No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Nineteen ninety-nine was a year of taking stock. For humanitarian lawyers, this was facilitated by the fact that it was a year of anniversaries. As well as being the final year of the decade of international law, it was also the centenary of the first Hague peace conference and the first Hague Convention and the fiftieth anniversary of the 1949 Geneva Conventions, providing ample occasion for reflection on the successes and failures of this branch of international law over the past century. The tone of the various commemorative meetings was chastened rather than celebratory. As one commentator noted: ‘At the end of a century which has seen so much of war and in which the laws of war have proven so comparatively ineffectual, it seems obvious that that law must be seen as deficient and the record of the last hundred years be adjudged one of failure rather than achievement. (…) Yet the principle conclusion is not that the world needs new law, or different law, but that the law which we have needs to be made more effective.’
The major developments in international humanitarian law have closely tracked a century that has seen society and the nature and aims of warfare change dramatically. Developments in the law have been reactive rather than anticipatory and have built on a model that was designed in response to imperatives that were different than those faced today and those that will be faced in the future. The time has long since passed in many countries when the state has a monopoly on violence. Entire societies have been militarised, and in many areas war has been ‘privatised’ as ‘mercenaries, rebels, mutinous gangsters emerge to exploit the decline of the state’.
3. Greenwood, Christopher, ‘International Humanitarian Law and the Laws of War’, Revised Report for the Centennial Commemoration of the First Hague Peace Conference 1899(May 1999) p. 3Google Scholar (para. 1.6).
4. ‘The century that murdered peace’, The Observer, 12 12 1999Google Scholar.
5. UN SG's Report on the Protection of Civilians in Armed Conflict. S/1999/957 of 8 September 1999.
6. See further ‘Conflicts in Kosovo, Sierra Leone and Angola, Question of East Timor Key Elements of Security Council's Work for 1999’, UN Press Release SC/6784, 18 01 2000Google Scholar.
7. A recent report stated that 300,000 children are currently serving as soldiers in current armed conflicts, in more than 30 countries. ‘Promises Broken: An Assessment of Children's Rights on the 10th Anniversary of the Convention on the Rights of the Child’ (New York, Human Rights Watch, 12 1999)Google Scholar.
8. Report of the Special Rapporteur, Ms. Asma Jahangir, submitted pursuant to Commission on Human Rights resolution 1998/68, E/CN.4/1999/39, para. 97, 6 January 1999. The report deals further with the issue of child soldiers at paras. 71–73.
9. Commission on Human Rights resolution 1999/80, 28 April 1999, part IV, paras. 14–19.
10. For more on relevant developments within the SC, see supra n. 6.
11. Convention 182.
12. http://www.igc.org/hrw/campaigns/crp/montedec.htm.
13. See ‘Children of War’, Rädda Barnen, No. 4/99, 12 1999, p. 3Google Scholar.
14. ‘Children of War’, A newsletter on child soldiers from Rädda Barnen, No. 3/99, 10 1999, p. 2Google Scholar.
15. OAU Doc. CAB/LEG/24.9/49 (1990).
16. Report of the Group of Experts for Cambodia, A/53/850, S/1999/231, para. 6.
17. ‘Swedish MP announces formation of independent Kosovo investigation’, Associated Press, 6 08 1999Google Scholar. The Commission's website is at http://Kosovocommission.org/.
18. ‘International Commission of Inquiry on East Timor Concludes Session in Geneva’, UN Press Release, HR/99/120, 14 12 1999Google Scholar.
19. Loi no. 99–08 du 29 Rabi El Aoul 1420 correspondant au 13 juillet 1999 relative au rétablissement de la concorde civile.
20. Guatemala: Memoria del Silencio. Available online at http://hrdata.aaas.org/ceh/index.html (Spanish only). An English language summary is available at http://hrdata.aaas.org/ceh/report/English/toc.html.
21. Peace Agreement between the Government of Sierra Leone and the Revolutionary United Front of Sierra Leone. Available online at http://www.sierra-leone.gov.s1/peace_agreement.htm.
22. UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan stated: ‘I instructed my Special Representative to sign the agreement with the explicit provision that the United Nations holds the understanding that the amnesty and pardon in article IX of the agreement shall not apply to international crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and other serious violations of international humanitarian law’. UN Doc. S/1999/836, p. 2, para. 7.
23. Art. XXVI of the Peace Agreement calls for the establishment of a Truth and Reconciliation Commission to ‘address impunity, break the cycle of violence, provide a forum for both the victims and perpetrators of human rights violations to tell their story, get a clear picture of the past in order to facilitate genuine healing.’ The Truth and Reconciliation Act is at http://www.sierra-leone.Org/trc.html.
24. See McDonald, A., ‘Sierra Leone's Uneasy Peace: the amnesties granted in the Lomé Peace Agreement and the UN's dilemma’, 13 Humanitäres Völkerrecht (2000), pp. 11–26Google Scholar.
25. TRC Report, Vol. 1, p. 76.
26. TRC Report, Vol. 5, p. 348. See further, J. Dugard at p. 254 of this volume.
27. She was appointed by the Security Council on 11 August 1999 and officially took up her post on 15 September 1999. SC Res. 1259 (1999), 11 August 1999.
28. He was sworn in on 24 November 1999.
29. See inter alia, ‘Letter from President McDonald to the President of the Security Council Concerning Outstanding Issues of State Non-Compliance’, ICTY Press Release, JL/P.I.S./444-E, The Hague, 2 11 1999Google Scholar; Letter from Judge Gabrielle Kirk McDonald, the President of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, to the President of the United Nations Security Council, Concerning Croatia, JL/P.I.S./438-E, The Hague, 29 September 1999.
30. Prosecutor v. Slobodan Milosević, Milan Milutinović, Nikola Sainović, Dragoljub Ojdanić and Vlajko Stojiljković, IT-99-37, 23 May 1999.
31. Franco, A., ‘Carla Del Ponte, procureur au TPIY, engage trois enquêtes au Kosovo, dont une sur l'UCK’, Le Monde, 22 12 1999Google Scholar; Statement by Carla Del Ponte (…) on the Investigation and Prosecution of Crimes Committed in Kosovo, ICTY Press Release, PR/P.I.S./437-E, 29 September 1999; UN War Crimes Prosecutor Sets Out Kosovo Strategy', Reuters, 29 09 1999.Google Scholar
32. IT-97-27.
33. The latest figures are available online at http://www.un.org/icty/glance/fact.htm.
34. Prosecutor v. Zejnil Delalić, Zdravko Mucić also known as “Pavo”, Hazim Delić and Esad Landžo also known as “Zenga”, Case No. IT-96-21-T, Judgement, 16 November 1998.
35. Ibid., para. 810, p. 289.
36. Prosecutor v. Tadić, Decision on the Defence Motion for Interlocutory Appeal on Jurisdiction, 2 Oct. 1995, IT-94-1-AR72, para. 83.
37. See also Čelebići Judgement, supra n. 34 at para. 317, where the Chamber, in finding that violations of common Article 3 gives rise to individual criminal responsibility under Article 3 of the ICTY Statute, stated: ‘Recognising that this would entail an extension of the concept of “grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions” in line with a more teleological interpretation, it is the view of this Trial Chamber that violations of common Article 3 may fall more logically within Article 2 of the Statute. Nonetheless, for the present purposes, the more cautious approach has been followed.’
38. Ibid., para. 226.
39. Ibid., para. 230.
40. Ibid., para. 231.
41. Ibid., para. 234.
42. Ibid., para. 259.
43. Ibid., para. 263.
44. Ibid., para. 343.
45. Ibid., para. 394.
46. Ibid., para. 354.
47. Ibid., para. 378.
48. Ibid., para. 383.
49. Ibid.
50. Ibid., para. 383.
51. Ibid., para. 489.
52. Ibid., para. 443.
53. Ibid., para. 454.
54. Ibid., para. 495.
55. Ibid., paras. 941, 963.
56. Ibid., para. 1066.
57. Prosecutor v. Furundžija, Case No. IT-95-17/1-T, Judgement, 10 December 1998, para. 7.
58. Ibid., para. 267.
59. Ibid., para. 271.
60. Ibid., para. 272.
61. Ibid., para. 273.
62. Ibid., para. 274.
63. Ibid., para. 172.
64. Ibid., para. 185.
65. Ibid., para. 186.
66. The written judgement and sentence were issued later. Prosecutor v. Zlatko Aleksovski, Case No. IT-95-14/1-T, Judgement, 25 June 1999.
67. Judgment, para. 14 of Joint Opinion of the Majority, Judge Vohrah and Judge Nieto-Navia, on the Applicability of Article 2 of the Statute pursuant to Paragraph 46 of the Judgment.
68. Ibid., para. 30.
69. Ibid., para. 34.
70. Paras. 21–22 of his Dissenting opinion.
71. Ibid., para. 42.
72. Ibid., para. 44.
73. Prosecutor v. Daško Tadić, Case No. IT-94-1-A, Appeals Chamber, Judgement, 15 July 1999, para. 94.
74. Ibid., para. 120.
75. Ibid., para. 137.
76. Ibid., para. 122.
77. Ibid., para. 138.
78. Ibid., para. 140.
79. Ibid., para. 156.
80. Ibid., para. 154.
81. Ibid.
82. Ibid., para. 166.
83. Ibid., para. 167.
84. Ibid., para. 168.
85. Ibid., at paras. 185–229.
86. Ibid., para. 271.
87. Ibid., para. 272.
88. Ibid., para. 305.
89. The Prosecutor v. Goran Jelisić, Case No. IT-95-10-1, Judgement, 14 December 1999.
90. Ibid., paras. 98, 108.
91. Ibid., para. 83.
92. Ibid., para. 82.
93. Ibid., at para. 105.
94. Ibid., para. 108.
95. Ibid., para. 96.
96. ICTR Press Release, ICTR/UPD/014, Arusha, 18 March 1999.
97. The Prosecutor v. Omar Serushago, Case no. ICTR 98-39-5, Sentence, 5 February 1999.
98. The Prosecutor v. Clément Kayishema and Obed Ruzindana, Case No. ICTR-95-1-T, Judgement, 21 May 1999.
99. IT-96-10-T.
100. Ibid., para. 31 of Sentence.
101. Ibid., para. 604.
102. Ibid., para. 623.
103. Ibid., para. 603.
104. Ibid., para. 647.
105. Ibid., para. 649.
106. Ibid., para. 584.
107. Ibid., para. 587.
108. Ibid., para. 213.
109. Ibid., para. 220.
110. Ibid., para. 230.
111. Ibid., para. 492.
112. Ibid., para. 227.
113. Ibid., para. 229.
114. Ibid., para. 515.
115. Ibid., para. 88.
116. Ibid., para. 89.
117. Ibid., para. 91.
118. Ibid., para. 93.
119. Ibid., para. 94.
120. Ibid., para. 95.
121. Ibid., paras. 96–97.
122. Ibid., para. 99.
123. Jean-Bosco Barayagwiza v. The Prosecutor, Case No. ICTR-97-19-AR72, Decision of the Appeals Chamber [on release of Barayagwiza], 3 November 1999.
124. ‘Rwanda snubs tribunal prosecutor’, BBC World, 11 11 1999Google Scholar.
125. Supra n. 123, para. 46.
126. The Prosecutor v. Georges Anderson Nderubumwe Rutaganda, Case No. ICTR-96-3-T, Judgement and Sentence, 6 December 1999, para. 400.
127. Ibid., para. 444.
128. Ibid., para. 443.
129. Ibid., para. 435.
130. Ibid., para. 421.
131. Ibid., para. 117.
132. Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, Report No. 1/99, Case 10.480, 27 January 1999.
133. See Annual Report of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (1997), OEA Ser.L/II.98 Doc. 6 rev. 1 of 3 April, 1998, Report 55/97, Case 11.137 (Abella), Argentina, paras. 164–166. See also IACHR, Report 26/97, Case 11.142 (“La Leche”), Colombia, para. 132.
134. Supra n. 132 at para. 65.
135. Ibid., paras. 67, 82.
136. General Amnesty Law for the Consolidation of Peace (Decree 486), 20 March 1993.
137. Supra n. 132 at para. 107.
138. Ibid., para. 115.
139. Ibid., paras. 150–158.
140. Jorgić case, Decision of Federal Supreme Court, 30 April 1999, 3StR215/98, p. 5, at I. See further the comments of Lüder and Schotten in Correspondents' Reports at p. 367 of this volume.
141. Götzfried case, Regional Court of Stuttgart, Judgment of 20 May 1999 — 2 Js 61533/97.
142. In a Decision of 6 November 1998.
143. See further W. Schabas in Correspondents' Reports at p. 345.
144. See further I. Bryan and P. Rowe at p. 307 of this volume.
145. Nulyarimma v. Thompson [1999] Federal Court of Australia 1192 (1 September 1999). See further Correspondents' Reports at p. 331.
146. Decision of 6 November 1998 of the Brussels Tribunal of First Instance on extradition request in respect of Augusto Pinochet Ugarte. Ruling on Article 61 quinquies 5 C.I. Cr- request for an instrument of supplementary preliminary investigation. Dossier nr. 216/98. Notices nr. 30.99.3447/98.
147. Loi du 10 février 1999 relative à la répression des violations graves du droit international humanitaire, reprinted at p. 539 of this volume.
148. AP Worldstream, 19 November 1999; Barrow, Greg, ‘Ethiopians push SA for Mengistu extradition’, BBC, 3 12 1999Google Scholar; ‘Focus on mounting pressure to extradite former Ethiopian dictator’, IRIN, 7 12 1999Google Scholar.
149. Joint Communication to the Press. ICRC No. 99/57, Federation No. 32/99, 26 October 1999.
151. Ibid., s. 10.
152. ICRC Communication to the Press No. 99/56, 11 October 1999.
153. The People on War Report: ICRC worldwide consultation on the rules of war (Geneva, ICRC 1999) at p. viGoogle Scholar.
154. Decision on the prosecution motion under Rule 73 for a ruling concerning the testimony of a witness, 27 July 1999.
155. The intention is not to provide a comprehensive analysis of every relevant SC resolution but merely to draw attention to their humanitarian aspects and particularly, specific references to humanitarian law and to breaches of the law and the need for responsibility. Only resolutions that specifically refer to humanitarian law or relate to armed conflicts in some way are mentioned. For a good general overview of the SC's work in 1999, see supra n. 6.
156. S/PRST/1999/29 of 22 October 1999.
157. S/PRST/1999/31, 12 November 1999.
158. S/PRST/1995/5 of 29 January 1999.
159. S/PRST/1991/1 of 7 January 1999.
160. See Note by the Netherlands State Secretary of Justice to Parliament on Article 1F of the Refugee Convention, in van Krieken, Peter J., ed., Refugee Law in Context: The Exclusion Clause, (The Hague, TMC Asser Press 1999) pp. 300–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
161. See supra n. 6.
162. S/PRST/1999/34 of 30 November 1999.
163. This is stated in the guidelines. See also Winfield, Nicole, ‘UN peacekeepers bound to respect, protect civilians’, Associated Press, 10 08 1999Google Scholar.
164. The Safety Convention entered into force on 15 January 1999 with the ratification of the 22nd State, in accordance with Article 27(1).
165. A/54/549, 15 November 1999. http://www.un.org/peace/srebrenica.pdf.
166. Ibid., para. 503.
167. http://www.un.org/News/ossg/rwanda_report.htm. The report has no document number.
168. UN Press Release SG/SM/7263, AFR/196, 16 December 1999.
169. Rapport d'Information No. 1271 par la mission d'information de la commission de la Défense Nationale et des Forces Armées et de la Commission des Affaires Étrangères sur les operations militaires menées par la France, d'autres pays et l'ONU au Rwanda entre 1990 et 1994.
170. Forges, A. Des, Leave None to Tell the Story (New York, Human Rights Watch 1999)Google Scholar; see also Gourevitch, P., We Wish to Inform You that Tomorrow We Will Be Killed With Our Families: Stories from Rwanda (New York, Farrar Straus & Giroux 1998)Google Scholar.
171. A study of 101 conflicts fought between 1989 and 1996 found that small arms and light weapons were generally the weapon of preference or even the only weapon used. Wallensteen, P. and Sollenberg, M., ‘Armed Conflicts, Conflict Termination and Peace Agreements, 1989–1996’, 34 Journal of Peace ResearchGoogle Scholar, quoted in Arms Availability and the Situation of Civilians in Armed Conflict, ICRC 1999.
172. Arms Availability and the Situation of Civilians in Armed Conflict, ICRC 1999, s. 2(e). http://www.icrc.org//icrceng.nsf/4d.../10805a47444523884125680f0034a72c?OpenDocument.
173. Ibid.
174. Supra n. 6.
175. S/PRST/1999/28, 24 September 1999.