Events

Yale Genocide Symposium: Prosecution, Protection, Preservation

From April 19, 2019 10:00 until 17:00

At Watson Center, Yale University

Overview:

The symposium, organized by the Genocide Studies Program at Yale University, intends to examine the challenges facing the Yazidi people in the wake of the attempted genocide against the Yazidi initiated by ISIL in August 2014. Presentations may explore novel conceptual and theoretical approaches as well as case studies with broader implications.  Nadia Murad, Recipient of the 2018 Nobel Peace Prize, will deliver the keynote address.  

Speakers:

Prosecution Issues: Focusing on strategies to pursue the perpetrators of the genocide

  • Kjell Anderson, Instructor in Peace & Conflict Studies, University of the Fraser Valley
  • Naomi Kikoler, Simon-Skjodt Center for the Prevention of Genocide
  • Akila Radhakrishnan, President of the Global Justice Center
  • Grant Shubin, Deputy Legal Director at the Global Justice Center

Protection At Home and Abroad: Focusing on the challenges facing asylum-seekers abroad, and risks to the community in Iraq

  • Emily Feldman, Journalist and Editor
  • James Freda, Human Rights Officer at the United Nations Team of Experts on the Rule of Law and Sexual Violence in Conflict
  • Melinda Taylor, Counsel in International Criminal Law and Human Rights

Preservation of Culture and Society at Home and Abroad: Focusing on the need to preserve and promote Yazidi culture, and the strategies for doing so

  • Tutku Ayhan, PhD Candidate in Security Studies at the University of Central Florida
  • Matthew Barber, PhD Candidate in Near Eastern Languages & Civilizations, University of Chicago
  • Güley Bor, Researcher at the Conflict Research Programme-Iraq
  • Salema Mirza, Instructor and Advisor at the Yazidi Cultural Center and Volunteer at Yazda

Myanmar and Accountability for Grave Crimes

From April 10, 2019 12:00 pm until 1:30 pm

At American University Washington College of Law, Room NTO1

Co-hosted by the Global Justice Center, War Crimes Research Office at American University Washington College of Law, and Human Rights Watch

Since August 2016, Myanmar's security forces have conducted a systematic campaign of brutal violence against the Rohingya Muslim minority, escalating decades-long policies of persecution and discrimination. While all members of the Rohingya population were targeted for violence, gender was integral to how the atrocities were perpetrated.

Justice for genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity is unlikely in Myanmar's domestic courts. So what are the options for justice? Please join us for an important discussion of opportunities and challenges for accountability in Myanmar with:

Panel:

  • Stephen Rapp, former United States Ambassador-at-Large for War Crimes Issues
  • Akila Radhakrishnan, President, Global Justice Center
  • Param-Preet Singh, Associate Director in the International Justice Program, Human Rights Watch
  • Naomi Kikoler, Deputy Director, Simon-Skjodt Center for the Prevention of Genocide, U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum

Moderated by:

  • Susana SáCouto, Director, War Crimes Research Office at American University Washington College of Law

This event is free and open to the public, but registration is required. Lunch will be served. Please RSVP at https://www.wcl.american.edu/secle/registration and see the attached flyer for more information.

Download Invitation

Stand Speak Rise Up: Know the System, Fix the System

From March 27, 2019 11:50 until 12:50

At European Convention Centre Luxembourg (ECCL), 4 Place de l'Europe, 1499 Luxembourg.

Stand Speak Rise Up! is hosted by Her Royal Highness The Grand Duchess of Luxembourg and her Foundation, in cooperation with the Women’s Forum and with the support of the Luxembourg Government. The conference is in partnership with the Dr. Denis Mukwege Foundation and We Are Not Weapons of War.

Slow progress on ending sexual violence in fragile environments is not a reflection of efforts to combat it. Indeed, sexual violence in fragile environments is steadily rising on global policy and humanitarian agendas. International organisations, governments, researchers, NGOs, foundations, and the private sector are devoting increasing resources to this issue. Yet, despite growing attention and the private sectors' increasing willingness to help address social issues, usually reserved for government and humanitarian organisations, responses to sexual violence in conflict remain lacking in coordination, scale and efficiency. That's because to fix the system, we need to understand the system.

  • What are the main obstacles to building a complete and accurate understanding of sexual violence in fragile environments globally?
  • How will survivor involvement and initiatives accelerate the changes needed to "fix the system"?
  • What examples of cross-sectoral and/or intra-sectoral collaboration offer best practices for knowledge sharing and impact?
  • What should be the role of the private sector in these efforts (e.g., funder, solution provider)?

Exchanges between:

  • Céline Bardet, Founder and President, We are NOT Weapons of War
  • Antonia Mulvey, Founder and Executive Director, Legal Action Worldwide
  • David Pereira, President, Amnesty International Luxembourg
  • Kim Thuy Seelinger, Director, Sexual Violence Programme, Human Rights Center, Berkeley Law School
  • Michel Wurth, Director, ArcelorMittal Luxembourg; Vice-President, Luxembourg Red Cross

Expert commentators:

  • Elise Boghossian, Founder, EliseCare
  • Akila Radhakrishnan, President, Global Justice Center

Moderated by:

Alanna Vagianos, Women's Reporter, HuffPost

 

CSW Side Event: Working Towards Greater Implementation of 1325 – Models of Best Practice States Parties and Civil Society

From March 11, 2019 10:30 until 12:00

At New York City Baha'i Center, 866 UN Plaza

Speakers:

  • Tia Bown, NAWO YWA
  • Grant Shubin, Deputy Legal Director Global Justice Center
  • WILPF activists from Cameroon and Niger
  • Rugya Muttawa, Founder Hope Organisation Libya

Overview:

UNSRC 1325 was passed and ratified in 2000, more than 18 years later and with numerous related resolutions since, there is still a way to go to ensure the full implementation of 1325.  Human Rights violations in conflict zones are well documented and much of the vision of 1325 remains unrealized.

Young women are often subject to double marginalization – as women, and as young people. In many societies and families, they are the last to eat, to speak, to receive an education. They do not have a voice, and only speak when spoken to. With little or no education or training, young women and girls are relegated to caretaking, cooking, childbearing, collecting firewood and fetching water – the unpaid labour, which is often not regarded as important by the society, and does not provide the women with financial means of their own. Conflict aggravates this situation. We will therefore have a voice of a young woman from the NAWO Young Women’s Alliance WPS network.

Civil society was active in the creation of 1325 and has remained committed and active since in its implementation despite lack of resources.  There are numerous examples from civil society from which we can learn to increase implementation elsewhere in addition to understanding better obstacles and challenges.  Representatives from civil society working at policy level and on the ground will share perspectives.

States Parties, have to varying degrees, supported and implemented 1325. Hearing from them their view of success and their learning in implementation, will take forward the discourse on this important issue.

The event will provide time for discussion to learn from the expertise in the room, especially in preparation for the 20th anniversary next year.

Roundtable: Legal Limits to the Use of the Veto

From March 8, 2019 9:00 until 17:00

At Foley Hoag, LLC

Question at Issue: Are there legal limits to the use of the veto by the Permanent Members of the U.N. Security Council blocking action in the face of genocide, crimes against humanity or war crimes? Or is the veto in such circumstances a carte blanche that can be utilized at the complete discretion of the permanent members?

Proposition: There are legal limits to the use of the veto power in the face of genocide, crimes against humanity or war crimes. Three arguments support this conclusion:

  1. The veto power derives from the UN Charter, which is subsidiary to jus cogens norms. Thus, a veto that violates jus cogens norms, or permits the continued violation of jus cogens norms, would be illegal or ultra vires. The Charter (and veto power) must be read in a way that is consistent with jus cogens.
  2. The veto power derives from the UN Charter, which states in Article 24(2) that the Security Council “[in] discharging [its] duties” “shall act in accordance with the Purposes and Principles of the United Nations.” A veto in the face of a draft resolution aimed at curtailing or alleviating the commission of genocide, crimes against humanity or war crimes does not accord with the Charter’s purposes and principles.
  3. A permanent member of the Security Council that utilizes the veto power also has other treaty obligations, such as those under the Genocide Convention, which contains an obligation to “prevent” genocide. A Permanent Member’s use of the veto that would enable genocide, or allow its continued commission, would violate that state’s legal obligation to “prevent” genocide. A similar argument can be made as to allowing the perpetration of at least certain war crimes, such as “grave breaches” and violations of Common Article 3 of the 1949 Geneva Conventions. (Given that under Article 103 of the Charter, the Charter trumps inconsistent treaty obligations, this argument may only apply where treaty obligations also embody jus cogens norms or accord with the Charter’s purposes and principles.) Alternatively, these treaties and the veto power could (and should) be read consistently, so that there is no conflict, making article 103 inapplicable.

Goal of Project: To ensure that the UN Security Council is able to act in the face of genocide, crimes against humanity and/or war crimes; therefore, to have the members of the General Assembly request an Advisory Opinion from the International Court of Justice (ICJ): Are there legal limits to the use of the veto power in the face of genocide, crimes against humanity or war crimes?

Initial Goal of Initiative: To form a group of NGOs and States who support this initiative and would be willing to work to convince the General Assembly to make this request of the ICJ.

Alternative Concept: To put some of these legal concepts directly into a GA resolution that notes the legal obligations related to genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes, and calls for veto restraint (and not ask for an Advisory Opinion).

    —Professor Jennifer Trahan, NYU Center for Global Affairs, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Supporting Individuals:

  • Hans Corell, former Under-Secretary General for Legal Affairs
  • Richard Goldstone, former Prosecutor of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia & the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda,
  • Navanethem (“Navi”) Pillay, former High Commissioner for Human Rights
  • Andras Vamos-Goldman, co-founder & former Executive Director, Justice Rapid Response
  • David M. Crane, former Chief Prosecutor, Special Court for Sierra Leone
  • Judge Christine Van den Wyngaert, formerly International Court of Justice (ad hoc), International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, and International Criminal Court; presently Kosovo Specialist Chambers (signing in a personal capacity)

Supporting NGOs:

  • The Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
  • The International Center for Transitional Justice
  • The World Federalist Movement - Institute for Global Policy
  • Parliamentarians for Global Action
  • Open Society Justice Initiative
  • Global Justice Center
  • Syrian Justice and Accountability Center
  • Moroccan National Coalition for the International Criminal Court
  • Lawyers for Justice in Libya
  • Women’s Initiatives for Gender Justice