View previous stories
	International Criminal Court issues warrants for first Darfur war crimes suspects by UN News / AFP   2 May 2007 (UN News)   The International Criminal Court (ICC) today issued its first warrants for war crimes and crimes against humanity in Sudan’s conflict-wracked Darfur region, giving the country’s Government responsibility for the arrest of a Sudanese minister and a militia commander. The court’s Pre-Trial Chamber I issued warrants of arrest for Ahmad Muhammad Harun, former Minister of State for the Interior of the Government of Sudan and currently Minister of State for Humanitarian Affairs, and Janjaweed militia leader Ali Muhammad Al Abd-Al-Rahman, also known as Ali Kushayb.   “As the territorial State, the Government of the Sudan has a legal duty to arrest Ahmad Harun and Ali Kushayb,” ICC Prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo said, adding, “This is the International Criminal Court’s decision and the Government has to respect it.”   The two men are accused of targeting civilians in attacks on four villages in West Darfur between August 2003 and March 2004, according to the warrant that outlines multiple counts of personal responsibility for murder, pillaging and rape for each.   “In his public speeches, Ahmad Harun not only demonstrated that he knew that the Militia/Janjaweed were attacking civilians and pillaging towns and villages, but also personally encouraging the commission of such illegal acts,” the judges concluded.   It alleges that Ali Kushayb, leader of the Janjaweed in the Wadi Salih, “enlisted fighters, armed, funded and provided supplies to the Militia /Janjaweed under his command thereby intentionally contributing to the commissions of the crimes.” The Court noted that he “personally participated in some of the attacks against civilians.”   According to the Court, in early 2003, Mr. Harun was appointed head of the “Darfur Security desk,” where his main task was to manage and personally recruit, fund and arm the Janjaweed militia – forces that would ultimately number in the tens of thousands.   The communiqué emphasizes that the case highlights the connection between a high Government figure and a powerful Janjaweed leader, and shows the underlying operational system that enabled massive crimes against civilians who were known not to be involved in the conflict.   The issuance of the warrants comes amid increasing international efforts to stop the bloodshed and improve humanitarian assistance in Darfur, where more than 200,000 people have been killed and at least 2 million others forced to flee their homes since 2003.   Despite numerous recent attacks against relief workers in Darfur, the humanitarian community continues to explore ways to increase its access and resume activities in hard-to-reach areas, the UN Mission in Sudan (UNMIS) reported today.   Also, in an effort to further facilitate humanitarian activities, Sudanese Government and UN officials met with representatives of the European Commission, Jordan and international non-governmental organizations (NGOs) at the Ministry for Humanitarian affairs in Khartoum.   2.5.2007. (AFP)   The International Criminal Court (ICC) has ordered the arrests of a Sudanese minister and a Janjaweed militia leader on charges of murder, torture and rape.   The two men face a long list of 42 and 50 charges of crimes against humanity and war crimes respectively.   In court documents released today the judges said there were "reasonable grounds" to conclude that the pair was "criminally responsible" for crimes including torture, mass rape and the forced displacement of entire villages during a series of attacks in western Darfur in 2003 and 2004.   Khartoum was quick to reject the warrants, saying the court had no jurisdiction in the matter.   ICC chief prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo hailed the judges decision as "a big and important step ahead". "These two will have to face justice, they will be in the dock, in two months or two years...they know that," he said. Mr Moreno-Ocampo focused his 20-month investigation on events alleged to have occurred between 2003 and 2004, the most violent period in the crisis.   The Arab Janjaweed, armed and backed by the Sudanese government, are accused of the worst violence involving attacks on civilians of black African origin. Their offensive started after a rebellion against Khartoum.   "The government of the Sudan has a legal duty to arrest Ahmed Haroun and Ali Kosheib. “This is the International Criminal Court"s decision, and the government has to respect it," the prosecution said.   Sudan meanwhile insisted that the ICC had no jurisdiction to try alleged crimes committed in Darfur. The case was referred to the ICC by a UN Security Council resolution passed on March 25, 2005.   The international community has been urging Sudan to accept the deployment of a robust UN peacekeeping force in Darfur to prop up the embattled African Union contingent which has been deployed there since 2004.   "The judges decision clearly shifts the burden on Sudan to adhere to its responsibilities as it must under the Security Council resolution," Richard Dicker of Human Rights Watch said. Human Rights Watch called on the Security Council "to monitor Sudan"s conduct and insist it hands over the suspects as required".   It also called on other international organisations involved in the region, such as the Arab League and the African Union, to ensure Khartoum complies with its obligations to the ICC. If the men are handed over to the ICC there will first be a confirmation of charges hearing, where judges will have to decide if there is enough evidence to proceed to an actual trial.
	States failing to regulate corporations to protect human rights by Bill Baue Policy Innovations   April 2007   Ruggie report says Voluntary Human Rights Initiatives set stage for Binding Global Standards.   Harvard Professor John Ruggie recently released a much-anticipated report in fulfillment of his two-year mandate as Special Representative to the Secretary-General on business and human rights.   Prof. Ruggie expresses some frustration (felt more sharply by victims of human rights abuses and those in the human rights advocacy community) over failing to find legally binding international human rights standards that apply directly to corporations. However, international law does require national governments to hold corporations accountable for human rights abuses, an area Prof. Ruggie finds lacking.   "The report is huge because it''s the first evidence-based analysis and survey compiling what business and governments are doing on human rights," said Susan Aaronson, a professor at the George Washington University School of Business and author of the upcoming book Trade Imbalance: The Struggle to Weigh Human Rights Concerns in Policymaking. "One of the most shocking findings in Ruggie''s report is that states have not met their duty to regulate corporations to protect human rights."   "Companies are going to increasingly understand that they need to lobby states to set more clear regulation on human rights—they did it on corruption, and more recently on climate change and greenhouse gas emissions," Prof. Aaronson told SocialFunds.com. "The best way to have stable economic growth is to have clear international standards."   In addition to assessing "hard law" requirements, Prof. Ruggie also examines so-called "soft law" mechanisms, or those that "derive normative force through recognition of social expectations." Foremost among these are what Prof. Ruggie characterizes as "hybrid" multi-stakeholder voluntary initiatives.   Prof. Ruggie cites three as representing best practice: the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) whereby companies disclose payments to host governments, the Kimberley Process that seeks to stem the flow of conflict diamonds, and the Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights that promotes human rights impact assessments (HRIAs) in the extractive sector. However, Prof. Ruggie finds these self-regulation schemes lacking in accountability.   "John''s report got the balance about right on voluntary initiatives, which represent a double-edged sword," said Bennett Freeman, senior vice president for social research and policy at the Calvert Group, a socially responsible investing (SRI) firm. Mr. Freeman was instrumental in creating the Voluntary Principles when he served as deputy assistant Secretary of State for the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor (DRL).   "We''ve got to push national governments to further codify and enforce laws related to business responsibility for human rights, but that can''t be an excuse for slacking on hardening these voluntary initiatives on accountability mechanisms on the one hand or substituting for international binding standards on the other," says Freeman.   Prof. Ruggie suggests that voluntary initiatives are drawing a blueprint of the architecture for binding standards.   "As they strengthen their accountability mechanisms, they also begin to blur the lines between the strictly voluntary and mandatory spheres for participants," Prof. Ruggie writes. "Once in, exiting can be costly."   Just as participation can be self-reinforcing, so too can accountability be self-imposed. Prof. Ruggie cites the efficacy of human rights impact assessments.   "Several SRI funds strongly promote human rights impact assessments coupled with community engagement and dialogue," Prof. Ruggie writes, referring to a letter submitted to him by faith-based institutional investors and SRI members of the Interfaith Coalition on Corporate Responsibility (ICCR).   "However, relatively few firms conduct these assessments routinely—and only a handful seem ever to have done a fully fledged human rights impact assessment (HRIA), in contrast to including selected human rights criteria in broader social/environmental assessments."   "And apparently only one company—BP—has ever made public even a summary of an HRIA," writes Prof. Ruggie, referring to a document co-authored by Mr. Bennett assessing the Tangguh LNG Project for BP Indonesia.   "No single measure would yield more immediate results in the human rights performance of firms than conducting such assessments where appropriate."   If HRIAs are so effective, why are they so rare?   "There aren''t more HRIAs happening because not enough of a fire has been lit under companies in industries where they are particularly necessary," Mr. Freeman told SocialFunds.com. "I would like to think HRIAs will become standard operating procedure over the next decade not only for extractive industries but even in beverage industries, for example."   Voluntary initiatives exhibit four additional blind spots, according to Prof. Ruggie: They currently do not apply to small and medium-sized enterprises, or to developing country firms, or to state-owned enterprises in emerging economies, and determined laggards find ways to avoid scrutiny. Despite these problems with voluntary initiatives, he still sees his mandate as pushing society toward the tipping point where voluntary initiatives blur into becoming standard practice.   "His comment about getting to the tipping point I think reveals his thinking about the strategic question, How do we secure better compliance with global human rights standards affecting business?" states Mort Winston, chair of the department of philosophy and religion and director of the Center for the Study of Social Justice at The College of New Jersey, and former chair of Amnesty International USA. "His view, which I share, is that it is necessary to get to a critical mass of companies that have adopted and are practicing voluntary CSR before one has any hope of generating the political will among nation states to enact global legal obligations that are directly binding on corporations."   Prof. Ruggie ends the report by not-so-coyly noting he "would welcome a one-year extension to complete the assignment" by submitting "recommendations in his next (and final) report to the Council," a sentiment almost universally shared in the human rights advocacy community.   "In the likely and hopeful event that his mandate is extended, there will be an expectation that he will outline broadly applicable standards that will address what he calls the protection gaps for victims and predictability gaps for companies," states Mr. Freeman.   (This article republished from SocialFunds.com with kind permission). Visit the related web page
	View more stories