March 2019

March 2019 - Domestic Prosecution of International Crimes Update

BY CLEO MEINICKE, RESEARCH ASSOCIATE AT PILPG-NL

This news update draws together worldwide updates concerning the prosecution of international crimes. Especially in Asia action is taken in the prosecution of international crimes. The information is collected from different online news platforms.

AFRICA

Rwanda | Genocide: Supreme Court upholds 30-year jail sentence for Bandora

Charles Bandora, who was extradited from Norway in 2013 to Rwanda for his role in the genocide in the former Ngenda Commune, was handed a 30-year jail sentence in 2015 by the High Court’s specialised chamber for international crimes. The Supreme Court now upheld the sentence. [March 23, 2019]

Uganda | Kwoyelo Trial Continues in Gulu; Prosecution to Call 130 Witnesses

On Monday, March 11, the trial of Thomas Kwoyelo, a former commander of the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA), resumed. He is facing 93 charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity committed between January 1995 and December 2005. The trial takes place before the International Crimes Division (ICD) sitting at the High Court in Gulu. [March 14, 2019]

AUSTRALIA & OCEANIA

Australia | By sending asylum seekers to Nauru and Manus, is Australia guilty of crimes against humanity?

Independent federal MP Andrew Wilkie argued the current and previous Australian governments are guilty of crimes against humanity. The failure to meet obligations under international law with regards to asylum seekers and refugees and “to forcibly transfer anyone to a third country and to detain them indefinitely without trial” can be considered crimes against humanity under the Rome Statute. Several communiques call for Australian government officials to be investigated. [February 28, 2019]

Australia | Australia drafting laws to deport war criminals

Australia is drafting laws to punish war criminals and people suspected of committing crimes “of serious international concern.” The consequences include the cancellation of the alleged criminals’ Australian visas and immediate deportation, according to the Department of Home Affairs. An accused war criminal Zoran Tadic fled to Serbia recently to avoid being extradited to Croatia for the crimes he committed in Skabrnja in 1991. [March 11, 2019]

ASIA

Bangladesh | Investigators find war crimes evidence against 5 Mymensingh men

War crimes evidence against five people from Mymensingh has been found by the Investigation agency of the International Crimes Tribunal. The five suspects collaborated with Razakar Bahini during the Liberation War in 1971. They are alleged to have killed 45 people and abducted seven people in Dhobaura upazila of Mymensingh. [March 10, 2019]

Bangladesh | War Crimes: ICT investigators find evidence against 9 Gaibandha men

Evidence against nine Gaibandha men for committing war crimes in collaboration with Razakar Bahini during the Liberation War in 1971 was found. The crimes included killing, rape, abduction and torture. [March 24, 2019]

Myanmar | Myanmar military court to probe Rohingya atrocity allegations

According to the Myanmar army,  a military court was set up to investigate its conduct in 2017 against the Rohingya Muslim minority that caused more than 730,000 Rohingyas to flee to Bangladesh. The United Nations, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch accuse the security forces of mass killings, rape and arson. [March 18, 2019]

Philippines | PH court hands down first conviction on terrorist for crimes against humanity

A Philippine court on Friday handed down the country’s first conviction of a terrorist for crimes against humanity and genocide and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua, a sentence fixed to 40 years. [March 15, 2019]

South Korea | South Korea region seeks to tag Japanese firms as 'war criminals'

South Korea's largest province is considering whether to stigmatize nearly 300 Japanese companies over their actions during World War II. The province is considering requiring schools to put alert labels on the firms’ products in school. The proposed practice attempts to give students a better understanding of history. The sticker would read,  “a Japanese war criminal company made the product.” The list of companies includes Nikon, Panasonic and Yamaha. [March 20, 2019]

Sri Lanka | Sri Lanka U-turns on war crimes probe

While the president of Sri Lanka Maithripala Sirisena claimed to ensure accountability for wartime abuses when he came to power in January 2015, he is now of the opinion that one should not “dig the past and re-open old wounds.” He declared that he will ask the UN Human Rights Council to reconsider a resolution that called for investigations into the killings of 40,000 ethnic Tamil civilians in the war that ended in May 2009. [March 6, 2019]

Sri Lanka | Sri Lankan army says it is ready to face any investigation on war crime

The Sri Lankan army welcomes investigations into their conduct during the nation’s decades-long civil war against the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam in order to defend its soldiers against allegations of grave human rights abuses. [March 18, 2019]

 Sri Lanka | Sri Lanka Tamils demand foreign judges in war crimes probe

The United Nations granted Colombo more time for implementing the commitments the government made in 2015 with regards to past war crimes. The UN Human Rights Council in Geneva gave the government two more years, a second extension, to set up a credible investigation into the crimes committed during the civil war. The probe is expected to include a special “hybrid” court involving local and foreign judges. [March 22, 2019]

CENTRAL AMERICA/ CARRIBEANS

Guatemala & El Salvador |  Central Americans confront amnesty for war crimes

Both countries are considering legislative initiatives to grant amnesty to perpetrators of war crimes. These initiatives elicited widespread opposition. [March 7, 2019]

Guatemala | Facing Protests, Guatemala Postpones Vote on Amnesty for War Crimes

Guatemala’s Congress suspended a scheduled vote on amnesty for war crimes. Several lawmakers walked out,  and opposition victims’ groups, human rights and activists protested against it. International organizations, foreign governments and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights also called on the government not to proceed with the vote. [March 13, 2019]

EUROPE

Bosnia | Bosnia’s Updated War Crimes Strategy Languishes in Limbo

Bosnia and Herzegovina’s revised Strategy for War Crimes Processing has as a goal to complete all war crimes cases by 2023, but was removed from the agenda for a Council of Ministers session in July 2018. No explanation for this was given. The strategy will probably not be discussed until the Council’s new members are chosen. [February 26, 2019]

Bosnia & Herzegovina | 12 years in Prison for a Wartime Rapist

Saša Cvetković, a former member of Republika Srpska Army, was found guilty of the rape of two women and a double murder near Srebrenica, in 1992. Next to imprisonment, he has to pay 15.000,00 BAM to one of the victims of sexual violence to compensate for physical and mental suffering from the attack. [March 22, 2019]

Germany | Did Germany ignore thousands of leads on possible war crimes?

Evidence suggests that war criminals were seeking asylum in Germany, yet their cases remained unprocessed. Between 2014 and 2019 the Federal Office for Migration and Refugees (BAMF) referred thousands of cases of "crimes under international law" to the Federal Criminal Police Office (BKA) and the Attorney General. However, only 129 cases were investigated. [March 7, 2019]

Kosovo | Kosovo Court Acquits Ethnic Serb Of War Crimes

A court in Kosovo has acquitted an ethnic Serb on charges of war crimes due to contradictory testimonies given by witnesses.  [March 8, 2019]

Kosovo | Kosovo’s New War Crimes Strategy Faces Political Obstacles

Special Prosecutor Drita Hajdari is concerned that the new strategy to prioritize the prosecution of war crimes after years of few prosecutions cannot succeed without senior political support in both Kosovo and Serbia. Especially “Serbia should understand that punishing war crimes is also in its interest, because war criminals are moving around freely.“ [March 13, 2019]

Netherlands | Dutch police arrest Rwandan genocide suspect on extradition request

The International Crimes Unit of the Dutch police arrested a Rwandan man near Utrecht, who is suspected of having participated in the 1994 genocide in Rwanda. Rwanda requested the extradition of the suspect. [March 20, 2019]

Sweden | Sweden calls for international tribunal to bring Isis fighters to justice

Stefan Löfven, Sweden’s prime minister, called for the establishment of an international tribunal to investigate EU nationals returning home after joining terror groups who are suspected of committing war crimes. [March 7, 2019]

NORTH AMERICA

United States | U.S. Judge Strips Citizenship Of Ex-Bosnian Muslim Woman Convicted Of War Crimes

A United States judge revoked the citizenship of a Bosnian-born Muslim woman for her involvement in war crimes during the wars in the former Yugoslavia. [March 5, 2019]

United States | United States Supports Germany’s International Arrest Warrant for Accused Syrian War Criminal

The United States government issued a statement supporting Germany’s request to Lebanon to extradite a high-ranking Syrian official accused of war crimes and crimes against humanity. In doing so, the United States supports Germany’s exercise of universal jurisdiction. This marks a significant development in US legal practice. [March 6, 2019]

United States | US judge dismisses Namibian genocide claims against Germany

A United States court has dismissed a compensation lawsuit lodged against Germany by two Namibian tribes for genocide and property seizures in colonial times. [March 7, 2019]

SOUTH AMERICA

Colombia | Colombia war crimes: Mass protests in support of special tribunal

Colombian President Ivan Duque objected to six out of 159 articles of the law implementing a peace deal with Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC). The president criticised the special jurisdiction for being too lenient towards rebel commanders. The special jurisdiction also oversees the establishment of a tribunal for war crimes. This criticism may be advantageous for the dissident fighters who still refuse to adhere to the peace deal. [March 19, 2019]

The Virtual Human Rights Lawyer - Namibia Pilot

PILPG Netherlands, the Legal Assistance Centre (LAC) from Namibia, and Intercidadania from Brazil, are working together on the design and development of the ‘Virtual Human Rights Lawyer’ (VHRL). This tool will be the outcome of an innovative project that combines several disciplines and areas of knowledge, such as IT, international and Namibian law and communications to support victims of human rights violations.

The VHRL is a tool that aims to provide victims of human rights violations with a platform to inquire which judicial and non-judicial mechanisms are available in their situation. The VHRL will take the form of a ‘chatbot’ based on specific decision trees that guide the user from his or her legal issue to the appropriate mechanism.

Jasmijn de Zeeuw

The pilot version of the chatbot will be designed for Namibia in cooperation with the Legal Assistance Centre in Windhoek, Namibia. Jasmijn de Zeeuw, a senior research associate at PILPG Netherlands, worked as a legal intern at the LAC for the past six months and initiated the partnership. She recently gave a seminar to the PILPG team on the background of the organization and the advantages of doing the pilot in Namibia.

The LAC was founded in 1988 and is the largest NGO working on the protection of human rights in Namibia. The organization works on public interest cases, particularly in the area of human rights, political and civil rights, but also cultural, economic and social rights. Among the most addressed issues are discrimination and violations of land rights. The organization works for example with the San people in respect to their ancestral land rights.

Next to being an exciting, young, and dynamic country, Namibia also presents a good pilot project. Namibia has the size of Spain and France combined but only 2.6 million inhabitants, thus a very low population density. Having been a former colony of Germany and South Africa, the inhabitants experience strong inequalities. The country’s GINI coefficient is 59.1 with a disproportionately wealthy white elite.

For the problems arising from these inequalities, and other human rights violations experienced by Namibians, the VHRL aims to provide easy and accessible support for the victims. About 45% of the population owns a mobile phone and Namibia’s mobile phone network coverage amounts to 95%, therefore the VHRL can be used by a substantive part of the population.

Follow this blog to stay up-to-date on our project! If you're interested in more information or want to help collaborate with us on this initiative, you can reach out to us at ggricius@pilpg.org.

To Be Genocide or Not to Be Genocide, That Is the Question

BY: PHEDRA NEEL, RESEARCH ASSOCIATE, PILPG-NL

DURING THE HUMAN RIGHTS WEEKEND ORGANIZED BY HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH AND DE BALIE, THE DOCUMENTARY ‘ON HER SHOULDERS’ WAS SHOWN. THIS FILM DRAWS ATTENTION TO NOBEL PEACE PRIZE WINNER NADIA MURAD AND HER FIGHT FOR THE RECOGNITION OF THE YAZIDI GENOCIDE. THE YAZIDI ARE A RELIGIOUS MINORITY THAT WAS ATTACKED BY ISIS. THIS BLOG POST REFLECTS ON THIS FIGHT AND CONSIDERS EXPLANATIONS WHY SOME MEMBERS OF THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY ARE RELUCTANT TO USE THE WORD ‘GENOCIDE’.

Between the 7th and 10th February 2019, Human Rights Watch organized, in cooperation with De Balie, the seventh edition of the Human Rights Weekend. This year’s topic was “Where do I stand” and invited the attendees to think about how they are (in)directly involved in human rights violations and how they can contribute in ending these violations. The program consisted of masterclasses, lectures, and documentaries. One of these documentaries showed the incredible story of Nadia Murad. Nadia is a Yazidi girl, who witnessed her community being murdered by ISIS. She was later captured herself and forced to become a sex slave. Today she is known as the most recent Nobel peace Prize winner for her global advocacy campaign to fight for the rights of the Yazidi. This campaign consists of addressing heads of states and governments, asking for help for the survivors and for the attack on her people to be considered as genocide. Whereas some states have indeed passed legislation that recognizes the events as genocide, others refuse to do so until the United Nations (UN) itself officially uses the word genocide to describe the atrocities. 

The Yazidi are a religious minority living in small communities in the Sinjar region in Northern Iraq. According to Nadia herself, they have allegedly endured 74 genocides, the latest one being executed by ISIS. On August 3, 2014, ISIS invaded Sinjar and destroyed whole villages. They lined up the men and executed them, they killed the elderly women and forced all girls above the age of nine to become sex slaves. All boys under the age of twelve were trained to join the fighting brigades of ISIS. In Nadia Murad’s village, Kocho, only fifteen men survived the attack. Other villages suffered the same brutality or are still suffering, as around 3000 girls are still believed to be sex slaves. 

In June 2016, the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic, a UN inquiry mission, claimed that ISIS was committing a genocide against the Yazidi. The Chair, Paulo Pinheiro, emphasized that genocide has occurred and that it is ongoing. According to Commissioner Carla Del Ponte, “ISIS has subjected every Yazidi woman, child or man that it has captured to the most horrific of atrocities. […] ISIS has made no secret of its intent to destroy the Yazidis of Sinjar, and that is one of the elements that allowed us to conclude their actions amount to genocide”. 

Even though the UN experts have stated that these events qualify as genocide, the UN as such has not used this term in a definite manner. What it has done, however, is adopt a United Nations Security Council Resolution in September 2017, which established an investigative team in order to document the atrocities and to hold the perpetrators responsible. This team, after a year of talks with Baghdad to secure its cooperation, will start its operations in 2019. However, it is yet to adopt a Resolution defining the events as a genocide.

Some states decided to act before the UN and passed national legislation to qualify the atrocities as genocide. According to the Times of Israel, the United States House of Representatives passed a motion deeming the mass killings to be a genocide in March 2016. This was followed by the Scottish Parliament and the British House of Commons in April 2016, Canada in October 2016, France in December 2016, and Armenia in 2017. Others however, refuse to do so until the UN officially declares the atrocities a genocide.  

Why is it that the UN has failed to declare the atrocities as genocide, and are states seemingly waiting for the UN to act first? The word ‘genocide’ is a legal concept defined by article 2 of the 1948 Genocide Convention 1948. The following articles of the Convention create obligations for the states parties to the Convention, calling on them to adopt legislation, try the perpetrators, provide effective penalties, among other legal obligations. In other words, calling a situation a genocide also means activating legal obligations under the Genocide Convention.  

Secondly, genocide is a heavily loaded term that plays a strong role in international relations. If you call a country out for genocide, it is very likely that the diplomatic ties between the two concerned states will be broken or will be, at the very least, strained. For example, several countries refuse to recognize the Armenian genocide in an attempt to keep friendly relations with Turkey.

Lastly, genocide is sometimes called the crime of all crimes. If a country admits that a genocide is taking place or has been taking place, then that country admits that it, as a member of the international community, has failed to prevent the most serious international crime from taking place and that it has failed to protect international peace and security.

Therefore, the United Nations does not use the term lightly and it is most likely awaiting the findings of the team now operating in the field, before officially labelling the atrocities as genocide. As long as the United Nations postpones this declaration, countries can hide behind the organization to not risk diplomatic repercussions. This means that the Yazidi will have to wait even longer for their suffering to be recognized as suffering constituting genocide. 

Domestic Prosecution of International Crimes - Introduction

BY CLEO MEINICKE, RESEARCH ASSOCIATE PILPG-NL

“An International Criminal Court is hereby established.
It [...] shall be complementary to national criminal jurisdictions. ”

— ICC Rome Statute Article 1

In October 2018, the Bosnian state court indicted a former soldier of crimes against humanity for his involvement in the murder and enforced disappearance of civilians in the Kljuc area. In September of that year, a German court convicted Ibrahim Al F. for war crimes committed in Syria and in the same month a military tribunal in the Democratic Republic of the Congo found two military commanders guilty of crimes against humanity committed in the villages of Kamananga and Lumenje (South Kivu). These are just three recent examples of domestic efforts in the prosecution of those responsible for international crimes.  

Based on the complementarity principle of the International Criminal Court (ICC), where states are “unwilling or unable” to prosecute international crimes, the ICC may step in to prosecute those most responsible for the commission of the crimes under its jurisdiction, namely genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression. However, out of 28 cases before the Court since its inception in 2001 only three resulted in successful convictions.  Several suspects were acquitted after lengthy proceedings, of which Gbagbo and Blé Goudé are the latest examples. Therefore, the ICC should be regarded as a last resort while domestic courts carry the main responsibility to prosecute those responsible for international crimes.

Despite efforts by Bosnia, Germany, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and others, many states around the world do not have the right legislation in place to prosecute international crimes on a domestic level yet and among those that have, many face obstacles and limitations to the actual prosecution of those crimes.  

This blog post is the first in a series of posts elaborating on the domestic prosecutions of international crimes, providing an overview for readers interested in this topic as well as monthly analyses on developments in different regions worldwide. The focus of the blog post series is on the four core crimes that fall under the jurisdiction of the ICC. Other transnational crimes such as terrorism, piracy, or human trafficking may be used as examples of domestic prosecution of international crimes.  

Sources of Jurisdiction for Domestic Courts

Two main events have empowered domestic courts to exercise jurisdiction over international crimes. The first is the emergence of the principle of universal jurisdiction. This principle is based on the notion that any state may exercise jurisdiction over a situation involving crimes considered “to be of extreme gravity and concern the international community.” It emerged after World War II when the international community implemented a large number of international treaties, including the 1949 Geneva Conventions, that enabled states to implement the principle on a domestic level to prosecute genocide and war crimes, for example. The second event was the adoption of the Rome Statute of the ICC that obliges its 124 member states to amend their domestic legislation to be able to prosecute international crimes. Based on the principle of complementarity, the ICC only has jurisdiction over cases where states are unwilling or unable to take action. In the cases touched upon in the introduction, which concern the gravest crimes, the national courts acted based on the universality principle and the Rome Statute.

Even though universal jurisdiction is the most used form of jurisdiction for international crimes, there are other forms of jurisdiction that provide domestic courts with the power to prosecute international crimes, especially those not falling under the Rome Statute. The territoriality principle permits jurisdiction based on where the crime took place. Domestic courts can use this type for example in cases of terrorist attacks if they have been committed on the state’s territory. The active personality principle permits jurisdiction based on the nationality of the perpetrator. Thus, where the perpetrator is a national of a state, that state may prosecute him or her. Alternatively, the passive personality principle allows for a state to claim jurisdiction based on the nationality of the victim. Third, the protective principle bases jurisdiction over a person on the protection of national interests or security even when the person is outside the state’s boundaries. Hence, domestic courts can base jurisdiction on several different principles to prosecute crimes of an international character.

Limitations to the Domestic Prosecution of International Crimes

The prosecution of international crimes domestically is often complicated. Problems occur, for example, when a state has not incorporated the international crimes into its domestic law or does not provide for universal jurisdiction. When a state does have a basis to prosecute international crimes, these cases are often complex and evidence is difficult to obtain from the respective states. Moreover, policy restrictions arise where there is a lack of specialized units or prosecutorial limits. Germany, France and the Netherlands for example have specialized war crimes units that support the investigation of the crimes committed. Lastly, lack of political will limit the success of prosecuting international crimes.

What are the main limitations to domestic prosecution of international crimes in the world? Are there geographical trends in the domestic prosecution of international crimes? In which areas are international crimes included in national legislations?  Were suspects successfully prosecuted? What obstacles do states face? These are just some of the questions that will be addressed in the next blog posts!

February 2019

February 2019 - Southern Cameroons National Council - Introduction

BY PHEDRA NEEL, RESEARCH ASSOCIATE PILPG-NL 

The situation in Southern Cameroons is as dire as it is unknown. The Cameroonian government is fighting groups in the region that it labels “armed separatist groups”. These groups want to establish an independent state called Ambazonia. The resulting violence is causing casualties on both sides.  Civilians see their human rights violated on a large scale. This blog series aims to raise awareness about this situation by regularly discussing specific aspects of the situation or by bringing updates of recent events.

Southern Cameroons and its continuing battle for independence 

Today, the inhabitants of Cameroon are facing multiple challenges. In the north, they are still combating Boko Haram and trying to cope with more than 100.000 Nigerian refugees fleeing the organization. In the east, Cameroon is struggling with the spillover effects from the conflict in the Central African Republic. In the west, the government is fighting what it calls “armed separatist groups”. Two years ago, some of these groups took up arms in their pursuit of an independent Southern Cameroons called ‘Ambazonia’. This claim for independence dates back to the colonial days. 

Following the Treaty of Versailles, the German colony ‘Kamerun’ was divided into a French Trusteeship, now known as the Republic of Cameroon, and a British trusteeship, the Southern Cameroons. After the French trusteeship gained independence in 1960, the British trusteeship was presented with a choice: to join Cameroon or to join Nigeria, another former British trusteeship. Southern Cameroons was thus never given the chance to become truly independent. Southern Cameroons eventually choose to join Cameroon, and Cameroon promised to grant the Southern Cameroonians equal rights in a federal state.

However, Cameroon has not upheld its promises, and undermined the position of the people of Southern Cameroons on multiple occasions. For example, it has forced the people of Southern Cameroons to use the French language in official settings instead of their predominantly native English language. In 2016, the people of Southern Cameroons once again started to protest for more rights, including the right to use English in schools and in courtrooms. The federal government forcefully repressed these protests. As a result, some people of the Southern Cameroons felt that independence would be the only solution. Ever since, violence has become part of everyday life in the region, and is taking a toll on the civilian population. 

Every day, newspapers report about alleged murders, extrajudicial killings, kidnappings, disappearances, dismembered bodies, and shootings. A report produced by humanitarian organizations, including UNICEF and the Human Rights Committee, has shown that the ‘Anglophone crisis’ has left 1.3 million people in need of assistance and 435,500 people internally displaced. About 3,700 unaccompanied minors are in urgent need for psychological care. More than 40 percent of hospitals and health centers no longer provide vaccines, and more than 15 percent of births occur without the presence of trained healthcare professionals. Those who manage to flee the country are not out of harm’s way either.  For example, they live in dire conditions in host communities. Furthermore, 47 Southern Cameroonian leaders are on trial on counts of terrorism. These individuals have been detained since January 2018, after being illegally extradited from Nigeria to Cameroon. While the situation receives more attention from the international community, the prosecutions continue. Their trial has been postponed on numerous occasions, currently until February 20, 2019.

At first, international organizations and states seemed unwilling to interfere or comment on the situation, apart from general calls for peace and sustainable solutions. However, since the elections in October 2018, which were won by Paul Biya – Cameroon’s president since 1982 – some states have started speaking up. For example, the United Kingdom asked for “a peaceful and structured process leading to constitutional reforms” in response to the 2018 election results. This is uncommon, as asking for constitutional reforms is more intrusive than asking for a dialogue. The other former colonizer, Germany, has gone even further than the United Kingdom. Even before the election results were made official, German members of parliament asked the German federal government for action. More specifically, they wanted the Government to offer its services as a mediator in order to start political dialogue; suspend development aid to Cameroon; work together with the EU to encourage dialogue; and bring an end to military cooperation with the Cameroonian government. 

The Unites States of America have reconsidered their assistance to Cameroon. They are still providing assistance in the fight against Boko Haram but are increasingly afraid that their contribution is used in Southern Cameroons. 

Whereas France did not issue a similar statement after the elections, it has spoken on several other occasions. For example, France did speak up whenover 70 students and staff members from a secondary school were kidnapped in November 2018, when a journalist was arrested for accusing the government of being responsible for the death of an American missionary in Southern Cameroons, and when the government arrested opposition leader Maurice Kamto.

However, more concrete action will be needed to pressure the federal government to stop the large scale human rights violations. The United Nations should take action that goes beyond mere condemnations of the violence. For example, the United Nations Human Rights Council could appoint a special rapporteur for the entire territory of Cameroon. Such an appointment could help document the violence, and facilitate negotiations towards a peaceful solution.

At the same time, the international community as a whole could work together to put an end to the violence that is negatively affecting the everyday life of so many individuals. Each of these members has an interest in the stability in the region, andthe power to pressure the Cameroonian government to bring lasting peace.