GLOBAL GOVERNANCE: HUMAN RIGHTS & ENVIRONMENTAL
HUMAN RIGHTS:
Khashoggi:
October 2018, journalist Jamal Khashoggi visited the Saudi Arabian embassy in Istanbul to arrange his
marriage documents. As a journalist, he was highly critical of political repression and religious
intolerance, with strong anti-authoritarian views.
he failed to reappear leaving the embassy, so was investigated as a murder.
The Saudi government admitted he was murdered by "rouge operatives"
The office of the high commissioner for human rights blamed the Saudi government, naming it
"premeditated extra-judicial execution"
As international condemnation grew, saudi arabia tried some suspects behind closed doors. Turkey
began its own trials but the accused was not present and saudi arabia refused to co-operate.
America unwilling to seek justice due to fear of hurting relations. Trump boasted be 'saved' Mohammed
bin Salman's 'ass' by getting 'congress to leave him alone'
____________________________________________________________________________________
International law: rules that govern relations between states. It provides a framework but with no
authority to force obedience.
The Nuremberg trials:
Westphalian principles traditionally enshrined the concept for human rights as a relative. Nazi's were
tried as war criminals for crimes against humanity.
The crimes exposed at Nuremberg developed a human rights based approach to international law as an
urgent concern.
Universal declaration of human rights, 1948;
UDHR: "the inherent dignity" and "the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family"
1951: refugee convention
1979: discrimination against women convention
1984: convention on torture
United nations high commissioner for human rights established in 1993; current commissioner is Volker
Turk as of October 2022.
,NGOs highlight human rights abuses:
1. Amnesty international
2. Human rights watch
3. Save the children
This pressures the international community to pay attention to rights abuses documentation.
____________________________________________________________________________________
How successfully do judicial institutions enforce human rights?
International court of justice (ICJ): UN's primary judicial branch established by UN charter in 1945.
Sometimes known as the world court.
It sits permanently in the Hauge, and designed to settle disputes between UN member states
President: Yuuji, 15 judges taken from across various legal systems
Its role is to settle disputes, offer advisory opinions on legal questions. Attempts to enforce rule of law in
international disputes – leading to a more peaceful, stable world.
Article 94 of UN charter lays down that all members should 'comply with the decision of the court'. If the
state does not comply, the other party may approach the UNSC to enforce judgement
In what ways has the ICJ been successful?
Liberals regard the ICJ as a vital way of establishing a more rules-based approach to international affairs,
rather than resulting to wars. It possesses great moral authority and states can be unwilling to question
its ruling
• 1988, American war ship USS Vincennes mistakenly shot down an Iranian airliner plane mistaking it
for a fighter jet. 290 people were killed. Iran took this case to the ICJ and although the US refused to
accept liability, it did express 'deep regret' for shooting down the airliner and paid US$61.8million in
compensation to victims families.
• 2002, ICJ settled a dispute between Nigeria and Cameroon over the ownership of oil-rich peninsula.
Both states were happy with the outcome and avoided military disputes.
• 2012, ICJ ruled that the former president of Chad must be tried for his crimes against humanity and
torture. Habré sought refuge in Senegal but as a result of the judgement, Senegal put him on trial –
he was guilty of killing 40,000 people and sentenced to life.
Why has the ICJ not been successful?
Effectiveness is severely limited due to Realist nation state power maximiser view. Consequently, their
national interest will be placed above international law, challenging the ICJ. Notion of the ICJ is
undermined by the realist agenda.
,• The ICJ cannot initiate cases, only try those presented to it
• Its liberal principles conflict realist state egoism
• States are able to choose whether they are subject to decision of the court by signing optional
clause. In 2021, just 74 of 193 members signed this.
• Although UNSC is supposed to uphold ICJ rulings, veto members unlikely to do this.
• Chapter VII of charter says coercive action can only be taken when international peace and security
are threatened.
2020, ICJ ordered government of Myanmar to take all necessary measures to stop genocide against
remaining Rohingya Muslims. Myanmar's leader stated the issue was an internal armed conflict which it
would deal with without outside influence.
UNGA asked for advice surrounding the wall Israel was building to separate it from the Palestinian
territories, the ICJ declared this as 'illegal'.
The then Israeli prime minister condemned the ruling as 'one-sided and politically motivated' and made
it clear that 'the state of Israel absolutely rejects the ruling.'
The then Israeli prime minister condemned the ruling as 'one-sided and politically motivated' and made
it clear that 'the state of Israel absolutely rejects the ruling.'
Chagos Islands:
1968, UK granted Mauritius independence, as part of the deal, they had to cede the Chagos islands to
the UK. The British government then evicted thousands of chagossians and allowed Americans to open a
military base at Diego Garcia.
In 2019, ICJ stated that the islands should be returned to the Mauritius, the UK had refused to comply.
Until Keir Starmer became prime minister and ruled for giving the islands back to Mauritius.
____________________________________________________________________________________
After the cold war there was growing concern about establishing reactions to genocide, war crimes, and
crimes against humanity occurring in Rwanda, Sierra Leone, and former Yugoslavia. Also worked with
Cambodian government
UN created four UN war crimes tribunals; the aim was:
• Punish and bring justice to those guilty of human rights abuses
• Try the heads of government for crimes committed within their country.
• Make public the extent of the horror of crimes of genocide
Former Yugoslavia:
, The international criminal tribunal for the former Yugoslavia was instituted in 1993 and ran until 2017.
This was the first since the Nuremberg trials.
Its aim was to 'spear head the shift from impunity to accountability'
By the time it has closed, it has totally convicted and sentenced 90 war criminals, ranging from low-
ranking soldiers to senior figures. Radovan Karadzic, former president of Bosnian Serb republic, he was
sentenced to 40 years in prison for the 1995 Srebrenica massacre.
Cambodia:
Established in conjunction with UN in 1997. It has tried members of the murderous Khmer rouge
government.(1975-79) which was responsible for deaths of 2 million people. The court handed out 3 life
imprisonments.
It has engaged many Cambodians into understanding what happened in their country during this period.
Rwanda:
investigated in which 800,000 Tutsis were murdered, and opened its first case in 1997. They convicted
61 individuals being complicit of genocide, including former prime minister; Jean Kambanda, who
became the first head of government to be convicted on genocide charges.
Sierra Leone:
Established in 2022, UN established special court to try those who committed atrocities during the 10-
year civil war. During 1990s, president Charles Taylor had supported opposition groups in their attempts
to gain control of diamond mines, leading to carnage, in which revolutionary united front and allied
criminal gangs murdered or hacked off limbs of their victims.
By 1999, 50,000 had died.
2012, sentenced Taylor to 50 years' imprisonment for complicity to civil war atrocities.
____________________________________________________________________________________
Update:
"I don’t need international law" - Donald Trump, asked by a journalist in oval office following 2026
Venezuela intervention.
West's adversaries are influenced only by force or by the threat of force.
"international law has always been toothless against the world's leading powers"
Criticisms of recent tribunals:
HUMAN RIGHTS:
Khashoggi:
October 2018, journalist Jamal Khashoggi visited the Saudi Arabian embassy in Istanbul to arrange his
marriage documents. As a journalist, he was highly critical of political repression and religious
intolerance, with strong anti-authoritarian views.
he failed to reappear leaving the embassy, so was investigated as a murder.
The Saudi government admitted he was murdered by "rouge operatives"
The office of the high commissioner for human rights blamed the Saudi government, naming it
"premeditated extra-judicial execution"
As international condemnation grew, saudi arabia tried some suspects behind closed doors. Turkey
began its own trials but the accused was not present and saudi arabia refused to co-operate.
America unwilling to seek justice due to fear of hurting relations. Trump boasted be 'saved' Mohammed
bin Salman's 'ass' by getting 'congress to leave him alone'
____________________________________________________________________________________
International law: rules that govern relations between states. It provides a framework but with no
authority to force obedience.
The Nuremberg trials:
Westphalian principles traditionally enshrined the concept for human rights as a relative. Nazi's were
tried as war criminals for crimes against humanity.
The crimes exposed at Nuremberg developed a human rights based approach to international law as an
urgent concern.
Universal declaration of human rights, 1948;
UDHR: "the inherent dignity" and "the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family"
1951: refugee convention
1979: discrimination against women convention
1984: convention on torture
United nations high commissioner for human rights established in 1993; current commissioner is Volker
Turk as of October 2022.
,NGOs highlight human rights abuses:
1. Amnesty international
2. Human rights watch
3. Save the children
This pressures the international community to pay attention to rights abuses documentation.
____________________________________________________________________________________
How successfully do judicial institutions enforce human rights?
International court of justice (ICJ): UN's primary judicial branch established by UN charter in 1945.
Sometimes known as the world court.
It sits permanently in the Hauge, and designed to settle disputes between UN member states
President: Yuuji, 15 judges taken from across various legal systems
Its role is to settle disputes, offer advisory opinions on legal questions. Attempts to enforce rule of law in
international disputes – leading to a more peaceful, stable world.
Article 94 of UN charter lays down that all members should 'comply with the decision of the court'. If the
state does not comply, the other party may approach the UNSC to enforce judgement
In what ways has the ICJ been successful?
Liberals regard the ICJ as a vital way of establishing a more rules-based approach to international affairs,
rather than resulting to wars. It possesses great moral authority and states can be unwilling to question
its ruling
• 1988, American war ship USS Vincennes mistakenly shot down an Iranian airliner plane mistaking it
for a fighter jet. 290 people were killed. Iran took this case to the ICJ and although the US refused to
accept liability, it did express 'deep regret' for shooting down the airliner and paid US$61.8million in
compensation to victims families.
• 2002, ICJ settled a dispute between Nigeria and Cameroon over the ownership of oil-rich peninsula.
Both states were happy with the outcome and avoided military disputes.
• 2012, ICJ ruled that the former president of Chad must be tried for his crimes against humanity and
torture. Habré sought refuge in Senegal but as a result of the judgement, Senegal put him on trial –
he was guilty of killing 40,000 people and sentenced to life.
Why has the ICJ not been successful?
Effectiveness is severely limited due to Realist nation state power maximiser view. Consequently, their
national interest will be placed above international law, challenging the ICJ. Notion of the ICJ is
undermined by the realist agenda.
,• The ICJ cannot initiate cases, only try those presented to it
• Its liberal principles conflict realist state egoism
• States are able to choose whether they are subject to decision of the court by signing optional
clause. In 2021, just 74 of 193 members signed this.
• Although UNSC is supposed to uphold ICJ rulings, veto members unlikely to do this.
• Chapter VII of charter says coercive action can only be taken when international peace and security
are threatened.
2020, ICJ ordered government of Myanmar to take all necessary measures to stop genocide against
remaining Rohingya Muslims. Myanmar's leader stated the issue was an internal armed conflict which it
would deal with without outside influence.
UNGA asked for advice surrounding the wall Israel was building to separate it from the Palestinian
territories, the ICJ declared this as 'illegal'.
The then Israeli prime minister condemned the ruling as 'one-sided and politically motivated' and made
it clear that 'the state of Israel absolutely rejects the ruling.'
The then Israeli prime minister condemned the ruling as 'one-sided and politically motivated' and made
it clear that 'the state of Israel absolutely rejects the ruling.'
Chagos Islands:
1968, UK granted Mauritius independence, as part of the deal, they had to cede the Chagos islands to
the UK. The British government then evicted thousands of chagossians and allowed Americans to open a
military base at Diego Garcia.
In 2019, ICJ stated that the islands should be returned to the Mauritius, the UK had refused to comply.
Until Keir Starmer became prime minister and ruled for giving the islands back to Mauritius.
____________________________________________________________________________________
After the cold war there was growing concern about establishing reactions to genocide, war crimes, and
crimes against humanity occurring in Rwanda, Sierra Leone, and former Yugoslavia. Also worked with
Cambodian government
UN created four UN war crimes tribunals; the aim was:
• Punish and bring justice to those guilty of human rights abuses
• Try the heads of government for crimes committed within their country.
• Make public the extent of the horror of crimes of genocide
Former Yugoslavia:
, The international criminal tribunal for the former Yugoslavia was instituted in 1993 and ran until 2017.
This was the first since the Nuremberg trials.
Its aim was to 'spear head the shift from impunity to accountability'
By the time it has closed, it has totally convicted and sentenced 90 war criminals, ranging from low-
ranking soldiers to senior figures. Radovan Karadzic, former president of Bosnian Serb republic, he was
sentenced to 40 years in prison for the 1995 Srebrenica massacre.
Cambodia:
Established in conjunction with UN in 1997. It has tried members of the murderous Khmer rouge
government.(1975-79) which was responsible for deaths of 2 million people. The court handed out 3 life
imprisonments.
It has engaged many Cambodians into understanding what happened in their country during this period.
Rwanda:
investigated in which 800,000 Tutsis were murdered, and opened its first case in 1997. They convicted
61 individuals being complicit of genocide, including former prime minister; Jean Kambanda, who
became the first head of government to be convicted on genocide charges.
Sierra Leone:
Established in 2022, UN established special court to try those who committed atrocities during the 10-
year civil war. During 1990s, president Charles Taylor had supported opposition groups in their attempts
to gain control of diamond mines, leading to carnage, in which revolutionary united front and allied
criminal gangs murdered or hacked off limbs of their victims.
By 1999, 50,000 had died.
2012, sentenced Taylor to 50 years' imprisonment for complicity to civil war atrocities.
____________________________________________________________________________________
Update:
"I don’t need international law" - Donald Trump, asked by a journalist in oval office following 2026
Venezuela intervention.
West's adversaries are influenced only by force or by the threat of force.
"international law has always been toothless against the world's leading powers"
Criticisms of recent tribunals:
