierry Kaiser, Carlijn Ruers","doi":"10.1163/18754112-20210004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18754112-20210004","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000Peacekeepers deployed as part of the United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in Mali (minusma) are operating in an increasingly hostile environment, requiring them to use force regularly in order to defend civilians, themselves and, more generally, minusma’s mandate. Over the last few years, minusma’s mandate has been expanded to enable the Mission to address the growing threat posed by hostile armed groups, including terrorist armed groups, and to provide support to counter-terrorist forces. The frequent hostilities, coupled with the Mission’s enhanced “robust” mandate and the rising number of demands made on minusma by non-UN forces for operational and logistical support, have raised questions concerning the status and legal protection of minusma’s peacekeepers under international humanitarian law, and more broadly the adequacy of the legal framework applicable to modern UN peacekeeping operations deployed in a “no peace to keep” environment. This article argues that a clarification of the application of the legal framework is required in order to afford better protection to Mission personnel and to more accurately capture the situation on the ground.","PeriodicalId":38927,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Peacekeeping","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-05-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43083407","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-03-08DOI: 10.1163/18754112-20210001
M. Islam
Security Sector Reform (ssr) is one of the key mechanisms of the UN norms of liberal peacebuilding. After the end of a 14-year-long civil war, ssr in Liberia has faced enormous challenges but opened a new space for peace and democracy for the people. Under the comprehensive supervision of the USA, two private military companies, DynCorp International and Pacific Architects and Engineers (pae), have played a pivotal role in army reform. Alternatively, unmil has been involved in police reform, which has not been considered successful enough. Furthermore, this study has observed that before ssr, disarmament, demobilisation, and reintegration (ddr) was not properly managed, which has had a pessimistic impact on ssr. The study has also found that the reformed army and police have been strongly criticised due to a lack of local ownership and citizen oversight, gender inequality, and poor democratic control. Nevertheless, beyond its limitations, the study shows that ssr has achieved a mixture of success in the current security, stability and peace in Liberia.
{"title":"The Dynamics of Security Sector Reform in Liberia","authors":"M. Islam","doi":"10.1163/18754112-20210001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18754112-20210001","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000Security Sector Reform (ssr) is one of the key mechanisms of the UN norms of liberal peacebuilding. After the end of a 14-year-long civil war, ssr in Liberia has faced enormous challenges but opened a new space for peace and democracy for the people. Under the comprehensive supervision of the USA, two private military companies, DynCorp International and Pacific Architects and Engineers (pae), have played a pivotal role in army reform. Alternatively, unmil has been involved in police reform, which has not been considered successful enough. Furthermore, this study has observed that before ssr, disarmament, demobilisation, and reintegration (ddr) was not properly managed, which has had a pessimistic impact on ssr. The study has also found that the reformed army and police have been strongly criticised due to a lack of local ownership and citizen oversight, gender inequality, and poor democratic control. Nevertheless, beyond its limitations, the study shows that ssr has achieved a mixture of success in the current security, stability and peace in Liberia.","PeriodicalId":38927,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Peacekeeping","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43346385","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-12-18DOI: 10.1163/18754112-02303004
M. Buscemi
In peacekeeping operations, private companies are frequently and increasingly engaged by the United Nations to carry-out a wide-range of activities that can potentially impinge on human rights. This article deals with two recent cases of misconduct committed by contractors whose activities, albeit not on the face of it involving the threat or (lethal or not-lethal) use of force, nonetheless caused harm to individuals. The first case-study relates to the mismanagement of sanitary waste, while the second case addresses the (mis)use of unarmed surveillance drones. Against this backdrop, the article purports to assess whether, and under what conditions, wrongdoing committed by private contractors gives rise to the international responsibility of the United Nations. The study explores, firstly, the question of the ‘direct’ attribution of such conduct to the United Nations, based on the qualification of the contractors as agent of the Organization, as understood in the Draft Articles on the Responsibility of International Organizations. It then analyzes the issue of the ‘indirect’ responsibility of the United Nations for failing to have sufficient oversight of the outsourced activities. In this respect, it highlights the crucial role played by internal accountability mechanisms, in particular the Office of Internal Oversight Services, in appraising the monitoring measures taken by the Organization with regard to the practice of contractors and in recommending remedial actions.
{"title":"Misconduct Committed by (Civilian) Private Contractors in Peacekeeping Operations","authors":"M. Buscemi","doi":"10.1163/18754112-02303004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18754112-02303004","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000In peacekeeping operations, private companies are frequently and increasingly engaged by the United Nations to carry-out a wide-range of activities that can potentially impinge on human rights. This article deals with two recent cases of misconduct committed by contractors whose activities, albeit not on the face of it involving the threat or (lethal or not-lethal) use of force, nonetheless caused harm to individuals. The first case-study relates to the mismanagement of sanitary waste, while the second case addresses the (mis)use of unarmed surveillance drones. Against this backdrop, the article purports to assess whether, and under what conditions, wrongdoing committed by private contractors gives rise to the international responsibility of the United Nations. The study explores, firstly, the question of the ‘direct’ attribution of such conduct to the United Nations, based on the qualification of the contractors as agent of the Organization, as understood in the Draft Articles on the Responsibility of International Organizations. It then analyzes the issue of the ‘indirect’ responsibility of the United Nations for failing to have sufficient oversight of the outsourced activities. In this respect, it highlights the crucial role played by internal accountability mechanisms, in particular the Office of Internal Oversight Services, in appraising the monitoring measures taken by the Organization with regard to the practice of contractors and in recommending remedial actions.","PeriodicalId":38927,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Peacekeeping","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42293635","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：