Govt explains UN vote
The Namibian delegation to the UN will explain the country's stance on genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity during the debate that it did not want on the General Assembly's agenda.
The government has reiterated its commitment to the cause of human rights and ending suffering, and that it must be done through recognised bodies such as the United Nations Security Council.
This reassurance comes after the country's leadership was reproached for voting against a motion to discuss “the responsibility to protect and the prevention of genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity” during the 72nd General Assembly Session in New York.
In a statement issued yesterday, international relations minister Netumbo Nandi-Ndaitwah emphasised that it was merely a “procedural vote” and not a reflection of Namibia's stance on human rights.
“Namibia will express her views and position on this issue during that debate, and will then decide on how to vote depending on the content of the resolution,” she said.
“Namibia remains committed to defend human rights and to end human suffering, but through globally supported and internationally recognised multilateral bodies and institutions. We support the premise of the Responsibility to Protect, but through the UN Security Council.”
The minister further said like many other countries, Namibia was concerned that this concept could be used to undermine the UN Security Council, which had the mandate to “maintain international peace and security”.
“Furthermore, to date there is no legal instrument in place to back R2P. The United Nations relies on its Human Rights Council and other international mechanisms to deal with issues of gross human rights abuses, war crimes and genocide.”
According to a report by the UN Security Council, the concept commonly referred to as R2P recognises that states have the primary responsibility to protect populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity.
“One of the principal ways in which we can do so is by strengthening accountability for the implementation of the responsibility to protect and by ensuring rigorous and open scrutiny of practice, based on agreed principles. Accountability ties authorities to their populations and individual states to the international community,” Nandi-Ndaitwah emphasised.
Only 21 countries voted against the motion while 113 countries pushed for the discussion to be placed on the General Assembly's agenda. Seventeen countries abstained from voting, which means the discussion will take place.
The R2P also recognises that there is a collective responsibility to encourage and assist countries to fulfil their primary responsibility and to use diplomatic, humanitarian and other peaceful means in accordance with Chapters VI and VIII of the United Nations Charter to protect populations from atrocities.
Meanwhile, the Unite to End Genocide website stipulates that the R2P expects international communities to prevent, react, and to rebuild afflicted countries.
This essentially means Namibia, like the rest of the world, will be obliged to spend time and resources on ensuring that conflicts and crises are prevented or halted before genocide or mass atrocities occur.
Unite to End Genocide further emphasises that when reacting to a mass atrocity, the international community is always expected to start out with the least intrusive and coercive measures possible.
“Military intervention should not be used unless absolutely necessary. R2P does recognise that sometimes military intervention is necessary, but asserts that military intervention should only be used if there is just cause and all precautionary principles are observed.
“Should military intervention occur, the global community has a responsibility to rebuild after the intervention has occurred and aid in recovery and reconciliation, as well as directly address the cause and necessity for military intervention in the first place,” the lobby group says.
JEMIMA BEUKES
This reassurance comes after the country's leadership was reproached for voting against a motion to discuss “the responsibility to protect and the prevention of genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity” during the 72nd General Assembly Session in New York.
In a statement issued yesterday, international relations minister Netumbo Nandi-Ndaitwah emphasised that it was merely a “procedural vote” and not a reflection of Namibia's stance on human rights.
“Namibia will express her views and position on this issue during that debate, and will then decide on how to vote depending on the content of the resolution,” she said.
“Namibia remains committed to defend human rights and to end human suffering, but through globally supported and internationally recognised multilateral bodies and institutions. We support the premise of the Responsibility to Protect, but through the UN Security Council.”
The minister further said like many other countries, Namibia was concerned that this concept could be used to undermine the UN Security Council, which had the mandate to “maintain international peace and security”.
“Furthermore, to date there is no legal instrument in place to back R2P. The United Nations relies on its Human Rights Council and other international mechanisms to deal with issues of gross human rights abuses, war crimes and genocide.”
According to a report by the UN Security Council, the concept commonly referred to as R2P recognises that states have the primary responsibility to protect populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity.
“One of the principal ways in which we can do so is by strengthening accountability for the implementation of the responsibility to protect and by ensuring rigorous and open scrutiny of practice, based on agreed principles. Accountability ties authorities to their populations and individual states to the international community,” Nandi-Ndaitwah emphasised.
Only 21 countries voted against the motion while 113 countries pushed for the discussion to be placed on the General Assembly's agenda. Seventeen countries abstained from voting, which means the discussion will take place.
The R2P also recognises that there is a collective responsibility to encourage and assist countries to fulfil their primary responsibility and to use diplomatic, humanitarian and other peaceful means in accordance with Chapters VI and VIII of the United Nations Charter to protect populations from atrocities.
Meanwhile, the Unite to End Genocide website stipulates that the R2P expects international communities to prevent, react, and to rebuild afflicted countries.
This essentially means Namibia, like the rest of the world, will be obliged to spend time and resources on ensuring that conflicts and crises are prevented or halted before genocide or mass atrocities occur.
Unite to End Genocide further emphasises that when reacting to a mass atrocity, the international community is always expected to start out with the least intrusive and coercive measures possible.
“Military intervention should not be used unless absolutely necessary. R2P does recognise that sometimes military intervention is necessary, but asserts that military intervention should only be used if there is just cause and all precautionary principles are observed.
“Should military intervention occur, the global community has a responsibility to rebuild after the intervention has occurred and aid in recovery and reconciliation, as well as directly address the cause and necessity for military intervention in the first place,” the lobby group says.
JEMIMA BEUKES
Comments
Namibian Sun
No comments have been left on this article