Position of Citizenship Rights in Protection Responsibility Doctrine (R2P) and Humanitarian Interventions
Akhlāq-i zīstī i.e., Bioethics Journal,
Vol. 8 No. 1 (1397),
2 November 2018
,
Page 331-345
https://doi.org/10.22037/bioeth.v8i1.33167
Abstract
Background and Aim: The doctrine of responsibility to protect (R2P) was proposed as a new initiative in the twenty first century by the states enjoying governance right and it is amongst the novel topics in the area of the international laws. This provision stepped into the arena for supporting the citizens’ rights and limiting the autocratic states’ measures. The present article aims at elaborating the role of citizenship rights from the side of the doctrine of the responsibility to protect (R2P) and humanitarian interventions.
Materials and Methods: The present descriptive-analytical research has been codified based on a library research method.
Ethical Considerations: In all the stages of this research’s writing, principles like content originality and impartiality have been observed.
Findings: Considering the war atrocities during the ending years of the 21st century and the human right violations and the crimes against humanity that led to the vast breach of the international laws and the citizenship rights in regions like Rwanda and former Yugoslavia, Iraq, Syria and some others, the findings signified that the global community should be persuaded to set the ground for the enforcement of the R2P doctrine in case of the vast violation of the international and humanitarian regulations.
Conclusion: Definition of governance as the states’ responsibility for protecting and supporting their citizens and limiting the domain of the autocratic states’ measures like the breach of their citizens’ rights through giving the priority to the concept "human" in contrast to "state" and "support" in lieu of "governance" is indicative of this doctrine’s efforts for delineating a novel path in the international laws. In line with these goals, R2P doctrine was organized following two decades of endeavors by the UN and in three responsibility sections, namely prevention, reaction and reconstruction. Each of the aforesaid doctrine’s three sections has been stabilized based on the documents affirmed by the UN in the form of R2P doctrine and efforts have been made for using it in the international crises like Sudan’s Darfur, Libya and Syria. Based on a 2001’s Canadian commission, the scale for the operationalization of R2P doctrine, as well, is massacre, ethnic cleansing, genocide and invasion. The decisions by UN’s Security Council for recognizing the conditions of the doctrine’s operationalization, as well, play a major role hence all the stages of this doctrine’s operationalization are to be supervised by the UN.
Please cite this article as: Khalili Far H, Goldoziyan I, Asgar Khani AM. Position of Citizenship Rights in Protection Responsibility Doctrine (R2P) and Humanitarian Interventions. Bioethics Journal, Special Issue on Citizenship Rights, Autumn 2018; 331-345
- Responsibility Doctrine; Citizenship Rights; Humanitarian Interventions; International Regulations
How to Cite
References
Cronin B. International Legal Consensus and the control of Execess state violence. 11 Global Governance 2005; 15(3): 311-330.
Hurd I. Legistimacy and Authority International politics, International organization. Berlin: Law Publishing Company; 2016. p.404.
Hammer M, Leonard A. Foucauldian Approach tointernational law. Burlington: Ashgate Publishing Company; 2019. p.7-20.
Evans G. The Responsibility to protect: Ending Mass Atrocity Crimes Once and for All. Washington: Brooking Institution Press; 2017. p.168.
Javid MJ. Critique of the Philosophical Foundations of Human Rights. Tehran: Foroozeh Publications; 2016. p.47.
Watson A. The Evolution of International Society: A Comparative Historical Analysis. London: Routledge; 2019. p.24.
Alam A. History of Western Political Philosophy, New Age and Middle Ages. Tehran: Ministry of Foreign Affairs; 1998. p.46.
Doaago HU, Hashemi SM. The Position of Dignified Citizenship Rights in the Doctrine of Liability for Protection in the Light of International Law. Journal: Ethical Research 2019; 36(4): 83-106.
Marjanovic M. Is Humanitarian War the Exception Mises Institute IT. London: Murray, W.Geographies of Globalization; 2011. p.37.
Habibollahzadeh T, Mir Lohi SMH. A Study of the Legitimacy of the Responsibility of Protection in Islam. Quarterly Journal of Islamic Human Rights Studies 2015; 3(7): 33-52.
Ghorbannia N. The Relationship between Human Rights and Friendly Rights. Ph.D. Thesis. Tehran: University of Tehran, Faculty of Law and Political Science; 2017. p.18.
Safaei SH. Intervention in the internal affairs of other countries from the perspective of international law. Legal Journal 1988; 9(4): 5-40.
Abbasi Ashqali M. Humanitarian Interventions and the Principle of Non-Intervention. Political-Economic Information 2001; 5(10): 169-170.
Sadeghi D. International Responsibility of Support and Sovereignty of Governments. Journal of International Relations Studies 2013; 4(22): 133-155.
Legal consequence of the Construction of a wall in the occupied Palestinian territory ICJ Reports, Advisory Opinion 2004; 10(88): 155-156.
- Abstract Viewed: 449 times
- pdf (فارسی) Downloaded: 115 times