By Anna Jarman

Picture: Globe License: Public Domain

Last year, the “refugee crisis” experienced a political reckoning, as governments around the world sought to tighten boarders and curtail refugee-friendly policies where they had previously existed.  At the same time, the number of displaced people continued to climb in 2017, after it reached its highest number ever at 65 million people at the end of 2016.  The below events chronicle 2017’s most significant developments in the refugee crisis and the policy responses to it.

Travel Ban – Shortly after taking office, President Trump signed an Executive Order titled “Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States,” which greatly reduced the number of refugees the U.S. would admit -- including blocking admission of all Syrian refugees -- and suspended entry of nationals from seven Muslim-majority countries for 90 days.  The order was met with immediate protests, international criticism, and legal challenges by those who saw the order as a “Muslim ban.”  A nationwide temporary restraining order was issued in the case Washington v. Trump, and upheld by the Ninth Circuit.  The first order was replaced by a second and then a third order which revised the original list of countries, clarified the effect on green-card holders, and made the 90-day ban permanent.  The Ninth Circuit upheld a lower court decision finding the order unlawful in Hawaii v. Trump; the Supreme Court granted cert in January, and allowed the administration to implement the travel ban while legal challenges were pending.

Refugees Cross U.S. Border into Canada – the number of asylum seekers illegally crossing from the U.S. into Canada spiked to more than 15,000 people last year.  The refugees, many of whom fear Trump’s immigration policies, were met by both opposition by anti-migrant groups and a supportive response by Canada, which granted asylum at increasing rates.

South Sudan – Displacement from South Sudan’s war became the largest refugee crisis in Africa.  More than 2 million people had fled to neighboring countries by the end of the year, with another 2 million displaced inside the country.

Rohingya Refugee Crisis – After a group of militant Rohingya Muslims attacked police bases in northern Myanmar on August 25, the army responded with a brutal show of force, burning villages, killing civilians, and raping women.  Within weeks, over 420,000 Rohingya refugees had fled, leading to a mass exodus “unprecedented in terms of volume and speed,” according to the International Organization for Migration.  Over 700,000 Rohingya have now fled to squalid refugee camps in neighboring Bangladesh.  The U.N.’s human rights commission described the retaliation as ethnic cleansing and possibly genocide.

German and Austrian Elections – Radical right-wing populist parties performed well in both the Austrian and German elections.  The newly elected Chancellor of Austria, Sebastian Kurz, earned his reputation as foreign minister for tightening Austria’s borders during the refugee crisis, when Austria was taking in more asylum-seekers than any EU country except Sweden.  Germany’s chancellor, Angela Merkel has tightened her asylum policy under pressure from the far right and in response to backlash against her initial welcoming stance.  Germany resumed deporting Afghans whose asylum claims were rejected after stopping deportations in May when a bombing near the German embassy in Kabul killed around 150 people.

Manus Island Removal – Hundreds of asylum seekers held for years in an Australian-run detention center on Papua New Guinea’s Manus Island were forcibly removed in November, three weeks after Australia officially closed the camp.  Afraid to leave the camp, the refugees had remained, despite Australia cutting off electricity, food, and water.  Security forces eventually stormed the camp destroying the refugees’ shelters and belongings. 

Climate Change Spurs Migration -- Research published last year suggests that changing weather is spurring people to seek asylum in Europe, and predicts that trend to continue as temperatures are projected to rise.  The research has sparked discussions on the appropriateness of the current definition of “refugee,” which includes people fleeing persecution but not those forced to leave by climate change.

East Congo – Eleven Congolese refugees were killed by Rwandan police responding to a protest over reduced food rations in a Kiziba camp.  Over 17,000 Congolese refugees inhabit the Western Rwanda refugee camp.  Violence in Eastern Congo has worsened recently due to clashes between government soldiers, local militias, and foreign rebels.

Looking ahead, the U.S. Supreme Court is expected to hear arguments on the travel ban this year, and the new Austrian and German governments are likely to further articulate their more restrictive immigration policies.  At the same time, the international community will grapple with how to respond to the world’s ever-increasing number of displaced persons fleeing conflict, ethnic cleansing, and changing climate.

Read More

April 03, 2018

By Maura Sokol

Photo: Stephen J. Rapp License: CC BY-ND 2.0

On February 28th, the Georgetown Law Human Rights Institute hosted a lecture by Ambassador Stephen J. Rapp, the Robert F. Drinan, S.J., Visiting Professor of Human Rights for 2017-2018. Ambassador Rapp was the United States Ambassador-at-Large for War Crimes Issues in the Office of Global Criminal Justice under President Obama from 2009 to 2015. In the position, Ambassador Rapp traveled the world extensively and worked with the Secretary of State to formulate US policy regarding the prevention and accountability of mass atrocities.

Ambassador Rapp began his lecture by acknowledging the potential tension between criminal justice and human rights but asserted that the effective pursuit of these two concepts is essentially the same and needs to be the same. In both the United States and in international law, the criminal justice process is only successful when it works with the trust of victims and victimized communities. Criminal prosecution efforts must reinforce norms against violence and abusive conduct.  

Ambassador Rapp also explained some of the history behind international criminal prosecutions and human rights. Historically, national leaders did not have to worry about facing consequences for their crimes due to the concept of sovereignty; even if they violated international treaties or harmed individuals across borders, this concept kept them largely safe from international action. Ambassador Rapp asserted that this all began to change at the Nuremberg trials after World War II. The key to Nuremberg, he says, was individual responsibility, the prosecution of men and not states or entities. This allowed for the international community to hold individuals accountable for war crimes without intruding on a nation’s sovereignty.

Another key to the Nuremberg trials was that they were organized by all of the world’s great powers at the time, and justice was not dictated by global politics. The support or lack thereof from all global powers in international criminal justice has had a huge impact on its success or failure.  This helps to explain why the Nuremberg efforts ended with the beginning of the Cold War, and not again until the end of the Cold War was there a global effort to hold individuals accountable for international crimes. This effort began again with a number of tribunals, most notably the tribunals for Yugoslavia and Rwanda enacted through the United Nations Security Council.

A third element that Ambassador Rapp believes was essential to Nuremberg, Yugoslavia, Rwanda, and other tribunals, was extensive investigations and fact-finding missions. The evidence gathered by these inquiries, sometimes gathered while the crimes were being committed, was essential to the pursuit of international criminal justice. It is useful on the one hand for linking crimes at a low level to the powerful men at the top who keep their hands clean but orchestrate the crimes. It is also useful because it provides the “big picture”, which is important to establish the required proof of context and intent for international crimes. 

The global picture is very different in 2018: many of the tribunals have closed or are in their final stages, the International Criminal Court is on shaky ground, and gaps in justice have become more apparent. The worst crimes being committed today are in places where international courts do not have jurisdiction, and Russia and China will veto efforts to create jurisdiction. Where Russia once only used their Security Council veto strategically, Russia now uses the veto power to undermine efforts to promote human rights everywhere. China argues that atrocities by countries are internal affairs. Countries that have long respected the rule of law are moving in the other direction, and increasingly leaders are elected who demonstrate a disrespect for human rights.

So, what is positive and what is possible in this new world? For one, the United Nations Human Rights Council has taken up many causes after action is blocked in the Security Council. These efforts have been successful for Syria, South Sudan, Myanmar, and many others. There are some vast differences between “soft” human rights law and the process of prosecuting international crimes, and progress must be made in efforts to bridge these two processes. Evidence collection is still crucial, and there are too many insufficiencies in inquiries and fact-finding missions that must be corrected. However, in the absence of the support that was once there from some of the great powers, if victims take up the cause and have the evidence, it is possible to build the support on the international level.

Read More

March 15, 2018

By April Kent

The U.N. Security Council recently unanimously approved a resolution condemning the killings, torture, and human rights abuses plaguing Burundi, threatening sanctions against perpetrators of the violence. The resolution called for Burundi’s government “to immediately convene an inclusive and genuine inter-Burundian dialogue.” At least 240 people have been killed in Burundi since protests began in April against President Pierre Nkurunziza's successful bid for a third term. Many in the international community have pointed to the language used by the government to describe its opponents as reminiscent of the rhetoric that paved the way for the genocide in Rwanda. Britain’s U.N. Ambassador Matthew Rycroft stated, “We know that in the worst case what we’re talking about is a possible genocide, and we know that we have to do everything that we possibly can to prevent that.” The country’s foreign Minister countered that “Burundi is not in flames,” dismissing international concerns that his country is at risk of a Rwanda-like genocide.

Read More

November 17, 2015

 By Stephen Kozey

Although international criminal law (ICL) has its roots in the 1500s or earlier, the normative development of this body of law only really picked up within the past century or so. Even though some aspects of ICL remain uncertain, its recent development has been fairly swift and robust. Thus, ICL doctrines are fully capable of reasoned application today to hold individuals responsible for international crimes they commit, such as war crimes and gross violations of international human rights.

Unfortunately, as Jack Donnelly points out, it seems that the procedural mechanisms for enforcing ICL do not deserve such kudos. The two principal avenues for prosecuting alleged international criminals – international tribunals and domestic courts – are simply not up to the task. Their inadequacy is evidenced, for example, by the fact that U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon still has to plead for protection of human rights and an end to mass atrocities.

International criminal tribunals are not effective mechanisms because they tend to be expensive and overburdened, and proceedings often take many years to start and many more years to conclude. The title of a recent Forbes article on the ICC says it all: “International Criminal Court: 12 Years, $1 Billion, 2 Convictions.”

Read More

April 18, 2014

By Katie Bacharach

Onesphore Rwabukombe, a former Rwandan mayor, was sentenced to 14 years in prison for his role in the Rwandan genocide, according to the BBC. 

He was found guilty of ordering the killing of between 400 and 1,200 people who had taken refuge at a church in Kiziguro, where Rwabukombe was the mayor at the time. He had been living as a political refugee in Germany since 2002. This was the first trial to take place in Germany in connection with the Rwandan genocide.

Read More

February 22, 2014