Topic: Universal Jurisdiction in Crimes against Humanity
Country: Portugal
Topic page: background guide and all position papers All Portugal position papers GLIMUN 2011 committees
The UN must be prepared to confront crimes against humanity as they affect the international community. One of the possible causes of a nation’s inaction in the face of crimes against humanity is that the nation in which the crimes were committed potentially could not afford an investigation and trial to convict the perpetrators. These circumstances are often exacerbated when a nation suffers from a great conflict or war.
A second possible cause of inaction to stop crimes against humanity is that the rulers of the nation have no incentive to prosecute the perpetrators. The ruling leaders could have party or familial relations with the criminal, so they might halt the investigation to prevent their ally from losing power.
When crimes against humanity occur, the international community has a responsibility to intervene to stop these crimes when the nation in which the atrocities occur does not act. To justify intervention, a crime must be so detestable that it violates humanity, not just the laws of a particular nation. However, different states have different ideas of when intervention is necessary, and the guidelines that should govern intervention must be that the state with the official right to try the accused is not acting and there must be sufficient evidence that the crimes in question are being committed.
If a state is harboring the person accused of committing crimes against humanity, the state in question has the duty to prosecute the perpetrator. When a state is inadequately equipped or unwilling to protect its people and the people of neighboring nations, the international community should help with the costs of the investigation and prosecution. It is inexcusable to not prosecute human rights abuses due to insufficient financial resources in a state.
As a member of NATO, we support international organizations intervening to stop massive human rights abuses. However, we do not support unilateral human rights interventions, as this could lead to nations pursuing their national interests marauding under the banner of human rights interventions. The international community must balance a respect for national sovereignty with the responsibility to protect against large-scale human rights abuses. In cases like Kosovo, international organizations like NATO had to step in to protect national sovereignty, and this is the way that we believe situations under these circumstances should be handled. International organizations, organizations such as the UN, NATO, the African Union, and the European Union, should all be used to protect the balance between national sovereignty and assisting in the prevention of human rights abuses. By utilizing these organizations, the intervention will carry an international mandate that will lend legitimacy to the operation and hold the nations providing troops and supplies accountable to the larger community.
