On 16 May 2006, resolution 1679 was unanimously adopted by the Security Council of the United Nations Organisation (UNO). It expressed its intention to consider conducting a "United Nations Operation in Darfur" and called for the deployment of "a joint African Union and United Nations technical assessment mission" . The resolution represented a strong step towards a direct intervention of the UNO peacekeeping forces in Sudan, intervention which has been more and more demanded by international organisations, media and some states. However, owing to a refusal of Sudan to let the United Nations (UN) conduct a larger mission, the only international force present in Darfur so far remains the African Union, through the African Union Mission in Sudan (AMIS). As a permanent member of the Security Council of the UN, an international actor, and an active promoter of Human Rights in the world, France must unavoidably feel concerned by the dramatic human situation in Sudan's Darfur region, and cannot ignore its international legal duties towards the conflict.
[...] The failure of Sudan to address such crimes leads to the right, and perhaps even duty, of France to react. III) Consequently of the failures of Sudan to address these crimes, the International community, and among it France, faces some responsibilities regarding international public law France has long been very reluctant to speak about genocide and even to intervene in Sudan. It for instance opposed UN economic sanctions proposed by the USA in August 2004, and long called the event a “civil war”. On 6 August 2006, however, foreign minister P. [...]
[...] As a permanent member of this Council, France should at least support, and even promote sanctions against the Sudanese government, prosecution of criminals of war, and implementation of an effective peacekeeping force. Sudanese courts being unable or unwilling to prosecute criminals, the International Criminal Court (ICC) is theoretically competent to deal with crimes in Sudan. (See annex number France could alert ICC, pursuant to article 13(b) of the Rome Statute of ICC, so that it seized the dossier[15]. (See annexe number 4). [...]
[...] Having been unable to prevent the eruption of a massively murderous conflict, the international community, and France among them, has the duty to act in order to stop the conflict, settle peace, prosecute liable people, and organise indemnification of the victims. Annexes Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide Article 3 The following acts shall be punishable: Genocide; Conspiracy to commit genocide; Direct and public incitement to commit genocide; Attempt to commit genocide; Complicity in genocide. [...]
[...] res. 2200A (XXI) U.N. GAOR Supp. (No. 16) at 52, U.N. Doc. A/6316 (1966) U.N.T.S entered into force Mar University of Minnesota, Human Rights Library, http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/instree/b3ccpr.htm. Article [...]
[...] Official recognition of the occurrence of genocide in Darfur would imply France's responsibility towards it. Having ratified the Genocide Convention on 14th October 1950, France undertook to “prevent” and genocide (article 1 of the Convention). Though this obligation firstly applies to French territory, customary law extended it through the principle of universal jurisdiction[12]. France is competent to prosecute Sudanese persons for all crimes listed in article 3 of the Convention (See annex number 1). But even before genocide has occurred, France had the duty to try to prevent it. [...]
APA Style reference
For your bibliographyOnline reading
with our online readerContent validated
by our reading committee
