The analysis of the rules evolution, in particular internationally, demonstrates normative and principles conflicts that serve as power play instrument and the colonizer-colonized dichotomy, even when its essence is directed to the maintenance of peace. The the Responsibility While protecting (RWP) presented by Brazil in 2011, within the context of the development of global standards, permeated by non-linear conflictual interactions, where the interventions based on a Responsibility to Protect(R2P) civilians, have challenged the existing structures in the global order and therefore has sparked great debate regarding the prevalence of decisions emanating from the United Nations Security Council - UNSC against the sovereignty and self-determination of peoples, since there is no control of legality and legitimacy of that discretion which the United Nations - UN holds. In this sense, the present work aims to analyze if the Responsibility to Protect can be considered as an attempt to influence from the Global South countries in the production of global standards and this can work as a capable principle of safeguarding the coercive nature of measures by of the UNSC, a way of accountability that implies a large extent by the level of responsibility of emanating acts from the UN Security Council that determ interventions, and what tools are needed for the Responsibility to Protect is an effective tool of prior control of legality and legitimacy. In order to meet this goal, we adopted a dialectical approach, drawing on the monographic method, through bibliographical and documentary research and interdisciplinary literature, among others that apply to the subject under study. / A análise da evolução das normas, em específico no âmbito internacional, demonstra conflitos normativos e principiológicos que servem de instrumento de reprodução de poder e da dicotomia colonizador-colonizado, mesmo quando sua essência está voltada para a manutenção da paz. O Princípio da Responsabilidade ao Proteger (RWP, sigla em inglês), apresentado pelo Brasil em 2011, surge no contexto da evolução das normas globais, permeadas por interações não lineares conflituosas, onde a implementação cada vez maior de intervenções baseadas em uma Responsabilidade de Proteger (R2P, sigla em inglês) civis, tem desafiado as estruturas existentes na ordem global e por isso tem suscitado grande debate no que toca a prevalência de decisões emanadas do Conselho de Segurança das Nações Unidas - CSNU face à soberania e a autodeterminação dos povos, uma vez que não há um controle de legalidade e legitimidade desse poder discricionário do qual a Organização das Nações Unidas - ONU é detentora. Nesse sentido, a presente dissertação visa analisar se a Responsabilidade ao Proteger pode ser considerada como uma tentativa de influência a partir dos países do Sul Global na produção de normas globais e se esta pode funcionar como um princípio capaz de acautelar as medidas de natureza coercitiva por parte do CSNU, isto é, uma forma de accountability que implique em um maior nível de responsabilidade por parte dos atos emanados do Conselho de Segurança da ONU que determinem intervenções, bem como quais são os instrumentos necessários para que a Responsabilidade ao Proteger seja uma ferramenta eficaz de controle prévio de legalidade e legitimidade. De forma a cumprir esse objetivo, adotou-se uma abordagem dialética, valendo-se do método monográfico, por meio de pesquisa bibliográfica e documental e literatura especializada interdisciplinar, dentre outras que aplicáveis ao tema em estudo.

La recevabilité est le cœur de la procédure judiciaire. Elle permet d’étudier la pénalisation de la vie internationale. Elle semble pouvoir rendre compte de la réponse judiciaire à la rancœur internationale au regard des grands faits criminels ; quel qu’en fut le territoire de commission.Cette thèse porte sur la notion de recevabilité devant la Cour pénale internationale. Avec la création de la CPI, la justice pénale internationale prend une dimension nouvelle. La pratique de la Cour est encore récente. L’étude est le prétexte pour examiner le fonctionnement de la Cour pénale internationale. Les Etats ont tenté de limiter la capacité de recevoir de la Cour. Ils l’ont ainsi fondée sur le principe de la complémentarité. Elle supplée l’inaction ou l’action défaillante des Etats, qui ont le devoir de poursuivre les auteurs de crimes internationaux. L’article 17 du Statut de Rome énonce les exceptions permettant de déclarer une affaire recevable devant la CPI. Ainsi, la recevabilité d’une affaire ayant fait l’objet d’une enquête ne sera retenue que s’il est prouvé que les Etats n’ont pas l’intention de mener véritablement à bien les poursuites. Et, que par ailleurs, le seuil de gravité de l’affaire est atteint. Le caractère universel de la compétence de la CPI est battu en brèche par les conditions de recevabilité. On analyse la recevabilité comme une condition de compétence à juste titre, car c’est bien le manquement de l’Etat à assurer l’effectivité des poursuites qui justifie que l’affaire soit déclarée, par la Cour elle-même, recevable. Les conditions requises pour que la Cour puisse agir, force est de constater l’implication du système de recevabilité tant sur l’organisation de la Cour que sur ses rapports avec les Etats. Celles-ci ne sont pas négligeables. De fait, le système de recevabilité est amené à évoluer. Il se caractérise par sa capacité à influencer le droit interne. Ainsi, la décision de recevoir doit amener les Etats à adapter leur droit interne. La viabilité de la Cour, à long terme, dépend du maintien d’une synergie de coopération avec les juridictions nationales, des États parties et d'autres Etats. Le système de recevabilité tend à mettre en évidence des indicateurs émergents dans la pratique de la Cour pénale internationale. C’est notamment le réalignement frappant des rôles des acteurs internationaux et la relation nouvelle qui s’instaure entre les Etats et la Cour. Le système de recevabilité de la Cour tend à éroder le principe de la souveraineté de l'Etat, sans être elle-même balayée par l'opposition catégorique des Etats souverains. / Admissibility is the heart of the judicial process. It studies the criminalization of international life. It seems to account for the judicial response to the international resentment against the great criminal acts, whatever was the territory of commission.This thesis deals with the notion of admissibility before the ICC. With the creation of the ICC, International Criminal Justice is a new dimension. The practice of the Court is still new. The study is an excuse to investigate the operation of the ICC. States have tried to limit the ability to receive from the Court. They did so based on the principle of complementarity. It compensates the action or inaction of failing states, which have a duty to prosecute international crimes. Article 17 RS sets out exceptions to declare a case admissible before the ICC. Thus, the admissibility of a case which is the subject of an investigation will be accepted only, if it is shown that States did not intend genuinely to carry out prosecutions. And that furthermore, the threshold of gravity of a case is reached. The universal nature of the jurisdiction of the ICC is undermined by the conditions of admissibility. Analyzing the admissibility of competence as a condition rightly, for it is the failure of the state to ensure effective prosecution to justify that the case will be declared by the Court itself, admissible. The requirements for the Court to act, it is clear involvement of the system of admissibility as on the organization of the Court that its relationship with the United States. These are not insignificant. In fact, the system will evolve admissibility. It is characterized by its ability to influence the law. Thus, the decision to receive should encourage States to adapt their domestic law. The viability of the Court, in the long run depends on maintaining a synergy of cooperation with national courts of States Parties and other States. The system of admissibility tends to highlight indicators emerging in the practice of the International Criminal Court. This is especially striking realignment of the roles of international actors and the new relationship established between the States and the Court. The system of admissibility of the Court tends to erode the principle of state sovereignty, without itself being swept by the opposition of sovereign states.

La responsabilité de protéger a été élaborée en 2001 par la Commission internationale de l’intervention et de la souveraineté des États. Le concept se voulait une réponse aux controverses suscitées par les interventions armées à des fins humanitaires menées dans les années 1990. Il cherchait à concilier l’intervention à des fins humanitaires et le principe de souveraineté afin d’assurer la protection universelle des populations civiles, notamment par les actions du Conseil de sécurité, tout en respectant les principes qui constituent les fondements de la société internationale basée sur la Charte des Nations Unies. Avec son entérinement par les 191 États membres des Nations Unies lors du Sommet mondial de 2005, la responsabilité de protéger est devenue un sujet incontournable du discours international. En 2011, la mise en œuvre de la responsabilité de protéger par le Conseil de sécurité durant la guerre civile en Libye et la crise postélectorale en Côte d’Ivoire a mis le concept au premier plan de l’actualité internationale. Notre mémoire cherche à déterminer les répercussions juridiques qu’a eues la responsabilité de protéger sur le principe de la souveraineté étatique et sur le fonctionnement institutionnel du Conseil de sécurité. / The Responsibility to Protect was elaborated in 2001 by the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty following the controversies surrounding humanitarian interventions lead during the 1990s. The Responsibility to Protect aimed at reconciling intervention for human protection purposes and sovereignty in order to ensure the universal protection of civilian populations, notably through the Security Council, while respecting the principles constituting the foundation of the international society based on the Charter of the United Nations. Since its acceptance by the 191 Member States of the United Nations during the 2005 World Summit, the concept has become a subject of first importance at the international stage. The implementation of the Responsibility to Protect by the Security Council in 2011 during the Civil War in Libya and the post-electoral crisis in Ivory Coast has put the concept on the headlines of the international news. Our thesis aims at determining the juridical repercussions that the Responsibility to Protect had on the State Sovereignty principle and on the institutional functioning of the Security Council.

Magister Philosophiae - MPhil / 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. / South Africa

L’analyse des relations entre le gouvernement intérimaire rwandais et la communauté internationale durant le génocide de 1994 met en évidence la primauté du facteur politique voire géopolitique sur la prise en compte de considérations strictement juridiques et humanitaires de la part de l’ONU et des États tiers les plus impliqués dans cette crise (Belgique, France, États-Unis). La marginalisation progressive du gouvernement intérimaire sur la scène internationale, au moment où il sollicite une aide extérieure pour mettre fin aux massacres, ne s’est pas accompagnée d’un renforcement des effectifs et du mandat de la Mission des Nations Unies pour l’Assistance au Rwanda (MINUAR), qui constituait pourtant la principale demande des autorités rwandaises au Conseil de sécurité. Ce désengagement de la communauté internationale s’est effectué au détriment de la sécurité et de la protection des populations civiles menacées. Dans le même temps, la criminalisation de ce gouvernement a contribué à faire entériner l’acceptation d’une issue militaire au conflit souhaitée par la rébellion du Front Patriotique Rwandais (FPR), au mépris des accords de paix et de partage du pouvoir d’Arusha signés en 1993. La présomption de culpabilité à l’égard du camp gouvernemental a par la suite fortement impacté la justice internationale, le Tribunal Pénal International pour le Rwanda (TPIR) ayant échoué dans sa mission consistant à juger tous les auteurs de crimes commis en 1994 et à favoriser la réconciliation nationale, du fait de son manque d’impartialité et d’indépendance tant au niveau des poursuites et de l’instruction que du rendu de ses jugements et de leur pleine application. / An analysis of relations between the interim government of Rwanda and the international community during the genocide of 1994 demonstrates how political, even geopolitical, factors were given priority over strictly judicial and humanitarian considerations by the UN and the third-party states most implicated in this crisis (Belgium, France, the USA). The progressive marginalisation of the interim government on the international scene, at the time when it was soliciting external help to put a stop to the massacres, did not see a reinforcement of staff or of the mandate of the United Nations Assistance Mission for Rwanda (UNAMIR), which nonetheless constituted the principal demand of the Rwandan authorities to the Security Council.This disengagement on the part of the international community happened to the detriment of the security and protection of the civil population under threat. At the same time the criminalisation of this government contributed to the endorsement of a military outcome to the conflict ; the outcome desired by the rebellion of the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF), contravening the Arusha Accords signed in 1993. The presumption of guilt attached to the government camp subsequently had a strong impact on international justice, as the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) had failed in its mission of judging all the perpetrators of crimes committed in 1994, and of favorising national reconciliation, due to its lack of impartiality and independence as much at the level of investigation and prosecution as at the level of the delivery of the judgments and their enactment.

Academic literature and the media offer a variety of monikers for emerging states like Brazil, India and China, most prominently, ‘emerging powers’ and ‘emerging markets’. This article argues the terms used to describe these states create assumptions about their behaviour in global governance (GG). In order to accurately assess the impact of emerging states on international institutions, it is necessary to more systematically examine their current participation in GG. Does the use of power and economic interests in GG negotiations distinguish emerging states from traditional powers, as the ‘emerging’ part of these terms suggests? And can the content of GG negotiations predict the dominance of each factor, as implied by the ‘power/market’ part? This article tackles these questions by comparing the behaviour of one emerging state (India) and one traditional power (the United States) in negotiations at the World Trade Organisation and the United Nations Security Council. The results demonstrate that, while there is clearly something distinctive about at least India’s participation in GG, focussing on power or economic interests alone is insufficient to explain that distinctiveness or its implications for relations between rising and traditional powers in GG.

Der Einfluss Internationaler Organisationen reicht angesichts der Herausforderung, für globale Probleme Lösungen zu finden, mittlerweile so weit, dass sich die Frage nach den in ihnen vorhandenen Machtbegrenzungsmechanismen stellt. Doch wie kann die Macht Internationaler Organisationen kontrolliert werden, wenn das aus dem nationalen Verfassungsrecht bekannte Gewaltenteilungsprinzip nicht auf die internationale Ebene übertragen werden kann?   Die Arbeit analysiert die dazu innerhalb der Vereinten Nationen (UNO) und der Welthandelsorganisation (WTO) existierenden formalisierten Mechanismen anhand ihrer Gründungsverträge. Dabei werden drei Kategorien von Machtbegrenzungsmechanismen identifiziert: Kompetenzzuweisungen und -abgrenzungen, organinterne Mechanismen und schließlich Interaktion zwischen den Organen. Die in der Praxis bedeutsamsten Mechanismen stellen zum einen das Vetorecht im UN-Sicherheitsrat sowie der negative Konsens im Streitbeilegungsgremium der WTO dar, die zur Gruppe der organinternen Mechanismen gehören. Zum anderen besteht in der Kontrolle der Streitbeilegungs-Panel der WTO durch den Appellate Body eine wichtige Machtbegrenzung durch Interaktion.  Die Untersuchung dokumentiert das paradoxe Phänomen, dass die Mechanismen zur Begrenzung der Macht in vielen Fällen auch eine machtsteigernde Wirkung haben, indem sie die Effizienz, Akzeptanz und Legitimation der Organisation erhöhen. Die Verfasserin erklärt dies damit, dass das Augenmerk der Gründungsstaaten in der Entstehungsphase auf dem Funktionieren der Organisation als Gegengewicht zu ihren jeweiligen Mitgliedsstaaten lag. Dass Internationale Organisationen in der Zwischenzeit so stark an Einfluss gewonnen haben, dass ihre Macht nunmehr begrenzt werden sollte, ist eine neue Entwicklung, die jedoch in Zukunft deutlich an Bedeutung gewinnen wird. / In light of the challenge to find answers to global problems, the influence of international organizations nowadays goes so far that the question of existing checks and balances within these organizations arises. But how can power be controlled when the principle of separation of powers originating from national constitutional law cannot be transferred to the international stage? The purpose of this thesis is to analyze existing formalized internal mechanisms within the United Nations and the World Trade Organization on the basis of their founding treaties. The author identifies three categories of checks and balances: allowing and limiting competencies, mechanisms within the organs and finally interactions between the organs. In practice, the most important mechanisms of these organizations are on the one hand the power of veto within the UN Security Council and the negative consensus within the WTO dispute settlement body, which belong to the category of mechanisms within the organs. In addition, the control of the WTO dispute settlement panels by the Appellate Body is an important form of checks and balances through interaction. The analysis shows the paradoxical phenomenon, that checks and balances in many cases have the effect of increasing power by augmenting the efficiency, acceptance and legitimacy of the organization. The author explains this by reference to the intentions of the founding states during the developing phase to strengthen these organizations as a counterbalance to their respective member states. It is a new development that international organizations have now increased their influence so much that their power should be limited, but this will become significantly more important in the future.

"Mémoire présenté à la Faculté des Études supérieures en vue de l'obtention du grade de LL.M. en Maîtrise en droit Option recherche" / Le crime d'agression se veut etre un des quatre crimes internationaux sous la juridiction de la CPI. Lorsque les delegues a la Conference de Rome n'eurent point atteint de consensus sur une definition du crime, celui-ci resta, depuis, indefini en droit. En consequence, la CPI n'aura juridiction pour entendre des causes portant sur le crime d'agression qu'une fois la definition sera adoptee par l'Assemblee des Etats Parties au plus tot en 2009. Ce memoire traite trois problematiques liees au crime d'agression : la question de la responsabilite penale individuelle, le role du Conseil de securite de l'ONU, et les parametres du crime en tant que tel. La responsabilite penale individuelle est analysee, inter alia, du point de vue du principe des sources du droit international. Quant al'eventuelle implication du Conseil de securite dans le champ de competence de la CPI sur le crime d'agression, l'auteure soutient tel que suit: Si le Conseil de securite se voit accorde un pouvoir plus large que celui dont il est presentement dote en vertu des articles 13(b) et 16 du Statut de Rome, chaque membre permanent aura un veto sur toute situation d'agression qui serait autrement portee devant la Cour. Ceci aura pour consequence de politiser la CPI en ce qui a trait au crime et rendra hypothethique toute definition eventuelle. Si la definition est bien con9ue et redigee, on fait valoir, qu'il n' est point necessaire de limiter davantage la competence de la CPI. Les parametres de la definition du crime proposes par l'auteure sont etablis selon les conclusions d'une analyse des notions composantes de l'agression. L'essentiel du concept se veut un recours illegal et non-necessaire qui constitue une rupture ala paix. Amoins qu'il ne soit exerce en « legitime defence» ou en vertu d'un mandat du Chapitre VII, Ie recours ala force constitue prima facie une agression et s'il est suffisamment grave, il s'agira d'un crime d'agression. Ce memoire termine avec un projet de definition du crime d'agression en vue d'avancer Ie discours vers un consensus sur ces problematiques majeures. Non seulement est-il possible d'arriver aun consensus sur la definition, croit l'auteure, mais nous sommes plus que jamais al'aube d'y parvenir. / The crime of aggression is one of the four international crimes under the jurisdiction of the ICC. When delegates at the Rome Conference were unable to agree on the content of a definition, the crime was left undefined. As a result, the ICC can only begin prosecuting individuals for the crime of aggression once a definition is adopted by the Assembly of States Parties in 2009, at the earliest. This thesis examines three issues associated with the crime of aggression: the question of individual criminal responsibility, the role of the UN Security Council and the general scope of the definition of the crime of aggression itself Individual criminal liability is reviewed, inter alia, from the perspective of international sources doctrine. Regarding the role of the Security Council in relation to the crime of aggression, the author concludes: if the Security Council is vested with more powers than it already has under Articles 13(b) and 16 of the Rome Statute, each permanent member will have a veto over any situation of aggression that might otherwise be brought before the Court. This would result in a complete politicization of the ICC and render moot any future definition of the crime of aggression. If a definition for the crime of aggression is properly conceived and constructed, it is argued, there is no need to further limit the Court's exercise of jurisdiction. The author proposes general parameters for the scope ofthe definition based on conclusions reached in the analysis of the conceptual components of aggression. At its essence, the act of aggression is the unnecessary, unlawful use of force which constitutes a breach ofthe peace. Unless employed in "self-defence" or under a Chapter VII mandate, the use offorce constitutes prima facie an act of aggression, and if it is sufficiently grave, a crime ofaggression. This thesis concludes with a working definition ofthe crime of aggression to promote dialogue and ultimately a consensus on these core issues. Not only is a definition is within reach, the author believes, we are closer to it than we ever have been before.

Le Tribunal spécial pour le Liban (TSL) est établi en vertu d’un accord bilatéral conclu entre l’ONU et le Gouvernement libanais; mais ses instruments constitutifs ne sont entrés en vigueur qu’en vertu de la résolution 1757 (2007) du Conseil de sécurité adoptée sur la base du Chapitre VII de la Charte. Le TSL, siégeant aux Pays-Bas, composé de juges étrangers et libanais, s’avère un tribunal pénal internationalisé sui generis. Son mandat principal consiste à poursuivre les responsables de l’attentat du 14 février 2005 ôtant la vie à l’ancien Premier Ministre libanais Rafic HARIRI et de 22 autres personnes ; toutefois la compétence du TSL peut être élargie pour couvrir des attentats connexes. Plusieurs caractéristiques distinguent le TSL du fait qu’il est le premier tribunal pénal créé sous les auspices des Nations Unies, sans appartenir à la discipline du droit international humanitaire, et qui ne juge que des crimes de terrorisme en temps de paix à la lumière du droit national libanais ; comme il est le premier tribunal pénal international qui mène des procès in absentia; et le premier qui est doté d’un Bureau pour la Défense - comme organe autonome du TSL – sur un même pied d’égalité avec le Bureau du Procureur en conférant des pouvoirs larges aux conseils de la Défense. Le TSL fonctionne selon son propre Règlement de procédure et de preuve - adopté par ses juges - associant à la fois le système romano-germanique et le système anglo-saxon. Le fonctionnement du TSL confronte des défis juridiques, de par son financement mixte assuré à travers la contribution conventionnelle du Gouvernement libanais et les contributions volontaires des États membres, ou de par sa primauté restreinte qui est juste limitée aux juridictions libanaises, générant une coopération problématique avec les États tiers et hésitante avec le Liban. Également, le Statut du Tribunal est réticent sur la question des immunités. La mise en place du TSL a créé une grande polémique politique au Liban, son fonctionnement au cœur d’un cadre géopolitique instable provoque des enjeux stratégiques pertinents ayant des impacts sur la scène politique au Liban et au Moyen-Orient. Le TSL encourt des enjeux stratégiques du fait que son premier acte d’accusation incrimine des membres appartenant au Hezbollah - une résistance armée contre Israël - allié de l’Iran et de la Syrie. Le Printemps arabe et ses implications sur la révolte syrienne générèrent une instabilité politique et sécuritaire au Liban, alertant une nouvelle série d’attentats terroristes. La mission principale du TSL consiste à mettre fin à l’impunité au Liban, principalement celle relative aux assassinats politiques. Du fait que le TSL est établi juste pour juger un seul attentat et un nombre restreint de crimes connexes dans un cadre temporel et spatial restreints, alors qu’un grand nombre de crimes graves de droit international humanitaire et de crimes politiques et terroristes restent impunis au Liban, le TSL est conçu comme un instrument de justice sélective. Pour ses détracteurs, le TSL concrétise le dilemme entre « paix civile » et « justice internationale », bien que sa finalité consiste à consolider la réconciliation nationale à travers la découverte de la vérité. / The Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL) is created through a bilateral agreement concluded between the UN and the Lebanese Government; but its essential instruments didn’t come into force until the adoption of the binding resolution 1757 (2007) of the Security Council adopted under Chapter VII of the UN Charter. The STL, sitting in the Netherlands, composed of foreign and Lebanese judges, is an internationalized criminal tribunal sui generis. Its primary mandate consists on prosecuting those responsible for the 14th February 2005 attempt which caused the death of the former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafic HARIRI and 22 other people; nevertheless the STL’s jurisdiction can be extended to cover connected attacks. Many features distinguish the STL, since it is the first criminal tribunal that was created under the UN’s framework outside of the International humanitarian law’s discipline; it judges terrorism crimes in peace time under the Lebanese domestic law; moreover, it is the first international criminal tribunal which holds trials in absentia, establishes an Office for the Defense as an autonomous organ equally with the Office of the Prosecutor giving the defense counsel large powers. The STL works according to its proper Rules of Procedure and Evidence – adopted by its judges – associating the civil law system and the common law system. The STL’s functioning confronts legal challenges due to its combined funding mechanism, assured by the conventional contribution of the Lebanese Government as by the voluntary contributions of member States; or due to its restricted primacy limited only to Lebanese courts, arising a problematical horizontal cooperation. In addition, the STL’s Statute expresses reluctance on the immunities’ question. The implementation of the STL has created a large political controversy in Lebanon; its work in an unstable geopolitical framework triggers relevant strategic issues having impacts on the political scene in Lebanon and Middle-East. The STL incurs strategic challenges since its first indictment incriminates Hezbollah members – an armed resistance against Israel – ally of Iran and Syria. The Arab spring and its implications on the Syrian revolution generate instability to the political and security conditions of Lebanon, alerting a new series of terrorist attempts. The main mission of the STL consists to end impunity in Lebanon related first and foremost to political assassinations. The STL is considered as an instrument of selective justice since it is established only to judge a single attempt and a small number of connected crimes in a restricted spatiotemporal framework, whereas a large number of serious crimes of International humanitarian law and political crimes perpetrated in Lebanon are still unpunished. For its detractors, the STL embodies the dilemma between "civil peace" and "international justice", although its finality seeks to consolidate the national reconciliation through the discovery of the truth.

Le 22 juin 1994, le Conseil de sécurité de l’ONU vote la résolution 929 autorisantle déploiement d’une force multinationale humanitaire, neutre et impartiale au Rwandaayant pour mission de mettre fin aux massacres. Concrètement, c’est la France, àl’initiative de ce projet, qui va assurer le commandement de la mission dénomméeOpération Turquoise. Celle-ci se heurte à l’opposition des rebelles tutsis du FrontPatriotique Rwandais, aux réserves des organisations humanitaires mais elle reçoit lesoutien appuyé du gouvernement intérimaire rwandais hutu. L’Opération Turquoisesuscite surtout une vague d’accusations dans la presse française, le président FrançoisMitterrand et les militaires français étant accusés de « complicité de génocide », voire de« participation au génocide ». Ces accusations perdurent et reviennent régulièrementdepuis plus de vingt ans, relayées par des journalistes qui disent avoir découvert puisrévélé « l’inavouable » rôle de la France au Rwanda.Cette étude analyse les enquêtes journalistiques menées de 1994 à 2014 et lesconfronte aux documents confidentiels et secret-défense issus des archives américaines,françaises, rwandaises et onusiennes, ainsi qu’à la stratégie militaire mise en oeuvredurant l’Opération Turquoise. Elle permet ainsi d’identifier les sources sur lesquellesreposent ces accusations et d’en évaluer le bien-fondé. Ce faisant, elle met en évidence lafaçon dont la recherche s’est concentrée sur le génocide au détriment de la lutte arméeinitiée par le FPR de 1990 à juillet 1994, laissant de côté des aspects essentiels à lacompréhension de la tragédie rwandaise. / On the 22nd June 1994, the UN Security Council passes the resolution 929authorising the deployment of a multinational humanitarian, neutral and impartial force toRwanda having as its mission to put an end to the massacres. In concrete terms, it isFrance, on initiative of this project, who goes to carry out the command of the missionnamed Operation Turquoise. This comes up against the opposition of the Tutsis rebels ofthe Rwandan Patriotic Front, to the reservations of the humanitarian organisations but itreceives the backup support of the acting Rwandan Hutu government. OperationTurquoise incites above all a wave of accusations in the French press, with the PresidentFrançois Mitterand and the French military soldiers being accused of 'complicity ingenocide', even of taking part in the genocide. These accusations have endured and havebeen regularly coming back for more than twenty years, relayed by journalists who claimto have discovered then revealed the shameful role of France in RwandaThis study analyses the journalistic inquiries led from 1994 to 2014 and comparesthem with confidential secret defence documents stemming from American, French,Rwandan and UN records, as well as the military strategy put in place during OperationTurquoise. It also allows identification of the sources on which these accusations lie andevaluation of their validity. In so doing, it brings to the fore the way in which the researchhas focused on the genocide to the detriment of the armed struggle initiated by the RPFfrom 1990 to July 1994, leaving aside essential aspects in the comprehension of theRwandan tragedy.