‘Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.’ – Article 2 Universal Declaration of Human Rights
In the face of today’s crises around the world, military intervention often appears to be the only solution when people are killed, tortured and terrorized. However, more often one gets the feeling that ‘the Security Council […] is no longer a guarantor for legitimacy under international law, but only for failure to render assistance’.1 But if one briefly puts aside the anger, the lack of understanding and the feeling of powerlessness, then one must ask oneself whether it is actually legally and morally justified for states to intervene in the affairs of other states. Is it okay to intervene? And are we obliged to do so?
Genocide and crimes against humanity are two concepts in international law; created in response to the atrocities perpetrated by the Nazis against the European Jewry. Hersch Lauterpacht shaped the concept of ‘crimes against humanity’ and Raphael Lemkin coined the term ‘genocide’. But what is the difference between these two?
Guest Post by Vasilina
The aim of this post is to show the importance of the United Nations (UN) in inter- and intrastate conflicts on the example of Myanmar. The article will focus on the work of the UN and its agencies as well as their impact on the conflict in Myanmar.
Human rights are the rights that are afforded to every human being. Every person, regardless of their origin, age, gender, race, ethnicity, religion, political views or sexual orientation, has access to the same fundamental human rights which serve as a basis for a life in dignity.
In the article entitled “#Denial – the last phase of genocide” I wrote about the importance of punishments for the act of genocide. However, one question remains: who should be responsible for carrying out these punishments?
Since the State is usually the perpetrator of a genocide, it is highly unlikely that they will prosecute themselves. In instances like this, the global rights principle is very important. As a result of this principle, violations of human rights such as genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes or even torture – committed by any State worldwide – can be prosecuted and punished.
Foto: www.pixabay.com/Creative Commons