DOCSLIB.ORG

Global Campus Human Rights Journal 2017 2

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Global Campus Human Rights Journal 2017 2 Volume 1 No 2 2017 Global Campus Human Rights Journal Editorial committee Editorial committee Frans Viljoen Anna Krasteva Convening editor Co-editor University of Pretoria New Bulgarian University Matthew Mullen Co-editor Mahidol University Editorial assistant Editorial assistant Isabeau de Meyer Isabeau de Meyer University of Pretoria University of Pretoria International editorial advisory boardInternational editorial Ahmed Al Moatassem Alshorbagy Asim Mujkic Alexandria University School of Law University of Sarajevo Marco Borraccetti Esther Damalie Naggita-Musoke University of Bologna Makerere University Vahan Bournazian Gerd Oberleitner Yerevan State University University of Graz Nancy Cardinaux Sriprapha Petcharamesree University of Buenos Aires Mahidol University Islam Ibrahim Chiha George Novisi K Vukor-Quarshie Alexandria University School of Law University of Venda Carmen Marquez Carrasco University of Seville The Global Campus Human Rights Journal (GCHRJ) is a peer-reviewed scholarly journal, published under the auspices of the Global Campus of Human Rights (see http://www.eiuc.org/education/ global-campus-regional-masters.html) as an open-access on-line journal. It is supported financially by the European Union Commission and appears twice annually. This journal should be cited as (2017) 1 Global Campus Human Rights Journal ISSN: 2532-1455 Headquarters and contact information: European Inter-University Centre for Human Rights and Democratisation Monastery of San Nicolò, Riviera San Nicolò, 26 I-30126 Venice Lido, Italy https://www.eiuc.org/education/global-campus-regional-masters.html This journal content is offered under a CC Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives license. Content in this journal can be considered under this license unless otherwise noted. Global Campus Human Rights Journal Volume 1 No 2 2017 Global Campus of Human Rights 2017 Global Campus Human Rights Journal (2017) Volume 1 No 2 The Global Campus Human Rights Journal (GCHRJ) is a peer-reviewed scholarly journal, published under the auspices of the Global Campus of Human Rights as an open-access on-line journal. Aim: The Global Campus Human Rights Journal aims to serve as a forum for rigorous scholarly analysis, critical commentaries, and reports on recent developments pertaining to human rights and democratisation globally, particularly by adopting multi- and inter-disciplinary perspectives, and using comparative approaches. It also aims to serve as a forum for fostering interdisciplinary dialogue and collaboration between stakeholders, including academics, activists in human rights and democratisation, NGOs and civil society. Publication details: It is published under the auspices of the Global Campus of Regional Human Rights Masters (see http://www.eiuc.org/ education/global-campus-regional-masters.html), and is supported financially by the European Union Commission. It appears twice annually, in July and in December. Open access: The Global Campus Human Rights Journal is an open-access journal. There are no access charges for readers. Users are free to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of articles published in the journal, or use them for any other lawful purpose. On-line: The Global Campus Human Rights Journal is an on-line journal. Its url is https://globalcampus.eiuc.org/human-rights-journal Submissions: Submissions may be made at any time, electronically to [email protected]. No fees are charged for submission or article processing. Submissions should: • include an assurance that the article has not been published, submitted, or accepted elsewhere. • conform to the style conventions on the journal web site. • be concise. • be written in UK English, or in French or Spanish. If submitted in French or Spanish, an abstract in English (of between 750 and 1000 words) has to be submitted together with the article. • for English language style, follow the University of Oxford Style Guide (www.ox.ac.uk). • be between 6 000 and 8 000 words in length, references included. • (for submissions in English) include an abstract (summarising the article as a whole, including its aim, a clear description of its findings) of between 250 and 300 words. The abstract should include at least five key words. • include a brief bibliography indicating academic qualifications and current professional position, and email contact address, as follows: Charles Ntuli; BA (Oxford), PhD (Lund); Visiting Professor, University of Sao Paolo; [email protected] Style guidelines: Detailed style guidelines are on the Journal’s website, https://globalcampus.eiuc.org/human-rights-journal Layout and typesetting: Lizette Hermann, Pretoria University Law Press (PULP), Centre for Human Rights, Faculty of Law, University of Pretoria. The Global Campus of Human Rights Headquarters and contact information European Inter-University Centre for Human Rights and Democratisation (Monastery of San Nicolò, Riviera San Nicolò, 26 I-30126 Venice Lido, Italy) https://www.eiuc.org/education/regional-programmes.html The Global Campus of Human Rights is a unique network of one hundred participating universities around the world, seeking to advance human rights and democracy through regional and global cooperation for education and research. This global network is promoted through seven Regional Programmes: • European Master’s in Human Rights and Democratisation (EMA) https://www. eiuc.org/education/ema.html • Master’s in Human Rights and Democratisation in Africa (HRDA) http://www. chr.up.ac.za/index.php/llm-hrda.html • European Master’s Programme in Democracy and Human Rights in South East Europe (ERMA) www.cips.unsa.ba and https://www.facebook.com/erma programme/ • Master’s in Human Rights and Democratisation in Asia-Pacific (APMA) http:// www.ihrp.mahidol.ac.th and http://sydney.edu.au/arts/human_rights_democrati sation/ • Master’s in Human Rights and Democratisation in the Caucasus (CES) http:// www. regionalmaster.net/ • Master’s in Human Rights and Democratisation in Latin American and the Caribbean (LATMA) www.unsam.edu.ar/ciep/ and https://twitter. com/Ciepoficial • Arab Master’s in Democracy and Human Rights (ARMA) https://www. eiuc.org/ arab These Regional Programmes offer specialised post-graduate education and training in human rights and democracy from a regional perspective, with an interdisciplinary content as well as a multiplicity of research, publications, public events and outreach activities. The Global Campus integrates the educational activities of the Regional Programmes through the exchange of lecturers, researchers and students; the joint planning of curricula for attended and online courses; the promotion of global research projects and dissemination activities; the professional development of graduates through internships in inter-governmental organisations; and the strong focus of networking through the Global Campus Alumni Association, as well as support to the alumni associations of the Regional Programmes. The wealth of human resources connected by global and regional alliances fostered by the Global Campus and its Regional Programmes, offer remarkable tools and opportunities to promote human rights and democracy worldwide. The Global Campus of Human Rights develops its activities thanks to the significant support and co-funding of the European Union – through the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights 2014-2020 and its partner universities around the world. The Global Campus equally boasts many joint institutional agreements and strategic alliances with inter-governmental, governmental and non-governmental organisations at the local, national and international level. Contents Editorial .............................................................................................. vii Articles Socio-economic development and resource redistribution as tools for conflict prevention and post-conflict peace building in fragile societies: A comparative analysis of Burundi and Rwanda by Nicholas W Orago ........................................................................... 226 Human rights violations in the ChevronTexaco case, Ecuador: Cultural genocide? by Anna B Suman................................................................................. 259 Intractable conflicts in Africa: The international response to the Darfur and South Sudan crises by Rodger Owiso, Elsabé Boshoff, Adiam Z Tsighe and Tapiwa M Mamhare ............................................................................. 287 Special focus: Securitisation Editorial of special focus: Securitisation and its impact on human rights and human security by Anna Krasteva................................................................................. 315 Introduction to Global Classroom on Securitisation by Manfred Nowak............................................................................... 323 State security securitisation and human security in Africa: Tensions, contradictions and hopes for reconciliation by Kwadwo Appiagyei-Atua, Tresor M Muhindo, Iruebafa Oyakhirome, Estella K Kabachwezi and Stephen Buabeng-Baidoo ...................................................................... 326 The ‘mantra of stability’ versus human security in the post-Soviet space by Sos Avetisyan, Vahan Abrahamyan, Marianna Chobanyan, Kostantyn Lyabuk and Walanga Nabi ..................................................... 350 Securitisation versus citizenship: Populist and authoritarian misuses of security threats and civic responses in the Balkan states by
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Failure of UN Security Council Resolution 2286 in Preventing Attacks on Healthcare in Syria
    The Failure of UN Security Council Resolution 2286 in Preventing Attacks on Healthcare in Syria January 2017 SYRIAN AMERICAN MEDICAL SOCIETY C1 Contents Acknowledgements C3 Foreword 1 Background 2 Methodology 2 Executive Summary 3 Attacks on Healthcare, June–December 2016 4 Advanced and Unconventional Weaponry 7 All Forms of Medical Facilities and Personnel Targeted 7 Conclusion 8 Appendix: Attacks on Medical Personnel, June–December 2016 9 ABOUT THE SYRIAN AMERICAN MEDICAL SOCIETY The Syrian American Medical Society (SAMS) is a non-profit, non-political, professional and medical relief organization that provides humanitarian assistance to Syrians in need and represents thousands of Syrian American medical professionals in the United States. Founded in 1998 as a professional society, SAMS has evolved to meet the growing needs and challenges of the medical crisis in Syria. Today, SAMS works on the front lines of crisis relief in Syria and neighboring countries to serve the medical needs of millions of Syrians, support doctors and medical professionals, and rebuild healthcare. From establishing field hospitals and training Syrian physicians to advocating at the highest levels of government, SAMS is working to alleviate suffering and save lives. On the cover: Aftermath of an attack on a hospital in Aleppo, October 2016 Design: Sensical Design & Communication C2 The Failure of UN Security Council Resolution 2286 in Preventing Attacks on Healthcare in Syria Acknowledgements None of our work would be made possible without Syria’s doctors, nurses, medical assistants, ambulance drivers, hospital staff, and humanitarian workers. Their inspiring work amidst the most dire of circumstances con- tinues to inspire us to help amplify their voices.
    [Show full text]
  • Landmine Monitor 2014
    Landmine Monitor 2014 Monitoring and Research Committee, ICBL-CMC Governance Board Handicap International Human Rights Watch Mines Action Canada Norwegian People’s Aid Research team leaders ICBL-CMC staff experts I © December 2014 by International Campaign to Ban Landmines – Cluster Munition Coalition (ICBL-CMC). All rights reserved. ISBN: 978-2-8399-1160-3 Cover photograph © Jared Bloch/ICBL-CMC, June 2014 Back cover © Werner Anderson/Norwegian People’s Aid, November 2013 Cover design by Rafael Jiménez Landmine and Cluster Munition Monitor provides research and monitoring for the Cluster Munition Coalition (CMC) and the International Campaign to Ban Landmines (ICBL). For more information visit www.the-monitor.org or email [email protected]. Landmine and Cluster Munition Monitor makes every effort to limit the environmental footprint of reports by pub- lishing all our research reports online. This report is available online at www.the-monitor.org. International Campaign to Ban Landmines The International Campaign to Ban Landmines (ICBL) is committed to the 1997 Mine Ban Treaty (or “Ottawa Conven- tion”) as the best framework for ending the use, production, stockpiling, and transfer of antipersonnel mines and for destroying stockpiles, clearing mined areas, and assisting affected communities. The ICBL calls for universal adherence to the Mine Ban Treaty and its full implementation by all, including: • No more use, production, transfer, and stockpiling of antipersonnel landmines by any actor under any circumstances; • Rapid destruction of all remaining stockpiles of antipersonnel landmines; • More efficient clearance and destruction of all emplaced landmines and explosive remnants of war (ERW); and • Fulfillment of the rights and needs of all landmine and ERW victims.
    [Show full text]
  • United States / Afghanistan
    December 2002 Vol. 14, No. 7 (G) UNITED STATES / AFGHANISTAN FATALLY FLAWED: CLUSTER BOMBS AND THEIR USE BY THE UNITED STATES IN AFGHANISTAN Acronyms Used In Report........................................................................................................................................ iii I. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS.........................................................................................................1 Methodology ..........................................................................................................................................................3 Outline of Report....................................................................................................................................................3 Recommendations ..................................................................................................................................................4 To minimize the humanitarian harm of cluster bombs during strikes ................................................................4 To minimize the aftereffects of cluster bombs ...................................................................................................4 To improve clearance .........................................................................................................................................4 To develop better cluster bomb controls for the future ......................................................................................5 II. WHAT ARE CLUSTER BOMBS?.......................................................................................................................6
    [Show full text]
  • Cluster Weapons – Military Utility and Alternatives
    FFI-rapport/2007/02345 Cluster weapons – military utility and alternatives Ove Dullum Forsvarets forskningsinstitutt/Norwegian Defence Research Establishment (FFI) 1 February 2008 FFI-rapport 2007/02345 Oppdrag 351301 ISBN 978-82-464-1318-1 Keywords Militære operasjoner / Military operations Artilleri / Artillery Flybomber / Aircraft bombs Klasevåpen / Cluster weapons Ammunisjon / Ammunition Approved by Ove Dullum Project manager Jan Ivar Botnan Director of Research Jan Ivar Botnan Director 2 FFI-rapport/2007/02345 English summary This report is made through the sponsorship of the Royal Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Its purpose is to get an overview of the military utility of cluster munitions, and to find to which degree their capacity can be substituted by current conventional weapons or weapons that are on the verge of becoming available. Cluster munition roughly serve three purposes; firstly to defeat soft targets, i e personnel; secondly to defeat armoured of light armoured vehicles; and thirdly to contribute to the suppressive effect, i e to avoid enemy forces to use their weapons without inflicting too much damage upon them. The report seeks to quantify the effect of such munitions and to compare this effect with that of conventional weapons and more modern weapons. The report discusses in some detail how such weapons work and which effect they have against different targets. The fragment effect is the most important one. Other effects are the armour piercing effect, the blast effect, and the incendiary effect. Quantitative descriptions of such effects are usually only found in classified literature. However, this report is exclusively based on unclassified sources. The availability of such sources has been sufficient to get an adequate picture of the effect of such weapons.
    [Show full text]
  • Alternative Anti-Personnel Mines the Next Generations Landmine Action Consists of the Following Co-Operating Organisations
    Alternative anti-personnel mines The next generations Landmine Action consists of the following co-operating organisations: ActionAid International Alert Refugee Council Action for Southern Africa Jaipur Limb Campaign Royal College of Paediatrics & Action on Disability and Development Jesuit Refugee Service Child Health Adopt-A-Minefield UK MEDACT Saferworld Afghanaid Medical & Scientific Aid for Vietnam Laos & Save the Children UK Amnesty International UK Cambodia Soroptimist International UK Programme Action Committee CAFOD Medical Educational Trust Tearfund Cambodia Trust Merlin United Nations Association Campaign Against Arms Trade Mines Advisory Group United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) UK Child Advocacy International Motivation VERTIC Christian Aid Mozambique Angola Committee War Child Comic Relief Omega Foundation War on Want Concern Worldwide One World Action Welsh Centre for International Affairs Disability Awareness in Action Oxfam GB Women’s International League for Peace & Environmental Investigation Agency Pax Christi Freedom Global Witness Peace Pledge Union World Vision UK Handicap International (UK) People and Planet Hope for Children POWER Human Rights Watch Quaker Peace & Service The member organisations of the German Initiative to Ban Landmines are: Bread for the World Social Service Agency of the Evangelical Church Misereor Christoffel Mission for the Blind in Germany Oxfam Germany German Justitia et Pax Commission Eirene International Pax Christi German Committee for Freedom from Hunger Handicap International Germany
    [Show full text]
  • Pax Christi Colombia Best Practice Study
    THE CLUSTER MUNITION COALITION 2003-2009 Georg Frerks IKV PAX CHRISTI BEST PRACTICE STUDY NO. 4 November 2009 2 INDEX INDEX ........................................................................................................................................ 3 ABBREVIATIONS .................................................................................................................... 5 NOTE ......................................................................................................................................... 5 ABOUT THE AUTHOR ........................................................................................................... 6 1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 7 Goals of best practice studies ................................................................................................ 7 Lobby and advocacy campaigns by IKV Pax Christi ............................................................. 7 The selection of CMC as the object of a best practice study and research questions ......... 8 Definitions of advocacy and lobby ......................................................................................... 8 Evaluating advocacy and lobby ............................................................................................. 9 Lessons learned from the ICBL ........................................................................................... 10 Evaluative framework ..........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Fish Terminologies
    FISH TERMINOLOGIES Monument Type Thesaurus Report Format: Hierarchical listing - class Notes: Classification of monument type records by function.
    [Show full text]
  • Cluster Munitions in Albania and Lao PDR: the Humanitarian and Socio
    i UNIDIR/2006/15 Cluster Munitions in Albania and Lao PDR The Humanitarian and Socio-Economic Impact Rosy Cave, Anthea Lawson and Andrew Sherriff UNIDIR United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research Geneva, Switzerland About the cover The cover image shows a Federal Republic of Yugoslavia KB1 submunition. These devices account for the overwhelming majority of submunition contamination in Albania. © Damir Atikovic of Norwegian People’s Aid (Bosnia and Herzegovina). Used with permission. Note The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. * * * The views expressed in this publication are the sole responsibility of the individual authors. They do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the United Nations, UNIDIR, its staff members or sponsors. UNIDIR/2006/15 Copyright © United Nations, 2006 All rights reserved UNITED NATIONS PUBLICATION The United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research (UNIDIR)—an intergovernmental organization within the United Nations—conducts research on disarmament and security. UNIDIR is based in Geneva, Switzerland, the centre for bilateral and multilateral disarmament and non- proliferation negotiations, and home of the Conference on Disarmament. The Institute explores current issues pertaining to the variety of existing and future armaments, as well as global diplomacy and local tensions and conflicts. Working with researchers, diplomats, government officials, NGOs and other institutions since 1980, UNIDIR acts as a bridge between the research community and policy makers.
    [Show full text]
  • Five Priorities for the Air Force's Future Combat Air
    FIVE PRIORITIES FOR THE AIR FORCE’S FUTURE COMBAT AIR FORCE MARK GUNZINGER CARL REHBERG LUKAS AUTENRIED FIVE PRIORITIES FOR THE AIR FORCE’S FUTURE COMBAT AIR FORCE MARK GUNZINGER CARL REHBERG LUKAS AUTENRIED 2020 ABOUT THE CENTER FOR STRATEGIC AND BUDGETARY ASSESSMENTS (CSBA) The Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments is an independent, nonpartisan policy research institute established to promote innovative thinking and debate about national security strategy and investment options. CSBA’s analysis focuses on key questions related to existing and emerging threats to U.S. national security, and its goal is to enable policymakers to make informed decisions on matters of strategy, security policy, and resource allocation. ©2020 Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. All rights reserved. ABOUT THE AUTHORS Mark Gunzinger is a Non-resident Senior Fellow at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. Mr. Gunzinger has served as the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Forces, Transformation and Resources. A retired Air Force Colonel and Command Pilot, he joined the Office of the Secretary of Defense in 2004. Mark was appointed to the Senior Executive Service and served as Principal Director of the Department’s central staff for the 2006 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR). Following the QDR, he served as Director for Defense Transformation, Force Planning and Resources on the National Security Council staff. Mr. Gunzinger holds an M.S. in National Security Strategy from the National War College, a Master of Airpower Art and Science degree from the School of Advanced Air and Space Studies, an M.P.A. from Central Michigan University, and a B.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Volume II Oral and Written Evidence and the Committees' Correspondence with Ministers
    House of Commons Business, Innovation and Skills, Defence, Foreign Affairs and International Development Committees Scrutiny of Arms Exports (2012): UK Strategic Export Controls Annual Report 2010, Quarterly Reports for July to December 2010 and January to September 2011, the Government's Review of arms exports to the Middle East and North Africa, and wider arms control issues First Joint Report of Session 2012–13 Second Report from the Business, Innovation and Skills Committee of Session 2012–13 Fourth Report from the Defence Committee of Session 2012–13 First Report from the Foreign Affairs Committee of Session 2012–13 Second Report from the International Development Committee of Session 2012–13 Volume II Oral and written evidence and the Committees' correspondence with Ministers Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 2 July 2012 HC 419-II Incorporating HC 1697, Session 2010-12 Published on 13 July 2012 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £18.50 The Committees on Arms Export Controls The Business, Innovation and Skills, Defence, Foreign Affairs and International Development Committees are appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration, and policy of the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, the Ministry of Defence, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, the Department for International Development and any associated public bodies. Current membership BUSINESS, INNOVATION AND SKILLS: Mr Adrian Bailey*§, Mr Brian Binley, Paul Blomfield, Katy Clark*, Julie Elliott, Rebecca Harris, Margot James*, Simon Kirby, Ann McKechin*, Mr David Ward, Nadhim Zahawi* DEFENCE: Rt Hon James Arbuthnot§, Mr Julian Brazier, Thomas Docherty, Rt Hon Jeffrey M.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction and History of Mine Action Key Messages
    Chapter 1 PART I – WHAT IS MINE ACTION? INTRODUCTION AND HISTORY OF MINE ACTION KEY MESSAGES • Anti-personnel landmines, cluster munitions and explosive remnants of war (ERW) are defined in international treaties and conventions. • Landmines and cluster munitions have been used extensively around the globe since World War II. • Quantifying the level of contamination and the number of mine victims around the world has been difficult, but is becoming better as a result of improved survey and reporting processes. • The Anti-Personnel Mine Ban Convention (APMBC) and the Convention on Cluster Munitions (CCM) have played a key role in the development of the sector. • National level mine action programmes have successfully evolved over the years and landmines/ERW are increasingly seen as a development issue. INTRODUCTION Mine action is the combination of activities designed to: • reduce real and perceived risks to affected populations of landmines, cluster munitions, ammunition stockpiles and ERW; • address consequences of accidents upon victims; • reduce economic, social and developmental consequences of contamination; and • advocate developing, adopting and complying with appropriate instruments of international humanitarian law (IHL). Each of these elements of mine action is addressed in this publication. It is, however, important to understand that mine action is most effective when all its different component activities take place together, in a coordinated and reinforcing programme. Doing so is difficult, requiring the combined attention and efforts of international and national government agencies, international institutions, militaries, non-governmental organisations (NGOs), commercial companies and representatives of women, girls, boys and men in affected populations. 14 | Chapter 1 Mine action is not a static process that has already been defined and perfected.
    [Show full text]
  • Cluster Munitions: Background and Issues for Congress
    Cluster Munitions: Background and Issues for Congress Updated February 22, 2019 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov RS22907 Cluster Munitions: Background and Issues for Congress Summary Cluster munitions are air-dropped or ground-launched weapons that release a number of smaller submunitions intended to kill enemy personnel or destroy vehicles. Cluster munitions were developed in World War II and are part of many nations’ weapons stockpiles. Cluster munitions have been used frequently in combat, including the early phases of the current conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. Cluster munitions have been highly criticized internationally for causing a significant number of civilian deaths, and efforts have been undertaken to ban and regulate their use. The Department of Defense (DOD) continues to view cluster munitions as a military necessity but in 2008 instituted a policy to reduce the failure rate of cluster munitions to 1% or less after 2018. In November 2017, a new DOD policy was issued that essentially reversed the 2008 policy. Under the new policy, combatant commanders can use cluster munitions that do not meet the 1% or less unexploded submunitions standard in extreme situations to meet immediate warfighting demands. In addition, the new policy does not establish a deadline to replace cluster munitions exceeding the 1% rate and states that DOD “will retain cluster munitions currently in active inventories until the capabilities they provide are replaced with enhanced and more reliable munitions.” Potential issues for Congress include cluster munitions in an era of precision weapons, other weapons in lieu of cluster munitions, and the potential impact of DOD’s 2017 revised cluster munitions policy.
    [Show full text]