Search

Begin New Search Political Geography Rwanda Publishing Institution The Goettingen Journal of International Law

1. Protecting Protected Areas in Bello: Learning From Institutional Design and Conflict Resilience in the Greater Virunga and Kidepo Landscapes

Author:
Elaine (Lan Yin) Hsiao
Publication Date:
07-2020
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Goettingen Journal of International Law
Institution:
The Goettingen Journal of International Law
Abstract:
It has often been cited that major armed conflicts (>1,000 casualties) afflicted two-thirds (23) of the world’s recognized biodiversity hotspots between 1950 and 2000.1 In 2011, the International Law Commission (ILC) included in its long-term work program Protection of the Environment in Relation to Armed Conflict.2 This led to the adoption of twenty-eight Draft Principles, including designation of protected zones where attacks against the environment are prohibited during armed conflict.3 Protected zone designations apply to places of major environmental and cultural importance, requiring that they “[...] shall be protected against any attack, as long as it does not contain a military objective.”4 Most research on armed conflict and protected areas has focused on impacts to wildlife and less on how to protect these natural habitats from the ravages of armed conflict.5 This article highlights some of the gaps in the ILC Draft Principles towards protecting protected zones in bello. It uses transboundary protected areas (TBPAs) formalized through multilateral agreements to illustrate challenges on the ground. TBPAs are internationally designated “[...] protected areas that are ecologically connected across one or more international boundaries [...]” and sometimes even established for their promotion of peace (i.e., Parks for Peace).6 There is little legal research on how to design TBPA agreements for conflict resilience, conflict sensitivity, and ultimately positive peace.7 The research draws from two case studies in Africa’s Great Rift Valley: the Greater Virunga Landscape (GVL) between the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Rwanda, and Uganda, and the Kidepo Landscape, which forms part of the broader Landscapes for Peace initiative between South Sudan and Uganda. Both suffer from armed conflicts of various types and present two of the only TBPAs in the world that have incorporated environmental peacebuilding into their transboundary agreements.8 The case studies illustrate different approaches to TBPA design and the pros and cons of each modality in the context of conflict resilience and conflict sensitivity. This guides us on how to better protect protected areas in bello, ensuring that protected zones endure on the ground and not just in principle.
Topic:
Environment, Culture, and Conflict
Political Geography:
Africa, Democratic Republic of the Congo, and Rwanda

2. The International Residual Mechanism and the Legacy of the International Criminal Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda

Author:
Gabrielle Bardall
Publication Date:
12-2011
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Goettingen Journal of International Law
Institution:
The Goettingen Journal of International Law
Abstract:
By Security Council Resolution 1966 (2010), the Security Council established the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals as the legal successor to the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda. In the creation of the Residual Mechanism, the Security Council appears to have intended to ensure the continuation of the work of the Tribunals and thereby safeguard their legacies. Accordingly, the Statute of the Residual Mechanism continues the jurisdiction of the Tribunals, mirrors in many respects the structures of the Tribunals, and ensures that the Residual Mechanism's Rules of Procedure and Evidence are based on those of the Tribunals. However, the Statute of the Residual Mechanism is silent with regard to the weight the Judges of the Residual Mechanism must accord to ICTY and ICTR judicial decisions. While there is no doctrine of precedent in international law or hierarchy between international courts, this omission by the Security Council does have the potential to negatively impact the legacies of the Tribunal by allowing for departures by the Residual Mechanism from the jurisprudence of the Tribunals, which lead to similarly situated persons being dissimilarly treated. Nevertheless, even if the Residual Mechanism does adopt the jurisprudence of the Tribunals as its own, as a separate legal body it will still have to answer constitutional questions regarding the legitimacy of its establishment by the Security Council. While it can be anticipated that the Residual Mechanism will find itself validly constituted, the wisdom of the Security Council's decision to artificially end the work of the Tribunals by the establishment of the Residual Mechanisms will ultimately turn upon the question of whether any inherent unfairness could be occasioned to persons whose proceedings are before the Residual Mechanism. It will be suggested that the Security Council has provided the Residual Mechanism with sufficient tools to ensure that its proceedings are conducted in para passu with those of the Tribunals and that the responsibility of ensuring the highest standards of international due process and fairness falls to the Judges of the Residual Mechanism.
Topic:
Security
Political Geography:
Yugoslavia and Rwanda

3. The Future of Peacekeeping in Africa and the Normative Role of the African Union

Author:
Charles Riziki Majinge
Publication Date:
08-2010
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Goettingen Journal of International Law
Institution:
The Goettingen Journal of International Law
Abstract:
While it has been the responsibility of the United Nations to conduct peacekeeping operations on the continent, the trend is gradually changing. African Union and its regional organizations (RECs) are increasingly assuming responsibility of securing peace and stability on the continent. Many reasons militate in favour of this trend. Chiefly the unwillingness of the United Nations Security Council and of the developed countries to intervene timely and adequately to avert humanitarian catastrophes as happened in Rwanda, Southern Sudan and Angola. Furthermore, the desire of Africa to take steps to address its own problems without heavily relying on assistance from the international community whose availability is neither assured nor sufficient. This contribution argues that Africa can no longer expect the international community to shoulder the burden of peacekeeping in some of the most intractable conflicts on the continent without taking steps to participate actively in the process itself. While Africa has expressed its desire to address its own problems through the vision of “African solutions for African Problems”, African leaders must show greater willingness to fund and strengthen institutions they establish to carry out this vision. Lastly, the paper contends that the international community, especially the developed states, should take genuine and adequate measures to assist Africa realize its vision. A strong African Union capable of securing peace and stability on the continent is in the best interests not only of Africa but also of the international community as a whole.
Political Geography:
Africa, Sudan, Rwanda, and Angola