Search

Begin New Search Topic Atrocity Prevention

21. A Framework for Action for the Responsibility to Protect: A Resource for States

Author:
Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Publication Date:
07-2023
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Abstract:
The Responsibility to Protect populations from genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing has emerged as an important global principle since the adoption of the UN World Summit Outcome Document in 2005. Since the conception of R2P, individual states and regional organizations, the UN, civil society, and experts around the world have worked to establish what implementation of R2P and the prevention of mass atrocity crimes means in practice. The Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect and the Asia-Pacific Centre for the Responsibility to Protect have developed a guide for states on steps to take to protect populations from atrocity crimes, at home and abroad. “A Framework for Action for the Responsibility to Protect: A Resource for States” consolidates and builds upon existing expertise from published works and best practice from states, regional organizations and the UN on how to prevent and respond to atrocity crimes. We encourage all states to utilize this framework to assess gaps and identify opportunities to address atrocity risks in their own countries, as well as to understand options available for responding to risks in their region and around the world.
Topic:
International Law, Responsibility to Protect (R2P), Atrocity Prevention, and Risk Assessment
Political Geography:
Global Focus

22. R2P Monitor, Issue 65, 1 June 2023

Author:
Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Publication Date:
06-2023
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
The Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Abstract:
R2P Monitor is a quarterly publication applying the atrocity prevention lens to populations at risk of mass atrocities around the world. Issue 65 looks at developments in Afghanistan, Cameroon, Central Sahel (Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger), China, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Myanmar (Burma), Nicaragua, Nigeria, Sudan, Syria, Ukraine, Venezuela, Central African Republic, Ethiopia, Mozambique, South Sudan and Yemen.
Topic:
Human Rights, International Law, Responsibility to Protect (R2P), and Atrocity Prevention
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, China, Sudan, Ukraine, Israel, Yemen, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Palestine, Nicaragua, Mozambique, Syria, Venezuela, Ethiopia, Nigeria, Mali, Myanmar, South Sudan, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Niger, and Burkina Faso

23. R2P Monitor, Issue 64, 1 March 2023

Author:
Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Publication Date:
03-2023
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
The Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Abstract:
R2P Monitor is a quarterly bulletin applying the atrocity prevention lens to populations at risk of mass atrocities around the world. Issue 64 looks at developments in Afghanistan, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Central Sahel (Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger), China, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Myanmar (Burma), Nigeria, Syria, Ukraine, Venezuela, Ethiopia, Mozambique, South Sudan, Sudan and Yemen.
Topic:
Human Rights, International Law, Responsibility to Protect (R2P), and Atrocity Prevention
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, China, Sudan, Ukraine, Israel, Yemen, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Palestine, Mozambique, Syria, Venezuela, Ethiopia, Nigeria, Mali, Myanmar, South Sudan, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Niger, and Burkina Faso

24. A Strategic Framework for Helping Prevent Massa Atrocities

Author:
Lawerence Woocher
Publication Date:
09-2023
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Simon-Skjodt Center for the Prevention of Genocide, United States Holocaust Memorial Museum
Abstract:
The Simon-Skjodt Center’s “Lessons Learned in Preventing and Responding to Mass Atrocities” project aims to understand better how policy makers, across all levels of government, can take effective action to prevent mass atrocity crimes and protect civilian populations in situations in which they face serious threats of group-targeted, systematic violence.1 This document is designed to support policy makers and advocates in thinking through the types of strategies that are most relevant to preventing mass atrocities—that is, instances of large-scale, systematic violence against civilian populations.2 It does not argue for or against any particular strategy or tool, but suggests that more systematic consideration about strategies should yield more effective responses.
Topic:
Public Policy, Civilians, Atrocity Prevention, and Protection
Political Geography:
Global Focus

25. Improving the Use of Lessons Learned and Other Evidence for Atrocity Prevention in the US Department of State

Author:
Tallan Donine, Julia Fromholz, and Lawerence Woocher
Publication Date:
09-2023
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Simon-Skjodt Center for the Prevention of Genocide, United States Holocaust Memorial Museum
Abstract:
There are no simple solutions to the prevention of mass atrocities. Decisions about what actions to take to address atrocity risks are invariably difficult judgment calls. Given the stakes, policy makers should make every effort to increase their chances—even if just marginally—of making wise decisions. One way to improve policy choices is to use all available information and insights that are relevant to the decision, including lessons or evidence drawn from analysis of experience or data. Virtually every report on US government efforts to prevent mass atrocities has called for greater investment in lessons learned efforts. At the same time, recent legislation and policy initiatives demonstrate that the US government is increasingly committed to using evidence in policy making across the board, including in atrocity prevention. Yet, no study has analyzed the obstacles to using lessons learned and other evidence for atrocity prevention and how they might be addressed. This report seeks to help fill the gap. This report focuses specifically on the use of lessons learned and other evidence within the US Department of State as a whole, given its lead role in developing and carrying out US foreign policy, including actions to help prevent and respond to mass atrocities. The State Department is a large and diverse institution, making it difficult to characterize the degree to which it exhibits the attributes associated with effective use of lessons learned and other evidence. Nevertheless, we identified a number of common themes across interviews with 25 former and current officials, which paint a picture of the difficulty of encouraging use of lessons learned and other evidence for atrocity prevention in the State Department and help identify potential areas for improvement. This report intends to draw attention to areas of atrocity prevention policy making that could be strengthened; it should not be read as an assessment of any particular entity within the Department.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, State Department, and Atrocity Prevention
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

26. Preventing and MitigatingMass Atrocities in Northwest and Southwest Cameroon

Author:
Simon-Skjodt Center for the Prevention of Genocide
Publication Date:
05-2023
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Simon-Skjodt Center for the Prevention of Genocide, United States Holocaust Memorial Museum
Abstract:
The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum’s Simon-Skjodt Center for the Prevention of Genocide released a brief in May 2023, “Preventing and Mitigating Mass Atrocities in Northwest and Southwest Cameroon: Identifying Policy Options.” This brief outlines policy options to prevent and mitigate mass atrocities in the Anglophone region of Cameroon, where continued conflict between armed Anglophone separatists and government security forces has resulted in over 6,000 people killed and over 600,000 people internally displaced since 2017. After years of grinding crisis, armed actors on both sides may have little incentive to shift towards peace and global powers have made insufficient and so far unsuccessful efforts to end the violence. The situation necessitates coordinated, sustained, and calibrated responses. Based on expert consultations, this brief calls on the Cameroonian government and armed separatist groups to immediately cease the targeting of civilians and for foreign governments and multilateral organizations to re-energize and support efforts for the conflict parties to reach a mediated agreement, among other recommendations, to prevent atrocities and protect civilians.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Armed Conflict, Atrocity Prevention, and Protection
Political Geography:
Africa and Cameroon

27. Gearing Up the Fight Against Impunity: Dedicated Investigative and Prosecutorial Capacities

Author:
Howard Varney and Katarzyna Zdunczky
Publication Date:
03-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
The International Center for Transitional Justice (ICTJ)
Abstract:
Holding perpetrators to account for the worst crimes known to humanity is one of the most important responsibilities of the community of nations in the 21st century. Notwithstanding the appalling nature of atrocity crimes, most perpetrators do not face justice. Specialized investigative and prosecutorial units, however, offer a ray of hope in this otherwise bleak justice landscape. Such units now operate in several countries around the world, including Argentina, Bosnia and Herzegovina, France, and Germany. This report, which was prepared jointly by ICTJ and the Foundation for Human Rights emerges from efforts to persuade the South African government to create a dedicated capacity to investigate and prosecute apartheid-era crimes, which have been long neglected. The report considers ways of gearing up the fight against impunity for serious international crimes and crimes of the past. It compares countries that leave atrocity crimes to the general administration of justice and those that adopt a specialized or dedicated approach. Specialized prosecutorial and investigative capacities are entities that focus exclusively on a particular category of crimes. While specialized units vary in size, structure, staffing, and operations, innovations such as prosecution-led investigations and bringing multi-disciplinary skills under one roof, make them considerably more effective than a generalized approach. The report provides a high-level audit of specialized units in 23 countries. It considers different models of domestic dedicated investigative and prosecutorial approaches and analyses their track records. Eleven case studies contrast countries with specialized units and those without. The report examines certain features that characterize specialized units, including their structure, composition, operations, and relationships with civil society and other entities. It analyzes the main challenges faced by the units including political dynamics, accessing evidence, and victim support. The report includes an overview of recent efforts by various specialized units to deliver criminal accountability for serious crimes committed in Syria. It concludes with recommendations on how to make specialized units more effective.
Topic:
International Law, Reform, Criminal Justice, Accountability, and Atrocity Prevention
Political Geography:
Uganda, Kenya, Africa, Europe, Middle East, Argentina, South America, Balkans, North Africa, Syria, Tunisia, Peru, and South Sudan

28. Civil Society-Led Truth-Seeking Initiatives: Expanding Opportunities for Acknowledgment and Redress

Author:
Eduardo González Cueva, Jill Williams, and Félix Reátegui Carrillo
Publication Date:
04-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
The International Center for Transitional Justice (ICTJ)
Abstract:
This study reviews civil society-led truth-seeking initiatives in different regions of the world drawing on their experiences, methodologies, and contributions. It identifies lessons learned and best practices and presents practical options for activists considering similar endeavors. The report is inspired by and builds on the work of transitional justice practitioners, including at ICTJ, who deploy wide-ranging modalities to advance truth seeking, including oral history, artwork, theatrical productions, reenactments, museum exhibits, memorials, films, and documentation projects. The right to the truth is a fundamental component of redress for victims of massive human rights violations. Institutional silence, suppression of complaints, and refusal to acknowledge such violations further perpetuates them by protecting and enabling those responsible. In many contexts, government-supported truth commissions are not possible. Moreover, total reliance on state-sanctioned formats can result in one-size-fits-all approaches to truth seeking, devoid of creativity or potential. In the absence of political will, civil society actors have responded to demands for truth by devising and carrying out truth-seeking efforts independently, using a wide array of tools and methods. Civil society-led truth-seeking initiatives provide a practical channel by which communities can respond to demands for redress when the state fails to deliver on its obligations to protect victims’ rights. While truth-seeking initiatives can take many forms, they generally share three main objectives: (1) establish the facts about human rights violations that remain disputed or denied and validate different interpretations and analyses of those facts; (2) protect, acknowledge, and empower victims and survivors; and (3) inform public policy, promote institutional reform, and contribute to social and political transformation. Through an examination of case studies from the United States, Colombia, Scotland, and West Papua, the report highlights common considerations and procedural questions that civil society groups should consider when designing and implementing a truth-seeking mechanism. These considerations can help inspire and guide civil society actors as they lead truth-seeking efforts in the United States and around the world.
Topic:
Reform, Transitional Justice, Youth, Criminal Justice, Memory, Engagement, Reparations, Gender, Atrocity Prevention, and Truth and Reconciliation
Political Geography:
Europe, Asia, Colombia, South America, North America, and United States of America

29. “Don’t Abandon Us”: Preventing Mass Atrocities in Papua, Indonesia

Author:
Made Supriatma
Publication Date:
07-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Simon-Skjodt Center for the Prevention of Genocide, United States Holocaust Memorial Museum
Abstract:
This report assesses the risk of mass atrocities (large-scale, systematic violence against civilian populations) in Papua, Indonesia, over the next 12–18 months. Since its integration into Indonesia in 1969, Papua has seen ongoing political resistance and armed rebellion in favor of independence, and government repression in response. The region is home to Indigenous Papuans and a growing population of migrants from other parts of Indonesia, layering intercommunal tensions on top of the conflict over the region’s governance. An upward trend in the frequency of violent incidents prompted this analysis of the potential for mass atrocities. This report is based on field research in Indonesia, including in Papua, from March to August 2021, as well as on expert consultations and a literature review. The report’s conceptual framework and research questions draw from the atrocity assessment framework developed by the US government.
Topic:
Security, Armed Forces, Indigenous, Industry, Atrocity Prevention, and Risk Assessment
Political Geography:
Indonesia, Southeast Asia, and Papua

30. Attacks on Hospitals from Syria to Ukraine: Improving Prevention and Accountability Mechanisms

Author:
Elise Baker and Gissou Nia
Publication Date:
06-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Atlantic Council
Abstract:
When Russia invaded Ukraine on February 24, 2022, it soon began implementing one of its frequent—and criminal—tactics that it had already been using in its military intervention in Syria: bombing healthcare and medical facilities. Syrian government forces first began targeting health workers in Syria in 2011 at the start of the Syria crisis, and Russia joined them in targeting the healthcare system upon its official entrance to the conflict in 2015. Over the course of the conflict, over 90 percent of 601 recorded attacks on medical facilities were attributable to either Syrian or Russian forces. In Ukraine, Russia has reportedly perpetrated more than 200 attacks on healthcare facilities and ambulances since the start of the invasion. The well-documented pattern of targeted attacks on healthcare in Syria and Ukraine undermines long-established and hard-won provisions under international humanitarian law intended to protect civilians during conflict. Despite the scale of the problem, which extends beyond Syria and Ukraine, there has been no prominent criminal prosecution of any alleged perpetrators of attacks on healthcare in any conflict, no establishment of a UN mandate dedicated to this issue, and no task force created by national governments specifically aimed at prevention of and accountability for these crimes. The international community’s failure to compel meaningful action to stop the criminal practice of targeting healthcare in conflict after conflict has resulted in continued deaths of health workers and civilian populations. In a new issue brief by the Atlantic Council Strategic Litigation Project‘s Elise Baker and Gissou Nia, the two propose recommendations to UN bodies, the World Health Organization, national governments and other institutions and decision makers for concrete actions to prevent future attacks and advance accountability for past ones.
Topic:
Syrian War, Accountability, International Community, Hospitals, and Atrocity Prevention
Political Geography:
Europe, Ukraine, Middle East, and Syria