Article 51

https://legal.un.org/repertory/art51/english/rep_supp3_vol2_art51.pdf

Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-
defense if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security
Council has taken the measures necessary to maintain international peace and security.
Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defense shall be immediately
reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and
responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such
action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security.

Caroline case
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4792657-Waxman-Caroline-Affair-Review.html

The Caroline affair in 1837 and the subsequent McLeod case were a diplomatic incident in
the relationship between Britain and the United States over the issue of Canada. National
interests and honor caused the problem to endure and created tension in the relationship
between the two countries. However, the highly regarded points of view of the two
governments were the basis for ending the Caro line affair and McLeod’s case. Ending the
Caroline affair solved one of the major conflicts between the United States and Britain, ended
the threat of a war between the two countries similar to the War of 1812, and provided the
basis to discuss other issues and sign the Webster-Ashburton Pact in 1842. The settlement
process of the Caroline affair also formed the anticipatory self-defense principle
in international law, which also became one of the principles of national politics.

The Responsibility to Protect

https://www.un.org/en/preventgenocide/rwanda/assets/pdf/Backgrounder%20R2P
%202014.pdf

Who is responsible for protecting people from gross violations of human rights?

Emergence of the concept Debating the right to “humanitarian intervention” (1990s)

Following the tragedies in Rwanda and the Balkans in the 1990s, the international community
began to seriously debate how to react effectively when citizens’ human rights are grossly
and systematically violated. The question at the heart of the matter was whether States have
unconditional sovereignty over their affairs or whether the international community has the
right to intervene in a country for humanitarian purposes. In his Millennium Report of 2000,
then Secretary-General Kofi Annan, recalling the failures of the Security Council to act in a
decisive manner in Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia, put forward a challenge to Member
States: “If humanitarian intervention is, indeed, an unacceptable assault on sovereignty, how
should we respond to a Rwanda, to a Srebrenica, to gross and systematic violation of human
rights that offend every precept of our common humanity?”

From humanitarian intervention to the responsibility to protect (2001)

The expression “responsibility to protect” was first presented in the report of the International
Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS), set up by the Canadian
Government in December 2001. The Commission had been formed in response to Kofi
Annan's question of when the international community must intervene for humanitarian
purposes. Its report, “The Responsibility to Protect,” found that sovereignty not only gave a
State the right to “control” its affairs, it also conferred on the State primary “responsibility”
for protecting the people within its borders. It proposed that when a State fails to protect its
people – either through lack of ability or a lack of willingness – the responsibility shifts to the
broader international community.

Report of the High-level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change (2004)

In 2004, the High-level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change, set up by Secretary-
General Kofi Annan, endorsed the emerging norm of a responsibility to protect – often called
“R2P” – stating that there is a collective international responsibility, ‘exercisable by the
Security Council authorizing military intervention as a last resort, in the event of genocide
and other large-scale killing, ethnic cleansing and serious violations of humanitarian law
which sovereign governments have proved powerless or unwilling to prevent.” The panel
proposed basic criteria that would legitimize the authorization of the use of force by the UN
Security Council, including the seriousness of the threat, the fact that it must be a last resort,
and the proportionality of the response.

Report of the Secretary-General: In larger freedom (2005)

In his report “In larger freedom,” Secretary-General Kofi Annan “strongly agreed” with the
approach outlined by the High-level Panel and suggested that a list of proposed criteria –
including seriousness of the threat, proportionality and chance of success - be applied for the
authorization of the use of force in general.
United Nations World Summit (2005)

In September 2005, at the United Nations World Summit, all Member States formally
accepted the responsibility of each State to protect its population from genocide, war crimes,
ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. At the Summit, world leaders also agreed that
when any State fails to meet that responsibility, all States (the “international community”) are
responsible for helping to protect people threatened with such crimes. Should peaceful means
– including diplomatic, humanitarian and others - be inadequate and national authorities
“manifestly fail” to protect their populations, the international community should act
collectively in a “timely and decisive manner” – through the UN Security Council and in
accordance with the UN Charter – on a case-by-case basis and in cooperation with regional
organizations as appropriate.

In practice

The first time the Security Council made official reference to the responsibility to protect was
in April 2006, in resolution 1674 on the protection of civilians in armed conflict. The
Security Council referred to that resolution in August 2006, when passing resolution 1706
authorizing the deployment of UN peacekeeping troops to Darfur, Sudan. Recently, the
responsibility to protect featured prominently in a number of resolutions adopted by the
Security Council:

Libya (2011)

Following widespread and systematic attacks against the civilian population by the regime in
the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya (short: Libya), the UN Security Council, on 26 February 2011,
unanimously adopted resolution 1970, making explicit reference to the responsibility to
protect. Deploring what it called “the gross and systematic violation of human rights” in
strife-torn Libya, the Security Council demanded an end to the violence, “recalling the
Libyan authorities’ responsibility to protect its population,” and imposed a series of
international sanctions. The Council also decided to refer the situation to the International
Criminal Court. In resolution 1973, adopted on 17 March 2011, the Security Council
demanded an immediate ceasefire in Libya, including an end to ongoing attacks against
civilians, which it said might constitute “crimes against humanity.” The Council authorized
Member States to take “all necessary measures” to protect civilians under threat of attack in
the country, while excluding a foreign occupation force of any form on any part of Libyan
territory. A few days later, acting on the resolution, NATO planes started striking at
Qadhafi’s forces.

Côte d’Ivoire (2011)

In response to the escalating, post-election violence against the population of Côte d’Ivoire in
late 2010 and early 2011, the UN Security Council, on 30 March 2011, unanimously adopted
resolution 1975 condemning the gross human rights violations committed by supporters of
both ex-President Laurent Gbagbo and President Ouattara. The resolution cited “the primary
responsibility of each State to protect civilians,” called for the immediate transfer of power to
President Ouattara, the victor in the elections, and reaffirmed that the UN Operation in Côte
d’Ivoire (UNOCI) could use “all necessary means to protect life and property.” In an effort to
protect the people of Côte d’Ivoire from further atrocities, UNOCI on 4 April 2011 began a
military operation, and President Gbagbo’s hold on power ended on 11 April when he was
arrested by President Ouattara’s forces. In November 2011, President Gbagbo was transferred
to the International Criminal Court to face 2 charges of crimes against humanity as an
“indirect co-perpetrator” of murder, rape, persecution and other inhumane acts. On 26 July
2012, the Council adopted resolution 2062 renewing the mandate of UNOCI until 31 July
2013.

South Sudan (2011)

On 8 July 2011, the Security Council, in resolution 1996, established a UN peacekeeping

mission in South Sudan (UNMISS), to – among other things – advise and assist the
government in fulfilling its responsibility to protect civilians. South Sudan officially became
an independent country on 9 July 2011, the climax of a process made possible by a 2005
peace deal that ended a long civil war. In December 2013, fighting between pro- and anti-
Government forces began, causing the displacement of approximately 706,000 people,
77,000 of whom sought refuge at UNMISS bases. In February 2014, the Security Council
reiterated its steadfast support for UNMISS and its vital mission on behalf of the international
community to protect civilians in South Sudan, including foreign nationals, as well as
conduct human rights monitoring and investigations, and facilitate assistance to populations
in need.

Yemen (2011)
On 21 October 2011, resolution 2014 condemned human rights violations by the Yemeni
authorities and encouraged an inclusive Yemeni-led political process of transition of power,
including the holding of early Presidential elections. This resolution explicitly recalled the
Yemeni Government’s “primary responsibility to protect its population.”

Syria (2012)

Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has stressed the urgent need for a political solution to end
the crisis in Syria, which over the past three years has claimed more than 100,000 lives and
led to a dire humanitarian crisis. He has called on the region and the international community,
in particular the Security Council, to find unity and lend full support to the efforts of the Joint
Special Representative of the United Nations and the League of Arab States, Lakhdar
Brahimi, to help the Syrian people reach a political solution to the conflict Both the General
Assembly and the Human Rights Council have strongly condemned the continued
“widespread and systematic” human rights violations in Syria and demanded that the
government immediately cease all violence and protect its people. The High Commissioner
for Human Rights recommended referring the situation in Syria to the International Criminal
Court and urged the Security Council to assume its responsibility to protect the population of
Syria. “The Government of Syria is manifestly failing to protect its populations,” the
Secretary-General’s Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide, Adama Dieng, said in a
statement in December 2012. “The international community must act on the commitment
made by all Heads of State and Government at the 2005 World Summit to protect populations
from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity, including their
incitement,” said Mr. Dieng.

Central African Republic (2013)

The conflict in the Central African Republic (CAR) erupted when Séléka rebels launched
attacks in December 2012, and has taken on increasingly sectarian overtones as mainly
Christian militias have taken up arms. On 10 October 2013, in resolution 2121, the Security
Council emphasized “the primary responsibility of the Central African authorities to protect
the population, as well as to ensure the security and unity in its territory”, and stressed “their
obligation to ensure respect for international humanitarian law, human rights law and refugee
law.” In March 2014, the UN Secretary-General outlined his proposal for the establishment
of a nearly 12,000-strong UN peacekeeping operation in the CAR. 3
Reports of the Secretary-General- Implementing the responsibility to protect (2009)

Based on the outcome document of the 2005 World Summit, a 2009 report by the Secretary
General outlined a strategy around three pillars of the responsibility to protect:

1. The State carries the primary responsibility for protecting populations from genocide,
war crimes, crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing, and their incitement;
2. The international community has a responsibility to encourage and assist States in
fulfilling this responsibility;
3. The international community has a responsibility to use appropriate diplomatic,
humanitarian and other means to protect populations from these crimes.

If a State is manifestly failing to protect its populations, the international community must be
prepared to take collective action to protect populations, in accordance with the UN Charter.

Early warning, assessment and the responsibility to protect (2010)

The Secretary-General’s report on early warning, assessment and the responsibility to protect
identified gaps and proposed ways to improve the UN’s ability to use early warnings more
effectively, including information from field operations, and improve early, flexible and
balanced responses where there is risk of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes or
ethnic cleansing.

The role of regional and sub-regional arrangements (2011)

This report by the Secretary-General emphasized the need for global-regional collaboration to
help implement the responsibility to protect. While emphasizing that the responsibility to
protect is universal and each region “must move forward,” the report acknowledged that
“each region will operationalize the principle at its own pace and in its own way.”

The responsibility to protect: timely and decisive response (2012)

The Secretary-General’s fourth report on the responsibility to protect, presented in September

2012, examined the idea of a “timely and decisive response” when a State failed to protect its
people, including the range of tools and partners available, and the close connection between
prevention and response.

State Responsibility and Prevention (2013)

The Secretary-General’s fifth report on the responsibility to protect, published in August
2013, focuses on prevention. The report aims to provide analysis and strategies that can help
States to fulfil their responsibilities to protect populations from genocide, war crimes, crimes
against humanity and ethnic cleansing.

The Secretary-General’s Special Adviser

In 2008, the Secretary-General appointed Edward Luck as his Special Adviser on the
Responsibility to Protect. Mr. Luck was succeeded, in June 2013, by Ms. Jennifer Welsh. The
Special Adviser is responsible for the further development and refinement of the concept as
well as for the continuation of the political dialogue with Member States and other
stakeholders on further steps toward implementation

Article 1(2) of both covenants on Human Rights (1966)

https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/international-covenant-civil-
and-political-rights#:~:text=Article%2012-,1.,any%20country%2C%20including%20his
%20own.

Article 1(2)

1. Everyone lawfully within the territory of a State shall, within that territory, have the
right to liberty of movement and freedom to choose his residence.
2. Everyone shall be free to leave any country, including his own.
3. The above-mentioned rights shall not be subject to any restrictions except those which
are provided by law, are necessary to protect national security, public order (ordre
public), public health or morals or the rights and freedoms of others, and are
consistent with the other rights recognized in the present Covenant.
4. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of the right to enter his own country.

Right to self-determination in relation to cultural development

https://digitallibrary.un.org/nanna/record/25252/files/E_CN.4_Sub.2_404_Rev.1-EN.pdf?
withWatermark=0&withMetadata=0&version=1&registerDownload=1

39. At its fifteenth session the General Assembly, on 14 December 1960, adopted
resolution 1514 (XV), entitled "Declaration on the granting of independence to colonial
countries and peoples".
This declaration, which is a document of historic importance, represents one of the most
significant contributions the United Nations has made to developing the concept of the right
of self-determination, to condemning colonialism and all forms of subjection of peoples to
alien domination and exploitation as a denial of that right and of fundamental human rights
and to action to promote decolonization.

The Declaration reads as follows: The General Assembly, Mindful of the determination
proclaimed by the peoples of the world in the Charter of the United Nations to reaffirm faith
in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal
rights of men and women and of nations large and small and to promote social progress and
better standards of life in larger freedom. Conscious of the need for the creation of conditions
of stability and well-being and peaceful and friendly relations based on respect for the
principles of equal rights and self-determination of all peoples, and of universal respect for,
and observance of. human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to
race, sex, language or religion.

Recognizing the passionate yearning for freedom in all dependent peoples and the decisive
role of such peoples in the attainment of their independence, Aware of the increasing
conflicts resulting from the denial of or impediments in the way of the freedom of such
peoples, which Considering the important role of the United Nations in assisting the
movement for independence in Trust and Non-Self-Governing Territories, Recognizing that
the peoples of the world ardently desire the end of colonialism in all its manifestations,

And to this end Declares that:

1. The subjection of peoples to alien subjugation", domination and exploitation

consitutues a denial of fundamental human rights, is contrary to the Charter of the
United Nations and is an impediment to the promotion of world peace and co-
operation.
2. All peoples have the right to self-determination; by virtue of that right they freely
determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural
development.
3. Inadequacy of political, economic, social or educational pre paredness should never
serve as a pretext for delaying independence.
4. All armed action or repressive measures of all kinds directed against dependent
peoples shall cease in order to enable them to exercise peacefully and freely their right
 to complete independence, and the integrity of their national territory shall be
respected.
5. Immediate steps shall be taken, in Trust and Non-Self-Gov erning Territories or all
other territories which have not yet attained independence, to transfer all powers to
the peoples of those territories, without any conditions or reservations, in accordance
with their freely expressed will and desire, without any distinction as to race, creed or
colour, in order to enable them to enjoy complete independence and freedom.

United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP)

United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples | Division for Inclusive
Social Development (DISD)

United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) was adopted
by the General Assembly on Thursday, 13 September 2007, by a majority of 143 states in
favour, 4 votes against (Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States) and 11
abstentions (Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Burundi, Colombia, Georgia, Kenya, Nigeria,
Russian Federation, Samoa and Ukraine). Years later the four countries that voted against
have reversed their position and now support the UN Declaration. Today the Declaration is
the most comprehensive international instrument on the rights of Indigenous Peoples. It
establishes a universal framework of minimum standards for the survival, dignity and well-
being of the Indigenous Peoples of the world and it elaborates on existing human rights
standards and fundamental freedoms as they apply to the specific situation of Indigenous
Peoples.