|
From
|
holenweg@vtx.ch (Pascal Holenweg)
|
|
Date
|
Tue, 11 Apr 2000 04:15:33 +0200
|
|
Subject
|
globe_l: 10.4 Bulletin de la CSSI
|
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
BULLETIN D'INFORMATION DE LA
COMMISSION SOCIALISTE DE SOLIDARITŠ INTERNATIONALE
GenËve, le 21 Germinal 208 / 10 avril 2000
(Ce bulletin ne paraÓt dÈsormais qu'en fonction du soutien qu'il reÁoit.
Merci donc ý celles et ceux dont le soutien a permis la parution de ce
numÈro. Pour les modalitÈs de ce soutien, voir en fin de bulletin, point 3)
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
1. UN GUERRIER EN CAGE : LEONARD PELTIER
2. GENEVA CALL FOR THE ADHESION OF NON-STATE ACTORS TO THE INTERNATIONAL
HUMANITARIAN LAW
3. COMMENT NOUS SOUTENIR
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
1. UN GUERRIER EN CAGE : LEONARD PELTIER
Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2000 16:24:05 +0200
Subject: globe_l: un guerrier en cage - entretien avec leonard peletier (1)
From: Pedro <pedrito@samizdat.net>
Les derniËres nouvelles qui nous sont parvenues concernant la situation de
santÈ du prisonnier politique amÈrindien Leonard Peltier font Ètat de son
sÈjour prolongÈ en observation ý la clinique Mayo de Rochester (Minnesota)
o˜ il rÈcupËre progressivement des forces aprËs l'intervention chirurgicale
rÈussie pratiquÈe par le Dr. Keller le 21 mars dernier.
Pendant ce temps, son comitÈ de dÈfense et ses avocats se prÈparent pour
la prochaine comparution de Leonard devant la Commission des libÈrations
sur parole prÈvue le 12 juin prochain. Des modËles de lettre de soutien
sont disponibles ý cet effet, vous pouvez nous les demander par email via
<LPSG-France@wanadoo.fr.
CommuniquÈ du Groupe de Soutien ý LÈonard Peltier :
"Appel pour Leonard Peltier
Leonard Peltier, prisonnier politique indien (Lakota-Anishinabe)
entre dans sa 25e annÈe d'incarcÈration arbitraire au pÈnitencier
fÈdÈral de Leavenworth (Kansas). Sa santÈ se dÈtÈriore et tous
les efforts entrepris par son comitÈ de dÈfense (LPDC) pour le
faire libÈrer n'ont toujours pas abouti. Une prochaine audition de
la Commission des libÈrations sur parole doit se dÈrouler, pour
Leonard, dans le courant du mois de juin. Pour faire pression, le
LPDC demande de lui faire parvenir dËs que possible des lettres
de soutien.
Groupe de Soutien ý Leonard Peltier c/o CSIA, BP 372, 75526
Paris Cedex 11.
TÈl. : 01 43 73 05 80. Fax : 01 43 72 15 77.
E-mail : LPSG-France@wanadoo.fr
Aux Etats-Unis : Leonard Peltier Defense Committee - LPDC,
PO Box 583, Lawrence, KS 66044, USA. TÈl. : 001 (785)
842-5774. Fax : 001 (785) 842-5796. Web :
http://www.freepeltier.org
E-mail : lpdc@idir.net
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
2. GENEVA CALL FOR THE ADHESION OF NON-STATE ACTORS TO THE INTERNATIONAL
HUMANITARIAN LAW
Geneva Call,
Post-office box 334,
1211 Geneva 4
fax/phone : 41.22.901.02.67
email:Geneva.Call@gkb.com
August 1999
PREAMBULE
Last 12 August was celebrated the fiftieth anniversary of the Geneva
Conventions. Geneva will organize moreover these days various conferences in
link with "its" Conventions.
The Geneva Conventions are thus fifty years old. It is beautiful age, but it
is the age, if not of "examination of conscience" (no one doubting the
legitimacy of the texts we commemorate), at least "medical check-up"
(adequacy of these texts to the reality of the present conflicts being
sometimes dubious). What is the question here is precisely the search for a
new capacity of humanitarian law and war law to apprehend realities of the
wars which cross and touch our world, and to associate with the respect of
the law the new actors of the wars and to ensure the "follow-up" of the
texts which try to control them.
The First Convention of Geneva was born from the indignation of Henri Dunant
vis-a-vis the massacres of the European wars (i.e. between European States)
of the middle of 19th century. Conventions of 1929 followed upon the Large
War, again, confrontation of States. Conventions of 1949 succeeded a World
war which still saw clashing States and alliances of States. They were
signed whereas the world engaged in the "cold war", of which, again, of the
States and of alliances of States were the principal actors.
Today, if the States and alliances they are forming are always determinant
actors of the wars, the importance of the "nonofficial" actors of the
conflicts increased. At the same time, the weapons which "Geneva law"
defines as "producing excessive traumatic effects or striking without
discrimination" proliferated. Moreover news of them are continuously
inventing, or old ones are recycling, in the same time that those existing
are prohibited: does the Ottawa Treaty banish the anti-personnel mines? One
will use mines anti-tank device, provided with sophisticated systems, for
the same use, with the same effects... Conventions we come to celebrate the
fiftieth anniversary were signed in the shade of atomic mushroom. The
commemoration was done while were disseminated everywhere in the world tens
of million anti-personnel mines, anti-tank device mines, cluster bombs,
which kill or mutilate a person every 20 minutes, and have killed more
people since the end of the second world war than the atomic bombs of
Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Moreover, while the Convention of 1949 (and the Convention following, until
Ottawa Treaty in 1997 against the anti-personnel mines) was the result of a
process with only the States, the ICRC and international governmental
organizations, the process which have lead to Ottawa Treaty have put in
evidence the non-governmental organizations capacity, not only to integrate
in such a process, but even to initiate, to define the field and the content
of it.
We thus celebrate the fifty years of Conventions of 1949 and at the same
time note a double change, fundamental: one about the actors of the
conflicts, second about the actors of the development of the legal standards
applying to these conflicts.
Geneva gave its name to the Conventions with the ambition, and it is still
the same, to contain the warlike practices within limits of the law, and to
say what, in a war, can be made and what must be prohibited. But we must
apply them to all the wars and all the actors of the conflicts. Geneva could
- and would have - engage today in the search, the study and the technical,
legal and public debate, about the evolution of "its" Conventions, on the
capacity of making them applied and respected, and on the possibilities of
associating more closely non-governmental organizations to the development
process of the humanitarian law and of checking the "follow-up" of the
concluded treaties.
It appears to us that Geneva, which gave its name the Conventions, must give
its support for their respect. A thing, indeed, is to define a standard.
Another is to make it respected. However this standard is nothing, or only a
speech, without the respect.
The standards were defined, the rules written, the principles expressed:
thus remain to make them respect, everywhere and by all, i.e. to ensure the
"follow-up" of the normative act. This respect of the humanitarian law, this
"follow-up" of the legal standards, implies their confrontation with
realities of the present conflicts, i.e. of different conflicts, and
differently being held from those which prevailed at the time when the
initial rules were posed: The current conflict of Balkans is not the Korea
War, the conflicts of today in the East Africa are not the of Indo-China War...
In fact, what was made fifty years ago, and that we commemorate this year,
was the same of what we propose to contribute to make: taking into account
the reality of the violations of the fundamental principles of the
humanitarian law into the humanitarian law. Conventions of 1949 are, from
this point of view, a step of aggiornamento of the texts founders of the
humanitarian law and war law. This law was born in SolfÈrino, it grew in
Verdun, it was confronted with Auschwitz and Hiroshima. It is necessary for
us today to confront the law with Kosovo and Kurdistan, i.e. with new
conflicts, which are difficult to apprehend and control, with new actors and
new organizations, that the law must integrate in its own development.
Finally it will be also necessary to return against the persons responsible
of the conflicts and responsible of the damage also responsible for repairs.
The Swiss Campaign against the mines, in collaboration with other NGOs
members of the group on non-state actors of the International Campaign
(ICBL) proposes to launch the Geneva Call for the universal renunciation of
the anti-personnel mines. Two other topics could be consider : children's
enrolment and torture. Others topics could follow. This Geneva call invites
the active non-state actors wherever in the world to sign notices of
renunciation to mines, children's enrolment, torture or an engagement to
never use them. In fact these various calls would be gathered under the name
of Geneva Call for the adhesion of the non-state actors to the international
humanitarian law.
The name "Geneva Call" refers to the international humanitarian law,
commonly called "Geneva law". The choice of Geneva brings moreover obvious
advantages: narrow and regular communications with the ICRC, the UNO
representatives of human rights and disarmament, the diplomatic missions of
almost all the States of the world, and with many IGO and NGO established in
this city. Moreover, the international and humanitarian vocation of Geneva
reinforces the idea of political impartiality of the Geneva Call and of the
working group of the ICBL.
Today, it's essential to convince the non-state actors to give up to use
anti-personnel mines, respectively enrolment of children, torture, as
methods of war, and to seek their cooperation, for example in the mines
clearance, assistance and rehabilitation of the victims. The armed groups,
while renouncing to the mines could facilitate the operations by providing
information to the organizations in charge of the mine clearance. In the
same way, while renouncing to children's enrolment, they could facilitate
the social rehabilitation of the child-soldiers in collaboration with the
organizations in charge of that.
The only way to reduce the number of mines infesting planet, to decrease
tortures cases and children's enrolment in armed groups, to save life of
many innocents is to touch all the actors of the conflicts.
HISTORY AND BIRTH OF THE PROJECT: FROM MINES TO TORTURE.
In December 1997, shortly after the signature of the Treaty of Ottawa, but
already during the preceding Conferences held in Maputo in 1996 and in Oslo
in September 1997, the question of the non-state actors (NSA) was evoked.
The International Campaign to ban landmines (ICBL) was conscious that if it
wants to achieve its goal, namely a planet remove from "the weapon of
coward", the engagement of government was not sufficient and that the
question of non-state actors is crucial.
Thus was born the idea of Geneva Call for the renunciation of the
anti-personnel mines. The interest caused by this proposal encouraged the
initiators to wide the problems to be treated. Thus the renunciation of
enrolment of children and torture will be also the subject of calls intended
for the non-state actors.
WHY " GENEVA CALL "?
The first motivation, and the first justification, of the Geneva Call is
obviously the gravity of the problems to which it intends contributing to
resolve: the dissemination of anti-personnel mines, the tendency in certain
areas of the generalization of children's enrolment in armed formations, the
recurrence of the practice of torture, to quote only the three topics being
the subject of proposals for engagements on behalf of the non-state actors.
The non-state actors being out of the process of negotiation and decision of
the international humanitarian law, and practically also out of the field of
its application, their practices and their methods are unverifiable. However
a humanitarian law, or a war law, which is respected only by the States, as
well as possible, is respected only by a part of the conflict's actors. It
is not acceptable that such a fundamental law is not a universal law. And it
is not a universal law, considering the fact that opposition movements are
not recipient, in one way or another. If the non-state actors are not
associated with the international humanitarian law, this one loses its own
capacity to be respected. The first objective of the Geneva Call is to
change this lack of the law.
POSSIBILITIES OF ENGAGEMENT OF NON-STATE ACTORS.
The non-state actors can give up to the anti-personnel mines, to children's
enrolment and to the torture in several manners:
- By an unilateral declaration addressed to Geneva Call and corresponding to
the requirements established by the Call.
- By a declaration addressed to the agent of Protocols I and II additional
to the Geneva Conventions, i.e. the Swiss Federal Council (as lays down it
article 96, paragraph 3, about the national liberation movements). But for
that, it would be necessary, for the anti-personnel mines, to amend the
Ottawa Treaty and to integrate such a disposition. Indeed, this Treaty has
not envisaged for the non-state actors a similar mechanism as the Geneva
Conventions.
- By bilateral agreements between non-state actors and States (like part of
an agreement of peace for example).
By now, only an action such as that proposed by Geneva Call could have fast
effects, taking into account the flexibility which allows the structure of
an association, in addition to the contacts already made with generally
favorable greetings received.
Moreover, the fact of constituting an independent association makes possible
to escape to the political and institutional constraints, and to be able to
contact rebellious organizations and armed movements that governments,
international governmental organizations, even NGOs, cannot assume, at least
in public. Lastly, the autonomy of behavior offering by the associative
structure makes possible to withdraw from the reactions of such governments:
indeed, certain large international organizations take the risk to be the
subject of retaliatory measures from governments opposing to discuss with
movements that are fighting. Moreover, they can be suspected of some
recognition of the reality of these movements and with more strNGO reason of
their capacity to take an engagement. The ICRC could for example see the
access of certain prisons being refused to its delegates if it appeared to
have negotiated an engagement with rebellious groups of these countries.
Such a risk is without object and effect with an independent association.
The problem of the non-state actors who cannot have access to the signature
of International Conventions is an old problem, and "Geneva Call" could be a
first step of its solving.
POLITICAL AND JURIDICAL CONTEXT
Political context
The general manager of ICRC, Paul Grossrieder said "the principles of
international humanitarian law are (...) what have the more in common in the
dominant rhetoric of international meeting, but also what is the more forget
in the current forms of conflict" and "an abyssal variation dig between the
declaration and the reality. It's like we affirm strNGOer the humanitarian
principles that we are convinced that they don't apply in complex wars of
today". These principles were born with the will to codify and to stop the
warlike practices which prevail in some wars between States, and it's the
States which, by adhering to the principles of international humanitarian
law, have constitute it like such. However, in the majority of the wars we
know today, the States are only one of the involved forces, when they are
still officially in the war, and when they are not dissimulated behind
apparent "non-state actors" consisted or handled by the States themselves.
Protocol II of 1977 (additional Protocol to Geneva Conventions, relating to
the protection of the victims, the non international wars), adopted on June
8, 1977, already made a place to the adaptation of the humanitarian law to
reality, and the changes of nature and form of the wars. It is the question
today of taking a step moreover, and of associating clearly, explicitly, the
non-state actors of the wars with the respect of humanitarian law, and
checking this respect. Paul Grossrieder, tying the lessons of the
development of Protocol II of 1977, announce that "on the policy filed, the
ICRC argued" vis-a-vis people who denounce the contacts taken with of armed
insurrectionary movements, by saying that "the contacts with movements of
release are a high interest for the States against the authority of which
these movements draw up, in particular when soldiers of a regular army fall
in the hand of a rebel group".
The national liberation movements admittedly were "non-state actors" of a
particular kind: they had for program, and for ambition, to found new
States, and thus, in a certain manner, to become themselves official actors.
The non-state actors which are concerning today, in addition to the will of
widening the place already made for the national liberation movements, are
often of another nature: the islamists armed groups, for example, do not
project to create new States, but to apply in existing States a social and
political project, and legal standards, others that those which prevail
there. But insofar as they use armed violence to achieve this goal, and
insofar as this use causes a war with the authorities in place, they become
non-state actors of a war, make victims and prisoners, use of violence
against civil population etc... The fundamental standards of the
humanitarian law must thus apply to them too.
Legal context
International humanitarian law, which Geneva Call proposes to associate the
"non-state actors", takes its principles of four Geneva Conventions of 1949
and two additional Protocols of 1977. These texts constitute a whole of
standard intend to protect the person in the case of conflict, that one
distinguish as "Geneva law" or "Hague law", and which fix the standard to
respect in the control of army operations, in other words the "choice of
means of harm", with certain arms prohibited (for example, gas and
bacteriological arms since the Protocol of Geneva of 1925, and arms which
produce "an excessive traumatisant effect or strike without discrimination"
since 1981, and the antipersonnel mines, finally, since the Ottawa Treaty of
1997).
The initiative (but not the "property") of coding the international
humanitarian law, which was based originally only on nonuniversal uses,
returns clearly to Henri Dunant and to the first Red Cross. It led in 1864
to the first Convention of Geneva, revised in 1906. In 1929 were added the
Geneva Conventions on the casualties and the patients on one hand, the
prisoners of war on the other hand. In 1940, the Swiss federal Council,
agent of Geneva Conventions, launched the process of revision which
succeeded, nine years later, four Conventions currently in force: the first
protects the casualties and the patients from the terrestrial armed forces,
the second the casualties, the patients and the shipwrecked men of the
maritime armed forces, the third the prisoners of war, the fourth the civil.
These Conventions are signed only by States (approximately 170): in the
actors of the wars, only the official actors ("High contracting parties")
undertake to respect the fundamental standards and the principles of the
international humanitarian law. However, an article common to the four
Convention (the article 3) stipulate that "in the event of a war which has
not an international character and emerge on the territory of one of the
High contracting parties, each one of part with conflict be hold to apply at
least the provision following... " (follow some provision require "in all
circumstance" that the non-combatant, combatant have deposit the weapon or
put out of combat, be treat "with humanity" and without discrimination base
"on the race, the color, the religion or the belief, the sex, the birth or
the fortune, or all other criterion similar", prohibiting "the murder in all
its forms, the mutilations, the cruel processing, tortures and torments",
the taking of hostages, "attacks to the dignity of the people" and
judgements arbitrary, and demanding that the casualties and patients are
collected and looked after. It would be possible besides, in the logic even
of the project of Geneva Call, and once this one launched on the first three
subjects which it proposes to cover (mines, enrolment children and tortures)
to invite the non-state actors to commit itself also respecting this text.
This one, moreover, is in withdrawal of the original proposal of the ICRC,
which proposed six criteria (each one is sufficient, and at least one is
necessary) to qualify the "wars not presenting an international character"
(in other words: "civil wars") that article 3 took into account. The five
most significant criteria are the following:
- the presence of a militarily organized rebellious force, having an
authority responsible for its acts, acting on a given territory and having
the means of respecting and of making respect the Convention
- the engagement by the "legitimate" government of regular army to fight a
rebel militarily force organised and controlling a part of the national
territory
- the recognition by the legal government of the belligerent quality to the
rebel, or its claim for itself of its clean quality of belligerent;
- the installation by the rebel of a political mode which presents the
characteristic of a State
- the exercise by the rebel of a capacity de facto on the population or on a
fraction of national territory
These criteria correspond to the situations that promoters of Geneva Call
have in their mind when they propose their project. It is obvious (but
undoubtedly useful to point out) that the engagements suggested by Geneva
Call will be only to non-state actors made up and recognized like such, i.e.
correspondent with at least one (and for some, with all) criteria evoked by
the ICRC. There is no question of contacting groups answering none of these
criteria, nor to receive the "spontaneous" adhesion of groups not
corresponding there. Geneva Call besides ready to formalize by its
scientific committee the requirements of representativity and reality for
the non-state actors.
The ICRC, with statutes that formally recognize its role of development,
proposal and revision of the texts of Geneva Conventions, has the
responsibility to work for their improvement. Here, it is not a question to
modify these texts, but to associate new actors to their principles.
Switzerland is the agent of Geneva Conventions. In this case, the project of
Geneva Call does not imply any modification of this situation. For the
authorities of the Geneva Canton, they right now announced their full
support for this project.
The purpose of the international humanitarian law is "to regulate the
hostilities in order to mitigate the effects of them", to take the
definition that gives Jean Pictet. This law is compound by international
rules originally conventional (like the Convention of Geneva or the Ottawa
Treaty) or usual, which according to the ICRC "are especially intended to
regulate the humanitarian problem of armed conflicts, international or not
international, and which restrict, for humanitarian reason, the right to use
the method and means of their choice for war, or protect the person and the
good affected, or can be affected, by the conflict ".
The commitments proposing by Geneva Call to the non-state actors correspond
fully to this definition, and they only aim that they respect established
standards, either by the Ottawa Treaty with regard to the mines, or by the
second additional Protocol with Geneva Conventions with regard to enrolment
of the children, or with Convention against the torture, adopted by the
general Assembly of UNO in 1984.
DIFFICULTIES
The difficulties of such a project are not to minimize, and some principles
must be recalled from the very start.
- Geneva Call will never give a political opinion and it does not fall to
him to deliver an opinion on the legitimacy or not of a conflict.
- Geneva Call does not relate to the mines exclusively, children's enrolment
and torture, but it condemns also any form of violence exerted against
innocent civil, and in violation of the humanitarian law, by non-state actors.
- Geneva Call is also conscious than certain groups frequently change their
composition, their leadership or their alliance, and that a decision taken
by some person in charge risk not to be following by a share of combatant on
the ground (dissident for example) and that it is necessary to signify this
aspect of their representative. This difficulty is however not specific to
the collaboration with non-state actors, and arises in extremely comparable
terms within the framework of the co-operation with governments.
- Geneva Call will have to be absolutely ensured of a mode of monitoring,
credible and neutral.
- Lastly, Geneva Call could not deny the existence of very diverse
movements, with specific motivations, including even groups created or
supported by governments.
CONCLUSION
Significantly, many armed groups recognized the need of discussing the
problem of the mines and of child-soldiers and some of them committed
themselves publicly giving up to it. Other actors declared themselves ready
to consider the renouncement of the mines for example if the States do also it.
Several unilateral declaration or bilateral agreement making explicitly
reference to the mines have already be signed by certain armed groups, in
Sudan, in Philippines, in Somalia, in Colombia, in Western Sahara (Polisario
Front) and in Afghanistan (Talibans). Others seem ready to support the
programmes of mine clearance and assistance to the victims of the mines in
the territories they control.
These declarations of intent are promising signs which encourage the Working
group and Geneva Call to continue their initiative. However they also raise
the problem to make sure that these engagements are effective and put into
practice on the ground. From this point of view, the Working group will have
also try to work out and propose a system of control to make sure that the
groups in question conform to their declarations and do not use Geneva Call
like an instrument of propaganda or legitimation.
Conscious of these problem and attentive to these difficulty, the Geneva
Call, support by the several members of the Working group of ICBL, wants
however put everything in work to find a solution with the problem of
non-state actors with the impossibility for them to sign some fundamental
text of international humanitarian law, like the Ottawa Treaty. Geneva Call
has only one and single objective: to tend towards a world without mines,
children soldiers and torture,
a world where fundamental principles international humanitarian law are
respected, everywhere, and by all.
GENEVA CALL is:
… A CALL for rebel movements and other armed groups ("non-state actors") to
commit themselves to a total ban on antipersonnel landmines. This means a
ban on the use, production, development, acquisition, stockpiling, retention
and transfer of such mines. It is also a call for them to cooperate in
stockpile destruction, mine clearance, victim assistance, mine awareness and
other mine action, all pursuant to humanitarian norms.
… A RESPONSE by global civil society to the changing nature of present-day
armed conflicts. These have seen the prevalence of internal conflicts
intensifying especially along ethnic, cultural and religious lines. It is
also a response to the inadequacy of current international humanitarian law
to address these realities. And that is partly because of its exclusively
state-based orientation and processes.
… A PROCESS, a complementary one that is more inclusive and persuasive of
"non-state actors." They not only are the other actors in these conflicts
but also can be actors in the practice and development of legal and
normative standards for such conflicts. This process has no other purpose
than humanitarian ends, including the ultimate goal of eliminating war and
other causes of human suffering.
… A STEP, the first one in a long journey, beginning with a non-governmental
initiative to engage rebel movements and other armed groups in a landmines
ban. This complements the governmental Mine Ban Treaty currently limited in
its direct application to and participation of "non-state actors". This
initiative is much in the same spirit as the global civil society monitoring
mechanism which fills a gap in the Treaty. It also paves the way for
subsequent similar steps on other war-critical and fundamental problems.
… A MECHANISM for rebel movements and other armed groups to adhere to or
deposit deeds of commitment to a total ban on antipersonnel mines and to
cooperation in mine action. It would be both cause for praise and basis for
accountability. The venue and depositary of these deeds would be in Geneva,
the home of international humanitarian law.
… AN ORGANIZATION, an international one independently formed under Swiss
law, with a ComitÈ d'Honneur of eminent global personalities, an
international directorate of regional focal points covering key conflict
regions, and an executive secretariat in Geneva. It is guided by the
principle of internationalism and relations of equality and co-responsibility.
… AN IDEA whose time has come. May the force of this idea be with it as it
echoes its call.
Geneva, 1 January 2000
L'Appel de GenËve,
Case postale 334,
1211 GenËve 4
fax/tÈl: 41.22.901.02.67
email:Geneva.Call@gkb.com
PROPOSED
" DEED OF COMMITMENT UNDER GENEVA CALL FOR ADHERANCE TO A TOTAL BAN ON
ANTI-PERSONNEL MINES AND FOR COOPERATION IN MINE ACTION "
WE, the undersigned rebel movement or armed group (" Non-State Actor "),
through our duly authorized representative (s),
Recognizing the global scourge of anti-personnel mines which
indiscriminately and inhumanely kill and maim combatants and civilians,
especially poor people, women and children, even after the armed conflict is
over ;
Realizing that the limited military utility of anti-personnel mines is far
outweighed by their appalling humanitarian, socio-economic and environmental
consequences, including on post-conflict reconciliation and reconstruction ;
Rejecting the notion that revolutionary ends or just causes justify inhumane
means and methods of warfare ;
Reaffirming our desire to protect the civilian population from military
attack and unnecessary suffering, and to respect their rights to life, to
human dignity, and to develop ;
Resolved to play our role not only as actors in internal armed conflicts but
also actors in the practice and development of legal and normative standards
for such conflicts, starting with a contribution to the overall humanitarian
effort to solve the global landmine problem for the sake of its victims ;
NOW, THEREFORE, hereby commit ourselves :
1. TO ADHERE to a total ban on anti-personnel mines and other humanitarian
norms. By anti-personnel mines we refer to those which effectively explode
by the presence, proximity or contact of a person, including other
victim-activated explosive devices and anti-vehicle mines with the same
effect, whether with or without anti-handling devices. By total ban, we
refer to a prohibition on the use, development, production, acquisition,
stockpiling, retention and transfer of such mines. This commitment
complements or supercedes, as the case may be, any existing unilateral
declaration of ours on anti-personnel mines.
2. TO COOPERATE IN AND UNDERTAKE stockpile destruction, mine clearance,
victim assistance, mine awareness and various forms of mine action,
especially where these programs are being implemented by independent
international organizations and non-governmental organizations.
3. TO ALLOW AND COOPERATE in the monitoring and verification by Geneva Call
and other independent international organizations and non-government
organizations of our commitment to a total ban on anti-personnel mines.
Such monitoring and verification are understood to include periodic visits
and inspections at the theater of armed conflict. Our commitment carries
with it the obligation to provide the necessary information in the spirit of
transparency and accountability.
4. TO ISSUE the necessary orders and directives to our commanders and
fighters for the implementation and enforcement of our commitment to a total
ban on anti-personnel mines, including measures for dissemination and
training, as well as disciplinary sanctions.
5. TO TREAT this commitment as one step or part of a broader commitment to
humanitarian norms, particularly of international humanitarian law and human
rights, and to contribute to their respect in field practice as well as the
development of humanitarian norms.
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
3. CE BULLETIN EST PRŠCAIRE, ET SA PARUTION INCERTAINE ET MENACŠE. Il ne
paraÓtra dÈsormais qu'une fois assurÈ son financement. :
VOUS POUVEZ LE SOUTENIR ET LA GARANTIR de deux maniËres :
DEPUIS LA SUISSE OU L'ETRANGER, PAR UN SOUTIEN FINANCIER, Èvidemment, en
adressant vos dons
. par virement sur le compte 42 5.371.347.08, Banque Migros, GenËve
. par chËques (barrÈs) ý l'ordre de Pascal Holenweg, ý l'adresse de la CSSI,
CP 343, CH-1211 GenËve 4
EN SURFANT -ET ÁA VOUS RAPPORTE ˆ VOUS AUSSI LA SOMME (MIRIFIQUE) DE 30
FRANCS (franÁais, hÈlas...) PAR HEURE DE CONNEXION
en vous inscrivant sur http://www.mediabarre.com/cgi-bin/mba?130858
MERCI DE VOTRE SOUTIEN -IL NOUS EST DŠSORMAIS INDISPENSABLE...
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
@ Pascal Holenweg, GenËve (holenweg@vtx.ch)
@ "Ce qui vient au monde pour ne rien troubler
@ ne mÈrite ni Ègards, ni patience" (RenÈ Char)
@
@ COMMISSION SOCIALISTE DE SOLIDARITŠ INTERNATIONALE
@ CP 343 CH-1211 GenËve 4
@
@ www.multimania.com/troubles/ www.home.ch/~spaw1265/
@ www.le-village.com/kiosque/Troubles/
@
@ Liste de dÈbat et d'information :
@ http://www.onelist.com/subscribe.cgi/Forum-socialiste
@
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
-
-
G L O B E
- - - - - - - - - - - -
s a m i z d a t . n e t
european counter network
bureaucratie : samizdat@samizdat.net
messages sur la liste : globe_l@ecn.org
archives web : http://www.ecn.org/lists/globe_l
envois restreints aux abonnes
http://www.samizdat.net/infos
![[<--]](/icons/prev.gif){kind=icon}
![[-->]](/icons/next.gif){kind=icon}