UNITED NATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS

COUNCIL
Letter from the Executive Board
It gives us immense pleasure to welcome you to this simulation of UNHRC (United
Nations Human Rights Council) at NDIM MUN 2025 at New Delhi Institute of
Management, New Delhi. We look forward to an enriching and captivating experience.

“Protection of Civilians and Internally Displaced people in areas of

armed conflict”

We have prepared this background guide, which is essentially to give you some idea
about the agenda at hand and to cater your basic research.As far as the committee and
discussion goes, please note that this Background Guide is exactly what its name suggests
(and nothing more). The information provided here is precise and abstract, and in no way
is it complete for you as a delegate. It is merely a starting point, from where one needs to
go into the depth of every facet of the agenda.

You will be apprised of the Rules of Procedure once again at the start of the committee,
but it is recommended that you center your arguments against what has already been told
to you. During your research, please stick to credible sources like Huffington Post, The
Guardian, United Nations official website, Human Rights Watch Reports, etc. Any
information from Wikipedia, personal blogs or unheard-of news reports will not be
regarded as substantial proof.

It's going to be an exciting 2 day affair of intense debate, cross questions, negotiations
and a lot more but all in decorum. In the end, we would like to tell you that never hesitate
to express yourselves in the committee and feel free to explore beyond the background
guide to get clear analysis of the agenda.

Rohan Nagpal Arnav Tokas

(Chairperson) (Chairperson)
 Introduction to the Committee
The United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) is a key body within the United
Nations system, tasked with promoting and protecting human rights around the world. It
was established in 2006, replacing the former United Nations Commission on Human
Rights, with the goal of strengthening the UN's work in defending fundamental freedoms
and ensuring the dignity of all individuals.

The UNHRC is made up of 47 member states, which are elected by the UN General
Assembly for three-year terms. These countries represent a diverse range of regions and
cultures, and their role is to address human rights issues globally through discussion,
monitoring, and advocacy. The Council meets regularly in Geneva, Switzerland, where it
holds sessions to review human rights situations, investigate violations, and make
recommendations for improvements.

The UNHRC works in several ways:

1. Universal Periodic Review (UPR): This is a process where the human rights
records of all 193 UN member states are reviewed every four years. It's a way to
hold countries accountable for how they uphold the rights of their citizens.
2. Special Procedures: The Council has independent experts, known as Special
Rapporteurs, who are tasked with investigating specific human rights issues or
countries. These experts can visit nations, collect data, and report back to the
Council with recommendations.
3. Resolutions: The Council can adopt resolutions addressing human rights abuses or
promoting human rights initiatives. These resolutions are not legally binding, but
they serve as a strong call for change and can have significant diplomatic and
moral weight.
4. Emergency Sessions: If there is an urgent human rights crisis, the UNHRC can
call emergency sessions to address the situation immediately, such as in cases of
violence, conflict, or repression.
While the UNHRC has the authority to make recommendations and public statements, it
does not have the power to enforce laws or take direct action like a peacekeeping force.
However, its influence lies in its ability to shape global discourse on human rights, foster
international pressure for reform, and provide a platform for victims and advocates to be
heard.

The work of the UNHRC is vital because human rights issues, such as discrimination,
freedom of speech, political repression, and access to education, affect people
everywhere. Through its resolutions and advocacy, the Council aims to ensure that
governments uphold the rights and freedoms that all individuals are entitled to, regardless
of nationality, ethnicity, religion, or background.

The UNHRC plays an essential role in shaping the global human rights landscape by
bringing attention to violations, encouraging positive change, and striving for a world
where every individual’s rights are respected and protected.
 Functions of UNHRC
The United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) is an important international body
that focuses on promoting and protecting human rights around the world. It is part of the
United Nations system and works to ensure that all people enjoy the fundamental rights
and freedoms guaranteed by international law. The Council addresses human rights
violations, provides a platform for dialogue, and aims to hold governments accountable
for their actions, particularly when human rights are at risk.

● Global Promotion of Human Rights: The UNHRC is committed to promoting

human rights worldwide, ensuring that everyone enjoys basic freedoms and
protections.
● Monitoring and Accountability: It holds governments accountable for human
rights abuses and works to ensure compliance with international human rights
standards.

One of the key functions of the UNHRC is to monitor and investigate human rights
situations in different countries. This can include examining reports from governments,
independent experts, and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to identify countries
or regions where human rights are being violated. The Council can issue
recommendations, urge countries to take action, or even launch investigations into
specific situations. In some cases, the UNHRC can even establish commissions to look
into specific events or crises, such as conflicts that lead to war crimes or mass human
rights abuses.

● Monitoring Human Rights Violations: The UNHRC monitors countries to

identify and address human rights violations through reports and investigations.
● Investigations and Recommendations: It can call for investigations, issue
recommendations, or set up commissions to address specific human rights issues
or abuses.

Another important role of the UNHRC is to facilitate discussions and promote

cooperation between member states on human rights issues. This is done through regular
meetings, where countries can raise concerns, share best practices, and work together to
address global human rights challenges. The Council also holds an annual session called
the "Universal Periodic Review" (UPR), where each member state’s human rights record
is assessed and discussed. The aim is to encourage positive change and create a global
commitment to improving human rights standards.
 ● Facilitating Dialogue: The UNHRC encourages member states to collaborate on
human rights issues, raise concerns, and share solutions.
● Universal Periodic Review (UPR): Every country’s human rights record is
reviewed to encourage improvements and hold governments accountable for
progress.

Furthermore, the UNHRC works to protect vulnerable groups, including women,

children, refugees, minorities, and indigenous peoples. It advocates for the rights of these
groups through resolutions and specialized programs. The Council also collaborates with
other UN bodies and organizations, such as the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) and the
UN Children's Fund (UNICEF), to provide humanitarian assistance and ensure these
populations' rights are respected.

● Focus on Vulnerable Groups: The UNHRC specifically targets the protection and
promotion of rights for vulnerable populations, such as refugees, minorities, and
women.
● Collaboration with Other UN Agencies: It partners with organizations like
UNHCR and UNICEF to enhance human rights protection and provide
humanitarian aid.

In summary, the UNHRC serves as a critical mechanism for monitoring and addressing
human rights violations, promoting global cooperation, and advocating for the protection
of the most vulnerable people around the world. Its work is vital in building a more just
and equitable world where human dignity is upheld for everyone.

● Key Role in Human Rights Protection: The UNHRC is essential in global efforts
to monitor, address, and prevent human rights abuses.
● Global Impact: Its work helps create a more just, equitable world where
everyone’s rights are respected and upheld.
 Introduction to the Agenda
In the context of armed conflict, civilians and non-combatants—those who are not
directly participating in the fighting—often find themselves the most vulnerable. Conflict
zones are marked by violence, chaos, and the breakdown of societal structures. Civilians
may be caught in the crossfire, suffer from deliberate attacks, or face immense hardship
as a result of the fighting. In many cases, civilians are not just affected by the immediate
violence of war but also by the broader consequences of the conflict: the destruction of
infrastructure, disruption of basic services, and widespread displacement.

Civilians in Armed Conflict

Civilians are the group least involved in the hostilities yet often bear the brunt of the
damage caused by armed conflicts. The effects on civilians can range from physical harm
such as injuries and death, to the psychological trauma of living through violence. In
some conflicts, civilians may be intentionally targeted, used as human shields, or
subjected to atrocities such as sexual violence or forced recruitment into armed groups.

These situations create urgent moral and legal questions. How do we ensure the safety of
those who are not part of the conflict? How do we address their basic needs in the middle
of a war? How do we prevent them from becoming victims of crimes like genocide,
ethnic cleansing, or torture?

Internally Displaced People (IDPs)

When conflict displaces people from their homes, they may become Internally Displaced
Persons (IDPs). Unlike refugees, IDPs remain within their own country's borders, but
they still face many of the same challenges as those fleeing to other countries. IDPs may
not have access to adequate shelter, food, water, or healthcare. They often live in
temporary shelters or camps, exposed to additional risks of violence and exploitation.
IDPs face a fragile existence, living in constant uncertainty about their future. Some may
never be able to return home, while others may need long-term support to rebuild their
lives.
In many parts of the world, displacement is a protracted issue, meaning that large
populations remain displaced for extended periods, sometimes even decades. In such
cases, humanitarian efforts must balance immediate emergency aid with long-term
solutions aimed at reintegrating displaced populations into society.

The Role of International Law and the International Community

In response to these challenges, the international community has developed a series of
legal frameworks, doctrines, and humanitarian principles designed to protect civilians and
IDPs in conflict zones. These instruments do not only provide legal standards but also
guide the actions of governments, humanitarian organizations, and international
institutions like the United Nations (UN).

The protection of civilians in conflict zones is not a new concept, but it has gained
increasing prominence in recent decades as part of the global movement to uphold human
rights and ensure accountability in conflicts. International law, including treaties such as
the Geneva Conventions, and humanitarian principles like the Responsibility to Protect
(R2P), set clear expectations for the conduct of states and armed groups during times of
war. These laws and frameworks aim to limit the suffering of civilians and provide the
necessary mechanisms for their protection and assistance.

The Importance of This Agenda

The agenda "Protection of Civilians and Internally Displaced People in Areas of Armed
Conflict" seeks to address these issues comprehensively. It is grounded in the recognition
that the protection of civilians is not just a moral imperative but also a legal obligation. It
emphasizes the need for coordinated international action to safeguard those most
vulnerable in conflict situations, ensure their access to humanitarian aid, and work toward
durable solutions for displaced populations.

This agenda also highlights the crucial role that the international community plays in
holding perpetrators accountable and ensuring that states live up to their obligations
under international law. The ultimate goal is to create a world in which civilians can live
free from the threat of violence, and IDPs can return home in safety or find lasting
solutions to their displacement.

In essence, this agenda calls on the international community to reaffirm its commitment
to the values of human dignity, justice, and peace by focusing on the protection of those
who are most affected by armed conflict: the civilians and the displaced.
 Relevant International Legal Instruments
Key Treaties, Doctrines and Conventions

1. The Geneva Conventions (1949) and Additional Protocols (1977) are at the
heart of international humanitarian law, forming the primary legal framework for
the protection of individuals in conflict. The Geneva Conventions, which were
first adopted in 1949, consist of four treaties that set out the protections due to the
wounded and sick in armed forces, prisoners of war, and civilians who find
themselves in conflict zones. These conventions emphasize that civilians must be
shielded from the effects of armed conflict and should not be the object of attack.
In 1977, the Additional Protocols to the Geneva Conventions expanded
protections, particularly for civilians, in both international and non-international
armed conflicts. These protocols emphasize the principles of distinction and
proportionality—distinguishing between combatants and civilians and ensuring
that the harm caused to civilians is not excessive in relation to the military
advantage gained. They also underscore the obligation of states and non-state
actors to take all feasible precautions to avoid harm to civilian populations.

2. The United Nations Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement (1998)

address the particular vulnerability of Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs),
offering a set of principles designed to guide governments, international
organizations, and other actors in responding to displacement within countries.
While not legally binding, these principles have become a critical framework for
protecting IDPs and ensuring their human rights. They provide practical guidance
on issues such as the right to safe and voluntary return to one's home, the
provision of emergency assistance, and the restoration of basic human rights for
displaced individuals. The Guiding Principles have been widely accepted as
customary international law and are used to inform the work of governments and
humanitarian organizations when responding to displacement crises.

3. The Responsibility to Protect (R2P) Doctrine, developed in the early 2000s,

outlines the international community’s obligation to prevent and respond to mass
 atrocity crimes, including genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and crimes
against humanity. Adopted by the United Nations in 2005, R2P asserts that if a
state is unwilling or unable to protect its citizens from such crimes, the
international community has the responsibility to intervene, including through
diplomacy, humanitarian assistance, and, as a last resort, military action. R2P has
been a pivotal development in shifting international norms from a system of non-
interference in sovereign states to one of collective responsibility for preventing
large-scale harm to civilians. Although the doctrine focuses on preventing the
worst forms of violence, it also aligns with the broader agenda of protecting
civilians in conflict zones, as it emphasizes the duty of states and international
organizations to take preventive measures and protect vulnerable populations.

4. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), adopted by

the United Nations in 1966, is another vital legal instrument protecting civilians,
including in conflict situations. The ICCPR guarantees the basic rights and
freedoms of individuals, such as the right to life, liberty, and security of person,
the right to be free from torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment, and the
right to freedom of movement. During times of armed conflict, the ICCPR ensures
that fundamental human rights cannot be suspended, even during emergencies, and
that individuals, including civilians and IDPs, must be treated with dignity and
respect. The treaty establishes that civilians must not be subjected to arbitrary
detention, displacement, or violence, even in times of war.

5. For the African continent, the Kampala Convention (2009) represents a

significant regional effort to address the protection of internally displaced persons.
This treaty, adopted by the African Union, is specifically focused on IDPs and
outlines the responsibilities of African states to protect, assist, and provide
solutions for people displaced within their own countries. The Kampala
Convention highlights the obligation of states to prevent displacement, protect
displaced populations from violence, and ensure their access to necessary
assistance, including shelter, food, and healthcare. It also stresses the importance
of durable solutions, such as the voluntary return of IDPs to their homes or their
integration into new communities, and seeks to ensure that the protection of IDPs
is integrated into peacebuilding efforts.
6. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), adopted by
the United Nations in 1966, is a core international human rights treaty that
guarantees the fundamental rights and freedoms of all individuals, including those
in conflict zones. The ICCPR sets out a broad range of civil and political rights,
which are essential for protecting civilians during and after armed conflict. It
guarantees the right to life, which directly protects civilians from unlawful
killings, as well as the right to security of person, ensuring that individuals are not
arbitrarily detained or subjected to torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading
treatment. These protections are crucial during times of armed conflict, where
civilians are at heightened risk of violence, detention, or mistreatment.
 IHL VS IHRL

1. Armed Conflict Context: Applicability of IHL and IHRL

International Humanitarian Law (IHL) is specifically designed to apply during armed

conflict, whether the conflict is international (between two or more states) or non-
international (involving non-state actors within a state). IHL's primary purpose is to
regulate the conduct of hostilities and protect persons who are not participating in the
conflict, such as civilians, prisoners of war, and the wounded. The core instruments of
IHL are the Geneva Conventions (1949) and their Additional Protocols (1977), which
provide detailed rules on the protection of civilians and the treatment of combatants and
prisoners.

On the other hand, International Human Rights Law (IHRL) is a broader body of law
that applies at all times, both in peacetime and during conflict. It aims to protect the
fundamental rights and freedoms of all individuals, regardless of whether a conflict is
ongoing. While IHRL applies universally, it can be partially suspended or "derogated"
under certain conditions during states of emergency or armed conflict, as detailed in
instruments such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
(ICCPR).

Thus, while IHL is conflict-specific, IHRL continues to provide a broader human rights
framework even in times of war, though with certain limitations during emergencies.

2. Derogation of Rights Under IHRL

Under IHRL, some rights may be derogated (suspended or limited) during a state of
emergency or armed conflict. This concept allows for temporary suspension of specific
rights in exceptional circumstances, provided the suspension meets certain conditions
such as being:
● Proportionate to the threat or emergency,
● Non-discriminatory, and
● Strictly necessary for the circumstances at hand.

The ICCPR allows states to derogate from specific rights under Article 4, such as the
right to liberty and security (e.g., arbitrary detention) during a declared state of
emergency. However, even during such derogations, certain core rights cannot be
suspended, including the right to life and protection from torture.
International Humanitarian Law (IHL), in contrast, does not allow for the suspension
of its protections in armed conflict. IHL is more precise, providing clear guidance for
situations in which the law applies, such as the treatment of prisoners of war, protection
of civilians, and the prohibition of specific methods of warfare. For instance, IHL
prohibits indiscriminate attacks that affect civilians or civilian infrastructure, and it
restricts the use of weapons that cause excessive harm or suffering.

In this way, while IHRL may allow derogations during emergencies, IHL remains in
force and provides specific protections related to warfare.

3. Specific Protection in Armed Conflict: IHL's Role

IHL provides detailed protections for individuals who are affected by armed conflict,
which can sometimes take precedence over certain rights under IHRL. For example:

● Protection of Civilians: IHL's primary goal is to ensure that civilians are not
targeted during armed conflict. Civilians must be treated humanely and be
protected from violence, forced displacement, and exploitation.
● Prisoners of War: IHL guarantees protections for prisoners of war, including the
right to humane treatment, adequate food, and medical care.
● Wounded and Sick: IHL mandates that those who are wounded or sick,
regardless of whether they are combatants or civilians, must receive care and
protection.

During armed conflict, some IHRL protections, like freedom of movement, may be
temporarily overridden in favor of IHL’s more stringent rules aimed at protecting civilian
lives. For example, during a conflict, the right to freedom of movement might be
restricted in certain circumstances (e.g., military operations), while the Geneva
Conventions ensure that civilians are not intentionally harmed by hostilities.
Thus, IHL’s protections take precedence in armed conflict, ensuring that those who
are vulnerable, including civilians and prisoners of war, are safeguarded from the worst
effects of war, even if certain IHRL rights may be limited.

4. The Complementary Nature of IHL and IHRL

IHL and IHRL are complementary, meaning that they both apply in armed conflict but
serve different purposes. IHL is the primary legal framework governing the conduct of
hostilities and the treatment of individuals during wartime, while IHRL continues to
govern the broader human rights of individuals in all contexts.
When the two bodies of law conflict, IHL takes precedence because it is specifically
tailored for situations of armed conflict. For example:

● Internment of Civilians: IHL allows for the internment of civilians in certain

situations, particularly when they pose a security threat. While IHRL generally
prohibits arbitrary detention, IHL allows internment for security reasons during
armed conflict.
● Targeting Combatants: IHL permits the targeting of combatants in armed
conflict, even though IHRL protects the right to life. However, under IHL,
combatants who are no longer actively participating in hostilities (such as
prisoners of war) are protected and cannot be harmed.

Thus, while IHRL provides important protections, IHL takes priority in regulating the
specific conduct of armed conflict and the protection of civilians and combatants during
war.

5. Focus of Application: IHL and IHRL in Armed Conflict

● IHL applies in situations of armed conflict, whether the conflict is international

(between states) or non-international (within a state). The primary aim of IHL is to
regulate the conduct of warfare and protect those who are not directly participating
in hostilities, such as civilians and prisoners of war.

● IHRL, on the other hand, applies universally and aims to protect the fundamental
rights of all individuals, both in peacetime and during conflict. However, it allows
for certain derogations (suspensions or limitations) during states of emergency or
conflict, as long as these derogations meet specific conditions. For example, the
right to life remains protected under both IHL and IHRL, but IHL explicitly
governs the lawful use of force in conflict.

An example of the conflict between the two bodies of law is the right to life. Under IHL,
combatants can be lawfully targeted and killed during armed conflict, whereas under
IHRL, the right to life is considered inviolable. However, because IHL is specifically
tailored for armed conflict, it takes precedence in determining how the right to life is
applied in these circumstances.
 CASE STUDIES

ICJ : Bosnia VS. Serbia

The Bosnia vs. Serbia case at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) is one of the
most significant cases in modern international law, particularly regarding the protection
of civilians and internally displaced persons (IDPs) during armed conflict. This case
revolved around accusations of genocide committed during the Bosnian War (1992-
1995), which saw widespread violence, including ethnic cleansing and mass displacement
of civilians.

The ICJ’s judgment in 2007 held considerable implications for the protection of civilians
and IDPs in conflict zones, as it provided clarity on state responsibility for genocide and
the obligations of states to prevent and punish genocidal acts.

Key Points and Rulings from the ICJ Case

1. Genocide and State Responsibility:

○ The ICJ ruled that Serbia had not directly committed genocide in Bosnia,
but it did find that Serbia failed to prevent genocide and did not fully
cooperate in bringing those responsible to justice, especially with the
infamous Srebrenica massacre.
○ This judgment reinforced the principle that states have a responsibility to
prevent genocide and protect civilians under international law, even if
they are not directly involved in perpetrating the violence.
2. State Obligation to Prevent and Punish Genocide:

○ The court emphasized that under the Genocide Convention (1948), states
are legally obligated to take action to prevent genocide, even before it
occurs, and punish those responsible if it does.
○ This includes actions to protect civilians and IDPs from the worst forms of
violence, particularly during armed conflict, and ensuring accountability for
violations.
3. Impact on International Accountability:
 ○ The judgment also established that states cannot simply stand by and allow
atrocities like genocide to take place on their territory, or elsewhere, without
facing consequences. This reinforced the international responsibility to
protect vulnerable populations during conflict.
○ The verdict has contributed to the development of legal precedents for
holding states accountable for failing to protect civilians in conflict, as seen
later in the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) Doctrine.

How the ICJ Case Can Serve as Precedent for Improving Protection of
Civilians and IDPs
The Bosnia vs. Serbia case provides an important legal precedent that can be used to
strengthen the protection of civilians and IDPs in future conflicts. Here’s how:

1. Strengthening Legal Obligations to Prevent Atrocities:

○ The ICJ's ruling highlighted that states have a legal duty to prevent
atrocities, including genocide, within their borders or in areas under their
control. This can be used to ensure that governments take preventive
measures to protect civilians and IDPs from harm, particularly before
violence escalates into large-scale conflict.
○ The obligation to prevent genocide could be expanded to include measures
that protect IDPs from displacement, violence, and exploitation, ensuring
that preventive action is taken at the first signs of mass displacement.
2. Clearer Accountability for State Failures:

○ The failure of Serbia to prevent genocide and punish those responsible set
an important precedent for holding states accountable for not fulfilling their
obligations to protect civilians. This provides a model for future cases in
which states fail to uphold their international responsibilities, especially in
terms of IDP protection.
○ The ICJ’s judgment reinforces that if states do not take necessary actions to
protect their populations or cooperate with international bodies in
addressing crimes against civilians, they could face legal consequences.
3. Expanding the Interpretation of the Genocide Convention:

○ The ICJ decision demonstrates that the Genocide Convention not only
applies to acts of genocide but also places obligations on states to ensure
 that they take proactive steps to prevent genocide and protect civilian
populations from violence.
○ This could be used to argue for more comprehensive protections for IDPs,
especially in regions where the risk of violence or ethnic targeting is high,
ensuring that states take action to prevent displacement before it happens.
4. Development of the Responsibility to Protect (R2P):

○ The Bosnia vs. Serbia case can be seen as a precursor to the

Responsibility to Protect (R2P) doctrine, which was formally adopted by
the United Nations in 2005. R2P emphasizes that when a state is unwilling
or unable to protect its own citizens from atrocities like genocide, the
international community has the responsibility to intervene.
○ The ICJ’s ruling reinforced this idea of collective international responsibility,
especially when a state is either complicit in, or fails to stop, atrocities
against its civilians. R2P can thus be used to advocate for stronger
international mechanisms to intervene and protect civilians and IDPs in
conflict situations.
5. Promoting the Prosecution of Perpetrators:

○ The judgment underscored the importance of prosecuting those responsible

for atrocities and genocide. This creates a legal framework to ensure that
perpetrators of violence against civilians or those causing forced
displacement (such as war crimes and crimes against humanity) are held
accountable through international tribunals or courts.
○ This serves as a deterrent for future perpetrators of violence and can ensure
justice for victims of conflict, encouraging transitional justice efforts and
the restoration of peace in post-conflict societies.
6. Increased Focus on International Cooperation:

○ The court found that Serbia had failed to cooperate fully with the
International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY),
highlighting the need for greater international cooperation in addressing
violations of international law, particularly in terms of IDP protection and
the prosecution of war crimes.
○ This suggests that stronger cooperation mechanisms between states and
international bodies like the United Nations, the International Criminal
Court (ICC), and humanitarian organizations are essential in preventing
 abuses against civilians and IDPs, and holding accountable those
responsible for violations.

ICTR (International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda)

The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) was established by the
United Nations (UN) in 1994 to prosecute individuals responsible for genocide, war
crimes, and crimes against humanity committed during the Rwandan Genocide. This
genocide took place over a span of just 100 days in which an estimated 800,000 people,
primarily from the Tutsi ethnic group, were brutally murdered by members of the Hutu
majority.

The ICTR's importance lies not only in its role in prosecuting the individuals responsible
for these horrific crimes but also in the broader principles it established regarding
international justice, accountability, and the protection of civilians during armed
conflict. Its verdicts provide precedents that help shape how we understand
international law, particularly when it comes to protecting vulnerable populations
such as civilians and internally displaced persons (IDPs) in areas of conflict.

Key Contributions of the ICTR

1. Accountability for Genocide and Crimes Against Humanity:

○ The ICTR was instrumental in establishing legal accountability for the

Rwandan Genocide, marking a key moment in international law where
individuals—not just states—were held responsible for genocide and
crimes against humanity.
○ Its judgments reinforced the idea that individuals who plan, instigate, or
commit mass violence against civilians, including IDPs, can be prosecuted
even if they are high-ranking government officials or military leaders.
2. Setting Precedents for International Criminal Law:

○ The ICTR made significant contributions to international criminal law,

including defining genocide and crimes against humanity in a way that
clarifies how these crimes are to be prosecuted and punished.
 ○ The tribunal also expanded the understanding of command responsibility,
establishing that military and political leaders who fail to prevent or
punish crimes committed by their subordinates can be held criminally
liable.
3. Impact on Future Tribunals:

○ The ICTR's work laid the groundwork for future international criminal
tribunals, such as the International Criminal Court (ICC). Many of the
legal principles developed at the ICTR, including the prosecution of
genocide, have been adopted in subsequent courts, helping to strengthen the
international legal framework for protecting civilians during conflict.

How the ICTR's Verdicts Can Serve as Precedent for Improving the
Protection of Civilians and IDPs
The ICTR’s verdicts provide a strong foundation for improving the protection of
civilians and IDPs in current and future armed conflicts. Here’s how its findings and
decisions can be used as legal precedents to advance civilian and IDP protection:

1. Establishing Legal Precedents for Holding Individuals Accountable:

○ The ICTR was crucial in holding individuals accountable for the genocide
in Rwanda, rather than allowing entire groups or states to evade
responsibility. Its focus on individual accountability, especially for those in
positions of power, sets an important precedent that can be applied in future
conflicts where civilian populations and IDPs are at risk of similar
atrocities.
○ Military and political leaders can be prosecuted if they either directly
participate in or fail to prevent or punish crimes against civilians,
reinforcing the importance of leadership accountability in protecting
vulnerable populations.
2. Broader Definition of Genocide and Crimes Against Humanity:

○ The ICTR broadened the understanding of genocide under international

law, clarifying that genocide involves acts committed with intent to
destroy a group, such as killings, causing serious bodily harm, and
inflicting conditions calculated to destroy a group physically or mentally.
 ○ By expanding these definitions, the ICTR established that acts of ethnic
cleansing, forced displacement, and violence against civilians and IDPs
can be prosecuted as genocide or crimes against humanity. This means
that international legal systems can intervene and hold perpetrators
accountable for crimes that cause massive displacement and harm to
civilians in conflict zones.
3. Protecting IDPs and Civilians Under International Law:

○ The ICTR explicitly recognized that civilians and IDPs are entitled to
special protection under international law. One of the major lessons from
the Rwanda case is the deliberate targeting of civilian populations as a
strategy of war, which is prohibited under both International
Humanitarian Law (IHL) and International Human Rights Law
(IHRL).
○ The tribunal’s convictions and verdicts can be used to argue for stronger
safeguards for civilians and IDPs in ongoing conflicts. For instance, states
and international organizations can be urged to take more proactive steps to
prevent forced displacement, ethnic violence, and mass killings by using
the ICTR's legal findings as a reference.
4. Defining Command Responsibility and Preventive Obligations:

○ The ICTR established the doctrine of command responsibility, which

holds that military and political leaders can be held liable for crimes
committed by their subordinates if they knew or should have known about
the crimes and failed to act to stop them.
○ This doctrine provides a legal tool for holding state authorities and
military commanders accountable for their failure to protect civilians and
IDPs from harm. By using these precedents, legal systems can demand that
military and political leaders take preventive measures to stop atrocities
and ensure accountability when crimes occur.
5. Supporting the Development of the Responsibility to Protect (R2P):

○ The ICTR’s verdicts align with the concept of Responsibility to Protect

(R2P), which was developed in the early 2000s and emphasizes that the
international community has an obligation to intervene when a state fails to
protect its citizens from atrocities.
○ The ICTR's approach to genocide and crimes against humanity has
informed R2P and shows how international law can be used to intervene
 and prevent genocide, displacement, and other mass atrocities. By
reinforcing R2P, we can strengthen global norms around protecting
civilians and IDPs in conflict zones, ensuring that humanitarian
intervention is possible when a state is unable or unwilling to protect its
people.
6. Promoting Post-Conflict Justice and Reconciliation:

○ The ICTR also played a key role in post-genocide justice and

reconciliation in Rwanda. The tribunal not only convicted those
responsible for mass violence but also contributed to Rwanda’s efforts to
rebuild its society through justice and accountability.
○ By emphasizing justice for victims, the ICTR’s approach can be used as a
model for countries recovering from conflict, ensuring that civilians and
IDPs receive justice and that perpetrators are held accountable. This
contributes to long-term peacebuilding and ensures that the international
community will not tolerate the mass violation of human rights.

UNMISS (United Nations Mission in South Sudan)

The United Nations Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS) was established in 2011 after
South Sudan gained independence, with the aim of supporting the country in its efforts to
achieve peace and stability. However, since its formation, South Sudan has faced severe
internal conflicts, particularly from 2013 onwards, when the country descended into a
civil war. As a peacekeeping mission, UNMISS is tasked with a wide range of
responsibilities, including protecting civilians, assisting internally displaced persons
(IDPs), supporting the peace process, and providing humanitarian aid.

The relevance and importance of UNMISS go beyond just a peacekeeping force. It serves
as a critical example of how the international community can help to protect civilians
and IDPs in conflict zones. By learning from its efforts, we can develop better strategies
and structures to improve civilian protection and support displaced populations globally.

Key Functions of UNMISS

1. Protection of Civilians:
 ○ One of the most critical functions of UNMISS is the protection of civilians
in South Sudan. This is particularly important because the country has
experienced widespread violence, including attacks on civilian populations,
ethnic violence, and sexual violence.
○ UNMISS has deployed peacekeeping forces and set up Protection of
Civilians (PoC) sites to provide safe havens for civilians, including IDPs
who have fled their homes due to the violence.
2. Humanitarian Assistance:

○ In addition to protecting civilians, UNMISS provides support for

humanitarian operations. It helps deliver essential food aid, medicine,
and shelter to the displaced population, ensuring that even in conflict
zones, essential services continue to be provided.
○ The mission coordinates with other UN agencies, such as UNHCR (United
Nations High Commissioner for Refugees) and OCHA (Office for the
Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs), to ensure aid reaches those in need.
3. Supporting Peace and Stability:

○ UNMISS plays an important role in supporting the peace process and

working towards national reconciliation in South Sudan. The mission
helps to implement peace agreements, monitors ceasefire violations, and
fosters dialogue between conflicting parties, which is essential for the long-
term stability of the country.
○ It also works to build institutions that can support governance and the rule
of law, which are vital for the protection of civilians and IDPs once a peace
settlement is reached.
4. Monitoring Human Rights:

○ UNMISS also focuses on monitoring and reporting human rights

violations, helping to document and expose abuses such as forced
displacement, atrocities, and gender-based violence. This documentation
plays a crucial role in accountability and justice for the victims.
How UNMISS Can Serve as a Precedent for Improving the Protection of
Civilians and IDPs
The experiences and lessons learned from the UNMISS mission can serve as a precedent
for improving civilian and IDP protection in other conflict zones. Here’s how UNMISS’s
efforts can be applied more broadly:

1. Expansion of Protection of Civilians (PoC) Sites:

○ One of the key strategies that UNMISS has used to protect civilians is the
establishment of PoC sites, which are safe zones where civilians can seek
refuge from violence. These sites have been set up near UN bases and are
heavily guarded to ensure the safety of those who seek protection.
○ This model can be expanded and replicated in other conflict zones where
civilians are at risk. Providing safe zones for civilians and IDPs can be a
vital strategy to shield them from violence during active conflict and
provide a foundation for their eventual reintegration once peace is
restored.
2. Robust Mandates for Civilian Protection:

○ The UNMISS mandate has evolved over time to emphasize stronger

protection of civilians as a primary goal. The mission has been authorized
to use force, when necessary, to protect civilians under threat. This includes
preventing attacks on civilian populations and defending them from
armed groups.
○ The experience of UNMISS shows how crucial it is for peacekeeping
missions to have clear mandates that prioritize civilian protection. In
future missions, mandates can be designed with even more robust
provisions to protect vulnerable groups, such as women, children, and
IDPs, from targeted violence.
3. Cooperation with Humanitarian Agencies:

○ UNMISS works closely with other UN agencies and international

humanitarian organizations to provide humanitarian assistance to IDPs
and other vulnerable populations. This ensures that even in the most
dangerous conflict zones, people receive life-saving aid, including food,
water, and medical services.
 ○ Cooperation between peacekeeping forces and humanitarian agencies can
be strengthened in future conflict zones to increase the effectiveness of aid
distribution, prevent access restrictions, and ensure the safety of aid
workers and recipients. This model helps to ensure that humanitarian
needs are met in parallel with efforts to restore peace and security.
4. Fostering National Ownership of Protection Efforts:

○ While UNMISS plays a crucial role in South Sudan, the ultimate goal is to
build the country’s own capacity to protect its civilians and manage
displacement. UNMISS has worked to strengthen the government’s ability
to protect its people, build local peacekeeping capacities, and support
reconciliation processes.
○ This concept of national ownership can be applied to other post-conflict
states to ensure that, over time, local governments and national
institutions take responsibility for the protection of civilians and IDPs.
International missions should focus on capacity-building and training to
ensure long-term, sustainable peace.
5. Preventing Sexual Violence and Providing Gender-Based Protection:

○ UNMISS has also been at the forefront of addressing sexual violence in

conflict, a major issue in South Sudan where women and girls have been
subjected to rape and abduction during the war. The mission has set up
programs to prevent sexual violence, support survivors, and ensure
perpetrators are held accountable.
○ The integration of gender-based protection strategies into future
peacekeeping mandates is essential. This includes not only providing safe
spaces for women and children but also ensuring that gender-sensitive
programs are incorporated into humanitarian aid, justice systems, and
community reintegration efforts.
6. Engaging the International Community in Protection Efforts:

○ UNMISS demonstrates the importance of a coordinated international

response to conflicts involving large-scale displacement and violence
against civilians. The mission’s success depends on the collaboration of the
UN, regional actors, NGOs, and civil society to address the root causes of
displacement and work toward long-term solutions.
 ○ By adopting a similar approach in other conflict zones, the international
community can create more comprehensive protection frameworks for
civilians and IDPs, ensuring collective action to prevent displacement and
stop violence.

References for further study:

1. https://www.ohchr.org/en/special-procedures/sr-internally-displaced-persons/about
-internally-displaced-persons#:~:text=According%20to%20the%20Guiding%20Pr
inciples,avoid%20the%20effects%20of%20armed
2. https://www.ohchr.org/en/special-procedures/sr-internally-displaced-persons/annua
l-thematic-reports
3. https://www.jips.org/
4. https://www.internal-displacement.org/
5. https://peacekeeping.un.org/en/protection-of-civilians-mandate
6. https://casebook.icrc.org/highlight/protection-civilians
7. https://interagencystandingcommittee.org/sites/default/files/2024-11/IASC%20Pol
icy%20on%20Protection%20of%20Internally%20Displaced%20Persons.pdf