Zugl.: Diss. / Literaturverz. S. [XI], [463] - 492.

Thesis (M.A.)--Carleton University, 1992. / Also available in electronic format on the Internet.

The project underlying this dissertation aims at analyzing three pro-animal-rights theories, evaluating the theories, and outlining an alternative theoretical account of animal rights. The analytical categories are justification and function of animal rights, the definition of the right holder, and the resolution approach to rights conflict. The categories are applied to a naturalist, a theocentric, and a contractarian approach to defend animal rights. The evaluation is substantiated by the assumption that rights are meant to protect less powerful beings against more powerful aggressors. The constructive segment is an investigation into what extent identified disadvantages of the theories can be avoided by outlining a new model for animal rights. The analyses and evaluation suggest that all three theories are at risk of contradicting the proper function of rights-based theories. Tom Regan’s naturalist account of animal rights includes a logical possibility to sacrifice less capable beings for the sake of more capable beings. Andrew Linzey’s theocentric case for animal rights may sometimes mean that vulnerable human persons should be sacrificed for more powerful non-human beings. Mark Rowlands’ outlined contractarian model, further reconstructed in this work, fails to provide a way to resolve rights conflicts, making the function of rights inapplicable to conflicts. In conclusion, it is suggested that defining the right holder as a self-preservative being can be supported by, at least, the contractarian rationale. That would also conform to the proper function of rights-based theories. It is also suggested that this means that rights conflicts should be resolved by a voluntary sacrifice of the most powerful being. Practical circumstances should be created where such voluntarity is both genuine and rationally possible.

This thesis focuses on GBV against women and girls in conflict and post-conflict societies with a particular emphasis on South Sudan. It notes that women and girls are disproportionately affected by gender-based violence, and other consequences of war, including displacement and loss of livelihood. The generally weaker social capital that women tend to possess is often a precursor to wanton abuse at the hands of both friend and foe. A United Nations Human Rights Commission situation report on South Sudan, the country has had an incredibly difficult experience for the people who were the victims of conflict as violence has completely eclipsed the rule of law. Women and girls continue to encounter gender-related violence in form of rape, defilement, sexual slavery and very many other human rights abuses such as forced prostitution, domestic violence and sex trafficking. Coupled with this, their needs are undermined and not adequately addressed by duty-bearers and state actors. This is the case despite the availability of national legal provisions that declare the protection of women and girls as a guiding principle. This study aims to provide an in-depth understanding of GBV against women and girls in South Sudan. To achieve this, the study offers an understanding of the nature and architecture of South Sudan as a conflict and post-conflict state, and the causes and contributing factors of GBV against women and girls in South Sudan. It also identifies the consequences and effects of GBV against women and girls in South Sudan and examines the legal framework for the protection of women and girls in South Sudan.   The study engages the feminist framework to place the study into perspective. It argues that the main factors leading to GBV against women and girls stem from the patriarchal nature of South Sudanese culture, which is further evidenced in the institutional structures. The study engages a qualitative research approach that is based on a descriptive analysis to offer a normative reflection on how conflict shapes societal attitudes towards women and girls. Being non-empirical, the study uses a library research method of investigation to incorporate available sources with relevant unpublished sources. The findings show that South Sudan is characterized by divided loyalty to two publics namely formal institutional structures and traditional cultural structures. It indicates that the strong formal and informal patriarchal institutions and practices grounded in violence and misogyny still exist giving men a hegemonic status which promotes aggressive behaviour and devaluation of women whilst serving to legitimize GBV against women and girls and prevent access to justice. The study shows that the prevailing laws in South Sudan are not sufficient to protect women and girls in South Sudan from GBV since many of these laws are enacted and enforced by men who oftentimes are the perpetrators of violence against women and are protected by patriarchal cultural and formal institutions. Finally, the study proposes adopting a human rights approach in an ethnically plural state, institutional reforms, legal reforms and increased resource allocation to GBV prevention.

Despite the amount of studies conducted in the field and actions taken, gender-based violence continues to be rampant in both Afghanistan and Armenia. This study investigates potential causes and factors as to why the two societies look and function the way it does. By conducting a comparative case study by using a most similar system design, the aim with the thesis is to gain a broader understanding of why the women of Afghanistan and Armenia are suffering to these levels. Experiences of Afghan and Armenian women will be studied together with the legal and social construction of the countries. The study is primarily based on the theoretical framework of factors contributing to gender-based violence. The combination of sources that have been selected and used have done so in order to create as fair and representative a picture of Afghan and Armenian society and the experiences of the women living there as possible.

Paragraphs 138 to 140 of the Outcome Document of the 2005 UN World Summit not only elevated the element of prevention to a prominent place within the principle of “responsibility to protect” (R2P), but also restricted the scope of R2P to four specific crimes under international law: genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity. This thesis explores the conceptual and practical consequences of linking R2P to the concept of international crimes, with a particular focus on the preventive dimension of R2P, the socalled “responsibility to prevent”. To date, much of what has been written about the “responsibility to prevent” borrows primarily from conflict prevention theory and practice. Such conflict prevention inspired accounts of the “responsibility to prevent” tend to depict the principle as a long-term agenda that seeks to build societies resilient to atrocity crimes; that rests primarily on pillars one (state responsibility) and two (international assistance and capacity-building); that is supportive rather than undermining of state sovereignty; and that can largely adhere to the traditional conflict prevention principles of impartiality, consent, and minimal coercion should more direct prevention efforts become necessary. Drawing on literature from criminology, this thesis develops an international crimes framework for operationalizing the preventive dimension of R2P. The framework, combined with three case studies of international crime prevention (Bosnia 1991-1995; Kenya 2007-08; and Libya 2011), challenges key assumptions of the conflict prevention accounts, arguing that linking R2P to the concept of international crimes turns the “responsibility to prevent” into a principle that is more focused on the short-term, rather than on so-called root causes of atrocity crimes; more focused on individuals, rather than on state structures and capacity; more partial regarding perpetrators and victims; and more coercive, intrusive, and controversial than is commonly acknowledged in academic writing and policy debates on the subject. More broadly, the thesis concludes that taking R2P’s focus on the prevention of international crimes seriously requires re-rethinking the “responsibility to prevent” in important respects.

Univ., Diss.--Hamburg, 2003. / Literaturverz. S. 215 - 226.

This thesis considers the extent to which the International Criminal Court's Office of the Prosecutor ('OTP') has been successful in realising its self-defined mandate of ending impunity in Kenya. In particular, it focuses on the OTP's attempts to encourage domestic investigations and prosecutions as part of its strategy of positive complementarity. This strategy has been hailed as being the best and perhaps the only way that the OTP may use its finite resources to make a significant contribution to ending impunity. Despite this, no empirical study has been published that evaluates the effectiveness of this strategy and the impact that it has on ending impunity in the targeted situation country. This thesis seeks to address this gap in the literature by conducting a case study on the OTP's implementation of its strategy of positive complementarity in Kenya following that country's post-election violence in 2007/08. In doing so, I also hope to make a modest contribution to existing debates over the effectiveness of the ICC as an institution as well as international criminal justice and transitional justice more generally.