Advanced

Skyldigheten att skydda - Vad krävs för att den ska användas?

Olovsson, Sofie LU (2015) LAGF03 20151
Department of Law
Faculty of Law
Abstract (Swedish)
Responsibility to protect, eller R2P, är en norm inom FN som uppstod som en reaktion på många av de inomstatliga konflikter som pågick världen över under 90-talet. FN:s misslyckande med att skydda de civila som drabbades av humanitära katastrofer visade på ett behov av förändring gällande möjligheten att ingripa i inomstatliga konflikter.

2001 utkom en rapport från den kommission, ICISS, som tillsatts på initiativ av Kanadas regering med uppdraget att komma fram till hur man gemensamt ska kunna värna mänskliga rättigheter världen över. Rapporten fick namnet ”The Responsibility to Protect”, och fastslår en växande norm inom internationell rätt som tyder på att staters territoriella integritet får ge vika i fall då ett agerande krävs för... (More)
Responsibility to protect, eller R2P, är en norm inom FN som uppstod som en reaktion på många av de inomstatliga konflikter som pågick världen över under 90-talet. FN:s misslyckande med att skydda de civila som drabbades av humanitära katastrofer visade på ett behov av förändring gällande möjligheten att ingripa i inomstatliga konflikter.

2001 utkom en rapport från den kommission, ICISS, som tillsatts på initiativ av Kanadas regering med uppdraget att komma fram till hur man gemensamt ska kunna värna mänskliga rättigheter världen över. Rapporten fick namnet ”The Responsibility to Protect”, och fastslår en växande norm inom internationell rätt som tyder på att staters territoriella integritet får ge vika i fall då ett agerande krävs för att skydda mänskliga rättigheter.

Denna uppsats undersöker dels vad denna skyldighet att skydda innefattar, samt vad som krävs för att den reaktiva delen av doktrinen verkligen ska kunna komma att användas då ett behov föreligger. Världssamfundet kan i enlighet med R2P vidta olika typer av exempelvis ekonomiska sanktioner mot en stat som misslyckas med att skydda sin befolkning, och en militär intervention får förekomma enbart i sista hand. I dagens läge krävs en auktorisering från säkerhetsrådets sida för att en sådan intervention ska få genomföras, något som dock är problematiskt då säkerhetsrådets fem permanenta medlemsstater, P5, ensamt kan blockera en intervention genom att använda sin vetorätt.

Sedan 2013 har kravet på ett avsägande av vetorätten i fall då interventioner behöver ske i enlighet med R2P uttryckts från många av FN:s medlemsstater. Detta beror mycket på att det funnits och finns en oförmåga att ingripa i situationen i Syrien, då Ryssland använt sitt veto för att blockera exempelvis en intervention från att auktoriseras. R2P kan alltså i nuläget inte alltid fungera såsom det är tänkt, och världssamfundet misslyckas fortfarande med att skydda civila i behov. På grund av säkerhetsrådets rättsliga status skulle dock inget annat organ accepteras som beslutsfattare vad gäller frågor rörande internationell fred och säkerhet, och det är istället min mening att avskaffandet av vetorätten i situationer som kräver en intervention i enlighet med R2P är det enklaste sättet att tillgodose doktrinens fungerande. (Less)
Abstract
Responsibility to protect, or R2P, is a norm within the UN that emerged as a reaction towards the many intrastate conflicts that occurred around the world during the 90’s. The UN’s failure to protect civilians from humanitarian disasters displayed a need for change regarding the opportunity to intervene during these types of conflicts.

In 2001 the commission, ICISS, founded under the authority of the Canadian Government and entrusted with the mission to determine how the international community can safeguard human rights around the world, released a report. The report was named “The Responsibility to Protect” and establishes an emerging norm within international law, indicating that the principle of non-intervention must give way in... (More)
Responsibility to protect, or R2P, is a norm within the UN that emerged as a reaction towards the many intrastate conflicts that occurred around the world during the 90’s. The UN’s failure to protect civilians from humanitarian disasters displayed a need for change regarding the opportunity to intervene during these types of conflicts.

In 2001 the commission, ICISS, founded under the authority of the Canadian Government and entrusted with the mission to determine how the international community can safeguard human rights around the world, released a report. The report was named “The Responsibility to Protect” and establishes an emerging norm within international law, indicating that the principle of non-intervention must give way in situations where actions are necessary in order to protect human rights.

This essay will study what this responsibility to protect includes, as well as what is needed for the reactive part of the norm to come to use when needed. The international community can take steps, for example economic sanctions, in accordance with R2P towards a state failing to protect its citizens; a military intervention is considered a last resort, and must always be authorized by the Security Council. This, however, is problematic due to the fact that the five permanent members of the Security Council, P5, always have the opportunity to block an intervention single-handedly.

Since 2013 a renunciation of the veto right in cases where an intervention is needed in accordance with R2P has been demanded by many of the UN’s member states. This is due to the fact that there has been, and still is, an inability to react concerning the situation in Syria where Russia has used its veto to, among other things, block an intervention from being authorized. Thus, R2P cannot be used the way it was thought out, and the international community is still failing to protect civilians in need. Due to the legal status of the Security Council no other organ would be accepted as the authorizing power in regard to matters concerning international peace and security. It is instead my opinion that an abolition of the veto right in situations that demand an intervention in accordance with R2P would be the easiest way to ensure the functioning of the norm. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Olovsson, Sofie LU
supervisor
organization
course
LAGF03 20151
year
type
M2 - Bachelor Degree
subject
keywords
Responsibility to protect, Folkrätt, R2P, Public international law, Skyldighet att skydda
language
Swedish
id
5431259
date added to LUP
2015-07-06 09:52:23
date last changed
2015-07-06 09:52:23
@misc{5431259,
  abstract     = {Responsibility to protect, or R2P, is a norm within the UN that emerged as a reaction towards the many intrastate conflicts that occurred around the world during the 90’s. The UN’s failure to protect civilians from humanitarian disasters displayed a need for change regarding the opportunity to intervene during these types of conflicts.

In 2001 the commission, ICISS, founded under the authority of the Canadian Government and entrusted with the mission to determine how the international community can safeguard human rights around the world, released a report. The report was named “The Responsibility to Protect” and establishes an emerging norm within international law, indicating that the principle of non-intervention must give way in situations where actions are necessary in order to protect human rights.

This essay will study what this responsibility to protect includes, as well as what is needed for the reactive part of the norm to come to use when needed. The international community can take steps, for example economic sanctions, in accordance with R2P towards a state failing to protect its citizens; a military intervention is considered a last resort, and must always be authorized by the Security Council. This, however, is problematic due to the fact that the five permanent members of the Security Council, P5, always have the opportunity to block an intervention single-handedly.

Since 2013 a renunciation of the veto right in cases where an intervention is needed in accordance with R2P has been demanded by many of the UN’s member states. This is due to the fact that there has been, and still is, an inability to react concerning the situation in Syria where Russia has used its veto to, among other things, block an intervention from being authorized. Thus, R2P cannot be used the way it was thought out, and the international community is still failing to protect civilians in need. Due to the legal status of the Security Council no other organ would be accepted as the authorizing power in regard to matters concerning international peace and security. It is instead my opinion that an abolition of the veto right in situations that demand an intervention in accordance with R2P would be the easiest way to ensure the functioning of the norm.},
  author       = {Olovsson, Sofie},
  keyword      = {Responsibility to protect,Folkrätt,R2P,Public international law,Skyldighet att skydda},
  language     = {swe},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {Skyldigheten att skydda - Vad krävs för att den ska användas?},
  year         = {2015},
}