1.1 INTRODUCTION
At the 2005 World Summit, world leaders reaffirmed the important role of women in conflict prevention, resolution and peacebuilding. They called for the full and effective implementation of the Security Council Resolution 1325 on Women and Peace and Security and, for the first time, accepted the inter-linkages across development, peace and security and human rights. This new resolve for integrated approaches to peacebuilding became a core rationale for the creation of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC). In making gender equality the PBC’s only thematic mandate, a new doctrinal imperative was created for ensuring systematic attention and resources to advancing gender equality within transitional recovery, reintegration and reconstruction efforts.”
In recent decades the nature of war has changed dramatically, with internal conflicts being waged by opposing armed groups, often divided along ideological or ethnic lines, that increasingly target civilians and wreak havoc on society – with severe physical, psychological, social, political and economic consequences. Conflict is no longer merely about securing borders and maintaining sovereignty; it is also about human security. Nations cannot be secure if their people are not secure. Where there is inequality and discrimination, violence, poverty, lack of education, lack of economic opportunity, political oppression and other destabilizing factors, there is a risk of conflict. Women and girls are especially affected in modern armed conflicts by extreme sexual violence, abductions and slavery. It is commonly said that women’s bodies have now become battlefields in conflicts between armed groups. At the same time, women have played major roles as peacemakers and peace builders.
The civil wars that waged in the 1990s brought to the eyes of the world how conflict was transforming. The genocide in Rwanda and the rape camps of Bosnia proved that the nature of conflict and its ravaging effects on women needed to be addressed urgently. At the 1995 UN sponsored Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing, women from around the world came together and for the first time there was a concerted focus on women’s experience in war. This resulted in a dedicated chapter on Women And Armed Conflict in the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action. It was a turning point and a call to action for women. In the years that followed, a global network of women, especially those who had been affected by conflict, worked at local, national and international levels to call for peace and security for women. In 2000, a global group of nongovernment organizations (NGOs) launched a worldwide appeal for the UN Security Council to formally recognize women’s rights, to promote their participation in all peace and security processes and to protect them in times of conflict. With the support of UN Secretary General Kofi Annan and the governments of Bangladesh, Jamaica, Canada and eventually the United Kingdom, women’s advocacy resulted in the Security Council’s passage of Resolution 1325 on Women, Peace and Security.
1.1 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK FOR WOMEN AND PEACEBUILDING UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW
One of the most important concepts for all groups to understand, in order to effectively implement the women, peace and security framework, is that it is a synthesis of exiting binding international law because it calls on all parties at all times to respect all international law applicable to the rights and protection of women and girls. Therefore, it is important to be familiar with this body of law, which includes international human rights and international humanitarian law. This is binding law that imposes duties on the nations that are parties to it. Through education and knowledge about these obligations, governments and international actors such as donors and international agencies can more easily understand their responsibilities, and practitioners and advocates at official, professional and grassroots levels can put pressure on governments to comply with their international treaty obligations.
The right to peacebuilding by women is protected by both legal and institutional frameworks. This area shall review some of those existing frameworks such as the universal declaration of human rights, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and later International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Right.
1.1.1 Universal Legal Framework for Women and Peacebuilding
Several instruments regulate the right to Women and Peacebuilding such as; the universal declaration of human rights, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. They would be discussed as listed above.
1.1.1.1 The Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948
On December 10, 1948 the UN General Assembly adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), the first international declaration of human rights principles recognizing that human rights and fundamental freedoms apply to everyone, everywhere.
Although it is not a treaty and thus is not binding international law, the UDHR is considered the global standard for human rights. It is the basis of more than 60 treaties, and many countries have included human rights modeled on the UDHR in their national constitutions and laws.
The UDHR has 30 articles that cover a wide range of political, social and economic rights, including the rights to:
• Freedom from discrimination of any kind based on race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status
• Life, liberty and security of person
• Equal protection of the law and right to legal remedy for violations of rights
• Freedoms of expression, peaceful assembly, association, religious belief and movement
• Protections from slavery, arbitrary detention, imprisonment without fair trial and invasion of privacy
• Right to marry freely and have equal say in marriage
• Right to education, healthcare and social services, with special rights for mothers and children.
Based on the principles contained in the UDHR, in 1966 the UN adopted two international treaties to formalize these human rights into binding international law: the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR). Along with the UDHR, these three instruments constitute the International Bill of Human Rights that apply to all people.
1.1.1.2 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
he ICCPR contains the principles on civil and political rights outlined in the UDHR. It commits states to respect the civil and political rights of individuals, including the rights to self-determination; life; freedom of speech; freedom of religion; freedom of assembly; electoral rights; rights to a fair trial; right to equality before the law; freedom from discrimination; prohibition of slavery; prohibition of cruel, inhuman and degrading. Denial of participation in politics and elections, discriminatory laws, lack of access to justice, inequality in marriage rights and subjection to cruel and inhuman treatment such as sexual violence and slavery have all traditionally left women disenfranchised and disempowered. The ICCPR is an important tool in advocating for the most basic rights of women to take part in society and to be protected from discrimination and violence.
1.1.1.3 United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325 (UNSCR 1325).
UNSCR 1325 on Women, Peace and Security was unanimously adopted by the UN Security Council in October 2000, and since then has been supplemented by four additional Resolutions[1] that advance specific dimensions of the women, peace and security agenda. Together, these resolutions recognize that women are affected by conflict and insecurity in specific ways and recognizes their right to be involved in decision-making at all levels on issues relating to peace and security. Nearly forty UN member states have developed National Action Plans (NAPs) to implement UNSCR 1325, and many organizations have also developed policies and programmes based on the priorities outlined in the resolutions. Resolution 1325 refers to two important issues. On one hand, it acknowledges the specific gender impact of armed conflicts on women and young girls. On the other, it alludes to the role women and young girls can play in peace building, understood in its broadest sense.
On the prevention aspect of the resolution, arguing that enhancing women’s participation in conflict prevention is vital to ensure implementation of UNSCR 1325: Prevention of armed conflict is a foundation to securing the rights of women as it prevents the creation of conditions that result in abuse of women and provides spaces and opportunities for governments and communities to prioritize development. Conflict prevention enables resources to be prioritized for the social sector and for economic productivity instead of military expenditures. Enhanced participation of women compliments successful conflict prevention and peace building approaches, which is emphasized in UNSCR1325. Resolution 1325 represented an important step forward, given that it tackles both the impact of armed conflict and women’s ability to become agents of peace and to overcome the reductionist view of women as victims of war.
1.1.1.4 The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against
Women (CEDAW)
CEDAW was adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1979 and is described as an international bill of rights for women. CEDAW promotes peace in the following way; through promoting gender equality and the elimination of gender-based discrimination, which creates space for women to actively and equally participate in rebuilding their communities and nations; through the protection of women from gender-based violence and sexual assault, including but not limited to their use as weapons of war, by creating stronger punishments and by promoting the participation of women in decision-making, increasing the likelihood that priorities, perspectives and needs of women are addressed in matters of sovereignty. CEDAW promotes not only women’s empowerment, but also a foundation for peace and justice around the world.
The adoption of UNSCR 1325 in 2000 was a historical moment and a culmination of many years of advocacy by women peace activists. In subsequent years, related resolutions were adopted to further strengthen the specific provisions focused on the use of sexual violence as a tool of war; the increased participation of women at all levels of peace negotiations and processes; zero tolerance policy for sexual abuse by United Nations personnel, including peacekeeping troops; end to impunity for sexual violence in conflict; and countering violent extremism. While some efforts have been undertaken to strengthen the monitoring of the implementation of the WPS agenda,[2] there remains a need for more systematic monitoring of UNSCR 1325 implementation progress. CEDAW can be a valuable tool in addressing this need.
The idea of a women’s rights treaty was given initial institutional impetus by the General Assembly Declaration on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women in 1967.[3] The working draft of the treaty emerged firstly from the Commission on the Status of Women, was further scrutinized by the Third Committee of the General Assembly (Social Affairs) and was ultimately adopted and opened for signature by resolution of the General Assembly.[4] The adoption of the Convention in 1979 signalled an important acknowledgement by the international community, and more particularly by the UN human rights system, of the deficiencies of the so-called ‘mainstream’ human rights instruments to protect and promote the rights of women.[5]The novelty of the Convention lay in its specificity to the lives of women and its transcendence of the boundaries traditionally established by human rights treaties, in particular between public and private spheres.[6] Much more than its symbolic importance, however, the entry into force of the Convention in 1981 established a treaty-based system of State accountability[7] for an enumerated list of women’s human rights, involving a periodic review of State compliance[8] by an independent committee of experts.[9]The Committee has established itself as the key institution advancing feminist-informed normative and legal developments on women’s rights under international law.[10]
The Convention does not specify its application to armed conflict—in contrast, for example, to the Convention on the Rights of the Child.[11] Further, its provisions do not specifically address the needs and rights of women that prevail in conflict-affected settings. Nevertheless, the Convention does not permit derogations and the Committee has consistently affirmed the Convention’s application to conflict, civil strife and public emergency.[12] The adoption by the Committee of GR30 on the rights of women in conflict prevention, conflict and post-conflict situations therefore arose from the recognized silences of the Convention in specifically addressing challenges to women’s rights in such settings.[13] The bulk of GR30 is dedicated to articulating the ways in which the rights guaranteed under the Convention are impacted by conflict, specifically the prohibition of discrimination in law, policy and custom;[14] the obligation on States to challenge discriminatory social and cultural patterns;[15] the prohibition on trafficking;[16] the right to political participation in domestic and international affairs;[17] access to education, employment, health;[18] the rights of rural women;[19] right to nationality;[20] right to equality in marriage and family relations;[21]and the right to enter into contracts.[22] GR30 notes the consequent obligations on States to remedy violations caused by conflict and makes several recommendations to States parties to this end.[23]
While GR30 now constitutes an authoritative statement of women’s human rights in conflict, there are clear limitations to the Committee’s traction over, firstly and most clearly, UN member States that have declined to ratify the Convention.[24] Such States are small in number, yet they include some significant actors in armed conflict and women’s rights—most notably the United States, but also Iran and Somalia. The CEDAW Committee’s oversight procedures have no bearing on these States and their conduct of hostilities domestically or internationally. The structural weaknesses historically associated with the Convention, due to the lack of any associated enforcement procedures, have been ameliorated in important ways through the entry into force of the Optional Protocol to the Convention in December 2000, which established an individual communications mechanism[25] and an inquiry procedure to investigate ‘grave or systematic violations’ of the Convention.[26] Nevertheless, these enhanced monitoring procedures are likewise limited to State parties to the Optional Protocol, which remains well behind the number of State parties to the Convention.[27]
1.1.1.5 UNSC
Typically regarded as the UN organ that is most militaristic and driven by global power politics, the UNSC is not formally attributed a role in advancing human rights by the UN Charter.[28] Rather, the UNSC has the responsibility to weigh the evidence in individual circumstances and to identify threats to the peace, breaches of the peace, and acts of aggression.[29] In determining the appropriate response to situations on its agenda, the UNSC can choose between its recommendatory powers under Chapter VI for the ‘Pacific Settlement of Disputes’ or its binding powers under Chapter VII for ‘Action with Respect to Threats to the Peace, Breaches of the Peace, and Acts of Aggression’. Envisaged as the enforcement body of the United Nations, the UNSC has unique authority to make binding decisions[30] and extraordinary powers that include the authorization of the use of force.[31]Those extraordinary powers reflect the primary mandate of the organ, namely ‘the maintenance of international peace and security’.[32]
The UN Charter’s preambular and Article 1 commitments to ‘promote and encourage respect for human rights’ imply a role for all UN organs. Moreover, human rights violations of sufficient severity can themselves constitute threats to international peace and security.[33] These Charter provisions have been the subject of highly varying interpretation by the UNSC during the seven decades of its operation.[34] While ‘the UNSC was not intended as a forum to debate and devise solutions to human rights issues’,[35] it first acknowledged that the systematic violation of rights could constitute an issue of international peace and security in the 1960s.[36] A growing, if indirect, role on human rights relevant to its mandate began to develop in the 1990s.[37] The end of the Cold War brought a new era of human rights across the wider UN system,[38] and with it increasing scrutiny of the UNSC and its legitimacy, including calls for the UNSC to reform, to democratize and to address the impact on human rights of its own operations.[39] These calls for reform overlapped with a feminist spotlight on rights violations impacting women in conflicts such as the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda, and calls for a refocus by the UNSC on the people affected by conflict and by its operations.[40]
1.1.2 Regional Legal Instruments Regulating Women and Peacebuilding
Several Regional instruments regulate Women and Peacebuilding such asthe Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights on the Rights of Women in Africa (PRWA), African charter of human and peoples rights. They shall be treated in turns.
1.1.2.1 Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights on the Rights of Women in Africa (PRWA
The Protocol came into force in 2005, is a significant tool for peace builders. The PRWA recalls Security Council Resolution 1325 in its preamble. It provides for a right to peace and declares that women have ‘the right to participate in the promotion and maintenance of peace. The PRWA requires states parties to take all appropriate measures to ensure the increased participation of women in all aspects of post-conflict reconstruction and rehabilitation.
The Protocol also provides opportunities for African women to be protected against human rights violations that affect them as civilians, refugees and/or soldiers during armed conflicts. Moreover, the Protocol proclaims the right of women to peace, and calls on states to ensure the participation of women in all aspects of planning, formulation, and implementation of post-conflict reconstruction and rehabilitation. The AU Protocol on the Rights of Women has the potential to impact significantly on the lives of African wome and to contribute towards putting an end to the human rights violations that affect women and children during conflicts. However, without the clear will of African states to enforce their commitment to the eradication of discrimination against women and to ensure gender equality, the rights of women as recognized in the Protocol will remain unenforceable. Although states parties remain primarily responsible for implementing the Protocol, the realization of women’s rights in Africa also calls for an active contribution of all relevant stakeholders: national gender machineries, sub-regional, regional and international organizations, and civil society groups.
Developments in the UN more broadly in the 1990s also had an important impact on the UNSC agenda. The UN Development Programme’s 1994 Human Development Report introduced the concept of ‘human security’ to the UN, which relocated the idea of global security, formerly situated in arms and State-centric concerns, to that located in all aspects of human development.[41] While the concept of human security has experienced varying degrees of legitimacy itself since, and its conceptual emergence may be critiqued for the omission of gender or feminist concerns,[42]it nevertheless provided an entry point for feminist activism and for the increasing adoption of thematic resolutions by the UNSC (a clear avenue through which it makes the connection with broader human rights-related issues).[43]
The UNSC made a first ambitious step towards embedding women’s rights in conflict within its agenda by issuing a press release on 8 March 2000, on the occasion of International Women’s Day, declaring that ‘members of the UNSC recognize that peace is inextricably linked with equality between women and men’.[44] A series of further steps included an arria formula meeting,[45] an open debate on women, peace and security and finally the adoption of Resolution 1325 in October 2000.[46] The Resolution provides for four principal pillars of priority action in which women’s rights should be advanced, namely: Participation, Protection, Prevention, and Relief and Recovery. The resolution is widely celebrated for its recognition of women’s gender-specific experiences of conflict and of women as agents of conflict transformation.[47]
As the resolution drew attention for its symbolic importance, practical concerns about weak provision for implementation quickly emerged.[48] In response to such concerns, seven additional WPS resolutions were adopted. Three focus broadly on advancing the women’s participation pillars (Resolution 1889 (2009), Resolution 2122 (2013), Resolution 2242 (2015)[49] and four focus on conflict-related sexual violence (CRSV) (Resolution 1820 (2008), Resolution 1888 (2009), Resolution 1960 (2010) and Resolution 2106 (2013).[50] These additional resolutions have extended the breadth and depth of Resolution 1325, made provision for the implementation of the overall WPS agenda and engaged a broad range of member States willing to lead adoption of additional resolutions on this issue.
While the WPS resolutions have signalled important political recognition by the UNSC that women’s inequality and rights are concerns of peace and security, a number of critiques have emerged. Numerous feminist scholars and activists have pointed to shortcomings in how the UNSC has engaged with concepts of gender and with the discriminations that characterize women’s lives. For example, a central motivation for activists in calling for the adoption of Resolution 1325 (2000) was to overcome the exclusion of women from decision-making, as well as increasing women’s role in the general activities that fall within the remit of the UNSC. In 1993, 1 per cent of deployed peacekeeping personnel were women, which has barely increased to 3 per cent by 2014.[51] Of 31 peace agreements signed between 1992 and 2011, only 4 per cent of signatories, 2.4 per cent of chief mediators, 3.7 per cent of witnesses and 9 per cent of negotiators were women.[52] While the resolutions call for the increased participation of women, they are absent of language that articulates measures to address the fundamental basis of women’s exclusion, namely addressing structural inequalities and gender discrimination.
There are significant concerns that issues such as women’s participation have been engaged with by the UNSC only in as far as they advance the UNSC’s and States’ security agendas.[53] For example, the UNSC-mandated 2015 Global Study on the Implementation of Resolution 1325 documented concerns among women’s activists globally that there are adverse consequences for women’s security when States co-opt the work of women’s organizations into State security strategies.[54] In particular, with respect to the prevention of violent extremism, Resolution 2242 (2015) calls for the participation of women and women’s organizations in the development of counterterrorism strategies.[55] There are fears that the mantle of women’s participation in national security will become a means for States to simply interpret participation as a role for women in intelligence gathering.[56] Women activists have expressed concerns ‘of women being “used” by the government, rather than being empowered to participate fully in society and overcome the barriers they face’.[57] In addition, where States fund women’s rights activities as a means to counter radicalism, rather than for the purposes of promoting gender equality per se, the perception that these organizations are linked with State security strategies can compromise trust and safety within their communities.[58]
1.2 Institutional instruments for Women and Peacebuilding under International law
Several institutions regulate Women and Peacebuilding such as the The International Criminal Court (ICC), Ad hoc Tribunals and Traditional Justice. They shall be treated in turns.
1.2.1 The International Criminal Court (ICC)
The establishment of the International Criminal Court (ICC) which came into force after the signing of the signing of the Rome Statute on July 01 2002 marks a new era of international justice and accountability for women. The Rome Statute of the ICC includes forms of sexual violence, including rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy and enforced sterilization in the definition of crimes against humanity and war crimes. Persecution, with gender as a basis for persecution, and the crime of enslavement, including the trafficking of women and children, are also listed as crimes against humanity. A statement in the commentary of the Statute explains further that rape and other sexual violence can constitute acts of genocide.
1.2.2 Ad hoc Tribunals
The International Criminal Tribunals of the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) created in 1993 and Rwanda (ICTR) created in 1994 have raised the standards of accountability for crimes of sexual violence against women. Even though the judgments they have handed down constitute a tiny fraction of cases, these set historic precedents in prosecuting war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide crimes. In so doing, the judgments of the Ad hoc Tribunals have clarified definitions of sexual violence, recognizing rape as a means of torture and a form of persecution. Sexual slavery, forced nudity and sexual mutilation are included within the scope of the judgments, and the Tribunals have noted explicitly that forced impregnation, forced marriage, forced abortion and sexual humiliation are serious violations of international law, and within the courts’ jurisdiction. The Tribunals have also recognized that sexual violence is a weapon of war, used as a tool of terror and destruction.
1.2.3 Traditional Justice
In post-conflict situations where widespread atrocities have been committed, national judicial systems may lack adequate financial and human resources to handle the large number of cases. In addition, national judicial systems may be subject to ethnic or religious bias arising from the conflict. Given the limited number of cases that international and national courts can handle, traditional and community based approaches are being viewed in some cases as a complementary, if not alternative, system of justice Traditional approaches to justice which often involve religious leaders, village elders and local officials in resolving domestic or communal conflicts, including rape and domestic violence.
However, it is essential that traditional justice mechanisms are consistent with international human rights standards and protect the rights of witnesses, victims and defendants.
In times of war and societal breakdown, crimes against women reach new levels of brutality and frequency. These assaults on individuals and basic decency must be identified, and those responsible must be held to account. Each conflict runs its own brutal course and demands a unique approach to seeking accountability. Recognizing the tragedies of history is one way to protect against their recurrence. Without accountability for crimes against women, the legal foundations of new governments will be weakened, the credibility of governing institutions will be undermined and women will continue to suffer discrimination
[1] (UNSCRs 1820, 1888 1889 and 1960)
[2] Cf. United Nations Security Council Resolution 1889 (2010); United Nations. UN Strategic Results Framework on Women, Peace and Security: 2011-2020; United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325, Report of the Secretary General on Women and Peace and Security, S/2010/498 (28 September, 2010); Coomaraswamy, R. (2015). Preventing Conflict, Transforming Justice, Securing the Peace : A Global Study on the Implementation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325.
[3]
UNGA Res 2263 (XXII) (7 November 1967).
[4] UNGA Res 34/180 (18 December 1979).
[5] reeman, M, Chinkin, C and Rudolf, B (eds), The UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women: A Commentary (Oxford University Press 2012) 5–7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
[6] Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (adopted 18 December 1979, entered into force 3 September 1981) 1249 UNTS 13 (CEDAW) art 1.
[7] We adopt here the meaning of ‘accountability’ as it conventionally used in respect of the CEDAW Convention. To quote Rebecca Cook:
Legal responsibility denotes liability for breach of the law, but accountability is a wider concept that requires a state to explain an apparent violation and to offer an exculpatory explanation if it can … States are seldom held responsible for ignoring their more international obligations to respect women’s human rights, but may more often be called to account for the status of women in their territory.
See further Cook, R, ‘State Accountability under the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women’ in Cook, R (ed), Human Rights of Women: National and International Perspectives (University of Pennsylvania Press 1994) 228–56Google Scholar. See also Freeman et al. discussing ‘accountability’ under the Convention.
[8] CEDAW art 18
[9] Freeman, M, Chinkin, C and Rudolf, B (eds), The UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women: A Commentary (Oxford University Press 2012) 5–7
[10] Convention on the Rights of the Child (adopted 20 November 1989, entry into force 2 September 1990) 157 Committee for the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, ‘General Recommendation No. 28’ (19 October 2010) UN Doc CEDAW/C/GC/28 para 11; CEDAW (n 2) para 2; Committee for the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, ‘Concluding Observations to Israel’ (22 July 2005) UN Doc CEDAW/C/ISR/3 paras 23–24; see also Committee for the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, ‘Statement on the Situation of Women in Gaza’ (18 July 2014) Decision 58/1, UN Doc CEDAW/C/2014/II/CRP. 7 UNTS 3 (CRC) art 38.
[11] P Patten statement to ‘Arria Formula Meeting on Linkages between Security Council on Resolution 1325 and CEDAW GR 30’ (5 December 2016) United Nations.
[12] CEDAW paras 10, 34–37, 53–56, 58–60.
[13] Ibid para 34–37.
[14] ibid paras 39–40.
[15] ibid paras 42–46, 70–72.
[16] ibid paras 48–51.
[17] ibid.
[18] ibid paras 58–60.
[19] ibid paras 62–64.
[20] ibid paras 74–80.
[21] ibid paras 12, 17, 24, 28, 33, 38, 41, 46, 52, 57, 61, 65, 69, 73, 81, 82–86.
[22] At the time of writing, there are 189 State parties to the Convention.
[23] Art 2.
[24] Art 8.
[25] At the time of writing, there are 107 State parties to the instrument.
[26] See generally Cook, R, ‘Reservations to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination of Women’ (1990) 30 VaJIntlL 643
[27] Charlesworth, H and Chinkin, C, The Boundaries of International Law: A Feminist Analysis (Manchester University Press 2000) 113
[28] Charter of the UN (n 27) Ch V.
[29] ibid art 39. See generally ibid Chapter VII, Action with Respect to Threats to the Peace, Breaches of the Peace, and Acts of Aggression.
[30] ibid art 25.
[31] Ibid
[32] ibid art 24(1).
[33] For example, in UNSC Res 1366 (2001) OP 10, the Security Council invited the Secretary-General: [T]o refer to the Council information and analyses from within the United Nations system on cases of serious violations of international law, including international humanitarian law and human rights law and on potential conflict situations arising, inter alia, from ethnic, religious and territorial disputes, poverty and lack of development and expresses its determination to give serious consideration to such information and analyses regarding situations which it deems to represent a threat to international peace and security.
[34] e generally Bailey, SD, The UN Security Council and Human Rights (St Martin’s Press 1994); , JG and Ugarte, BS, The UN Security Council in the Age of Human Rights (Cambridge University Press 2014
[35] Tachou-Sipowo, A-G, ‘The Security Council on Women in War: Between Peacebuilding and Humanitarian Protection’ (2010) 92 International Review of the Red Cross 197
[36] Ugarte, BS and Genser, J, ‘Evolution of the Security Council’s Engagement on Human Rights’ in Ugarte, BS and Genser, J (eds), The United Nations Security Council in the Age of Human Rights (Cambridge University Press 2014) 5
[37] ibid 5–6
[38] See generally Mertus, J, The United Nations and Human Rights: A Guide for a New Era (2nd edn, Routledge 2009)
[39] Otto, D, ‘Securing the “Gender Legitimacy” of the UN Security Council: Prising Gender from its Historical Moorings’ in Charlesworth, H and Coicaud, JM (eds), Fault Lines of International Legitimacy (United Nations University Press 2006).
[40] Ibid
[41] United Nations Development Programme, Human Development Report 1994 (Oxford University Press 1994)Google Scholar; Dedring, J, ‘Human Security and the UN Security Council’ in Brauch, HG et al. (eds), Globalisation and Environmental Challenges: Reconceptualising Security in the 21st Century (Springer 2008)
[42] Ryerson, C, ‘Critical Voices and Human Security: To Endure, To Engage or to Critique’ (2010) 12 Security Dialogue 169
[43] C True-Frost has documented that between January 1999 and October 2007, the UNSC adopted 41 thematic-focused resolutions. Prior to this, from the creation of the Council in 1946 to the adoption of human security concepts in 1999, it adopted only 13 thematic resolutions; True-Frost, C, ‘The Security Council and Norm Consumption’ (2007) 40 International Law and Politics 115 , 139–40.
[44] United Nations, ‘Peace Inextricably Linked with Equality between Women and Men Says Security Council, in International Women’s Day Statement’ Press Release (8 March 2000) SC/6816.
[45] United Nations Secretariat, ‘Background Note on the ‘‘Arria-Formula’’ Meetings of the Security Council Members’ Informal Non-Paper (25 October 2002),<http://www.un.org/en/sc/about/methods/bgarriaformula.shtml>.
[46] UNSC Res 1325 (2000) S/RES1325/2000.
[47] Cohn, C, Kinsella, H and Gibbings, S, ‘Women, Peace and Security’ (2004) 6 International Feminist Journal of Politics 130
[48] Ibid
[49] NSC Res 1820 (2008) S/RES1820/2008; UNSC Res 1888 (2009) S/RES1888/2009; UNSC Res 1960 (2010) S/RES1960/2010; UNSC Res 2106 (2013) S/RES2106/2009.
[50] United Nations, ‘Women in Peacekeeping’ (6 July 2017) <http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/issues/women/womeninpk.shtml>
[51] P Castillo Díaz and S Tordjman, ‘Women’s Participation in Peace Negotiations: Connections between Presence and Influence’ in UN Women Sourcebook on Women, Peace and Security (UN Women 2012).
[52] Hudson, N, ‘Securitizing Women’s Rights and Gender Equality’ (2009) 8 Journal of Human Rights 53
[53] R Coomaraswamy, ‘Preventing Conflict, Transforming Justice, Securing the Peace: A Global Study on the Implementation of UNSC Resolution 1325’ (UN Women 2015) 222.
[54] UNSC Res 2422 (2015) S/RES/2422, paras 11–13
[55] Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe, ‘Women and Terrorist Radicalization: Final Report’ (OSCE 2013) 5
[56] R Coomaraswamy, ‘Preventing Conflict, Transforming Justice, Securing the Peace: A Global Study on the Implementation of UNSC Resolution 1325’ (UN Women 2015) 222.
[57] UNSC Res 2422 (2015) S/RES/2422, paras 11–13.
[58] Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe, ‘Women and Terrorist Radicalization: Final Report’ (OSCE 2013) 5.