The Initiatives and Practices of Responsibility to Protect

• Main Authors: Lin, Shih Hsien, 林士先
• Other Authors: Chen, Chun I
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/03739782140441206163

碩士 === 國立政治大學 === 外交研究所 === 102 === The main purpose of this essay is to review the background of the development and practice of the concept "responsibility to protect" (R2P). In the history of mankind, wars and armed conflicts have never disappeared. And with the evolution of the times, the laws of the protection of human rights norms and the use of force are also more complete. But after the end of Cold War, the international community was suffered from various armed conflicts, making the international community must rethink how to deal with these new challenges. The concept of "R2P "was first introduced by Canada's "Intervention and State Sovereignty International Committee"(ICISS), which was established in response to the proposal of the then UN Secretary General Kofi Annan. The core concept of responsibility to protect is the sovereign state has the responsibility to protect its people from being suffered of genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. And when the state is lacking such capability or unwilling to take the responsibility of protection of its people, Then this responsibility should be shifted to the international community. However the initiative "responsibility to protect" is contradicted to the traditional international law principles such as: “non-interference in internal affairs", "sovereign equality" and "prohibit the use of force". Faced with this problem, the main purpose of this paper is to review the development and evolution of the concept of "responsibility to protect", and hope that through the process of case study to view the practice of the concept of "responsibility to protect". And in the conclusion of this essay, the author will discussed the controversy of between human rights and state sovereignty, the legal basis and the current legal status of the concept of "responsibility to protect".