"Ideally, peacekeeping operations demonstrate the concern of the international community in situations of instability or conflict arising between or within states. They are conceived to bring about peace and 'ensure the effective promotion and protection of [human] rights'. As a result, peacekeeping operations as well as peacekeepers are expected to comply with standards of human rights and humanitarian law. With respect to the Economic Community of West African States Cease-Fire Monitoring Group (ECOMOG), its intervention in Liberia, Sierra Leone, Guinea Bissau, and Côte d'Ivoire have been generally welcomed as a response to barbaric and devastating wars in West Africa. However, the observation of ECOMOG missions reveals several instances of violations of human rights and humanitarian law committed by ECOMOG peacekeepers. These violations include attacks against civilians, summary executions, rapes, torture, looting, etc. In other words, the saviours have turned into violators of rights. While these violations have provoked concern and indignation, few measures have been taken to address the problem, hold peacekeepers accountable and prevent abuses in the future. ... This study is divided into five chapters. Chapter one provides, among other, the background of the study, the statement of the research problem and the significance of the study. Chapter two gives an insight into the creation, structure, mechanisms and evolution of ECOMOG as the peacekeeping organ of ECOWAS. Chapter three examines the basis for the applicability of human rights and international humanitarian law to peacekeepers and shows the violations committed by the ECOMOG peacekeepers since 1990. Chapter four analyses the responses to abuses committed by ECOMOG peacekeepers. It discusses the national, regional and universal responses to these abuses. It investigates both prevention and accountability mechanisms existing to address abuses committed by ECOMOG peacekeepers. It also explores some potential accountability and prevention mechanisms. Finally, chapter five makes some concluding remarks and suggests specific recommendations for the improvement of the existing responses." -- Introduction. / Thesis (LLM (Human Rights and Democratisation in Africa)) -- University of Pretoria, 2004. / http://www.chr.up.ac.za/academic_pro/llm1/dissertations.html / Centre for Human Rights / LLM

Responding to the inequal impact of women in conflict and their contribution to peace processes, the Security Council has adopted eleven resolutions within the Women, Peace, and Security agenda, which further defined gender mainstreaming strategy within the field of peace and security. The strategy calls for integrating gender perspectives and considerations in all peacekeeping structures. Framed with the liberal feminist approach, this work aims to analyse how five of the current UN peacekeeping operations reflect gender mainstreaming strategy, both in their mandates and operational practice. Using the content analysis method, the study examines the missions' mandates to evaluate gender mainstreaming references from the establishing resolutions to the current one and is further supplemented by the review of their implementation process. The findings reveal a significant gap within the establishing mandates, as UNISFA and MONUSCO included minimal gender references in their authorizing resolutions while UNMISS covered almost all gender considerations. Such disparities have become less evident within the current mandates. The analysis of the operational practice further suggests a two-track gap between the mission's mandate and the situation in the field, as the evidence gathered shows that...

Au lendemain de la seconde Guerre mondiale, le multilatéralisme est devenu la condition de légitimité des interventions à des fins de protection humaine. Néanmoins le multilatéralisme suscite des problèmes de coopération, de commandement et de contrôle dans une force multinationale composée des contingents ayant des cultures militaires propres. Les échecs successifs de la première moitié de la décennie 1990 générèrent des travaux concentrés sur le maintien de la paix suivant une démarche up-down. Ils proposèrent dans un premier temps, la création d’une doctrine ‘‘robuste’’ qui comprendrait également l’élaboration des règles d’engagement (ROE) fermes et dans un second temps, la mise en oeuvre de mandats sans ambiguïtés. Or, tant que la configuration du Conseil de sécurité restera inchangée, les mandats seront toujours ambigus puisque les résolutions dont ils découlent laissent une part d’ambiguïté afin d’éviter le risque de veto. Chaque opération de paix ayant ses particularités propres, la création d’une doctrine robuste pour le maintien de la paix ne serait pas efficace. Posant les directives déterminant le niveau de force qui peut être utilisé dans diverses situations, les ROE se trouvent au coeur des opérations de paix et affectent la légitimité de celles-ci. Plutôt qu’une doctrine, la création d’un régime des ROE suivant une démarche bottom-up et son intériorisation par les casques bleus entrainerait une harmonisation de leurs comportements. Il serait alors possible de rechercher l’émergence d’une perception commune entre les Etats à l’égard du maintien de la paix et ce à travers une norme safe-efficient qui assurerait un environnement safe pour les soldats et un environnement efficient pour la réussite des opérations de maintien de la paix. Plus les Etats seront conscients des problèmes et des ambiguïtés relatifs aux opérations de paix, plus ils pourront avoir la volonté politique de mettre en oeuvre des mandats plus crédibles par l’intermédiaire de cette norme safe-efficient. / After the Second World War, multilateralism has become the legitimacy condition of interventions for human protection. Nevertheless, multilateralism creates problems of cooperation, command and control in a multinational force, which is composed of contingents having their own military cultures. Successive failures of the first half of the 1990s generate peacekeeping studies following an up-down path. Initially, they had proposed to create a “robust” doctrine that comprehends the drafting of firm Rules of Engagements (ROE), and in later times, they proposed to carry out the mandates without ambiguities for peace operations. Yet, as long as the configuration of the Security Council remains the same, the mandates will always be ambiguous, given that they are derived from the already ambiguous resolutions avoiding the risk of veto. Since every peace operation has its own particularities, the creation of a robust peacekeeping doctrine would not be efficient. ROEs are the directives issued by competent military authority that delineate the circumstances and limitations about the use of force. They are at the core of the peace operations and influence their legitimacy. Rather than a doctrine, the creation of a regime of ROE following a bottom-up path, and its internalization by peacekeepers, lead to a harmonization of their behaviors. It will then become possible to look for the emergence of a common perception between states about peacekeeping, and through this, a safe-efficient norm will emerge. This will secure a safe environment for soldiers and an efficient environment for the success of peacekeeping operations. The more awareness is created about problems and ambiguities concerning peace operations, the more willing will states become to carry out credible mandates through this safe-efficient norm.

United Nations peacekeeping forces and operations, have long had a history of crimes against civilians by its personnel, not least concerning crimes of sexual exploitation and abuse. While human rights violations are grave despite their origin, there is a specific element of impunity and distrust when the same people who comes to ‘protect’, are the same people who become perpetrators. In this sense, it is notably interesting and important to examine victims’ rights to access justice when crimes have been committed by UN Personnel. The primary aim is to explore to what extent the fore-mentioned victims have the possibility to access justice within the legal system of UN Transitional Administrations. These UN operations are chosen since it is particularly important to examine the extent to which victim’s may access justice when the UN exercises governmental powers and acts as a quasi-state. An underlying aim is to explore how the eventual inconsistencies within this system may be colored by postcolonial tendencies. In this sense, the study is conducted through a doctrinal method with a postcolonial perspective, examining the normative aspects of law in the light of a critical lens. The legal basis and the legal obligations of UN Transitional Administrations are compared to the International Standard on Victims’ rights and evidence on how victims’ rights to access justice is practiced within these administrations. Finally, the aim is to evaluate the result of this analysis from the standpoint of postcolonial theory.

This thesis investigates both substantive and procedural issues pertaining to allegations of crimes committed by UN peacekeepers in three African countries, Somalia, Burundi, and the Democratic Republic of Congo. Under the current UN Model Status-of-Forces Agreements, criminal jurisdiction over peacekeepers rests with their sending States. However, although the UN has no criminal jurisdiction, it has been the Office of Internal Oversight Services that has conducted investigations. It is argued that every Status of Force Agreement and every Memorandum of Understanding should contain specific clauses obligating Troop-Contributing Countries to prosecute and the UN to follow-up. If rape, murder, assault, and any other crimes by UN peacekeepers go unpunished, the message sent to the victims is that peacekeepers are above the law. Rape is the most commonly committed crime by peacekeepers, but is usually considered as an isolated act. The procedural issue of prosecuting peacekeepers is investigated in order to establish whether troops can be caught under the ambits of the criminal law of the Host State to hold UN troops criminally accountable for their acts. The laws relative to the elements of each crime and the possible available defences under the three Host States, and the criminal law of South Africa as a Troop-Contributing Country, are discussed. The apparent lack of prosecution is investigated and existing cases of prosecution discussed. Alternatives to the unwillingness by States with criminal jurisdiction under the Status of Forces Agreement or under the Memorandum of Understanding are considered. Considering the current rules related to crimes committed by peacekeepers, the argument put forward is that crimes by peacekeepers must be dealt with completely and transparently though a Convention aiming at barring Troop-Contributing Countries who do not meet their obligations under international law from participating in future operations of peace. This thesis, furthermore, suggests a tripartite court mechanism to fill the lacunae in the law relating to the prosecution of peacekeepers. It considers the issues of reserving jurisdiction over peacekeepers to the Troop-Contributing Countries which are reluctant to prosecute repatriated alleged perpetrators. The victims’ importance in criminal proceedings and their their right to a remedy are highlighted. / Criminal & Procedural Law / LL.D.

This thesis investigates both substantive and procedural issues pertaining to allegations of crimes committed by UN peacekeepers in three African countries, Somalia, Burundi, and the Democratic Republic of Congo. Under the current UN Model Status-of-Forces Agreements, criminal jurisdiction over peacekeepers rests with their sending States. However, although the UN has no criminal jurisdiction, it has been the Office of Internal Oversight Services that has conducted investigations. It is argued that every Status of Force Agreement and every Memorandum of Understanding should contain specific clauses obligating Troop-Contributing Countries to prosecute and the UN to follow-up. If rape, murder, assault, and any other crimes by UN peacekeepers go unpunished, the message sent to the victims is that peacekeepers are above the law. Rape is the most commonly committed crime by peacekeepers, but is usually considered as an isolated act. The procedural issue of prosecuting peacekeepers is investigated in order to establish whether troops can be caught under the ambits of the criminal law of the Host State to hold UN troops criminally accountable for their acts. The laws relative to the elements of each crime and the possible available defences under the three Host States, and the criminal law of South Africa as a Troop-Contributing Country, are discussed. The apparent lack of prosecution is investigated and existing cases of prosecution discussed. Alternatives to the unwillingness by States with criminal jurisdiction under the Status of Forces Agreement or under the Memorandum of Understanding are considered. Considering the current rules related to crimes committed by peacekeepers, the argument put forward is that crimes by peacekeepers must be dealt with completely and transparently though a Convention aiming at barring Troop-Contributing Countries who do not meet their obligations under international law from participating in future operations of peace. This thesis, furthermore, suggests a tripartite court mechanism to fill the lacunae in the law relating to the prosecution of peacekeepers. It considers the issues of reserving jurisdiction over peacekeepers to the Troop-Contributing Countries which are reluctant to prosecute repatriated alleged perpetrators. The victims’ importance in criminal proceedings and their their right to a remedy are highlighted. / Criminal and Procedural Law / LL.D.