OBSERVARE

Universidade Autónoma de Lisboa

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

Vol. 10, Nº. 1 (May-October 2019), pp. 29-43

THE RELEVANCE OF HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL SPECIAL SESSIONS: THE

PROTECTION OF THE CIVILIAN POPULATION IN CURRENT INTERNAL ARMED

CONFLICTS

Sónia Roque

sroque@live.com.pt

PhD student in International Relations at the Faculty of Economics, University of Coimbra-Center

for Social Studies (FEUC-CES, Portugal). Scholarship Holder of the Foundation for Science and

Technology.

Abstract

This article focuses on the analysis of the first decade (2006-2016) of the Human Rights

Council (HRC) work. We analyze particularly the relevance of the HRC special sessions in what

concerns to the protection of civilians in current non-international armed conflicts (NIAC). The

HRC, that replaced the Commission on Human Rights, was established by the United Nations

General Assembly (UNGA) Resolution 60/251 adopted on 15 March 2006. This institutional

reshaping intended to transform the HRC into an action-oriented body, in an attempt to give

a more effective and rapid response to global human rights (HR) protection challenges.

Following the 2004 Report of the High-Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change, the

United Nations General-Secretary Kofi Annan drew attention to the fact that a decisive

moment for the United Nations (UN) had began. Kofi Annan highlighted in particular the need

to fulfill the aspirations established in the United Nations Charter (UNC), and emphasized in

general terms the challenges facing HR protection, particularizing the protection of the civilian

population given the complexity of our days armed conflicts. Therefore the HRC appears in

this line of institutional restructuring.

The special sessions are one of the working methods of the HRC which allows the consideration

of gross HR violations that need attention and require an urgent decision-making. The author

argues that the analysis of these sessions is particularly relevant, because it allows us, on the

one hand to examine which situations were analyzed, and on the other hand the different

positions regarding this decision-making method that has not always proved consensual. I

also argue that this decision-making procedure reflects some opportunities and faces

challenges in trying to deal with the different perspectives of the actors within the HRC.

Keywords

Human Rights Council; Special Sessions; Protection; Civilian Population; Internal Armed

Conflicts

How to cite this article

Roque, Sónia (2019). "The relevance of Human Rights Council special sessions: the protection

of the civilian population in current internal armed conflicts". JANUS.NET e-journal of

International Relations, Vol. 10, N.º 1, May-October 2019. Consulted [online] on the date of

the last visit, https://doi.org/10.26619/1647-7251.10.1.3

Article received on May 24, 2018 and accepted for publication on September 4, 2018

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

Vol. 10, Nº. 1 (May-October 2019), pp. 29-43

The relevance of Human Rights Council special sessions: the protection of the civilian population in current

internal armed conflicts

Sónia Roque

THE RELEVANCE OF HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL SPECIAL SESSIONS: THE

PROTECTION OF THE CIVILIAN POPULATION IN CURRENT INTERNAL ARMED

CONFLICTS

Sónia Roque

Introduction

The HRC was established by the UNGA Resolution A/RES/60/251 adopted on 15 March

2006 replacing the Commission on Human Rights. The Commission had been criticized

for being a highly politicized body (Sheeran and Rodley, 2013: 745), in which countries

were seeking seats to avoid the discussion of their HR internal situation, and the approval

of measures such as the appointment of fact-finding missions, commissions of inquiry or

even the adoption of sanctions, by which the mission that gave rise to it “the protection

of the victims of HR abuses” became a protective shield for the offenders (Lauren, 2007:

307).

It is therefore not surprising that when talking about the need for more comprehensive

reforms in the UN system, special attention was devoted to replacing the Commission on

Human Rights and to the importance of HR for collective security (Lauren, 2007: 330-

331), as discussed after the World Summit, in the report of the High-Level Panel on

Threats, Challenges and Change entitled “A more secure world: our shared

responsibility”, as well as in the report of the United Nations Secretary-General (UNSG)

Kofi Annan “In larger freedom: towards development, security and human rights for all”.

On this issue Cox (2010: 95) emphasized the fact that the UNSG, the UN High-Level

Panel, and a growing number of Member States have lobbied in such a way that the

Commission began to be seen by many as a problematic institution that needed to be

replaced. As the World Summit in 2005 demonstrated, the idea of replacing the

Commission on Human Rights took over the UN, leading to a constant pressure to replace

this body that States may have perceived as a reputation cost if they did not support a

new institution. The HRC was therefore established in this sense as an action-oriented

body as set out in Resolution 60/251. Its status was also elevated to a subsidiary body

of the UNGA, which gave to this body greater powers of action and a higher autonomy

as advocated by the UNSG.

The translation of this article was funded by national funds through FCT - Fundação para a Ciência e

a Tecnologia - as part of OBSERVARE project with the reference UID/CPO/04155/2019, with the aim of

publishing Janus.net. Text translated by Cláudia Tavares.

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

Vol. 10, Nº. 1 (May-October 2019), pp. 29-43

The relevance of Human Rights Council special sessions: the protection of the civilian population in current

internal armed conflicts

Sónia Roque

From a constructivist point of view, the negotiation process and the establishment of the

HRC itself denote the influence that agents can have on the structure of the United

Nations (Ruggie, 1998; Wendt, 1995). Since we are dealing with an intergovernmental

process the role of the UNSG, the role of the Experts appointed by the SGNU and the

position of the Member States responsible for the decision-making were central in the

whole process.

Among the working methods of the HRC is the holding of special sessions which take

place whenever 1/3 of the Member States consider that there is a flagrant situation of

HR abuses that require attention and an urgent decision-making (A/RES/60/251: 4). This

method was sought as a way to counteract the political blockade that had begun to

discredit the work of the Commission, which allows us to infer about the importance of

these sessions for the protection of HR.

The convening of these sessions was also made more flexible compared to what

happened in the Commission. Besides analyzing the situation in specific countries, it is

also possible to hold sessions on topics on the field of HR (thematic sessions). Another

innovation was the reduction of the number of States needed to convene these sessions,

which allows urgent issues to be discussed in the HRC more easily (ICRC, 2008: 490).

All these innovations were aimed to respond quickly to HR urgent needs.

Special Sessions

Between 2006 and 2016, the first decade of the HRC work, which can be considered as

a milestone for the analysis of its performance, in which all expectations were put into

the work of this new body, were held 26

special sessions. This reveals on the one hand,

the greater capacity of performance and analysis of the HRC and, on the other hand, the

greater facility of convening these sessions. These sessions will be analyzed from the

point of view of their contribution to the protection of civilians in NIAC, taking into account

the initiative of their convocation, the contributions and positions for the decision-making

and the final result of the session in order to infer about the fulfillment of these

expectations.

Sudan

The first case in the ambit of our analysis to be taken before the HRC was the HR situation

in Sudan. This was the HRC fourth special session convened by Finland (A/HRC/S-4/1).

The session was supported by States from the various continents including Cuba, Russia,

China, India and Ecuador, which show greater susceptibility to interference in States

internal affairs. This could lead to a good prognosis for the HRC work. Nevertheless this

session had the opposition from the State concerned, Sudan that however participated

in the session, as did all States whose internal situation was analyzed. The States position

indicates, on the one hand, the acceptance of the competence of international bodies in

which States decide to participate, in this case, the HRC, and on the other hand, their

attempt to influence the decision-making of these bodies.

7 of these sessions referred to the Israel-Palestine conflict characterized by the UN as an international

conflict (TIJ, 2004: 7-8). The 7th, 10th and 13th sessions do not refer to armed conflict situations.

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

Vol. 10, Nº. 1 (May-October 2019), pp. 29-43

The relevance of Human Rights Council special sessions: the protection of the civilian population in current

internal armed conflicts

Sónia Roque

The information presented by the Independent Experts, the HRC Special Rapporteurs and

by the UN Special Representatives is essential in these sessions and in general terms to

the HRC decision-making. They are responsible for presenting concrete information on

each situation whose credibility or veracity is difficult to challenge, since the functions of

these experts are part of a mandate given to them in the framework of the UN system

and, as such, accepted by the UN Member States. This is a fundamental component of

the HRC work. As an intergovernmental political body the independence of these Experts

from Member States is crucial in the analysis of HR situations. Although cooperation is

the essential engine of this interaction, the work and independence of these Experts

allows them to persuade States to change their positions and perceptions regarding the

various issues as analyzed by Constructivism, and in our case, in what concerns to the

protection of the civilian population

The seriousness of the HR situation in Sudan, in particular, the offenses and abuses

against civilians, had come to the attention of the Commission, but without great practical

results. At the meeting, the representative of the Commission of Inquiry on Darfur, the

UNSG Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide, the UNSG and the United Nations

High Commissioner for Human Rights (UNHCHR) emphasized the attacks on civilians who

were sometimes instigated by the government itself. The UNHCHR specifically

enumerated these HR and International Humanitarian Law (IHL) violations (torture and

other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatments; sexual violence and other abuses; the

displacement of civilians; the looting of civilian property; the obstruction of humanitarian

assistance; the threats of murder; the impediment to the return of internally displaced

persons (IDPs); arbitrary arrests and detentions).

In line with these reports, Finland, the promoter of the session, introduced the draft

resolution A/HRC/S-4/L.1 in which concern was expressed regarding the humanitarian

and HR situation in Darfur and a call was made on the end of HR and IHL violations

(A/HRC/S-4/L.1: 1-2). Alternatively, Algeria, on behalf of the African Group (AG),

presented the draft resolutions A/HRC/S-4/L.2 and A/HRC/S-4/L.3. These proposals did

not contain any recognition of HR and IHL violations despite the information given by the

Independent Experts and Finland’s proposal. In this session as a result of the divergent

positions of Member States was approved the Decision S-4/101 adopted without a vote.

In this Decision, in general terms, the HRC Member States expressed their concern about

the humanitarian and HR situation in Darfur and decided to send a High-Level Mission to

assess the HR situation and the needs of the country in this regard (A/HRC/S-4/5: 3).

The AG's position indicates the lack of support for a strong and condemnatory action on

the situation in Darfur, which reveals at this early stage of the HRC's work a reluctance

of most States in adopting measures which could have internal implications particularly

at the criminal responsibility level. However the seriousness of the situation proven by

the information presented led to the appointment of a fact-finding mission,

demonstrating the importance of the Experts reports on the situation and the pressure

on the need to continue to monitor the humanitarian and HR situation in Sudan. The

focus on the protection of civilians in Sudan and the pressure to achieve an improvement

By civilians, as provided for in Article 50 of the I Additional Protocol to the Geneva Conventions (GC), we

mean persons who are not members of the armed forces; the civilian population comprises all persons who

are civilians. Some practice adds the condition that civilians are persons who do not participate in

hostilities (ICRC, 2005).

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

Vol. 10, Nº. 1 (May-October 2019), pp. 29-43

The relevance of Human Rights Council special sessions: the protection of the civilian population in current

internal armed conflicts

Sónia Roque

of the situation on the ground led to the analysis of the situation in regular sessions, in

which support from the govern and the AG was obtained.

South Sudan

Albania, Paraguay, the United Kingdom and the United States of America (USA)

requested a session about the HR situation in South Sudan, the HRC 26th special session

(A/HRC/S-26/1). This session had an interregional support, except from Venezuela and

South Sudan. Nevertheless South Sudan was willing to cooperate, reserving however its

sovereign right to take appropriate measures in a timely manner. This position reveals

that sovereignty remains an unavoidable point in international relations, although we

may regard cooperation as a counterweight to this situation in the sense analyzed by

Wendt (1995). According to this author the interaction in social structures (in which we

can include the HRC) can shape the identities and interests of the actors that seek also

legitimacy and international recognition.

We should begin by highlighting the independence of South Sudan from the State of

Sudan in 2011 and that despite the HR and IHL violations reported since 2006, as we

discussed on the special session on Sudan, no special session on the situation was

requested, being the regular forums considered sufficient to monitor the situation.

In the session the UNHCHR referred to HR violations in the country such as abductions,

arbitrary arrests and forced displacement and violations of civil and political rights

(freedom of movement, expression and opinion). The HR Commission in South Sudan

has denounced these offenses, including infractions against children, highlighting the

process of ethnic cleansing in the country also mentioned by the UNSG Special Adviser

on the Prevention of Genocide. The imminence of hunger; the reduction of civil society

groups and the increasing number of refugees and IDPs were also mentioned. For its

part, the Chair of the Coordination Committee of HRC Special Procedures (CCSP) referred

in particular to the sexual and gender-based violence used as a tool for ethnic cleansing

and also to the attacks on civilian infrastructures and sites; forced recruitment of

children; enforced disappearances; torture and ill-treatment and extrajudicial executions.

Taking the initiative of the decision-making the USA introduced the draft resolution

A/HRC/S-26/L.1 which was adopted without a vote in Resolution S-26/1 (A/HRC/S-26/2:

9). This shows the support of the AG in this late stage of HRC work regarding the need

of ensuring the protection of civilians. This Resolution included references to the

infractions against civilians as mentioned by the Experts. It also included the issue of the

accountability of offenders and the government’s responsibility to protect its population

from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity (A/HRC/S-

26/L.1: 2-4). The project also noted the importance of providing timely assistance and

protection to survivors of sexual and gender-based violence, taking into account the

needs of people with disabilities and referred to the restrictions on HR and fundamental

freedoms (A/HRC/S-26/L.1: 3). These references clearly link IHL to the safeguards of

International Human Rights Law (IHRL) in protecting civilians, a significant step in the

protection of civilians compared to the restrictive Decision approved in the fourth special

session.

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

Vol. 10, Nº. 1 (May-October 2019), pp. 29-43

The relevance of Human Rights Council special sessions: the protection of the civilian population in current

internal armed conflicts

Sónia Roque

Myanmar

The HR situation in Myanmar was examined at the initiative of Slovenia on the HRC fifth

special session (A/HRC/S-5/1). However this session was not supported by Myanmar,

Russia and India. This situation demonstrates that States don’t like to be targeted directly

in a specific session that blames them for failures in HR protection, but which can be

achieved under the new HRC working rules, which highlights the significance of the

structures in which States participate.

Regarding Myanmar, the Special Rapporteur on Myanmar warned about the violent

repression of peaceful demonstrations by security forces and the restrictions on the

media. Among the blatant violations were summary executions; restrictions on the

freedom of religion and expression; torture and ill-treatment; lack of independence of

judges and lawyers, as well as arbitrary arrests and detentions. The infractions were

reinforced by the information provided by the UNHCHR.

These reports were included in the draft resolution A/HRC/S-5/L.1 submitted by Portugal

on behalf of the European Union (EU) adopted without vote in the Resolution S-5/1

(A/HRC/S-5/2: 8). It was consensual to include besides the protection of the life and the

physical integrity of civilians, the need to respect HR and fundamental freedoms such as

peaceful political activities, guaranteeing also the freedom of peaceful assembly and

association and the freedom of opinion and expression, including for free and

independent media, and to ensure unhindered access to media information in Myanmar

(A/HRC/S-5/L.1: 1-2). In spite of the initial reluctance cooperation was obtained for the

resolution’s approval as well as the consensus of Myanmar, Russia and India, evidencing

the costs of reputation of States, due to the reports of the Experts and the mandate given

to the HRC in which they agree to participate.

Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC)

France had the initiative on the analysis of the HR situation in the DRC (A/HRC/S-8/1).

This was the HRC 8th special session.

In what concerns to HR violations the UNHCHR has reported in the country the occurrence

of summary or arbitrary executions; widespread abductions; looting and sexual violence

and abuses, including against IDPs, women and children. In this regard, as the facilitator

of the session, France presented, on behalf of the EU, the draft resolution A/HRC/S-8/L.1,

but after long discussions on the proposal A/HRC/S-8/L.2/Rev.2 submitted by Egypt on

behalf of the AG and the consensus reached, withdrew the draft. This allowed Resolution

S-8/1 to be adopted without a vote in order to secure a consensus regarding the

protection of civilians.

The initial proposal presented by Egypt A/HRC/S-8/L.2 was drafted in general terms,

without reference to acts of infraction. The pressure made by the promoters of the draft

resolution L.1 achieved consensus on the inclusion of the reference to offenses committed

in Kivu against civilians, in particular sexual violence, child militia recruitment and the

need for accountability for HR and IHL violations (A/HRC/S-8/L.2/Rev.1: 2). This

achievement proves the relevance of the actors identities in the HRC structure and the

mutual influence of these actors in the HRC work. The importance given to humanitarian

assistance (food, water, medicines and shelter) and to the free movement of people and

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

Vol. 10, Nº. 1 (May-October 2019), pp. 29-43

The relevance of Human Rights Council special sessions: the protection of the civilian population in current

internal armed conflicts

Sónia Roque

goods were also mentioned, going beyond the protection of the physical integrity and

dignity of civilians, increasingly consensual among States.

Sri Lanka

The HR situation in Sri Lanka was assessed at the HRC 11th special session on the

initiative of Germany (A/HRC/S-11/l). This session was supported mostly by the Western

European and Other States Group, with resistance from the countries of other continents

and from Sri Lanka. This opposition was based on the argument that this was an internal

situation of fight against terrorism.

The UNHCHR seeking to achieve progress in the protection of civilians has reported the

existence of HR and IHL violations in the country (killings; forced displacement;

destruction of property and livelihoods; lack of food, water and medical assistance and

lack of independence of national institutions). It also referred to the importance of

assisting the victims of violence that should have access to justice and remedies.

However, given the opposition to the session and in order to influence the final decision,

Sri Lanka presented the draft resolution A/HRC/S-11/L.1. In this proposal only the

offenses of the Tamil Tigers Eelam were mentioned. In the first amendment to the draft

resolution that resulted in Resolution S-11/1 (A/HRC/S-11/2: 10), there was an attempt

to reach consensus, given the refusal to accept Germany's proposal and some progress

was made. To the protection of civilians was added the responsibility of the State to

provide protection and humanitarian assistance (water, sanitation, food, medical care)

and the obligation to respect IHRL and IHL. There was evidence that the protection of

civilians was still insufficiently guaranteed by this proposal, and therefore this Resolution

did not count with the support of the States that promoted the session. A main argument

to this opposition was the fact that the infractions committed by the government were

not included in the Resolution.

Ivory Coast

The 14th special session about the HR situation in Ivory Coast was requested by Nigeria

(on behalf of the AG) and the USA (A/HRC/S-14/1: 4-5). The AG's position had been of

cooperation within the HRC. This Group tried to solve or manage the HR problems on the

Continent also through a decision-making position.

The Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights reiterated, on behalf of the UNHCHR,

the concern about HR violations in the country (repression of public meetings and

demonstrations; harassment and intimidation; arrest and arbitrary detentions; torture;

enforced disappearances; extrajudicial killings; forced displacements; violations of the

freedoms of information, expression and the freedom of movement) which hindered the

provision of humanitarian services and assistance.

Following the initiative to convene the meeting Nigeria, on behalf of the AG, introduced

the draft resolution A/HRC/S-14/L.1. This proposal was adopted consensually in

Resolution S-14/1 (A/HRC/S-14/1: 6-7). On the Ivory Coast HR situation, HR and IHL

violations committed by all parties to the conflict were considered as reported by the

Special Representative, including against fundamental rights and freedoms such as the

freedom of information and expression. The impact of the conflict on the provision of

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

Vol. 10, Nº. 1 (May-October 2019), pp. 29-43

The relevance of Human Rights Council special sessions: the protection of the civilian population in current

internal armed conflicts

Sónia Roque

humanitarian assistance, including the socio-economic impact on the population was

another important issue. The protection level granted by the Resolution goes beyond the

protection that would be conferred under IHL according to common Article 3 to the GC

(the only one accepted by all States in NIAC), specifying also the rights of IDPs and

refugees, including civil, political, economic and social rights that guarantee the well-

being and subsistence of the population. These rights are increasingly consensual as

evidenced in previous sessions.

Libya

The HR situation in Libya that had come under consideration at the UN was also taken

into account on the initiative of Hungary on behalf of the EU at the HRC 15th special

session (A/HRC/S-15/1: 6).

On the protection of civilians, UNHCHR and the CCSP have warned about the violent

repression against peaceful protestors with mass killings; arbitrary arrests and

detentions; torture of protestors; blockages to residential areas; impediment to medical

and humanitarian assistance; use of foreign combatants (mercenaries) and violations of

the fundamental rights and freedoms of the population.

On the initiative of the promoter of the session was presented draft resolution A/HRC/S-

15/L.1, project that was adopted without a vote in Resolution S-15/l (A/HRC/S-l5/l: 10-

11). The draft resolution contained an explicit reference to offenses against civilians

according to the information submitted by the Experts, including on fundamental rights

and freedoms violations (A/HRC/S-15/L.1: 1-2). Although there was no reference to

socio-economic rights unlike we have seen on Ivory Coast´s Resolution, or to the use of

mercenaries. Given the seriousness of the situation it was decided to establish a

Commission of Inquiry to investigate IHRL violations in Libya in order to ensure

accountability (A/HRC/S-15/L.1: 2). On Libya we find a consensual that could not be

reached on Syria.

Syria

In the same vein of other UN bodies that analyzed the HR situation in Syria as soon as

the conflict triggered, the HRC on the initiative of the USA analyzed this situation at its

16th special session (A/HRC/S-16/2: 5). This was the first of several extraordinary

sessions on Syria in order to contribute to the resolution or management of the internal

situation in the country, particularly important due to the blockade on the UN Security

Council (Gowan and Pinheiro, 2014). This lack of consensus did not occur in the analysis

of the Libyan conflict as we have seen.

The special session, as it will be evident in all the meetings convened, was not supported

by Syria. Syria considered that its internal situation was an emergency

situation/maintenance of public order, so it did not require the HRC's attention. This

position was supported by Russia, China, Cuba, Venezuela, Ecuador, Pakistan and

Nicaragua.

At the session, the Independent Experts did not take a stand on the classification of the

conflict, which could undermine decision-making. They focused on the protection of

civilians in terms of the HR and fundamental freedoms considered applicable to all

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

Vol. 10, Nº. 1 (May-October 2019), pp. 29-43

The relevance of Human Rights Council special sessions: the protection of the civilian population in current

internal armed conflicts

Sónia Roque

situations, including in emergency situations. Therefore, the UNHCHR among the offenses

considered the use of live fire against peaceful protestors; the practices of detention and

enforced disappearances; torture and ill-treatment; restrictions to freedoms of

expression, assembly and association; persecution and intimidation; attacks against

medical personnel, facilities and patients; attacks on densely populated areas;

impediment of food delivery and assistance to the wounded and blockade of public

services such as electricity and the transportation system, which could amount to crimes

against humanity. The Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food on behalf of the HRC

mandate holders also considered that reparations and compensations should be provided

to victims and their families.

Taking the initiative in decision-making, the USA presented draft resolution A/HRC/S-

16/L.1 approved in a non-consensual way in Resolution S-16/1. In the draft resolution it

was reaffirmed the obligation of States to protect the fundamental rights and freedoms

of civilians (A/HRC/S-16/L.1: 1) in line with the contribution of the Experts, indicating

once again the importance of these Experts in considering the protection of civilians

through the reporting of violations. However, socio-economic rights such as food and

health care were not mentioned explicitly, alluding only to the right to social justice.

A second session on Syria which corresponded to HRC 17th special session was requested

by Poland on behalf of the EU (A/HRC/S-17/1). This session had already interregional

support, including from Arab countries, but maintained the same opposition block.

Similarly to the previous session, UNHCHR and the Special Rapporteur on Torture on

behalf of the HRC mandate-holders did not take a position on the classification of the

conflict. The protection of civilians was considered under HR and fundamental freedoms

as provided by IHRL as reported at the 16th special session. These infractions were now

also confirmed by the mission sent to Syria.

In order to boost decision-making, Poland the promoter of the session on behalf of the

EU presented the draft resolution A/HRC/S-17/L.1 also approved in a non-consensual

way in Resolution S-17/1. The project referred to the reports of the Experts, and to the

report of the fact-finding mission on Syria which revealed the violations committed by

the Syrian authorities that could amount to crimes against humanity. In this resolution

States urged also the Syrian authorities to guarantee humanitarian and medical

assistance (A/HRC/S-17/L.1: 1-3). It was also decided to send a commission of inquiry

appointed by the HRC President to investigate alleged IHRL violations, including crimes

against humanity, in order to identify those responsible (A/HRC/S-17/L.1: 3). This

appointment denotes the strengthening of HRC competence in dealing with the

infractions against civilians whose offenders should be held responsible. It was also

decided to transmit the reports of this commission to the UNGA that should transmit

them to relevant bodies. These decisions reinforced the warning about the seriousness

of the violations committed against civilians and sleeked also a positioning by the main

UN bodies.

Once again Poland on behalf of the EU requested a meeting on Syria in the light of the

report submitted by the Commission of Inquiry. This report was discussed at the HRC

18th special session (A/HRC/S-18/2: 6). This session had greater interregional support

than the previous ones but maintained the same opposition bock.

The Commission of Inquiry reported, as did the UNHCHR in the previous sessions, the

HR and fundamental freedoms infractions against civilians in the country. Between these

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

Vol. 10, Nº. 1 (May-October 2019), pp. 29-43

The relevance of Human Rights Council special sessions: the protection of the civilian population in current

internal armed conflicts

Sónia Roque

violations were the killings, including of children; torture and ill-treatment; rape and

other forms of sexual violence; imprisonment or other forms of deprivation of liberty;

enforced disappearances; blockages of residential areas with obstruction of access to

water, food and other basic services; destruction of property and civil infrastructures;

violations of children's rights (including the right to education); restrictions to the

freedom of movement; use of hospitals as torture centers for injured demonstrators;

impediments to the provision of medical care and restrictions on civil and political rights

such as the freedom of expression and the rights to peaceful assembly or demonstration,

infractions that required a strong decision-making from the HRC.

In this regard Poland the promoter of the session on behalf of the EU presented in the

meeting the draft resolution A/HRC/S-18/L.1 approved in Resolution S-18/1, but as the

previous ones in a non-consensual way (A/HRC/S-18/2: 8-9). This proposal referred to

HR and fundamental freedoms violations according to the reports of the Experts,

emphasizing once again the importance of delivering humanitarian assistance; to the

voluntary return of refugees and IDPs and concern was also expressed about the lack of

accountability (A/HRC/S-18/L.1: 1-3). In the amendment to the draft resolution it was

added the reference to the importance of fulfilling the civil, political, economic, social and

cultural rights of the population, which demonstrates a greater consensus on this issue.

The UN bodies were also requested to take action based on the Resolution (A/HRC/S-

18/L.1/Rev.1: 2-4). This reference denotes the increasing pressure on the UN main

bodies on the need to protect civilians.

A new session was requested by the representatives of Denmark, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi

Arabia, Turkey, the EU and the USA regarding the deterioration of the HR situation in

Syria and the recent killings in El-Houleh, this would be the HRC 19th special session

(A/HRC/S-19/1). This session had even more extensive support, highlighting the

pressure on the need to solve the situation.

The Experts participating in the session, the UNHCHR and the Special Rapporteur on

Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions on behalf of the HRC mandate holders

referred, as in the previous sessions, to the protection of civilians in accordance with

IHRL, which included the protection of HR and fundamental freedoms on the basis of the

report of the Commission of Inquiry A/HRC/19/69.

Following these reports for the first time on the initiative of an Arab country, Qatar, was

presented the draft resolution A/HRC/S-19/L.1 also approved in a non-consensual way

in Resolution S-19/1 (A/HRC/S-19/2: 8). The proposal referred within the violations

against civilians to the use of heavy artillery against residential areas and to physical

abuses, specifying attacks on women and children, and violations of HR and fundamental

freedoms (A/HRC/S-19/L.1:1-2), with no reference to economic and social rights unlike

the previous ones. In the amendment to the draft resolution A/HRC/S-19/L.1/Rev.1 the

UNHCHR statement was also recalled. In this statement the UNHCHR drew attention to

the fact that the atrocities committed in Syria could amount to crimes against humanity,

including its appeal to the UN Security Council to refer the situation to the International

Criminal Court. This reference highlights the importance of the Independent Experts

reports in decision-making given the prolonged severity of the situation which required

the accountability of offenders. In the draft resolution it was also asked to the

Commission of Inquiry to conduct an investigation on El-Houleh in order to identify those

responsible (A/HRC/S-19/L.1:2), which reinforces the importance attached to

accountability as a means of combating impunity.

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

Vol. 10, Nº. 1 (May-October 2019), pp. 29-43

The relevance of Human Rights Council special sessions: the protection of the civilian population in current

internal armed conflicts

Sónia Roque

The HR situation in Syria was subsequently examined at the HRC 25th special session

requested by the United Kingdom due to the attacks in Aleppo (A/HRC/S-25/l).

As participants in the session the UNHCHR, the CCSP and the Commission of Inquiry

reported offenses against civilians in line with the previous session’s reports. The

protection of civilians was made under IHRL, which includes all HR and fundamental

freedoms, but by 2016 there was already an explicit reference to IHL, which means that

a consensus was reached on the qualification of the situation as an “armed conflict”.

Following the initiative of the session, the United Kingdom presented the draft resolution

A/HRC/S-25/L.1 approved once again in a non-consensual way in Resolution S-25/1

(A/HRC/S-25/2: 7-10). In this Resolution reference was made to IHRL and IHL violations

committed by all parties to the conflict, including sexual and gender-based violence, also

practiced against children. Reference was also made to the destruction of civilian

infrastructures (schools and medical facilities) in Aleppo; attacks on civilians; removal of

items from humanitarian convoys; deliberate interruptions of water supply;

indiscriminate use of arms; use of starvation of civilians as a method of combat and the

siege of populated areas (A/HRC/S-25/L.1: 1-3), without reference to economic and

social rights, revealing some reluctance towards this category of rights. The Commission

of Inquiry was also requested to conduct an inquiry into the events in Aleppo in order to

make the offenders accountable (A/HRC/S-25/L.1: 3-4), being again the fight against

impunity one of the main ways considered to dissuade the infractions.

Central African Republic (CAR)

On the initiative of Ethiopia on behalf of the AG it was requested a session on the HR

situation in CAR, this was the HRC 20th special session (A/HRC/S-20/1). This session had

a broad interregional support, including from the CAR. The country concerned was also

aware of the risk of genocide due to the ethnic and religious dimension of the crisis in

the CAR, which demonstrates the importance that States attach to cooperation through

the work of international institutions.

The UNHCHR and the CCSP referred as offenses in the country to summary or

extrajudicial executions based on religion; acts of sexual and gender-based violence;

enforced disappearances; torture; mutilations; ill-treatment; imprisonment and arbitrary

detention; looting and the destruction of property, in particular of religious buildings and

the use of child-soldiers, infractions which led to a large number of refugees and IDPs.

Following these reports Ethiopia on behalf of the AG presented the draft resolution

A/HRC/S-20/L.1 consensually approved in Resolution S-20/1 (A/HRC/S-20/2). In this

project Member States considered the HR and fundamental freedoms violations and

abuses as mentioned by the Experts (A/HRC/S-20/L.1: 1-2), but once again without

reference to economic and social rights, a topic that still reveals some reticence’s.

Iraq

Iraq has requested a session (22nd special session) on the HR situation in the country in

the light of the abuses committed by the so-called Islamic State, the Levant and

associated groups (A/HRC/S-22/4). This session had broad interregional support,

including from Russia and China contrary to what happened in the session about the HR

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

Vol. 10, Nº. 1 (May-October 2019), pp. 29-43

The relevance of Human Rights Council special sessions: the protection of the civilian population in current

internal armed conflicts

Sónia Roque

situation in Sri Lanka, an important fact if we take into account that both situations deal

with HR infractions in the fight against terrorism.

The UNHCHR has mentioned IHRL and IHL violations practiced by these groups against

civilians (sexual violence; kidnappings; torture; persecution based on ethnicity, religion

or sectarian affiliation; infractions to cultural and religious rights understood as identity

rights; use of child-soldiers; destruction of infrastructures and livelihoods; impediment

to humanitarian assistance; acts of harassment and intimidation and impediments to

leave the places of combat safely). They also mentioned IHRL and IHL violations practiced

by Iraqi forces and armed groups against these terrorist groups.

Assuming the initiative of the decision-making process, France supported by Iraq

presented the draft resolution A/HRC/S-22/L.1, consensually approved in Resolution S-

22/l (A/HRC/S-22/4: 9). In this project were highlighted the HR and IHL violations

committed by terrorist groups that could amount to war crimes and crimes against

humanity as reported by the UNHCHR. It was also consensual the need to protect and

provide assistance to civilians; protect civilian infrastructures; promote and protect all

HR and fundamental freedoms; investigate the alleged abuses and promote the return

of IDPs (A/HRC/S-22/L.1: 1-3). In this Resolution the protection of civilians agreed

interconnected IHRL and IHL, including the obligation to guarantee the livelihoods of the

population, but without reference to the violations committed by the government, a

situation that had been criticized in the session on Sri Lanka.

Boko Haram

The activities of the terrorist group Boko Haram, which had consequences in Cameroon,

Chad, Niger and Nigeria, were brought before the HRC by Algeria on behalf of the AG at

its 23rd special session (A/HRC/S-23/1).

At the session the UNHCHR referred to the ethnic and sectarian offenses committed by

Boko Haram (killings, abductions, sexual slavery, forced recruitment, looting and

destruction of villages and towns) which led to a high number of IDPs and refugees who

needed humanitarian and psychological assistance. There have also been reports of

serious IHRL and IHL violations committed by Nigerian and other forces in reaction to

this group's activities. In the same way the CCSP also recalled the need to respect HR

and fundamental freedoms (judicial guarantees, freedom of thought, conscience and

religion and the decision of each person to return to its own country).

Dealing once again with a situation in the African Continent Algeria on behalf of the AG

presented the draft resolution A/HRC/S-23/L.1 consensually approved in Resolution S-

23/1 (A/HRC/S-23/2: 9). It was consensual the reference to IHRL and IHL atrocities and

abuses committed by the terrorist organization against civilians in line with the reports

of the Experts. HR and fundamental freedoms infractions were also mentioned, and

concern was also expressed on the situation of IDPs and refugees (A/HRC/S-23/L.1: 3).

But once again no mention was made to the violations committed by States in the fight

against terrorism like in Iraq and Sri Lanka, and to the economic and social rights as

guarantees of the population.

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

Vol. 10, Nº. 1 (May-October 2019), pp. 29-43

The relevance of Human Rights Council special sessions: the protection of the civilian population in current

internal armed conflicts

Sónia Roque

Burundi

The seriousness of the HR situation prompted the USA to request a session on Burundi

which would be the HRC 24th special session (A/HRC/S-24/l). This session had the

support of Burundi also due to the awareness of the ethnic dimension of the conflict as

happened with CAR.

At the session the UNHCHR, the Special Representative on the Prevention of Genocide

and the CCSP, listed HR violations based on political and ethnic affiliation (extrajudicial

executions; arbitrary arrests and detentions; enforced disappearances; beatings; looting,

blockades of neighborhoods; torture; intimidation and the lack of livelihoods).

Following these reports the USA presented the draft resolution A/HRC/S-24/L.1

consensually approved in Resolution S-24/l (A/HRC/S-24/2: 9-10). In this session the

promotion and protection of HR and fundamental freedoms was reaffirmed (A/HRC/S-

24/L.1: 1) as mentioned by the Experts, with States requesting also the UNHCHR to

organize and dispatch to the country a mission composed of independent experts

(A/HRC/S-24/L.1: 5). This decision emphasizes once again the significance of the fight

against impunity in the HRC work.

Conclusions

From the cases analyzed, we highlight the initiative of the Western European and Other

States Group in convening most of the sessions. This pro-activity is in line with the

defense of a greater capacity of the HRC to deal with gross HR violations. There was also

an assumption by the AG of the issues in Africa that generate greater international

consensus, unlike the situations in other regions as evidenced by the lack of consensus

on Sri Lanka and Syria closer to the borders of great powers.

Notwithstanding the difficulties in framing current conflicts into the so-called classical

categories (NIAC, international conflict, disturbances or internal tensions), there is an

acceptance of the interrelation between IHL and IHRL in the protection of civilians as

proposed by the Independent Experts. This complementarity, in addition to the minimum

protection in NIAC conferred by common Article 3 to the GC, the only one agreed upon

by all States, covers HR and fundamental freedoms with an emphasis on civil and political

rights (freedom of opinion, expression, peaceful assembly, movement, religion or belief

and the exercise of peaceful activities including political ones). The protection of civilian

infrastructures and goods; the prohibition of all cruel, inhuman or degrading treatments

or punishments, in which is included the sexual violence, abuse and assault; the

prohibition of the use of child-soldiers; the obligation to provide the necessary livelihoods

to the population even if through humanitarian assistance (food, water, health care,

shelter), with emphasis on the part of the population considered most vulnerable

refugees, IDPs, women and children are also guarantees agreed in the resolutions, in

which all include the accountability of offenders.

References

A/HRC/S-4/1 (2006). Letter from Finland to the Human Rights Council (HRC).

A/HRC/S-4/5 (2006). Report of the HRC fourth special session (SS).

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

Vol. 10, Nº. 1 (May-October 2019), pp. 29-43

The relevance of Human Rights Council special sessions: the protection of the civilian population in current

internal armed conflicts

Sónia Roque

A/HRC/S-5/1 (2007). Letter from Slovenia to the HRC

A/HRC/S-5/2 (2007). Report of the HRC fifth SS.

A/HRC/S-8/1 (2008). Letter from France to the HRC.

A/HRC/S-8/2 (2008). Report of the HRC eighth SS.

A/HRC/S-11/1 (2009). Letter from Germany to the HRC.

A/HRC/S-11/2 (2009). Report of the HRC eleventh SS.

A/HRC/S-14/1 (2010). Report of the HRC fourteenth SS.

A/HRC/S-15/1 (2010). Report of the HRC fifteenth SS.

A/HRC/S-16/2 (2011). Report of the HRC sixteenth SS.

A/HRC/S-17/2 (2011). Report of the HRC seventeenth SS.

A/HRC/S-18/2 (2011). Report of the HRC eighteenth SS.

A/HRC/S-19/1 (2012). Letter from Denmark, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, the

European Union and the United States of America to the HRC.

A/HRC/S-19/2 (2012). Report of the HRC nineteenth SS.

A/HRC/S-20/1 (2014). Letter from Ethiopia to the HRC.

A/HRC/S-20/2 (2014). Report of the HRC twentieth SS.

A/HRC/S-22/4 (2014). Report of the HRC twenty-second SS.

A/HRC/S-23/1 (2015). Letter from Algeria to the HRC.

A/HRC/S-23/2 (2015). Report of the HRC twenty-third SS.

A/HRC/S-24/1 (2015). Letter from the United States to the HRC.

A/HRC/S-24/2 (2015). Report of the HRC twenty-fourth SS.

A/HRC/S-25/1 (2016). Letter from the United Kingdom to the HRC.

A/HRC/S-25/2 (2016). Report of the HRC twenty-fifth SS.

A/HRC/S-26/1 (2016). Letter from Albania, Paraguay, United Kingdom and the United

States to the HRC.

A/HRC/S-26/2 (2016). Report of the HRC twenty-sixth SS.

A/RES/60/251 (2006). HRC.

Cox, Eric (2010). “State Interests and the Creation and Functioning of the United Nations

Human Rights Council” Journal of International Law and International Relations. 6(1),

87-120.

Gowan, Richard; Pinheiro, Paulo Sérgio (2014). “Syria” in Genser, Jared; Ugarte, Bruno

Stagno (eds) The United Nations Security Council in the Age of Human Rights.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 434-453.

ICRC (2005). Customary IHL Database, disponível em https://ihl-

databases.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/home (consultado a 20 de julho de 2018).

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

Vol. 10, Nº. 1 (May-October 2019), pp. 29-43

The relevance of Human Rights Council special sessions: the protection of the civilian population in current

internal armed conflicts

Sónia Roque

ICRC (2008). “Interview with Luis Alfonso De Alba” International Review of the Red Cross.

90(871), 489-499.

Lauren, Paul Gordon (2007). “Commission on Human Rights to the Human Rights

Council” Human Rights Quarterly. 29, 307-345.

Ruggie, John (1998). Constructing the World Polity: Essays on international

institutionalization. London/New York: Routledge.

Sheeran, Scott; Rodley, Nigel (eds.) (2013). Routledge Handbook of International Human

Rights Law. New York: Routledge.

TIJ (2004). Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian

Territory Summary 2004/2.

Wendt, Alexander (1995). “Constructing International Politics” International Security.

20(1), 71-81.