The international law protection on civilians from sexual abuse and exploitation committed by the United Nations peacekeepers

Abstract

Since the 1990s, the UN has run its peacekeeping missions, which are well known for SEA, notably by TCCs. The use of violence is in direct opposition to the operation's civilian protection mandate. The dissertation focuses on the protection afforded to victims of SEA by UN peacekeepers. The focus of this dissertation is to investigate the effectiveness of international law in protecting civilians from SEA by UN peacekeepers. The dissertation will also explore the international legal regimes that regulate SEA, the reasons behind why acts of SEA occur under the UN, how the organization handles allegations of SEA, and the alarmingly low prosecution rates. This research is crucial as peacekeeping forces and UN staff have been accused of widespread sexual exploitation, with very few being held accountable. The dissertation aims to address research questions related to the international legal regimes regulating SEA, the protection afforded to civilians against SEA by UN peacekeepers, and the complexities created by immunity in the pursuit of justice and the allocation of responsibility in such cases. The findings of this dissertation highlight the need for a comprehensive understanding of various factors in protecting victims of SEA by UN peacekeepers. These factors include the evolving nature and objectives of peace operations, the use of force, consent from the host state, legal personality and immunity of international organizations, and the applicability of IHL. The concept of the use of force in UN peacekeeping operations has evolved with a growing emphasis on civilian protection, but there are challenges in implementing ROE in complex conflict environments. Consent from the host state is considered crucial for the success of UN peacekeeping missions, and the nature and scope of consent, and its relationship to state sovereignty and independence, are subjects of ongoing debate. The legal personality and immunity of IOs, officials, and agents of member states are crucial for their effective functioning, but the extent of immunity may vary depending on treaties and actions performed by officials. The applicability of IHL norms in peace operations is complex, and further clarification and implementation are necessary to ensure the effective protection of civilians and upholding of fundamental rights in post-conflict situations. When addressing SEA in the context of IOs, it is important to understand the distinctions between liability, accountability, and responsibility, as provided by the ILA. The concept of 'agents' of international organizations, as defined by the ICJ, plays a pivotal role in determining the link between individuals and organizations, and organizations can be held responsible for the actions of their agents. However, attribution of conduct in the context of SEA can be complex, involving considerations such as acknowledgment and adoption of conduct, ultra vires acts, and aid or assistance. Legal, practical, and reputational factors come into play for international organizations and states alike, and further research and legal developments are needed to clarify responsibilities and liabilities in combatting SEA in peace operations and upholding human rights.