Le Conseil de sécurité est l’organe principal du système onusien chargé du maintien de la paix et de la sécurité internationales. Face à une situation illégale, il ne peut donc l’ignorer et s’en désintéresser. Cependant, la perpétration d’un acte à la légalité controversée par l’un ou plusieurs de ses membres permanents peut nous laisser entendre que l’organe politique onusien aura des difficultés à remplir son rôle. Les membres permanents vont tenter d’instrumentaliser le Conseil de sécurité afin de diminuer l’illégalité de la situation. Ceci pose avec acuité le problème du contrôle de son activité en matière de maintien de la paix. L’accomplissement d’un acte illégal par un ou plusieurs membres permanents du Conseil de sécurité nécessite alors de réfléchir à des moyens d’ordre juridique pour limiter son pouvoir. Cette réflexion s’avère particulièrement pressante lorsque le Conseil est confronté à une occupation de guerre impliquant ses membres permanents ou, lorsqu’il crée ou autorise des opérations de paix de grandes envergures suite à un conflit armé impliquant ses membres permanents. Afin de limiter les prérogatives du Conseil de sécurité, le régime juridique de l’occupation tel qu’énoncé par le Règlement de La Haye (IV) de 1907 et la IVe Convention de Genève de 1949 devrait être appliquer par l’organe politique onusien lorsqu’il intervient dans une situation d’occupation de guerre impliquant ses membres permanents. L’objectif est d’éviter qu’il n’attribue aux puissances occupantes des missions qui dépassent le cadre juridique imposé par le droit des conflits armés. L’autorisation, par le Conseil de sécurité d’opérations de paix, telles qu’une administration civile transitoire ou une force multinationale avec un mandat de la paix avec recours à la force armée, suite à un conflit armé impliquant ses propres membres permanents, ouvre le débat sur leur réglementation. Alors, il sera proposé une interprétation progressiste de la définition de l’occupation telle qu’énoncée par le Règlement de La Haye (IV) de 1907 et la IVe Convention de Genève de 1949 afin d’y intégrer ces nouvelles formes d’occupations pacifiques, présentant de grandes similitudes avec les occupations de guerre. Ainsi, le régime juridique de l’occupation pourra leur être appliqué. / The Security Council is the primary body of the UN system responsible for peacekeeping and international security. In cases of violations of international law, the Security Council cannot turn a blind eye. Nevertheless, in cases when Security Council members are themselves perpetrators of international law violations one could conclude that this political body has difficulties in fulfilling its mandate. The danger exists that Security Council members in violation of international law will implicate the Security Council in justifying illegal decisions. This therefore raises the question of Security Council accountability. The violation of international law by a Security Council member therefore requires a legal mechanism to limit the powers of this body. This is particularly relevant for cases of occupation involving its permanent members, or, when the Security Council creates or authorizes large-scale peace-keeping operations following an armed conflict involving its own members. In order to limit the powers of the Security Council, this study proposes to impose a legal regime of administration as stipulated by the IV (1907) Hague and the 4th 1949 Geneva Convention, according to which the Security Council intervenes when a territory is administered by one of its permanent members. The goal is to avoid that the Security Council gives too much freedom to an administrative power during interventions which go beyond the legal framework defined by the law on administrated territories. The authorization by the Security Council of peace-keeping operations, such as transitional civil administration or multinational peace-keeping force mandated to use force, following an armed conflict involving its own members, opens the debate of their regulation. Consequently a progressive interpretation of occupation as defined by the IV (1907) Hague and the 4th 1949 Geneva Convention is proposed in order to encompass new forms of peaceful occupations which contain clear similarities with military occupations. Thus, they will fall under the legal mechanism of the latter.

<p>It is an unfortunate and cruel reality that both government and armed groups used child soldiers during armed conflict. Child soldiers have become an integral part of government forces as well as insurgent groups in Africa and elsewhere. Most of them are being exploited as combatants, while others perform functions, such as porters, spies who are able to enter small spaces, cooks, messengers, lookouts, and even suicide bombers. Some of the most disturbing aspects of child soldiering are that some of them are being forced to kill or are themselves killed, sexually abused and are exposed to drugs. The use of child soldiers in conflicts is not a recent phenomenon and has indeed become a common practice that characterises modern conflicts. Recruitment is usually carried out forcefully or voluntarily by both government and rebel forces. The difference between these two types of recruitment is not always clear since their decision to join is always influenced by external factors. Examples of such reasons for voluntary recruitment include the desire to revenge, adventure, peer pressure, and need for belonging and survival. Concerning the reason for survival, some argue that, the children do not actually choose freely to become combatants, but are rather forced by circumstances. There are numerous reasons for the continuous targeting of children by armed forces and armed groups. These include shortage of combatants, the fact that children are easy to train physically and psychologically, and also that children are obedient and are readily available. The recruited children are compelled to take part in brutal induction ceremonies, where they are threatened and forced to kill or witness the killing of someone they know.</p>

Il coordinamento dell’aiuto pubblico allo sviluppo, evocato negli ultimi anni da più parti come la soluzione alla deludente efficacia degli aiuti è in realtà un argomento che nasce quasi contemporaneamente alle prime organizzazioni internazionali dedicate allo sviluppo . La funzione ambivalente delle Nazioni Unite, agente di mediazione diplomatica da un lato (mediazione tra stati e tra gruppi di potere all’interno dello stesso stato), e agente di sviluppo dall’altro, garantisce all’organizzazione un ruolo preminente nel coordinamento degli aiuti nei contesti di guerra e di post-conflitto. E’ questa stessa ambivalenza che impone all’organizzazione un rapporto ufficiale con i territori sottosviluppati, incardinato nella relazione con i governi centrali degli stati. La critica radicale all’aiuto pubblico allo sviluppo individua tutte le distorsioni politiche ed economiche legate all’afflusso dei fondi, sottolineandone le aggravanti possibili laddove esista una discrasia tra gli obiettivi di sviluppo delle Nazioni Unite e quelli dell’élite che occupa le posizioni apicali dello stato. Questa ricerca attraverso un’analisi storica del contesto, mette in luce l’interazione tra il sistema degli aiuti e il sistema-paese in Tajikistan dall’ingresso delle organizzazioni ai giorni nostri. L’analisi dimostra infine che la struttura politico-economica radicata sul territorio, pur conservando i tratti di uno “stato predatorio” (tratti non alleviati bensì aggravati dalle distorsioni legate all’afflusso dei fondi per lo sviluppo), sfugge in realtà alla definizione stessa di “Stato”. Questo dato rivela una debolezza insita nell’approccio metodologico del sistema degli aiuti che si fonda proprio sull’archetipo dello “Stato”. / The Official Development Assistance (ODA) coordination has been recently launched as a genuine mean to increase aid effectiveness. Actually, the “aid coordination” paradigm was born almost contemporaneously to the first international organizations dedicated to “development”. The ambivalent function of the United Nation that acts both as an agent of diplomatic mediation (among states and among different lobbies within the borders of the same state), and as a development agent, guarantees to United Nations a preeminent role in the field of aid coordination in conflict and post-conflict contexts. It’s this real ambivalence that compels the United Nations to deal with development countries through official relations with the central governments. The radical critique to development aid shows different political and economic distortions related to the incidence of foreign funds. At the same time, it underlines that wherever the goals of the official governments diverge from the development goals of the aid community these distortions might be even more burdensome for the country. This research, through an historical analysis, draws attention on the interaction among the development industry and the country-system in Tajikistan from the arrival of the international organizations to our days. The analysis demonstrates that the political and economic structure of the country, while maintaining the features of a “predatory state” (features which are not alleviated but worsened by the distortions brought about by the aid industry), simply do not comply with the definition of a “State”. This result highlights an innate weakness of the aid industry methodological approach that is in fact, fully based on the political archetype of the “State”.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Universität, Frankfurt am Main, 2006. / Material type: Dissertations. Includes bibliographical references (p. 283-317).

No description available.

The aim of this thesis is to discuss the concepts of humanitarian intervention and the responsibility to protect (R2P), and; to investigate how best to apply the concepts in the face of humanitarian crises, in order to address concerns about their implementation. The failure of the Security Council to react to grave human rights abuses committed in the humanitarian crises of the 1990s, including Iraq (1991), Somalia (1992), Rwanda (1994), Bosnia (1993-1995) Haiti (1994-1997), and Kosovo (1999),triggered international debatesabout: how the international community should react when the fundamental human rights of populations are grossly and systematically violated within the boundaries of sovereign states, and; the need for a reappraisal of armed humanitarian intervention. Central to the debate was whether the international community should continue to adhere unconditionally to the principle of non-intervention enshrined in Article 2(7) of the UN Charter, or take a different course in the interest of human rights. The debate culminated in the establishment of the Canadian International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS) in 2000, with the mandate to find a balance between respect for sovereignty and intervention, for purposes of protecting human rights. Much of the scholarly literature on military intervention for human protection purposes deals with the legality and legitimacy of the military dimension of the concepts. The significance of the thesis is that: it focusesthe investigation on the potential abuse of the use of force for human protection purposes, when moral arguments are used to justify an intervention that is primarily motivated by the interests of the intervener, and; the propensity to use disproportionate force in the attainment of the stated objective of human protection, by powerful intervening states. The central argument of the thesis is that there are double standards, selectivity, abuses, andindiscriminate and disproportionate use of force in the implementation of R2P by powerful countries, and; that, whether a military intervention is unilateral, or sanctioned by the UN Security Council, there is the potential for abuse, and in addition, disproportionate force may be used.The thesis makes recommendations to address these concerns, in order to ensure the survival of the concept. / Public, Constitutional and International Law / LL.D.

The occurrence of internal armed conflict in Africa has increased over the last two decades. As such, Africa continues to be viewed by many as a troubled continent. In an attempt to avoid further conflict in Africa, organisations such as the United Nations have implemented comprehensive tools and strategies to prevent further conflicts from occurring. However, the genocide in Rwanda and the on-going unrest in Sudan have shown that there is still a lot of work to be done. In both these cases, the conflicts took place or escalated even with UN presence on ground. This paper will thus examine the UN's legal role in the prevention of internal armed conflict and establish the type of lessons that could be learnt from Rwanda and Sudan. / Public, Constitutional, and International / LL.M.

Armed conflict and violence against civilians in the Democratic Republic of the Congo has persisted for years starting in the 1990s. The Eastern, Western and North-Eastern parts of the country have seen the presence of a multiplicity of armed groups that have caused an escalation of the humanitarian crisis. The United Nations, in the interest of civilian protection, peacekeeping and security sector reform in the Democratic Republic of the Congo declared a mission under The United Nations Organisational Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUC). In spite of this mission, civilians continued in the Congo to suffer attacks and to endure human rights abuses by the armed militants that are fighting government and the government forces in shape of the Armed Forces of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (FARDC). This study examines the problematique of the mandate of MONUC in the Democratic Republic of the Congo in light of the challenges that have made its success debatable. The success of MONUC has become debatable in light of the fact that in spite of its presence and implementation in the DRC, between 2007 and 2010, conflict and the violence against civilians escalated to unprecedented levels. This study examines the causalities of the failure and observes its effect while making propositions towards amelioration of the challenges and the failure of the United Nations Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. / Political Sciences / M.A. (International Politics)

Le système de la Cour pénale internationale (CPI), dont la mission est d’assurer la justice internationale, repose sur un lien étroit avec le Conseil de sécurité. Il convient donc de s’interroger sur le rôle du Conseil dans le fonctionnement de la justice pénale internationale. Cette question est fondamentale, car l'intervention d'un organe politique dans l’activité d’un organe judiciaire remet en cause les missions de chacune de ces institutions. L’intrusion du Conseil dans l’activité de la CPI, basée sur sa mission de maintien de la paix, est en fait établie au nom d’un ordre international voulu par le Conseil lui-même. Ce rôle affecte le fonctionnement, l’indépendance et même l’impartialité de la Cour. Les pouvoirs que le Statut de Rome confère au Conseil, lui permettent en effet de saisir la CPI, d’imposer aux Etats de coopérer avec la Cour, de suspendre son activité ou encore de qualifier un acte, de crime d’agression. Cependant, les rapports entre le Conseil et la CPI ne devraient pas être subordonnés, mais entretenus dans le respect mutuel, ainsi une véritable crainte existe concernant le respect du Conseil envers le Statut de Rome. L’étude met en évidence le conflit entre justice et politique et révèle les enjeux actuels en termes de justice pénale internationale. / The international criminal Court system (ICC) whose mission is to ensure international justice, is based on a close relationship with the security Council. So it is proper to wonder about the Council’s role in the functioning of international criminal justice. Such a questionning is fundamental, for the intervention of a political body into the functioning of a judicial body calls into question the missions of both institutions. The Council’s interference in the activity of the ICC, based on its mission of maintaining international peace, is actually carried out on behalf of an international order intended by the Council itself. This role affects the functioning, the independence and even the impartiality of the ICC. The powers the Rome Statute gives to the Council allow it to refer to the ICC, to impose for the States to cooperate with the Court, to suspend its activity or also to qualify an act as a crime of aggression. However the relations between the Council and the ICC should not be subordinated, but maintained in mutual respect. Thus there is a real concern regarding the observance of the Rome Statute by the Council. The study highlights the conflict between justice and politics and reveals the current issues in terms of international criminal justice.

Iraq, 2003 : une coalition menée par les États-Unis et le Royaume-Uni engagea une action militaire juridiquement fondée sur une autorisation de recourir à la force implicitement contenue dans la résolution 1441 (2002) du Conseil de sécurité. Ce fondement fut également mis en avant au Kosovo (1999) ou encore au Liberia (1992).Ces trois cas illustrent l'application d'une pratique qualifiée d'autorisation implicite en matière de recours à la force. Alors que l'autorisation de recourir à la force doit résulter d'une mention explicite du Conseil de sécurité, l'autorisation implicite repose sur une interprétation entre les lignes des résolutions du Conseil afin d'y mettre en évidence une telle autorisation. Les États qui y recourent n'ont guère manqué de préciser qu'un précédent ne saurait se révéler de cette pratique en marge de la légalité internationale. Malgré son caractère controversé, ce moyen juridique tend cependant à devenir le support privilégié des États en l'absence d'une autorisation explicite.D'où, un paradoxe de l'autorisation implicite dont il nous reviendra d'en évaluer la légalité en examinant les modalités de son élaboration et de son application. Les difficultés à trancher la question de sa validité en droit international nous amèneront notamment à dépasser ce standard de légalité pour lui substituer celui de conformité, plus souple, dans un cadre juridique original : la légalité d'exception. Nous verrons enfin que l'approche téléologique de l'autorisation implicite souffre de lacunes substantielles au point de réaffirmer la double exigence du mandat clair ainsi que du contrôle des résolutions du Conseil de sécurité autorisant le recours à la force. / Iraq 2003: a coalition led by the United States and the United Kingdom undertook military action based on a legal authorization to use force implicitly contained in Security Council Resolution 1441 (2002). This argument was also highlighted in Kosovo (1999), and Liberia (1992).These three cases illustrate the application of a practice known as the implied authorization for use of force. While the authorization for use of military force must result from explicit Security Council Resolution, the implied authorization is based on an interprÉtation between the lines of Security Council Resolutions in order to highlight such an authorization. The States that had recourse to it made it abundantly clear that a precedent cannot result of this practice on the sidelines of international legality. However, despite its controversial nature, it tends to become the privileged support of the State in the absence of an explicit authorization.Hence a paradox of the implied authorization which we will assess the legality, by examining the modalities of its elaboration and its application. The difficulties by resolving the question of its validity under international law will lead us to overcome this particular standard of legality by substituting it for that of conformity, more flexible, in an original legal framework: the legality of exception. We shall finally see that the teleological approach of the implied authorization suffers substantial gaps so that we will reaffirm the dual requirement of the clear mandate and the control within the Security Council Resolutions authorizing use of force.