Koncepcja „odpowiedzialności za ochronę” w działaniach prewencyjnych Narodów Zjednoczonych

• Authors: Tomasz Lachowski

Title variants

EN

The use of “The Responsibility to Protect” doctrine under the United Nations preventive actions

• Languages of publication: PL

Abstracts

EN

The “post-cold war” world challenges the big issue of new threats to the international security system. Most of them are in connection to the phenomenon of fragile, disintegrated states (known as “failed states”), in which government does not control the state’s territory and deliver political goods to its inhabitants. This situation, when state loses its exclusive right to enforce law on its territory leads to the ongoing internal conflicts generally based on ethnic or religious tensions and threatens the local, regional and, possibly, global security. The paper looks at the matter of preventive diplomacy as one of the most successful tools in preventing the violent conflicts and mass atrocities. Author emphasises the need of the use of the mechanisms of preventive diplomacy not only enshrined in the Charter of The United Nations (mainly in Chapters VI and VIII of the Charter), but also those that can be described as a “measures to build confidence” among members of international community. The paper also examines the existence of the new concept of “The Responsibility to Protect” (R2P) within the tools and mechanisms of prevention. R2P is a holistic concept, which includes responsibility to prevent, react and rebuild, what is more, pointing out the primary responsibility of the state to protect its population and stressing that only if state is unwilling or unable to comply with its obligations of protection, the international community shall act in its place. To conclude, R2P, seen as a historical, new approach of international law, based on the principle that state sovereignty implies responsibility, can become an efficient response to the issue of deadly internal conflicts, especially on the level of prevention.

Keywords

PL

Prawo międzynarodowe; dyplomacja prewencyjna; ONZ

EN

International Law; Preventive diplomacy; United Nations

• Publisher: Łódzkie Towarzystwo Naukowe, Stowarzyszenie
• Journal: Studia Prawno-Ekonomiczne
• Year: 2011
• Volume: LXXXIV (84)
• Pages: 167-190

Dates

published

2011

Contributors

author

Tomasz Lachowski

• Katedra Prawa Międzynarodowego i Stosunków Międzynarodowych, Uniwersytet Łódzki

References

• Dokumenty
• Report of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty, The Responsibility to Protect, Ottawa, December 2001.
• Report of the Secretary General, Early warning, assessment and responsibility to protect, United Nations General Assembly 2010.
• Report of the Secretary General, Implementing Responsibility to Protect, United Nations General Assembly 2009.
• Report of the Secretary-General, Prevention of armed conflict, United Nations General Assembly Security Council 2001.
• Report of the Secretary General’s High Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change, A More Secure World: Our Shared Responsibility, United Nations 2004.
• Opracowania
• Bilková V., The Responsibilty to protect – New beginning or end of the road for humanitarian intervention?, Czech Yearbook of International Law 2010/1.
• Deng F. M., Zartman I. W., Rotchild D., Sovereignty as Responsibility: Conflict Management in Africa, New York 1996.
• Fleischer P., Dyplomaci w mundurach, Stos. Międzynar. 2010/67–68.
• Ghali-Boutros B., An Agenda for Peace, New York 1992.
• Hamilton R. J., The Responsibility to Protect: from Document to Doctrine – But what of implementation?, Harvard Human Rights Journal 2006/19.
• Kranz J., Między wojną a pokojem: świat współczesny wobec użycia siły zbrojnej, w: Kranz J. (red.), Świat współczesny wobec użycia siły zbrojnej: dylematy prawa i polityki, Warszawa 2009.
• Łoś R., Reginia-Zacharski J., Współczesne konflikty zbrojne, Warszawa 2010.
• Malendowski W., Spory – konflikty zbrojne – terroryzm. Dysfunkcjonalne czynniki współczesnych stosunków międzynarodowych, Poznań 2006.
• Mickiewicz P., Współczesne wyzwania bezpieczeństwa europejskiego, Bibl. Wszechnicy DSWE TWP 2006/3.
• Pietraś M. (red.), Międzynarodowe stosunki polityczne, Lublin 2006.
• Romiszewicz R., The New Challenge: Weak and Failed States, w: Rotfeld A.D. (ed.), Towards the UN Reform, New Threats, New Responses, Warszawa 2004.
• Sokalski H. J., Odrobina prewencji, dorobek dyplomacji prewencyjnej ONZ w Macedonii, Warszawa 2007.
• Stankiewicz W., Dyplomacja prewencyjna jako środek utrzymania ładu na kontynencie europejskim, Ann. UMCS 2009/XVI/1.
• Sutor J., Pokojowe załatwianie sporów międzynarodowych, Wrocław, Warszawa, Kraków, Gdańsk 1979.
• Symonides J., Przyjęcie zasady „odpowiedzialności za ochronę” w procesie reformowania Narodów Zjednoczonych, w: Menkes J. (red.), Prawo międzynarodowe: problemy i wyzwania. Księga pamiątkowa dla prof. R. Sonnenfeld-Tomporek, Warszawa 2006.
• Thakur R., The United Nations, Peace and Security: From Collective Security to Responsibility to Protect, Cambridge University Press 2006.
• Zajadło J., Koncepcja odpowiedzialności za ochronę (Responsibility to Protect) – nowa filozofia prawa międzynarodowego?, w: Kranz J. (red.), Świat współczesny wobec użycia siły zbrojnej: dylematy prawa i polityki, Warszawa 2009.
• Strony internetowe
• Bellamy A.J., Conflict prevention and responsibility to protect, Global Governance, April–June 2008 (dostępne na stronie http://findarticles.com).
• Luck E.C., United Nations and the Responsibility to Protect, Policy Analysis Brief, The Stanley Foundation, August 2008 (dostępne na stronie http://stanleyfoundation.org).
• Thakur R., UN breathes life into ‘responsibility to protect’, Toronto Star, Toronto 2011 (dostępne na stronie http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorialopinion/article/957664-un-breathes-life-into-responsibility-to-protect).

Identifiers

ISSN

0081-6841