TARUNA BAKTI MODEL UNITED

NATIONS 2023
STUDY GUIDE UNHRC
Genocide and Humanity: Violence at War
(Melvyn Zaafir Kairupan & Richard Farrel Johanes)
Welcoming Remarks, (Melvyn)

Dear Distinguished Delegates,

Our warmest welcome to everyone joining the United Nations Human Rights Council
(UNHRC) of Taruna Bakti Model United Nations (TBMUN) 2023. The Board of Dais (BoD)
of UNHRC TBMUN 2023 are more than honored to accept everyone into this journey with
us. As you embark on your journey together with us in the UNHRC, we cannot wait to hear
your captivating speeches and thought-provoking debate during the committee.

With a topic so close at hand “Genocide and Humanity: Violence at War,” the dais believes
that delegates can provide much needed substance for the debate as well as bridge through
the gaps of diplomacy since such topic may be controversial in certain parts of the world. As
the UNHRC topic, any debates will certainly revolve around human rights but from various
different perspectives. Hence, the BoD hopes that with the provided enlightenment in the
form of a study guide, delegates can digest and understand these topics and issues better.

Delegates are expected to actively participate in negotiation, argumentation, and substantive

contributions throughout the committee sessions and debates in order to successfully address
this urgent matter. In addition to the official proceedings, we encourage everyone to take
advantage of the committee's general sessions and events, which provide chances to make
new friends, experience novel things, and make enduring memories. You can be sure that our
committee will have an excellent meeting even though it will be conducted virtually.

Make use of this study guide to explore subjects and possible arguments so that talks are
productive and well-organized. We strongly encourage everyone involved to carry out
in-depth research, particularly on historical actions, considering the wide scope of this
phenomenon which necessitates careful framing and meaningful discussion. Wishing you
luck as you get ready, and we look forward to seeing you involved as soon as possible!

Warm Regards,
Melvyn Kairupan and Richard Johanes
Board of Dais of Taruna Bakti MUN

Chair Introduction, (Melvyn & Richard)

a. Melvyn Zaafir Kairupan - Head Chair;
Melvyn is a Cultural Philosophy penultimate from Parahyangan Catholic University. He has
been active in MUNs since 2018 and has gained a wealth of experience in delegating,
chairing, directing, and organizing MUNs from all over Indonesia. He hopes to bring
substance to the delegates when enlivening the debate for tackling crime. Despite the difficult
and technical nature of the subject, he hopes and expects the delegates to have fruitful
discussions about the complexities of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime.

b. Richard Farrel Johannes - Assistant Chair;

Richard Farrel Johanes or Richard is an undergraduate second year bachelor degree student at
Parahyangan Catholic University Bandung majoring in international relations. Richard is a
very adaptive and friendly person which made his adaptation in the new environment easy.
Richard had just started his MUN journey in 2023 and TB MUN will be his chairing debut.
He expect a structured and substantial speech in discussing Genocide and Humanity Violence
at War especially with the council UNHRC. He also expects sustainable and realistic
resolutions to be discussed by the Delegates of UNHRC. Godspeed delegates!

Council Introduction, (Richard)

UNHRC or United Nations Human Rights Council is an UN Intergovernmental body
established by the General Assembly in 2006 with mandates to investigate and address
humanitarian violation in member states globally and promoting the protection of human
rights among their member states. UNHRC also adopts resolutions that aligns with the
member states and international community goals to raise awareness and urges the
international community to take actions to eradicate human right violation. The council acted
as the forum of discussion between member states to address human rights situation and
make recommendations to solve humanitarian violation issues. In terms of membership,
UNHRC consists of 47 member states from African States to Eastern European States and
elected by the members of the general assembly based on the commitments and pledge
regarding humanitarian rights for 3 years.1 To carries its mandates, UNHRC has 4 mechanism
which are:
● Universal Periodic Review which acted as the reporting mechanism for member
states to report the domestic humanitarian condition every 4.5 years which the reports
acted as an evaluation on the further recommendations and actions that must be taken,
● Special Procedures which consist of expert individuals or group elected and assigned
by the council to certain countries to observe and report any forms of humanitarian
violation in order to alert the international community to take actions,
● Advisory Committee are group of experts or think-tank groups in the council to set
goals and recommends further actions regarding human rights violation,
● HRC Complaint Procedure is a complaint mechanism set by UNHRC in which the
report can be submitted by member states, organizations, and civil society that suffers
human right violation occurring in their countries.2

UNHRC is supervised by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR)
that has the mandate to promote, protect and achieve a full realization of all rights which are
written in the charter of the United Nations and in the international laws and treaties. This
fact has made UNHRC and OHCHR to be very related to one another. Under the support of
OHCHR, UNHRC packed Special Procedures to monitor, examine, advise, and report the
case of human rights issues in a particular country publicly which might be the concern of the
globe. This Special Procedures is able to address situations in all parts of the world without
the requirement for countries to have ratified human rights instruments.3

Topic Introduction, (Melvyn)

In the annals of human history, few atrocities rival the malevolence and scope of genocide—a
harrowing scourge that violently dismantles societies and leaves an indelible stain on the
collective conscience. Defined by the United Nations as the deliberate and systematic
obliteration, in part or in whole, of specific ethnic, racial, religious, or national groups,
genocide strikes at the very heart of humanity's most cherished principles.

1
United Nations Human Rights Council. Welcome to the Human Rights Council. Accessed from
https://www.ohchr.org/en/hr-bodies/hrc/about-council
2
United Nations Human Rights Council. The Human Rights Council Mechanism and Entities. Accessed from
https://www.ohchr.org/en/hr-bodies/hrc/other-sub-bodies
3
Ibid
The United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC), the world's arbiter of human rights,
categorically condemns genocide as a heinous violation of the sanctity of life and the inherent
dignity of individuals. The UNHRC emphasizes the abject cruelty inherent in acts designed to
extinguish entire communities, which are rooted in the bedrock principles enshrined in the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Genocide offenses, whether manifested as mass
killings, forced displacement, or sexual violence, not only violate basic human decency, but
also constitute a deliberate assault on the very foundation of the international human rights
framework.4

The UNHRC's condemnation of genocide goes beyond symbolic gestures; it represents a firm
commitment to confronting the profound and long-lasting consequences of this heinous
crime. The aftereffects of genocide go far beyond the stark statistics of lives lost,
encompassing a web of insidious consequences that seep into the very fabric of affected
societies.5

The immediate cost of genocide is the loss of countless lives, an incalculable tragedy that
shatters families and decimates communities. However, the UNHRC recognizes that the
impact of genocide goes far beyond the grim calculation of mortality rates. Survivors, those
who have endured the atrocities and witnessed the annihilation of their loved ones, bear the
weight of profound emotional and psychological trauma in addition to physical wounds.6

The emotional scars of genocide are deep, etching themselves into the collective
consciousness of survivors and communities. The lingering memories of violence, loss, and
terror create an atmosphere of fear and mistrust. The UNHRC emphasizes the importance of
4
Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect. (2023 April 14). Atrocity Prevention and the UN Human
Rights Council’s 52nd Session. Accessed from
https://www.globalr2p.org/publications/atrocity-prevention-and-the-un-human-rights-councils-52nd-session/
5
United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner. (1948 December 09).Convention on the
Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. Accessed from
https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/convention-prevention-and-punishment-crime-g
enocide
6
United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner. (2023 July 04). Human Rights Council Holds
Interactive Dialogue on the Prevention of Genocide and Starts Dialogue on the Situation of Human Rights in
Belarus. Accessed from
https://www.ohchr.org/en/news/2023/07/human-rights-council-holds-interactive-dialogue-prevention-genocide-a
nd-starts
acknowledging this enduring trauma, emphasizing that the consequences of genocide are not
limited to a single point in time, but reverberate across generations.

Moreover, the UNHRC recognizes that the scars of genocide impede the difficult process of
rebuilding shattered societies. When communities are burdened by the weight of trauma and
loss, restoring normalcy, trust, and social cohesion becomes a formidable challenge. The
inherent fabric of trust that binds individuals and communities together is frayed, making it
difficult to foster unity and cooperation.7

The transmission of trauma from generation to generation complicates the healing process
even more. Children born after genocide inherit not only physical remnants of destruction,
but also the psychological burdens carried by their parents and ancestors. The UNHRC
recognizes the cyclical nature of trauma, in which past scars continue to shape the present and
obstruct the prospect of a brighter future.

Furthermore, the UNHRC recognizes that genocide is not an isolated act confined within
national borders; its repercussions reverberate across regions, disrupting the delicate balance
of international peace and security. The deliberate targeting of communities and the
subsequent breakdown of social structures can trigger a cascade of events, exacerbating
existing tensions and contributing to broader geopolitical conflicts. The Council underscores
the need for a concerted international effort to prevent the metastasis of genocidal acts and
mitigate the far-reaching consequences that extend well beyond the immediate theater of
violence.8

In its tireless pursuit of justice, the UNHRC champions accountability as a linchpin in the
prevention of future atrocities. The Council asserts that holding perpetrators accountable
through fair and transparent legal processes is not only a moral imperative but also a practical
necessity. Justice, in this context, becomes a beacon guiding societies towards reconciliation
and resilience, steering them away from the abyss of perpetual violence.9
7
United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner. Rebuilding Lives. Accessed from
https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Publications/rebuildinglivesen.pdf
8
Ibid
9
United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner. OHCHR: Transitional justice and human
rights. Accessed from https://www.ohchr.org/en/transitional-justice
Status Quo, (Melvyn)
Genocide, as a crime under international law, is a flagrant violation of humanity's most
fundamental principles. Recognizing the gravity of this crime, the UNHRC has made it a
central tenet of its mission to prevent not only genocide but also related atrocity crimes.
According to the United Nations Office for the Prevention of Genocide and the
Responsibility to Protect, these heinous acts do not occur spontaneously; rather, they develop
as a process over time, with discernible warning signs that demand proactive attention.10

In its commitment to foresight and prevention, the UN Human Rights Council has developed
a Framework of Analysis that identifies key risk factors for atrocity crimes. These risk factors
serve as critical indicators, urging the international community to be cautious. Identity-based
discrimination, which includes prejudices based on ethnicity, nationality, religion, or race, is
one of the factors. Socio Economic exclusion, political exclusion, state fragility characterized
by weak governance and corruption, and conflict - whether manifested as intergroup tensions
or armed conflict - are all identified as potential precursors to atrocities.11

To prevent genocide and related crimes, it is necessary not only to recognize these risk
factors, but also to take decisive action to address and mitigate them. The United Nations
Human Rights Council emphasizes the importance of eradicating identity-based
discrimination, promoting socio economic inclusion, ensuring political participation,
strengthening state institutions, and fostering conflict resolution and prevention strategies.
The emphasis is on developing resilient societies that uphold the rule of law, protect human
rights without discrimination, establish legitimate and accountable national institutions,
eradicate corruption, constructively manage diversity, and support a robust and diverse civil
society as well as a pluralistic media.12

10
United Nations Office on Genocide Prevention and the Responsibility to Protect. Prevention of Genocide and
related Atrocity Crimes. Accessed from https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/prevention.shtml
11
United Nations Office on Genocide Prevention and the Responsibility to Protect. Analyzing Atrocity Crimes.
Accessed from https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/analyzing-atrocity-crimes.shtml
12
United Nations Office on Genocide Prevention and the Responsibility to Protect. Human Rights Council.
Accessed from https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/human-rights-council.shtm
Despite the UN Human Rights Council's concerted efforts, UN Secretary-General António
Guterres has issued sobering warnings. He admits that genocide is still a real threat on a
global scale.13 The chilling specter of genocide has manifested in various forms in recent
history, highlighting the formidable challenges confronting the global community in
safeguarding the fundamental tenets of human rights. Documented cases serve as stark
reminders of the critical need for preventative measures. These contemporary cases include,
but are not limited to:

1. The Rohingya Crisis,

The Rohingya Crisis, which has been ongoing since 2016, has claimed between 9,000
and 13,700 lives. The Rohingya community has been relentlessly persecuted, drawing
widespread condemnation for its brutality and flagrant disregard for basic human
rights;14
2. The Uyghur Situation,
The Uyghur Situation is notable for its systemic nature, with forced sterilization, mass
detentions, and a campaign of cultural obliteration. While there have been no
traditional mass killings, the egregious human rights violations against the Uyghur
population have sparked worldwide concern and condemnation;15
3. Iraqi-Turkmen Crisis,
Iraqi-Turkmen Crisis unfolding between 2014 and 2017, the Iraqi-Turkmen Crisis
resulted in the tragic loss of an estimated 3,500 to 8,400 lives. This harrowing episode
underscores the vulnerability of minority populations in the tumultuous landscape of
conflict and political upheaval;16
4. Genocide of Yazidis by the Islamic State,

13
United Nations UN News Global Perspective Human Stories.(2022 December 9). Genocide threat still real,
UN chief says, commemorating victims worldwide. Accessed from
https://news.un.org/en/story/2022/12/1131587
14
European Commision. (August 2018). The Rohingya Crisis. Accessed from
https://ec.europa.eu/echo/files/aid/countries/factsheets/rohingya_en.pdf
15
Maizland, Lindsay. (22 September 2022). China’s Repression of Uyghur in Xinjiang.Council on Foreign
Relations. Accessed from
https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/china-xinjiang-uyghurs-muslims-repression-genocide-human-rights
16
Al-Hamour Taher, Ali Dr. (August 2021). Iraqi Turkmen: The Controversy of Identity and Affiliation.
Accessed from https://library.fes.de/pdf-files/bueros/amman/18225.pdf
 Genocide of Yazidis by the Islamic State, unfolding from 2014 to 2019, the Genocide
of Yazidis by the Islamic State led to the deaths of an estimated 2,100 to 5,000
individuals. Deliberately targeting the Yazidi community, this atrocity underscores the
gravity of crimes committed by extremist factions;17
5. The Darfur Genocide;
Commencing in 2003, the Darfur Genocide has claimed an estimated 98,000 to
500,000 lives. This protracted conflict has brought into sharp focus the formidable
challenges of addressing genocidal acts amid political instability and internal strife.18

These instances represent but a fraction of the broader historical tableau of genocides. The
UNHRC remains actively engaged in its tireless mission to prevent genocide and atrocity
crimes by identifying risk factors and implementing measures to address and diminish them.
Through vigilant monitoring, rigorous investigations, and unyielding advocacy, the council
strives to forge a world where the specter of such egregious crimes is minimized, if not
entirely eradicated. The UNHRC's persistent efforts underscore the imperative of global
collaboration and unwavering vigilance in the face of persistent threats to human rights and
global peace.

Past Actions
Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime Genocide
The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime Genocide or the Genocide
Convention is an international treaty established and adopted by the UNGA specified on
Genocide. The treaty elaborates the definition of Genocide and it’s forms and condemn any
forms of genocide that must be taken as criminal act. It also enable and encourage member
states to recognize and take actions to prevent, condemn, and punish the crime of genocide by
utilizing it’s legislation function through policies. However it has ambiguity of how the state
should take measures regarding the genocide prevention which left member states to define it

17
Loft, Philip. (2023 August 09). UK Acknowledges Yazidi Genocide by Daesh/Islamic State. UK Parliament,
House of Commons Library. Accessed from
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/uk-acknowledges-yazidi-genocide-by-daesh-islamic-state/
18
Sikalnga, Ahmad. (February 2009). The Worlds Worst Humanitarian Crisis: Understanding the Darfur
Conflict. Accessed from
https://origins.osu.edu/article/worlds-worst-humanitarian-crisis-understanding-darfur-conflict?language_content
_entity=en
individually. It also has no specified mechanism and standard set to address the prevention of
genocide.19

Geneva Convention (12 August 1949)

Back in the times of war where human right was not the main concern, the Geneva
Convention was born. It consists of protocols and regulations to conduct armed conflicts and
limit it’s effects done by states in conflict. It also elaborates and promotes the forms of
victim, prisoner, and civilians of war which must be protected. The convention had also been
ratified by 194 member states which made it legal and must be obliged. Although it became
one of the first principles to address human right at war zones, the convention had no
standards and only acting as sets of principles that must be defined and uphold by each
member states according to their interpretation.20

Responsibility to Protect (R2P) 2005

Established at the peak of Rwandan and Balkan Genocide and NATO use of Military Forces
on Kosovo, R2P or Responsibility to protect is a global political commitment pledge by
member states established through the UNGA in 2005 to identify and address the crimes
against humanity such as war crime, genocide, and ethnic cleansing. The foundation
regarding the establishment of the commitments is the state's sovereignty responsibility is to
uphold the protection of human rights from all forms of human rights violation. It emphasizes
on three main pillars which are state’s responsibilities to protect their citizen, capacity
building through international cooperation and assistance, and timely decisive action making
from member states.21 Although the commitments manage to raise awareness of protection of
human rights, this commitment is considered weak because it only acted as the unified
interest with lack of actions taken by member states and vague terminology of human rights
violation and unrealistic goals set up by member states which left unreached. It also doesn’t

19
United Nations General Assembly. (1951 January 12). Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the
Crime Genocide. Accessed from
https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/documents/atrocity-crimes/Doc.1_Convention%20on%20the%20Pre
vention%20and%20Punishment%20of%20the%20Crime%20of%20Genocide.pdf
20
ICRC. (1949 August 12). The Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949. Accessed from
https://www.icrc.org/en/doc/assets/files/publications/icrc-002-0173.pdf
21
United Nations Office on Genocide Prevention and the Responsibility to Protect. Responsibility to Protect.
Accessed from https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/about-responsibility-to-protect.shtml
have mechanism to implement the commitment which left member states to determined
norms and actions according to their condition. 22

UNGA Resolutions 37/26

The Human Right Council on behalf of the General Assembly adopted a Resolutions on 23
March 2018 titled “Prevention on Genocide” which puts it’s basis on Universal Declaration
of Human Rights. It acknowledge the negative effect of genocide, previous actions that had
been taken, recognizes UNHRC main bodies contribution, urges member states to take
actions to prevent genocide, Condemning any forms of actions related to genocide taken by
member states, and promote the rights of human right to be free of genocide. Ratification of
Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide is also the main
target in the resolution. Although the resolutions manage to identify, address, and
recommends member states to prevent genocide, This resolution focuses on prevention of
genocide as the state’s responsibility rather than the individual, does not provides any further
mechanism to address the issues which relies on the past existing mechanism, no funding
mechanism provided to implement the resolutions, and the vague terminology with lack of
elaboration regarding genocide.23

Scope of Debate, (Melvyn)

Within the UNHRC conference dedicated to addressing the pervasive issue of genocide, the
breadth of the debate would highly be encouraged to encompass the multifaceted dimensions
critical to understanding, preventing, and responding to these egregious crimes.

1. Genocide Prevention;
Central to the discourse would be strategies for preventing genocide and related
atrocity crimes. Delegates would delve into the identification of risk factors, early
warning signs, and the formulation of effective prevention measures. The focus might
extend to international collaboration, intelligence-sharing, and diplomatic efforts
aimed at nipping potential genocidal acts in the bud before they escalate.

22
Holmes R, Kim. (2014 Jan 7). The Weakness of the Responsibility to Protect as an International Norm. The
Heritage Foundation. Accessed from
https://www.heritage.org/defense/commentary/the-weakness-the-responsibility-protect-international-norm
23
United Nations General Assembly. (2018 April 6). UNGA Resolutions 37/26 ‘Prevention of Genocide’.
Accessed from https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/documents/A-HRC-37-26.pdf
 2. Accountability to Actors;
The conference would undoubtedly tackle the imperative of accountability for
genocide and atrocity crimes. Participants would engage in discussions on the role of
international courts, national legal systems, and other mechanisms designed to hold
perpetrators accountable. Key considerations might include the efficacy of existing
legal frameworks, challenges in prosecuting offenders, and avenues for ensuring
justice for the victims.
3. Genocide Intervention;
A critical facet of the debate would revolve around intervention in situations where
genocide or related atrocity crimes are unfolding. Delegates would engage in
discussions on the responsibility to protect, the judicious use of force, and other
measures for halting ongoing atrocities. This might encompass the delicate balance
between respecting national sovereignty and the imperative to prevent mass violence
and human suffering.
4. Post Genocide Reconciliation;
The aftermath of genocide would form a poignant aspect of the discussions, with a
focus on reconciliation. Delegates might explore mechanisms such as truth and
reconciliation commissions, reparations, and other measures aimed at fostering
healing and rebuilding societies torn apart by the traumatic aftermath of genocidal
acts.

While these topics serve as the foundation for any genocide conference, it is critical to
recognize that the specific context and goals of such a gathering will shape the scope of the
debate. Nonetheless, the identified themes will almost certainly remain central, reflecting the
multifaceted nature of the problem and the need for comprehensive solutions.

The United Nations Office on Genocide Prevention and the Responsibility to Protect
illuminates the intricate web of political, legal, and moral considerations inherent in this
process by addressing the complexities surrounding the UNHRC's recognition of genocide.
These complexities that the delegates must not fail to address includes but is not limited to:
1. Political considerations;
Acknowledging genocide carries weighty political implications, especially when the
nation in question is a member of the UNHRC or maintains close ties with other
 member states. The potential reluctance of member states to criticize one another
might pose challenges, hindering decisive action in the face of genocidal atrocities.
2. Legal considerations;
The acknowledgment of genocide necessitates sufficient evidence to substantiate the
occurrence of such crimes. Challenges may arise, particularly if the country in
question is uncooperative or if there are limited resources available for thorough
investigation. The legal burden for establishing genocide can be formidable,
impacting the UNHRC's ability to navigate legal complexities effectively.
3. Moral considerations;
Acknowledging genocide entails moral implications, potentially casting the UNHRC
in the role of taking sides in a conflict. This ethical dilemma could complicate the
council's efforts to maintain impartiality and objectivity, crucial elements for fostering
effective international cooperation.

Navigating through these intricate considerations, any substantive debate on genocide within
the UNHRC would demand a delicate balance between diplomatic pragmatism and the moral
imperative to safeguard human rights on a global scale.

Bloc Position,
Within the UNHRC, countries often align themselves into regional and interest-based blocs,
which can influence their collective stance on various issues, including the prevention of
genocide. These blocs facilitate coordination, collaboration, and the advancement of shared
goals. The division of UNHRC countries into blocs concerning the prevention of genocide
can be outlined as follows:

1. Western Bloc;
Consisting of Western democracies, including the United States, Canada, members of
the European Union, and other like-minded nations, these countries emphasize on
human rights, the responsibility to protect, and the promotion of international
interventions when necessary to prevent genocide. These countries may prioritize the
protection of vulnerable populations and global stability.

2. African Bloc;
 African nations represented in the UNHRC focus on preventing genocide within the
African continent, addressing regional conflicts, and advocating for solutions that
respect national sovereignty while addressing human rights concerns.
3. Asian Bloc;
Asian countries in the UN Human Rights Council, including major powers such as
China and India, prioritize non-intervention, sovereignty, and regional stability while
also addressing human rights concerns within the context of their own cultural and
political dynamics.
4. Latin American Bloc;
Made up of Countries from Latin America and the Caribbean, they focus on
sovereignty, regional stability, and respect for non-intervention principles. The bloc
may also advocate for addressing socioeconomic factors contributing to potential
conflicts.
5. Eastern European Bloc;
Eastern European nations are concerned with regional stability, conflict resolution,
and the prevention of genocide within the region. The bloc may also stress the
significance of economic and political cooperation.
6. Non-Aligned Movement (NAM);
A diverse group of nations not aligned with any major power bloc puts focus on
national sovereignty, non-interference, and the right to self-determination. The bloc
may seek diplomatic and non-coercive solutions to conflicts, while also expressing
concern for human rights.
7. Islamic Bloc;
Countries with significant Muslim populations and have significant political support
for Islamic ideals, these countries focus on addressing issues related to Islamophobia,
advocating for the rights of Muslim communities, and contributing to global efforts to
prevent genocide, especially in areas with Muslim populations.

It is important to note that these blocs are not rigid, and that countries within each bloc may
have differing viewpoints. Even within a bloc, national interests, historical relationships, and
current geopolitical dynamics can cause stances to diverge. Furthermore, ad hoc coalitions on
specific issues may form, demonstrating the fluidity of alliances within the UNHRC. Because
genocide prevention is a complex and sensitive issue, it frequently necessitates careful
diplomacy and collaboration to bridge gaps between different blocs and advance a collective
approach to human rights protection.

Questions a Resolution Must Answer, (Melvyn)

1. How can the international community collectively identify and address risk factors
leading to genocide and related atrocity crimes in an effort to prevent genocides?
2. What role should international courts, national legal systems, and other accountability
mechanisms play in addressing and preventing genocide ?
3. How can the UNHRC facilitate cooperation between member states to ensure
accountability for perpetrators of genocide and related atrocities?
4. Under what circumstances should the international community intervene in cases of
ongoing genocide or imminent atrocity crimes?
5. What are the responsibilities of the UNHRC and its member states in the context of
the "responsibility to protect," and how can these responsibilities be effectively
exercised?
6. How can the UNHRC navigate political considerations when acknowledging
genocide, particularly when member states involved have close ties or are part of the
council?
7. What steps can be taken to overcome legal challenges associated with acknowledging
genocide, especially when sufficient evidence is difficult to obtain?
8. In what manner can the UNHRC maintain moral considerations and impartiality when
addressing genocide without being perceived as taking sides in conflicts?
 Bibliography
United Nations Human Rights Council. 2023. “OHCHR | HRC | Welcome to the Human
Rights Council.” OHCHR. 2023.
https://www.ohchr.org/en/hr-bodies/hrc/about-council.

“OHCHR | Human Rights Council Subsidiary Bodies.” n.d. OHCHR.

https://www.ohchr.org/en/hr-bodies/hrc/other-sub-bodies.

“Atrocity Prevention and the UN Human Rights Council’s 52nd Session.” n.d. Global Centre
for the Responsibility to Protect.
https://www.globalr2p.org/publications/atrocity-prevention-and-the-un-human-rights-
councils-52nd-session/.

General Assembly resolution 260 A (III). 1948. “Convention on the Prevention and
Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.” OHCHR. December 9, 1948.
https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/convention-preventio
n-and-punishment-crime-genocide.

“Human Rights Council Holds Interactive Dialogue on the Prevention of Genocide and Starts
Dialogue on the Situation of Human Rights in Belarus.” n.d. OHCHR.
https://www.ohchr.org/en/news/2023/07/human-rights-council-holds-interactive-dialo
gue-prevention-genocide-and-starts.

“Rebuilding Lives.” n.d. Accessed December 5, 2023.

https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Publications/rebuildinglivesen.pd
f.

United Nations. n.d. “OHCHR | OHCHR: Transitional Justice and Human Rights.” OHCHR.
https://www.ohchr.org/en/transitional-justice.

“Genocide Threat Still Real, UN Chief Says, Commemorating Victims Worldwide.” 2022.
UN News. December 9, 2022. https://news.un.org/en/story/2022/12/1131587.
“The Rohingya Crisis ECHO FACTSHEET.” n.d.
https://ec.europa.eu/echo/files/aid/countries/factsheets/rohingya_en.pdf.

Maizland, Lindsay. 2022. “China’s Repression of Uyghurs in Xinjiang.” Council on Foreign

Relations. September 22, 2022.
https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/china-xinjiang-uyghurs-muslims-repression-genoci
de-human-rights.

Al-Hamoud, Ali. 2021. “Iraqi Turkmen: The Controversy of Identity and Affiliation.”
https://library.fes.de/pdf-files/bueros/amman/18225.pdf.

Loft, Philip. 2023 August 09. “UK acknowledges Yazidi genocide by Daesh/Islamic State”.
UK parliament. House of Commons Library.
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/uk-acknowledges-yazidi-genocide-by-daesh-isl
amic-state/

Sikainga, Ahmad. 2009. “‘The World’s Worst Humanitarian Crisis’: Understanding the
Darfur Conflict.” Origins. February 2009.
https://origins.osu.edu/article/worlds-worst-humanitarian-crisis-understanding-darfur-
conflict?language_content_entity=en.

International Committee of the Red Cross. 1949. “THE GENEVA CONVENTIONS of 12

AUGUST 1949.” International Committee of the Red Cross.
https://www.icrc.org/en/doc/assets/files/publications/icrc-002-0173.pdf.

2019. “United Nations Office on Genocide Prevention and the Responsibility to Protect.”
United Nations. 2019.
https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/about-responsibility-to-protect.shtml.

Holmes, Kim. 2014. “The Weakness of the Responsibility to Protect as an International

Norm.” The Heritage Foundation. January 7, 2014.
https://www.heritage.org/defense/commentary/the-weakness-the-responsibility-protec
t-international-norm.
United Nations General Assembly. 2018 April 6. “Resolutions 37/26 Prevention on
Genocide”. https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/documents/A-HRC-37-26.pdf