Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T03:00:50.291Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Frontiers of Sovereignty: A Framework of Protection, Assistance, and Development for the Internally Displaced

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 July 2009

Francis M. Deng
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Absract

Among the major crises threatening humanity today, forcing some 20 million people to flee their countries as refugees and displacing some 30 million people within the borders of their countries, are violent internal conflicts, systematic violations of human rights, massive denials of democratic freedoms, and frustration of sustainable, environmentally sensitive development. Although mostly grounded in domestic jurisdictions, these crises often result in human rights tragedies of grave concern to the international community. In this article, the focus lies on the state's sovereignty to underscore its responsibilities and accountability to both domestic and international constituencies.

Keywords

human rightsinterventionpeaceful settlement of disputessovereignty.
Type
Leading Articles
Information
Leiden Journal of International Law , Volume 8 , Issue 2 , Autumn 1995 , pp. 249 - 286
Copyright
Copyright © Foundation of the Leiden Journal of International Law 1995

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. J. Herz, The Nation-State and the Crisis of World Politics (1976).

2. F.M. Deng, S. Kimaro, T. Lyons, D. Rothchild & I.W. Zartman, Sovereignty as Responsibility: Conflict Management in Africa 1 (1995).

3. M. Toole, Center for Disease Control, Department of Health and Human Services, Testimony before the US Senate, 3 April, 1990, as quoted in Refugee Policy Group, Internally Displaced Women and Children in Africa (1992).

4. L. Minear & Th. Weiss, Humanitarian Politics, Foreign Policy Association (1994).

5. For the various reports of the Representative of the Secretary-General to the Commission on Human Rights, the General Assembly, and the Secretary-General himself, see F.M. Deng, Profiles in Displacement: Sri Lanka, E/CN.4/1994/44/Add.l (1994); Profiles in Displacement:Colombia, E/CN.4/1995/50/Add.l (1994); Profiles in Displacement: Burundi, E/CN.4/1995/50/Add.2 (1994); Note on the Mission to Rwanda, E/CN.4/1995/50/Add.4 (1995); and Report to the Fifty-first Session of the Commission on Human Rights, E/CN.4/1995/50(1995).

6. Analytical Report of the Secretary-General on Internally Displaced Persons, UN Doc.E/CN.4/1992/23, at 4–5 (1992).

7. B. Boutros-Ghali, An Agenda for Peace: Preventive Diplomacy, Peacemaking and Peacekeeping 7(1992).

8. See, e.g., 1994 World Refugee Survey, US Committee for Refugees, Statement of the UNHCR to the PARINAC Regional Conference in Addis Ababa (1994); Refugee Policy Group, Internally Displaced Persons in Africa: Assistance Challenges and Opportunities (1992). The Refugee Policy Group notes that its estimates are derived from host country statistics, the International Committee of the Red Cross, United Nations agencies (UNDP, UNHCR, WFP),the Office of US Foreign Disaster Assistance, the country desks of the US Department of State, and private humanitarian and human rights organizations. “The estimates,” it says, “are weak, however, because there is neither an institution charged with collecting the information, nor a consistent methodology applied by the various groups collecting the data.” See also R. Wright, Millions Adrift in Their Own Lands, Los Angeles Times, 8 March, 1994.

9. OAU, Resolving Conflicts in Africa, 1 Press and Information Series 3 (1992).

10. Quoted in International Peace Academy, Africa's Internal Conflicts: The Search for a Response, Report of an Arusha, Tanzania, High-level Consultation, 23–25 March 1992, prepared by D. Ocaya-Lakidi, at 9–10.

11. Reproduced in W.M. Reisman & A.M. Schreiber, Jurisprudence: Understanding and Shaping Law 586–587 (1987). For the basic elements of Law, Science, and Policy and its pertinence to a legal programme of training designed to impart both the skills necessary for the clarification and implementation of public policy and a commitment to the principles of democracy, see the two classic articles by M.S. McDougal & H.D. Lasswell: Criteria for a Theory About Law, 44 South Carolina Law Review 362 and 374–394 (1971) and Legal Education and Public Policy, 51 Yale Law Journal 203 and 213–216 (1943). For a brief summary of the New Haven School of Law, Science, and Policy, see Reisman & Schreiber, Jurisprudence, at 573–590.

12. W.M. Reisman, Nullity and Revision: The Review and Enforcement of International Judgments and Awards 3, n. 1 (1971). See H.D. Lasswell & A. Kaplan, Power and Society: A Framework for Political Inquiry 56–73 (1950). See also McDougal & Lasswell, supra note 11.

13. S.J. Stedmant, Conflict and Conflict Resolutionin Africa: A Conceptual Framework, in F.M. Deng & I.W. Zartman (Eds.), Conflict Resolution in Africa 367–368 (1991).

14. W.G. Summer, Folkways 12–13 (1906).

15. D. Rothchild,Regime Management of Conflict in West Africa, in I. W. Zartman (Ed.), Governance as Conflict Management in West Africa (forthcoming).

16. Universal Declaration of Human Rights, UN Doc. A/810 (1948); International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, UN Doc. A/6316 (1966); and International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, UN Doc. A/6316 (1966). See F. Newman & D. Weissbrodt, Selected InternationalHuman Rights 11–15,16–24, and 25–41 (1990).

17. For a brief discussion of the Treaty of Westphalia, see G.M. Lyons & M. Mastanduno, Beyond Westphalia? International Intervention, State Sovereignty, and the Future of International Society (1993).

18. See H. Hannum, Autonomy, Sovereignty, and Selfdetermination: The Accommodation of Conflicting Rights (1990); Lyons & Mastanduno, supra note 17, at 6; and Th.G. Weiss & J. Chopra, Sovereignty is no Longer Sacrosanct: Codifying Humanitarian Intervention, 6 Ethics and International Affairs 95 (1992).

19. J. Austin (R. Campbell, Ed.), Lectures on Jurisprudence, or The Philosophy of Positive Law 225–226, 5th ed. (1885). Extracts reproduced in D. Lloyd, Introduction to Jurisprudence 134–137 (1959); and Reisman & Schreiber, supra note 11, at 270–280. See also W. Friedmann, Legal Theory 211–213,4th ed. (1960).

20. Id., at 211.

21. L.L. Fuller, Positivism and Fidelity to Law – A Reply to Professor Hart, 71 Harvard Law Review 634 (1958). See also H.L.A. Hart, Positivism and the Separation of Law and Morals, 71 Harvard Law Review 56 (1958).

22. See Weiss & Chopra, supra note 18, at 103. See also F.H. Hinsley, Sovereignty (1986).

23. See Fuller, supra note 21, at 646.

24. Id., at 660.

25. See Lyons & Mastanduno, supra note 17, at 6.

26. W.M. Reisman, Humanitarian Intervention and Fledging Democracies, 18 Fordham International Law Journal 794–805 (1988). See also W.M. Reisman, Coercion and Self-Determination: Construing Charter Article 2(4), 78 AJIL 642 (1984) and Sovereignty and Human Rights in Contemporary International Law, 84 AJIL 866 (1990).

27. See Hart, supra note 21, at 603–604.

28. R. Cohen, Human Rights Protection for Internally Displaced Persons, Refugee Policy Group (1991).

29. A. Henkin (Ed.), Human Dignity: The Internationalization of Human Rights v (1979). See also F.M. Deng, Protecting the Dispossessed: A Challenge for the International Community 1 (1993).

30. See Deng, supra note 29, at 14–20.

31. Scheffer, D.J., Toward A Modern Doctrine of Humanitarian Intervention, 23 University of Toledo Law Review 259 (1992).Google Scholar

32. Refugee Policy Group, Human Rights Protection for Internally Displaced Persons: An International Conference 7 (1991).

33. Id.

34. L. Henkin, International Law: Politics, Values and Functions, 216 HR 24–28 (1989–IV). Quoted in L. Henkin, R.C. Pugh, O. Schachter & H. Smit, International Law: Cases and Materials 16 (1993).

35. Canadian Council of International Law Procedure (1992), as quoted in Henkin et al.,supra note 34, at 19.

36. R.B. Lillich, Sovereignty and Humanity: Can They Converge?, in A. Graht-Madsen & J. Toman(Eds.), The Spirit of Uppsala 406–407 (1984). Quoted in Henkin et al., supra note 34, at 19.

37. Reisman, Coercion and SelfDetermination: Construing Charter Article 2(4) and Sovereignty and Human Rights in Contemporary International Law, supra note 26. A. ĎAmato, The Invasion of Panama was a Lawful Response to Tyranny, 84 AJ1L 516 (1990). Reisman's views were criticized by O. Schachter in The Legality of Pro-Democratic Invasions, 78 AJIL 645 (1984). C. Palley cites these sources to make the point that“[t]he most radical approach to humanitarian intervention (or intervention following massive violation of human rights) has been put forward by American jurists.”Further Preparatory Document submitted by C. Palley on the Question of the Role of the United Nations in International Humanitarian Activities and Assistance and the Principlesof Non-interference, UN Doc. E/CN.4/sub.2/1994/39 at 9, para. 26 (1994).

38. UN press release SG/SM/4560 of 24 April 1991. Cited in Lyons & Mastanduno, supra note 17, at 2. Portions of the statement are also cited in D.J. Scheffer, Toward a Modern Doctrine of Humanitarian Intervention, 23 University of Toledo Law Review 262 (1992).

39. J. Perez de Cuellar, Report of the Secretary-General on the Work of the Organization, UN Doc. A/46/1, at 12–13 (1991).

40. Id.

41. See Boutros-Ghali, supra note 7, at 5.

42. B. Boutros-Ghali, Empowering the United Nations, 1992/1993 Foreign Affairs 91–101 and 99.

43. See Scheffer, supra note 31, at 262–263.

44. Report of the Secretary-General on Conflicts in Africa: Proposal for an OAU Mechanism for Conflict Prevention and Resolution, OAU Doc. CM/1710 (L.VI) (1992).

45. Id.

46. Id.

47. Id.

48. See Lyons & Mastanduno, supra note 17, at 31.

49. See Deng, supra note 29, at 145. Although the statement did not refer to the study on internally displaced persons or the specific issue of a mechanism for their protection and assistance, China supported the appointment of a Special Representative on Internally Displaced Persons.

50. Id. See also UN Doc. E/CN.4/1994/48, para. Gl (1994); and Summary Records of the Conference Proceedings, UN Doc. E/CN.4/1993/SR.40, at 13–14 (1993).

51. UN Doc. A/RES/32/130 (1977).

52. UN Doc. ECOSOC/RES/1992/39 (1992).

53. Summary Records of the Conference Proceedings, supra note 50, at 13.

54. UN Doc. ECOSOC/RES/1503 XLVIII (1970).

55. See Deng, supra note 29, at 146–147.

56. K. Scanton, Pitfalls of Intervention, XVI Harvard International Review 16 (1993).

57. Vienna Declaration and Program of Action, World Conference on Human Rights, UN Doc. A/Conf.157/23(1993).

58. Id.

59. See Boutros-Ghali, supra note 42, at 99.

60. Weiss & Chopra, supra note 18, at 107.

61. Cohen, supra note 28, at 16–18.

62. Note by the President of the Security Council, UN Doc. S/25344 (1993).

63. The International Commission of the Red Cross generally maintains that the issue is one of implementation and not of gaps in the existing law. See M. Veuthey, Assessing Humanitarian Law, in Th.G. Weiss & L. Minear (Eds.), Humanitarianism Across Borders (1993).

64. UN Commission on Human Rights, Res. 1992/73, UN Doc. E/CN.4/1992/84 (1992).

65. See Deng, UN Doc. E/CN.4/1995/50, supra note 5, at 37.

66. See Lillich, R.B., Forcible Self-Help by States to Protect Human Rights, 53 Iowa Law Review 347–351 (1967)Google Scholar; Moore, J.M., The Control of Foreign Intervention in Internal Conflict, 9 VJIL 261–264 (1969)Google Scholar; and Goldman, S.E., A Right of Intervention Based Upon Impaired Sovereignty, 156 World Affairs 124–124 (1993)Google Scholar. Seealso Meron, Th. & Rosas, A., A Declaration of Minimum Humanitarian Standards, 85 AJIL 375–85 (1991), for a threshold below which humanitarian intervention might be triggered, and Scheffer, supra note 38, at 265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

67. See Deng, UN Doc. E/CN.4/1995/50, supra note 5, at 6 (1995).

68. See Reisman, Humanitarian Intervention and Fledging Democracies, supra note 26, at 794.

69. J. Steinbruner, Civil Violence as an International Security Problem, a memorandum dated 23 November 1992, addressed to the Brookings Institution Foreign Policy Studies Program staff. Reproduced in Deng, supra note 29, at 154–159.

70. Id.

71. Id.

72. L. Minear,A Strengthened Humanitarian System for the Post-Cold War Era, testimony before the Select Committee on Hunger of the US House of Representatives at a hearing entitled The Decade of Disasters:The United Nationś Response, in L. Minear, Th.G. Weiss & K.M. Campbell(Eds.), Humanitarianism and War: Learning the Lessons From Recent Armed Conflicts 36–42 (1991).

73. Secretary-General Boutros-Ghali outlined similar phases in his proposed strategy for the prevention and resolution of conflicts in An Agenda for Peace, supra note 7, at 7–8.

74. For a more elaborate discussion of these phases as applied to the crisis of the internally displaced,See UN Doc. E/CN.4/1993/35 (1993) and the revised version of that study in Deng, supra note 29. The study was considered by the Commission on Human Rights at its 49th session, its findings and recommendations endorsed, and the mandate of the Representative of the Secretary-General extended for two years to continue his work on the various aspects of the problem as presented in the study.