Skip to main content Accessibility help

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.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

1 results

  • 3 - Initiatives to Voluntarily Restrain Veto Use in the Face of Atrocity Crimes

  • Jennifer Trahan, New York University
  • Book:
    Existing Legal Limits to Security Council Veto Power in the Face of Atrocity Crimes
    Published online:
    15 August 2020
    Print publication:
    13 August 2020, pp 102-141

  • Summary

    This chapter explores initiatives that have sought voluntarily to restrain use of the veto in the face of atrocity crimes. They include: the “responsibility not to veto” found in the “responsibility to protect,” the “S5 initiative,” the French/Mexican initiative not to veto in the face of atrocity crimes, the ACT (Accountability, Coherence and Transparency) group of states’ Code of Conduct, and a proposal by a group known as “The Elders.” In addition to explaining the initiatives and providing background on them, this chapter evaluates the merits of each of the different approaches. Because all the initiatives call for voluntary veto restraint, until the recalcitrant permanent members of the Security Council (the Russian Federation, the People’s Republic of China, and the United States) join these initiatives – which appears unlikely – the initiatives will not fully solve the problem of veto use, or the threat of veto use, in the face of atrocity crimes.