'Nuff said

(Taking context-optional note of thought-provoking quotes)

Looking for a way out of Afghanistan? Maybe it's time to try something totally different, like putting into action, for the first time in history, the most enlightened edict ever passed by the United Nations Security Council: Resolution 1325.

-- The provocative lead paragraph of a Los Angeles Times op-ed by Ann Jones, entitled "In Afghanistan, a woman's place is at the peace table." Jones, author of books on Afghanistan and women and armed conflict, stresses the promise of full implementation of Resolution 1325 on Women and Peace and Security, which (as detailed in IntLawGrrls posts available here) the Security Council adopted on October 31, 2000. The commentary derives from Jones' longer post at TomDispatch blog. (credit for photo by Jones of Afghan women) In similar vein, see this recent IntLawGrrls post by guests/alumnae Christine Bella and Catherine O'Rourke.

Absence of women's authorial voices

(Delighted to welcome back alumna Fionnuala Ní Aoláin, who contributes this guest post)

In recent years, feminist international law scholars have wondered if we will ever be more than "a decorative frill on the edge of the discipline." in the apt phrase of IntLawGrrls guest/alumna Hilary Charlesworth.
With that in mind, we take note that an event yesterday on "What Makes a Great International Law Article," hosted by the American Society of International Law. Five of the most cited articles from the past decade were picked out in order to guide conversation on the topic. They were:

► Eric Stein, "International Integration and Democracy No Love at First Sight," 95 American Journal of International Law 489 (2001);
► Paul C. Szasz, "The Security Council Starts Legislating," 96 American Journal of International Law 901 (2002);
► Ryan Goodman, "Human Rights Treaties, Invalid Reservations, and State Consent," 96 American Journal of International Law (2002);
► W. Michael Reisman, "Assessing Claims to Revise the Laws of War," 97 American Journal of International Law 82 (2003); and
► Harold Hongju Koh, "International Law as Part of Our Law," 98 American Journal of International Law 43 (2004).

The notable absence of women in the list is surprising.
It is especially surprising given that international law scholars Christine Bell (another IntLawGrrls guest/alumna), Allison Marston Danner and Anthea Roberts have all garnered the Deák Prize for meritorious scholarship published in the American Journal of International Law, in 2007, 2004 and 2002 respectively.
On a positive note, the panel leading the discussion included two women: one prominent international law scholar and AJIL editor, Dinah Shelton, and AJIL Managing Editor Julie Furgerson.

Today's Guest Bloggers: Christine Bell and Catherine O’Rourke

It's IntLawGrrls' great pleasure to welcome as today's guest bloggers Christine Bell (left) and Dr. Catherine O'Rourke (right), colleagues at the Transitional Justice Institute, University of Ulster, Northern Ireland.
► Christine serves as an Associate Director of the Institute (along with IntLawGrrls alumna Fionnuala Ní Aoláin), and also is a Professor of Public International Law at the university's Magee campus in Derry. She's the previous Director of the Centre for International and Comparative Human Rights Law at Queen's University in Belfast, her hometown. After reading law at Selwyn College, Cambridge, England, Christine earned an LL.M from Harvard Law School, supported by a Harkness Fellowship. Both a barrister and an attorney, she practiced for a period at Debevoise & Plimpton in New York. She's served as chairperson of Belfast-based Committee on the Administration of Justice, as a founding member of the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission, and as a member of the European Commission’s Committee of Experts on Fundamental Rights. She has taken part in various peace negotiations discussions, and given advice and training to diplomats, mediators, and lawyers.
In 2007, Christine was a Fernand Braudel Senior Fellow at the European University Institute, Florence, Italy. Her 2006 article "Peace Agreements: Their Nature and Legal Status" won the Francis Deák Prize, awarded annually "to a younger author for meritorious scholarship published in The American Journal of International Law." Among her other publications are 2 books: On the Law of Peace: Peace Agreements and the Lex Pacificatoria (2008) and Peace Agreements and Human Rights (2000).
► Catherine is a Lecturer in Human Rights and International Law at the University of Ulster and Gender Research Coordinator at its Transitional Justice Institute. She earned her LLB (Law and Politics) from Queen's University Belfast, her MSc Gender and Development from the Gender Institute at the London School of Economics, and her PhD from the University of Ulster. This past November, the Politics Studies Association of Ireland gave Catherine the Basil Chubb Prize, recognizing the year's best PhD thesis undertaken in Ireland in any field of politics, for her dissertation, "The Law and Politics of Gender in Transition: A Feminist Exploration of Transitional Justice in Chile, Northern Ireland and Colombia" (supervised by Christine and by Dr. Carmel Roulston, Senior Lecturer in Politics at the University of Ulster). Catherine's other publications are here.
A Visiting Scholar in 2007-08 at American University School of International Service in Washington, D.C., Catherine also has been a Visiting Researcher at the law schools of Universidad Diego Portales in Santiago, Chile, and Universidad de los Andes in Bogotá, Colombia. She's been active in Amnesty International's Stop Violence Against Women campaign, provided guidance to the Northern Ireland women's sector on the Bill of Rights drafting process, and participated as a gender and security sector reform expert at the New York-based International Center for Transitional Justice.
In their guest post below, Christine and Catherine discuss the contents and analyze the findings of their empirical research into what impact, if any, U.N. Security Resolution 1325 (2000) on Women and Peace and Security may have had on negotiation and drafting of peace agreements.
Christine and Catherine dedicate their post to Marjorie "Mo" Mowlam (below left), who died from a brain tumor in 2005, at age 55. Mowlam, Christine and Catherine write, was

a British Member of Parliament and the British Secretary of State for Northern Ireland during the peace negotiations and production of the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement. She was one of the first women negotiators of a peace process, brought a different style to the process, and as we now know, did so while fighting cancer of the brain. Whether one agrees with her role as British Secretary of State, she was a powerful, innovative and feminist woman whose remarkable ways of communication played a key role in achieving a peace settlement. All sides would acknowledge her impact. She suffered political marginalization as a women due to her success and had she lived would undoubtedly be one of the woman who could have played a key mediation role in other conflicts.

Today Mowlam joins IntLawGrrls' other foremothers in the list just below our "visiting from..." map at right.

Heartfelt welcome!

Impact of Resolution 1325 on peace accords

(Our thanks to IntLawGrrls for the opportunity to contribute this guest post)

With last October's tenth anniversary of UN Security Council Resolution 1325 on Women, Peace and Security (2000), the resolution’s effectiveness is coming under intense scrutiny. (image credit) In our recent research on the impact of the resolution on the text of peace agreements, we make some significant findings about the impact of 1325 on peace agreement drafting.
(Our research dataset is available in full here. Our methodology, coding decisions, findings and our fuller analysis may be found in ‘Peace Agreements or ‘Pieces of Paper’? The Impact of UNSC Resolution 1325 on Peace Processes and their Agreements’, our article published in the October 2010 edition of International & Comparative Law Quarterly.)

Peace agreements can play a crucial role in setting post-conflict priorities and shaping the internal constitutional order. Women often attempt to influence agreement texts in pursuit of gender equality, in an effort to influence the key roadmap to the political and legal future that will shape their lives. For these reasons Resolution 1325 specifically targeted peace negotiations and agreements in paragraph 8, which calls on all actors involved, when negotiating and implementing peace agreements, to adopt a gender perspective, with particular reference to post-conflict needs. The aim of this perspective is to support local women’s peace initiatives as well as the human rights of women with relation to constitutional reform. (Prior IntLawGrrls posts on this resolution may be found here.)
In our research project, we were interested in whether the texts of peace agreements post-1325 showed evidence of the resolution’s impact. Did peace agreements signed after the resolution contain more references to women and gender equality than those signed before the resolution? If so, what was the nature of these provisions? What difference did involvement of the United Nations in the negotiation of the agreement make regarding, firstly, the number, and secondly, the nature, of peace agreement references to women and gender? Were peace agreements more likely to address the specific issues for women and girls identified in paragraph 8?
In summary we found:
► Only 16% of peace agreements contain references to women. But references to women have increased significantly since the passing of Resolution 1325, from 11% to 27% of agreements.
► This rise is more dramatic for agreements in which the UN had a third-party role (from 4% to 12%) than it is for agreements which did not involve the UN in such a role (from 7% to 14%).
► However, both before and after Resolution 1325 women are more likely to be referenced in agreements in which the UN is not named as a third party. The more marked increase in references to women in ‘UN’ agreements must therefore be understood in a context where such agreements were less likely to reference women prior to Resolution 1325.
► Peace agreement references to women are qualitatively often poor. They constitute scattered references to women, some of which contravene provisions of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women. Only on rare occasions do these references illustrate good practice.

Our data
Our study involved 585 peace agreements signed since between 1 January 1990 and 1 May 2010. We began by identifying provisions making explicit reference to ‘women’, ‘gender’, ‘widows’ or ‘girls’ and to ‘sexual violence’, or named forms of sexual violence such as ‘rape’.
We separately coded whether the UN was involved as some type of third party to the peace agreement. This enabled us to question the extent to which the UN has played a role in implementing its own normative standards. UN third party involvement was defined using the agreement text and documenting whether the UN, a UN agency, or a UN representative was party or signatory, mediator or facilitator, observer, witness or negotiator to the agreement.
In addition we undertook a qualitiative analysis of the reference to women.

Our Analysis
The overall finding that only 16% of peace agreements make any sort of reference to women is disappointing.

Even the higher figure for post-Resolution 1325 references to women of 27% (up from 11%) indicates a long way to go before peace agreements systematically include references to women. However, it does seem that the 2000 Security Council measure is having some effect, and particularly where the UN is involved.

Our qualitative review of the nature of the peace agreement references indicates that many of these references are unsubstantial.

There is little evidence of systematic inclusion of women in peace agreement texts, or systematic treatment of issues across peace agreements within conflicts. Moreover, some of the references in our database are, at best, ambiguous in terms of feminist gains, for example: the use of quotas which not only encourage but limit the participation of women (Bangladesh/Chittagong); references to ensuring women’s ‘moral integrity’ (Philippines); references to women as mothers to be targeted for early prisoner release (Nicaragua). Some strong textual provisions do however exist, often in countries that also have actions plans (see for example, Uganda).

Our conclusions
We suggest that further thought must be given to the strategies and barriers to effective implementation of Resolution 1325. Our findings regarding the resolution’s effectiveness with respect to peace negotiations and peace agreement texts suggest the need for further thinking on:
► What constitutes a ‘gender perspective’ in a peace agreement.
► How Resolution 1325 is being taken forward by organizations other than the UN is required, particularly as their role is increasing.
► Whether a ‘gender justice v peace’ dilemma exists where gender-specific concerns of women are left off the table, not due to oversight, lack of expertise, or lack of commitment, but because of concerns that inclusion would make it more difficult for the parties to reach agreement on other matters or destabilize any agreement reached.
► What constitutes good practice in terms of inserting ‘a gender perspective’ in peace agreement texts.
► How to retain space for women to re-envision peace processes in a transformative way, while influencing texts as they arise within the processes in which women are engaged.

We would encourage people to look at and use the research, and to contact us (c.bell@ulster.ac.uk, cf.orourke@ulster.ac.uk) with any response they may have.

Go On! Human Rights: A Drop of Liberation or Fig Leaf of Legitimation?

(Go On! is an occasional item on symposia of interest)

Newcastle Human Rights Research Group Symposium Announcement: Human Rights – A Drop of Liberation or Fig Leaf of Legitimation?
Date: 23 January 2010, Newcastle Law School, Newcastle University, UK.
This symposium draws upon the proliferation of academic commentary asserting that the international human rights project is in a state of crisis in the first decade of the twenty-first century, requiring a re-evaluation of both its impact and its future direction. With papers from world-leading authorities on human rights, this symposium provides a forum for assessing the effectiveness of human rights as an element of international law and in the domestic context of the United Kingdom in the face of these renewed and novel challenges. Moreover, this symposium draws together human rights sceptics and supporters from across disparate strands of transatlantic human-rights scholarship.

Confirmed Speakers
► Professor David Kennedy, Harvard University - ‘The International Human Rights Movement: Still Part of the Problem?’
► Professor Keith Ewing, Kings College London - Title TBC
► Professor David Bonner, University of Leicester - ‘If you cannot change the rules of the game, adapt to them: United Kingdom responses to the restrictions set by Article 3 ECHR on “national security” deportations’
► Professor Christine Bell, University of Ulster - ‘Human rights activism, expertise and academic inquiry: beyond legitimation v emancipation - a self-critical reflection’
► Mr. Steven Wheatley, Reader, University of Leeds - ‘The problematic authority of international human rights law.’
A limited number of places for delegates are available on a first-come-first-served basis, at a cost of £30 per head (or £10 per head for full-time postgraduates), inclusive of lunch and refreshments. Full details of the Conference Programme are available on the Newcastle Law School Website.
For further details regarding this symposium, please contact the Symposium Co-ordinators Dr Rob Dickinson (r.a.dickinson@ncl.ac.uk) or Dr Ole W. Pedersen (ole.pedersen@ncl.ac.uk). Payment at the event is possible provided you email to notify your attendance in advance. Please make all cheques for delegate fees payable to Newcastle University and send them to Dr Rob Dickinson, Symposium Co-ordinator, Newcastle Law School, 21-24 Windsor Terrace, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, NE1 7RU.

No applause for "a bad joke"

"It's a bad joke," International Criminal Court Prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo said. Got that right:
The subject of his complaint is the fact that Sudan's nominated its minister of humanitarian affairs to head a commission charged with investigating human rights violations in Darfur. Problem is that, as posted here, that minister, Ahmad Muhammad Harun, is sought by the ICC, having been named as a suspect in atrocities that occurred in Darfur in 2003 and 2004. Le Monde notes that the nomination occurred

just before U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon's visit last Thursday to Sudan. The move increased unease among observers, who noted that in giving priority in July to the deployment of a "hybrid force" to Darfur (UNAMID/MINAUD), the Security Council has relegated to secondary status implementation of the ICC arrest warrants, one of which is aimed at Harun.

Moreno-Ocampo's right to object to this rebuff, of course. Yet it's worth noting that Sudan's gambit has resonance outside the context of Darfur -- Sudan is by no means the only state in history to seek to pack an inquiry panel with persons sympathetic to its viewpoint, if not with persons perhaps responsible for the events that triggered the inquiry in the 1st place. One's reminded of the Widgery Report that exonerated British troops after Bloody Sunday in 1972 left 14 civil rights marchers dead. (See Christine Bell, Dealing With the Past in Northern Ireland, 26 Fordham International Law Journal 1095 (2003); Angela Hegarty, The Government of Memory: Public Inquiries and the Limits of Justice in Northern Ireland, 26 Fordham International Law Journal 1148 (2003)). More recently, there's been a host of post-9/11 inquiry panels said to operate independently of executive pressure notwithstanding that some were appointed by, and some staffed by employees of, the U.S. Defense Department.
These examples suggest that attention's due to developing standards for the promotion of independence and impartiality not only in international criminal trials (a subject on which I've written here and here), but also in commissions established to examine tragedies that have provoked international concern.