This thesis examines the legal and political dilemmas in the implementation of the African Union’s (AU) ‘right’ of forceful intervention through a systemic method of analysis. It first addresses the question of whether the AU’s intervention system represents a paradigm shift in international law on intervention and the authorization role of the United Nations. It examines whether there is a justifiable basis for the implementation of the AU’s intervention mandate outside the UN system, while taking into account the necessity of the international rule of law. It then analyzes the manner in which the failure to institutionalize the concept of sovereignty as responsibility within the AU system has contributed to the Union’s failure to implement its intervention mandate even within the UN system. The AU’s legal framework expressly grants the Union the mandate to forcefully intervene in a member state in situations of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. However, the failure of the AU’s legal framework to explicitly require authorization by the Security Council for intervention (as required by the UN Charter) has led to uncertainty on the envisaged implementation mechanism, including allegations of its inconsistency with the UN Charter and international law. The Security Council may, however, be ineffective in granting authorization due to the use of the veto. There is, therefore, the question of whether the AU’s legal framework exemplifies the crystallization of a customary law permitting humanitarian intervention, or is consensual (since African states have agreed by treaty to such intervention) and consequently, Security Council authorization is not mandatory. The core argument of this thesis is that although the necessity for the international rule of law restricts African Union’s forceful interventions to United Nations authorized enforcement action, robust intervention by the Union within that framework is compromised by a systemic failure of institutionalization of the concept of sovereignty as responsibility. This thesis recommends that for robust implementation of the African Union’s intervention mandate within the UN system, alternative authorization from the General Assembly be sought where the Security Council is ineffective. However, implementation of the AU’s intervention mandate within the UN framework is compromised by continued concerns of protecting traditional concepts of unfettered sovereignty. This is evident in non-intervention oriented clauses within the AU’s legal framework (which negate the intervention mandate) and the Union’s practice of opposing forceful interventions like in the case of Libya. Possible solutions to that predicament are examined. A systemic method of analysis is utilized in this thesis since there is an interaction of various legal norms within the AU system, in addition to the system’s interaction with environmental factors such as politics and increasing global interdependence, while it is also subject to the UN and international law systems. The significance of the research is in identifying legal, policy and contextual factors that can transform the AU into an effective regional mechanism for institutionalization of the rule of law within the African region (by deterring gross human rights violations) while safeguarding the values of the international rule of law. / published_or_final_version / Law / Doctoral / Doctor of Philosophy

A research report submitted to the Faculty of Law, Commerce and Management, University of the Witwatersrand, in 50% fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Management (in the field of Security). June, 2016 / This study explores civilians’ perceptions on the impartiality of the international humanitarian organization (IHO) Médecins sans Frontières (MSF). This is done through engaging participants from countries where MSF operates and has experienced different challenges in delivering humanitarian aid to civilians. The countries include the Democratic Republic of Congo, Ethiopia and Somalia. A basic interpretive approach was used to explore and interpret participants’ perceptions. Interviews were conducted with groups of participants based on their respective countries of origin. The interview questions and guide were developed using indicators of impartiality which the researcher formulated based on varying literature and definition of impartiality, independence and neutrality as the core humanitarian principles that guide the work of MSF together with many other IHOs. Participants expressed their perceptions on the impartiality of MSF through reflecting on associations they made between the IHO and parties they considered to have vested interests in humanitarian crises. These parties included Western countries, the military and persons perceived to have discriminatory and colonial intentions. Upon analysis of these perceptions, it becomes clear that MSF, as an IHO that holds itself to operate according to the humanitarian principles of independence, neutrality and impartiality, needs to reflect on how it builds its identity in order to mitigate perceptions that may have potential to hinder its ability to access and assist civilians affected by humanitarian crises. / MT2016

This thesis explores the relationship between regime types and international humanitarian nongovernmental organizations. Investigating 12 African regimes, varying between the governing types of autocratic and democratic over the last 50 years, and three specific humanitarian INGOs, I search to see if there is one regime type that works the best with this type of INGO. Using INGO presence, amount of funding, and amount of volunteers from each INGO in each country, I measure the presence of INGOs in democracies and autocracies. Compiling both an aggregate view of all 12 countries, and a disaggregate view of 4 individual countries, with investigative case studies, I discover that democracies are not the regime type that works the best with these INGOs. Contrary to the assumption made by most, that democracies do work best with humanitarian INGOs and should have the greatest INGO presence, I find this not to be the case. Rather, by grouping these regimes cohesively into four categories (autocracy, democracy, interruption, and transition), I find that democracy has the least amount of INGO presence, and very low numbers regarding the amount of funding and number of volunteers. Autocracies, interruption, and transition countries have greater INGO presence. In addition, as this question evolved over the course of writing it, other questions had to be asked and other variables considered. Issues of access, demands and needs of a country, and the domestic political environment all had to be enveloped into this question.

Philosophiae Doctor - PhD / The dissertation examines three military interventions in Sub-Saharan Africa which took place in the mid and late 1990s in Rwanda, the DRC and Lesotho. These interventions took place despite high expectations of international and regional peace on the part of most analysts after the collapse of cold war in 1989. However, interstate and intrastate conflicts re-emerged with more intensity than ever before, and sub-Saharan Africa proved to be no exception.The study sets out to analyse the motives and/or causes of military interventions in Rwanda in 1990, the DRC in 1996-7, and the DRC military rebellion and the Lesotho intervention in 1998. In analysing these interventions, the study borrows extensively from the work of dominant security theorists of international relations, predominantly realists who conceptualise international relations as a struggle for power and survival in the anarchic world. The purpose of this analysis is fourfold; firstly, to determine the reasons for military interventions and the extent to which these interventions were conducted on humanitarian grounds; secondly, to investigate the degree to which or not intervening countries were spurred by their national interests; thirdly, to assess the roles of international organisations like Southern African Development Community (SADC), the Organisation of African Unity (OAU) and the United Nations, in facilitating these interventions; as well as to evaluate the role of parliaments of intervening countries in authorising or not these military interventions in terms of holding their Executives accountable. In this context, the analysis argues that the intervening countries; Angola, Botswana, Burundi, Chad, Namibia, Rwanda, Sudan, South Africa, Uganda and Zimbabwe appeared to have used intervention as a realist foreign policy tool in the absence of authorisation from the United Nations and its subordinate bodies such as the OAU and SADC. / South Africa

<p>The dissertation examines three military interventions in Sub-Saharan Africa which took place in the mid and late 1990s in Rwanda, the DRC and Lesotho. These interventions took place despite high expectations of international and regional peace on the part of most analysts after the collapse of cold war in 1989. However, interstate and intrastate conflicts re-emerged with more intensity than ever before, and sub-Saharan Africa proved to be no exception.</p> <p><br /> The study sets out to analyse the motives and/or causes of military interventions in Rwanda in 1990, the DRC in 1996-7, and the DRC military rebellion and the Lesotho intervention in 1998. In analysing these interventions, the study borrows extensively from the work of dominant security theorists of international relations, predominantly realists who conceptualise international relations as a struggle for power and survival in the anarchic world. The purpose of this analysis is fourfold / firstly, to determine the reasons for military interventions and the extent to which these interventions were conducted on humanitarian grounds / secondly, to investigate the degree to which or not intervening countries were spurred by their national interests / thirdly, to assess the roles of international organisations like Southern African Development Community (SADC), the Organisation of African Unity (OAU) and the United Nations, in facilitating these interventions / as well as to evaluate the role of parliaments of intervening countries in authorising or not these military interventions in terms of holding their Executives accountable. In this context, the analysis argues that the intervening countries / Angola, Botswana, Burundi, Chad, Namibia, Rwanda, Sudan, South Africa, Uganda and Zimbabwe appeared to have used intervention as a realist foreign policy tool in the absence of authorisation from the United Nations and its subordinate bodies such as the OAU and SADC.</p>

<p>The dissertation examines three military interventions in Sub-Saharan Africa which took place in the mid and late 1990s in Rwanda, the DRC and Lesotho. These interventions took place despite high expectations of international and regional peace on the part of most analysts after the collapse of cold war in 1989. However, interstate and intrastate conflicts re-emerged with more intensity than ever before, and sub-Saharan Africa proved to be no exception.</p> <p><br /> The study sets out to analyse the motives and/or causes of military interventions in Rwanda in 1990, the DRC in 1996-7, and the DRC military rebellion and the Lesotho intervention in 1998. In analysing these interventions, the study borrows extensively from the work of dominant security theorists of international relations, predominantly realists who conceptualise international relations as a struggle for power and survival in the anarchic world. The purpose of this analysis is fourfold / firstly, to determine the reasons for military interventions and the extent to which these interventions were conducted on humanitarian grounds / secondly, to investigate the degree to which or not intervening countries were spurred by their national interests / thirdly, to assess the roles of international organisations like Southern African Development Community (SADC), the Organisation of African Unity (OAU) and the United Nations, in facilitating these interventions / as well as to evaluate the role of parliaments of intervening countries in authorising or not these military interventions in terms of holding their Executives accountable. In this context, the analysis argues that the intervening countries / Angola, Botswana, Burundi, Chad, Namibia, Rwanda, Sudan, South Africa, Uganda and Zimbabwe appeared to have used intervention as a realist foreign policy tool in the absence of authorisation from the United Nations and its subordinate bodies such as the OAU and SADC.</p>