forbes.com
UN to Negotiate Treaty on Crimes Against Humanity
The UN Sixth Committee adopted a resolution on November 22, 2024, to begin negotiations on a treaty codifying crimes against humanity and imposing state obligations for prevention and punishment, addressing a gap in existing international law.
- What immediate impact will the UN resolution on crimes against humanity have on international law and state obligations?
- On November 22, 2024, the UN Sixth Committee adopted a resolution to start negotiations for a treaty on crimes against humanity, scheduling preparatory sessions in 2026 and 2027, and formal negotiations in 2028 and 2029. This treaty aims to codify crimes against humanity and impose state obligations for prevention and punishment, a gap in current international law.
- How will this treaty on crimes against humanity address the current gap in international legal frameworks concerning prevention and punishment?
- This resolution, supported by various nations including Gambia, Palestine, Jordan, and Mexico, marks a significant step towards enhanced accountability for crimes against humanity. The treaty will build upon the International Law Commission's draft articles, incorporating prevention measures and strengthening international legal frameworks.
- What long-term implications might this treaty have on the prevention and prosecution of crimes against humanity, and what challenges might arise during the negotiation process?
- The future treaty will likely impact state practices by creating legally binding obligations to prevent and punish crimes against humanity. This could lead to increased domestic legislation, international cooperation, and prosecutions, potentially influencing the response to mass atrocities globally. The long negotiation process suggests a careful, considered approach to codifying these crucial obligations.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The framing is overwhelmingly positive, highlighting the progress made and the hope for a better future. The quotes from various delegates, emphasizing the moral and legal significance, contribute to this positive framing. Headlines or subheadings could potentially emphasize the challenges and complexities ahead for a more balanced view.
Language Bias
The language used is generally neutral, but words like "monumental," "milestone," and "daring journey of hope" suggest a positive and celebratory tone. While not overtly biased, these choices shape the reader's perception. More neutral language could be used, for example, describing the resolution as 'significant' instead of 'monumental' and 'important step' instead of a 'milestone'.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses heavily on the UN's process and the positive statements from various countries' delegates. It could benefit from including perspectives from organizations or individuals who might oppose or have reservations about this treaty, such as states with concerns about sovereignty or those who believe the existing legal framework is sufficient. Additionally, mentioning potential challenges in enforcement or the treaty's limitations would provide a more balanced perspective.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a largely positive narrative, implicitly framing the creation of this treaty as a clear good without fully exploring potential downsides or alternative approaches. There's no discussion of potential drawbacks, such as unintended consequences or conflicts with existing legal frameworks.
Sustainable Development Goals
The UN resolution to advance the draft treaty on crimes against humanity directly contributes to SDG 16 (Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions) by promoting the rule of law, accountability, and justice. The treaty will codify crimes against humanity, imposing clear duties on states to prevent and punish them. This strengthens international legal frameworks for preventing violence and promoting peaceful and inclusive societies.