Conference Program

The Responsibility to Protect (R2P) norm is pivotal in preventing mass atrocities and advancing international peace and security. In Africa, Rwanda and South Africa have been instrumental in adopting and advancing R2P principles.

Rwanda, in the aftermath of the genocide against the Tutsi, implemented judicial reforms, including the Gacaca court system, to facilitate national reconciliation and justice. This approach allowed for accountability of perpetrators, redress for victims, and community healing. Conversely, South Africa’s commitment to human rights and democratic governance underpins its R2P strategy. Its active role in international R2P dialogues and peacekeeping missions, alongside its history of overcoming apartheid, cements its status as an R2P advocate. However, implementing R2P in conflict zones like South Sudan and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) remains challenging. Adapting R2P to local conditions and aligning with the African Union's Constitutive Act, especially Article 4(h), is vital for effective interventions. Rwanda and South Africa showcase the adaptability required in R2P application, with Rwanda notably contributing troops to peacekeeping missions, reflecting its commitment to regional stability. The practical application of R2P in Africa faces challenges, including complex regional conflicts, diverging interpretations of state sovereignty, and the need for increased international cooperation.

Rwanda and South Africa’s efforts in R2P provide a model for other African countries in championing human rights, preventing atrocities, and maintaining peace and security. By harmonizing global standards with regional specifics, African nations can collaboratively strive for a more stable and prosperous continent.

This paper sets out to explore what insights the genocide case that South Africa filed against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) might give us into broader issues related to emerging powers and the liberal international order? It challenges the binary that is sometimes set up in popular discussions between the liberal order as a Western creation and alternative orders promoted by the ‘non-West’. In fact, emerging powers are strong, outspoken supporters of many elements of what is regarded as the liberal order. In making such claims, however, it is important to distinguish between different interpretations of the liberal order (what are its constituent elements?) and also between different emerging powers whose positions on matters such as human rights differ substantially. With a focus on South Africa, the paper contends that the ICJ case showcases South Africa’s commitment to international law, particularly human rights law, as a cornerstone of international relations. The country’s own history is one of a struggle for human rights, one which made an important contribution to the global human rights regimes, including having the system of apartheid declared a crime against humanity. The paper situates itself in the wider debate about the single origins of ideas around various elements of the liberal order versus the notion of multiple beginnings, which recognizes the theoretical and practical contributions made to this order by states in the ‘non-West’, as well as the importance of the mutual constitution of the order, and the development of ideas through interconnectedness.

According to the Afrobarometer, most Africans expect more responsive, democratic and accountable governments. African youths demand their rights to be represented and their voices to be heard. Protests and movements such as the Rhodes Must Fall in South Africa, #EndSARS in Nigeria, and the #FixThe Country protest in Ghana are a few examples from a long list of youth manifestations against incompetent leaders, fraud elections, injustice and inequality, or unpopular socioeconomic policies. These protests spark political changes but struggle to reform broader socioeconomic systems.

Regarding human rights, The African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights states that economic, social, and cultural rights have equal status to civil and political rights. Yet, most African states fail to ensure human security and Sustainable Development Goals. Soaring living costs contribute to heightened poverty, hindering access to necessities. Climate change and conflicts exacerbate human rights threats, with millions facing food and shelter insecurity due to weather events and displacement.

This paper delves into the interplay of security, development, and human rights in African states, focusing on Ghana. Drawing on data collected from Ghana's youth representatives, it offers a contextually relevant understanding of these issues. The paper examines Ghanaian youth's perceptions of sustainable development, security threats, and human rights violations, presenting ideas for tangible policies. With an international perspective, it explores how global influences shape Ghanaian youth perspectives on these issues, aiming to inform policies in Ghana and across Africa.

This paper aims to deconstruction the idea of the division in the Global South and Global North by presenting the Organisation of African, Caribbean, and Pacific States (OACPS) and the EU joint parliamentary as the evidence of cooperative factor. While there is a debate about the increasing gap between Global North and South, the joint attempt that the EU and the OACPS put forward signals that the cooperation between Global North and the South is still a valid practice. Having said that this paper attempts to present the cooperation dynamics between Global South and North by answering the following questions:

- Can Global North and South still have relevance in terms of cooperating for a common goal?

- Is the norms diffusion from Global North to Global South still a valid mechanism?