372 Journal of the Spanisch Institute for Strategic Studies N. 3 / 2014 The responsibility to protect is a new concept, and has only been in existence for seven years. Implementation of the concept has often been inadequate due to a lack of political consensus. Starting in 2001, it became the focus of UN discussions until it was finally approved at the UN World Summit of 2005. It is more a moral principle than a legal obligation. Approval of the responsibility to protect principle has been the most significant development since the debate on humanitarian intervention began77. The legal system has a new tool with which to address the protection of human rights: the responsibility to protect, which aims to become a firmly established rule of international law. We agree with Professor Gutiérrez Espada when he says that it is an indispensable tool in contemporary international relations, with all of its elements: the responsibilities to prevent, react and rebuild. Nevertheless, we believe it is necessary to clarify certain aspects that arise when it comes to its practical application. In addition, it is essential to overcome the tension that exists between state interests and the needs of vulnerable communities78, which becomes even more evident in light of the right of veto held by the permanent members of the Security Council. Abuse of the principle has sparked a flurry of criticism, suggesting that countries are using it to implement strategies aimed at protecting their own interests. As Gutiérrez Espada has pointed out “if the responsibility to protect concept, in its current structure, is to fulfil its purpose, the parameters governing the right of veto of permanent members of the Council need to be changed”. The responsibility to protect has three dimensions, of which prevention is the most important and plays a central role. Measures aimed at promoting prevention should therefore be implemented, such as the creation of early warning mechanisms, diplomatic efforts to avoid conflict and support for NGOs. Force should only be used as a measure of last resort, and is only justified when all other measures have failed. The United Nations should continue working to define the exact nature and con-tent of the responsibility to protect, establish a procedure for its implementation and 77 Vid. GARRIGUES, J.: “The responsibility to protect: from an ethical principle to an effective policy…cit., pag. 178. 78 In his farewell speech, Kofi Annan stated that: “When I look at the murder, rape and starvation to which the people of Darfur are being subjected, I fear that we have not got far beyond “lip service”. The lesson here is that high-sounding doctrines like the “responsibility to protect” will remain pure rhetoric unless and until those with the power to intervene effectively – by exerting political, economic or, in the last resort, military muscle – are prepared to take the lead”. Vid. GARRIGUES, J.: “The responsibility to protect: from an ethical principle to an effective policy…cit., pag. 157.
REVISTA IEEE 3
To see the actual publication please follow the link above