Consequences of un security council resolution 1593 on the situation in darfur

CONSEQUENCES OF UN SECURITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 1593 ON THE SITUATION IN DARFUR

President of Sudan Omar Al-Bashir

First Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court Luis Moreno Ocampo

Paper International and International Humanitarian Law Master in Humanitarian Action 07-01-2009 Alexandra Visser Alexandraroosje@yahoo.com

Consequences of Security Council Resolution 1593 on theSituation in Darfur – Alexandra Visser

CONSEQUENCES OF SECURITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 1593 ON THE CONFLICT IN DARFUR
On the 31 of March in 2005, the United Nations Security Council, decides to take action to bring justice to Sudan. It adopts Resolution 1593, under Chapter VII of the Charter to refer ‘the situation in Darfur since 1 July 2002 to the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court’ (ICC).(Kaufman 2006) On the 5th of July, 2005, the first Prosecutor for the ICC, Luis Moreno-Ocampo officially opened the investigation into the situation in Darfur. On July 14, he presented "evidence showing that Sudanese President, Omar Hassan Ahmad al-Bashir committed the crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes in Darfur." (Olara 2008) On first sight this Security CouncilResolution seems to be an important step of the international community to finally take up their responsibility to act to end the genocide that so far has caused an estimated 2.45 million displaced persons and more than 450.000 deaths. (CRS 2008) Certainly, this decision of the Security Council has far reaching effects, both positive as negative. The United Nations system might be empowered to takedecisive steps and bring justice in case of massive human rights violations 1 It is one of the first cases in which the Statute of Rome will be applied to trial personal responsibility for massive human rights abuses, and the first case in which the ICC has gained jurisdiction on the basis of a Security Council Resolution based on Chapter VII of the Charter. (Kaufman 2006) This case might open a newdoor to the future trial of war criminals, wherever in the world they come from. It fortifies universal consent on the minimal human rights to be protected. Possibly, it could have a deterring effect on other criminals. In relation to the Sudan itself, this step could bring a feeling of justice to the war torn country, it can bring to an end the government machinery conducting genocide, and open theway for the establishment of a new government. On the other hand, this decision of the Security Council can have several important negative consequences, not only for the country of Sudan, but for the security in the entire world. In this paper, these negative effects will shortly be discussed in an attempt to construct a more nuanced view of the Security Council Resolution. (Heleta 2008)According to many, the situation in Darfur, which began in 2003, is the biggest humanitarian crisis ever. (Williamson 2006) 2 However, the international community for a long time acted as a passive bystander. Under ever increasing pressure from NGOs, and statements from both the Bush administration and then

War Crimes, State agression, Genocide and Crimes against Humanity, see art. 5 Statute of Rome.Among others by March 2004, the UN’s humanitarian coordinator for Sudan, Mukesh Kapila said, “The only difference between Rwanda and Darfur is the numbers involved of dead, tortured, and raped.…This is ethnic cleansing, this is the world’s greatest humanitarian crisis, and I don’t know why the world is not doing more about it.” On April 2, UN Emergency Relief Coordinator Jan Egeland said that inDarfur, “scorched-earth tactics” have triggered “one of the world’s worst humanitarian crises.”
2

1

2

Consequences of Security Council Resolution 1593 on the Situation in Darfur – Alexandra Visser UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, 3 slowly, steps were taken to try to curtail the violence in Darfur. The decision that came only in 2005 to refer the situation to the ICC, had the purpose of...