From August 1994 until February 1995 I served as an Australian Defence Force legal officer with the Australian Medical Support Force which was a component of the United Nations Assistance Mission for Rwanda. During this deployment three duties I engaged with still stand out for me 25 years later: investigating the mass grave site at Ntarama, the use of force to defend the mandate and individual self-defence, and detention. This paper, in large part, engages with my reflections of these issues in the context of my military law practice, and academic research and writing. I conclude by making six observations from my experiences in Rwanda.
Since 2003, the un has sought to develop responses to combat sexual exploitation and abuse by un personnel serving on peace operations. Almost 15 years later, the un is still facing challenges in dealing effectively with allegations of sexual exploitation and abuse committed by peacekeepers. With the adoption of Security Council Resolution 2272 (2016) on 11 March 2016; the un Secretary-General’s reports of 16 February and 23 June 2016; and General Assembly Resolution A/res/70/286 in 2016; the un appears to have stepped up its efforts to combat sexual exploitation and abuse by peacekeepers. The first part of this paper seeks to outline the development of the un’s strategy to deal with sexual exploitation and abuse by peacekeepers. The second part identifies the key issues that underlie the un’s strategy. The third part reflects on three components of that strategy: the zero tolerance policy for sexual exploitation and abuse by peacekeepers, the accountability of un peacekeepers where allegations of sexual exploitation and abuse have been substantiated, and reparations for victims of sexual exploitation and abuse by un peacekeepers.
A key purpose of this article is to contribute to the development of a United Nations detention policy by examining two issues: (1) the definition of detention; and (2) the categorisation of detainees. This article examines the practice of United Nations peacekeepers taking and handling detainees and in that context develops a definition of detention that focuses on the nexus between the deprivation of an individual’s liberty and their consent in relation to that deprivation. The practice of United Nations peacekeepers suggests that there are at least two categories of detainees – those that are detained because they are suspected criminals, and those detained because they are considered a security threat to the operation.
The primary purpose of this article is to introduce the Copenhagen Process Principles and Guidelines so as to better understand how they relate to detentions in military operations. The Copenhagen Principles and Guidelines were “welcomed” by a number of states in October 2012 and concern the taking and handling of detainees in non-international armed conflicts and peace operations.
The Copenhagen Process Principles and Guidelines on the Handling of Detainees in International Military Operations are intended to contribute both to the humane treatment of detainees and the effectiveness of military operations. This article seeks to stimulate discussion concerning the Principles and Guidelines. It also provides the international community with a better understanding of a very successful process for developing normative standards or soft law. Finally, it explains some of the main issues dealt with during the Process, and some of the key aspects of the provisions contained in the Principles and Guidelines.
This paper examines the law concerning the privileges and immunities of international police serving in UN peace operations. It describes the legal framework concerning privileges and immunities in UN peace operations and focuses on the key legal privileges and immunities that UN police are granted. More specifically the paper describes the immunity of UN police from criminal and civil jurisdiction of the host State.