Veronica Rondon & Jelle Willem Van Der Ham - Lyon MUN
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Veronica Rondon & Jelle Willem Van Der Ham
Letter of welcome ..................................................................................................... 3
Introduction to the Committee ................................................................................ 5
Topic 1 Promoting sovereignty in the arctic region............................................... 6
Introduction to the issue ...................................................................................... 6
Timeline of events ................................................................................................ 7
Key terms and concepts ....................................................................................... 8
The issue ............................................................................................................... 9
UNCLOS ............................................................................................................. 9
Maritime Zones in UNCLOS ............................................................................. 9
Military presence and tensions .......................................................................... 12
What is expected of delegates ........................................................................... 15
Topic 2 The creation of an international tribunal for prosecuting Isis crimes ... 16
Introduction to the issue .................................................................................... 16
International attacks carried out by ISIS in USA and Europe ...................... 16
Arrests and legal actions taken up until now ................................................ 18
Current status of the attackers of the aforementioned attacks .................... 19
Different approaches to the matter ................................................................... 20
Domestic Tribunals ......................................................................................... 20
The permanent International Criminal Court ................................................ 20
An International Tribunal ................................................................................ 21
What is expected of the delegates..................................................................... 22
Bibliography ........................................................................................................ 23
2
Dear, most honourable Delegates,
It is our pleasure as chairs to welcome you to the United Nations Security Council
of the 2021 LyonMUN conference. Before we say anything else, let us briefly
introduce ourselves.
Veronica Rondon is a third year student of political sciences. She started her
journey in MUNs when she was 14 years old in high school. She has participated
in a great number of conferences (lost count of them by conference 10), both
national and international. She lives in Madrid at the moment, but was born in
Venezuela and also lived in Colombia. She is a big fan of cooking, good series
and good movies. You´ll find her watching the latest Netflix series, rewatching
Friends or doing a marathon of the Harry Potter movies. She loves chairing and
hopes to make LyonMUN an unforgettable experience for all of you.
Jelle van der Ham is a student from the Netherlands, currently living in
Amersfoort. He is studying a double degree in both spatial planning & landscape
architecture and political sciences. He has been a MUN fanatic since a young
age, making LyonMUN 2021 his 19th conference. He is an avid traveller, taking
every opportunity to explore some city or corner of Europe or the Netherlands,
preferably by train. He enjoys watching good movies (Wes Anderson is his
favourite) or the occasional Netflix series (The Good Place and Dark are where
it’s at), reading a good book, and listening to music (70’s rock, pop of all ages,
mediocre 90’s electronic, or anything really if it’s on vinyl) as well.
We are both looking forward very much to meeting and getting to know all of
you as well. To make the conference as successful as possible, research on the
committee’s topics is required. We expect a good level of understanding of both
the topics and your country’s position at the start of the conference. If you are
an MUN beginner, or you are not so experienced yet – please do not worry, do
research to the best of your abilities, and we will be happy to explain the rules
of MUN’ing to you during the conference. In any case, you can always contact
us at unsc@lyonmun.com
Of course, without wanting to sound too repetitive, like everything else the
conference will be very different from normal this year. Because of the ongoing
situation in Europe, we will be meeting up online instead of in the lovely city of
Lyon. Of course, we would have loved to meet you in real life. We have however
both chaired at online conferences in the past year already, and thoroughly
enjoyed them as well, and we are very confident that together, we can bring the
spirit of LyonMUN online successfully. We wish you the best of luck with
3
preparations for the conference and hope to see you all online on the 20th of
April.
We are looking forward to making the conference a success together with you.
Kind regards,
Jelle and Veronica
4The United Nations Security Council was created in 1946. It is permanently
established in the United Nations HeadQuarters in New York.
It is responsible for maintaining international peace and security. There are 5
permanent members, who have veto capacity, and 10 non-permanent members,
that rotate every 2 years.
The veto capacity means that a vote against a certain resolution by one of the 5
permanent members, vetoes said resolution, therefore, it shall not pass. Vetoes
are justified by different reasons, like national interests, preservation of foreign
policies, among others.
The Security Council is the only organ of the United Nations, apart from the
General Assembly, that can impose sanctions against countries, as well as other
assertive actions.
5When presenting the United States’ new Arctic Strategy, the US Secretary of the
air force Barbara Barrett was quoted as saying “The Arctic is among the most
strategically significant regions of the world today”. This is a telling statement
about this usually overlooked area which is set to play a much greater role on
the geopolitical and geostrategic stage than ever before. With the melting of
more sea ice in the Arctic Ocean and the unlocked potential for shipping and
resource extraction, the area is getting more sensitive for territorial disputes,
military tension, and confrontation, and prone to environmental damage. This
calls for
The most important rules, laws, and treaties in place regarding sovereignty in
the Arctic region, however, are those regarding maritime borders and control
over natural resources, which are defined in the UNCLOS. The United Nations
Convention on the Law of the Sea dictates the various forms of maritime
territories and which states or entities have control over them and a right to the
resources in them. Disputes arise here from the fact that every state has a right
to ask for an extension of the maritime area they have the exclusive right to
resources in if they can prove their physical landmass extends underwater. In
the Arctic area, with the melting of more sea ice and the increasing capabilities
to accumulate both mineral and hydrocarbon resources from the seabed, these
disputes are becoming more and more important for the member states
involved.
Apart from resources, the other important talking point in regard to UNCLOS and
the right to the Arctic waters is the right of passage. As more sea ice melts and
global trade continues to increase, several shipping routes over the Arctic Ocean
are becoming more attractive to more states. A prime example is the Northwest
passage, a shipping lane providing a shorter route from the Atlantic to the Pacific
Ocean than the current route, but which goes through what Canada sees as their
internal waters. In order to avoid confrontation in the future, there needs to be
consensus on these and other shipping routes in the area.
6April 1907: Canadian senator Poirier makes the first suggestion of claiming
sovereignty over Arctic territory, suggesting an area extending to the North Pole.
The Canadian Senate dismisses the idea.
April 1909: American explorer Robert Peary is the first to reach the North Pole
and claims the entire Arctic region for the US.
1916: Norway begins mining coal on the archipelago of Svalbard, which it
continues to do to this day.
1925: Canada and the Soviet Union claim all those entering the triangular
territories between their extremities and the North Pole to require permits from
them, effectively claiming sovereignty.
1945: President Truman first claims the natural resources on and beneath the
seabed of what he considers to be the American Continental Shelf to belong to
the US.
1958: The Convention on the Continental Shelf, precursor to the UNCLOS, is
approved, and is ratified by every country except Iceland.
1969: An American oil tanker becomes the first commercial vessel to cross the
Northwest Passage, a shipping route across the Arctic north of Canada providing
a shorter link between the Pacific and Atlantic oceans. Canada sees the waters
of this passage as Internal waters, while other countries see them as
international waterways.
1982: After more than 10 years of negotiating, UNCLOS is signed, setting the
rules for maritime borders as they are now.
1992: Russian president Yeltsin approves a plan for oil and gas company
Gazprom to develop an oil field offshore to Nova Zembla.
2007: A pair of Russian submarines descend beneath the Arctic Ocean to explore
the Russian continental shelf, and plant a Russian flag. This sparks outrage from
Canada, whose foreign minister states a country “can’t just plant flags and say,
we are claiming this territory”.
2007: Canadian forces hold their first of annual military exercises in the Arctic.
2013: US president Obama presents the National Strategy for the Arctic Region.
2013: Gazprom as the first company starts pumping crude oil from beneath the
Arctic Ocean.
7Arctic Region: Generally, and also for the sake of this research report, we will
define the Arctic Region as the region within the Arctic Circle.
Franz Josef Land: A Russian Arctic Archipelago, located east of Svalbard, on
which Russia’s most important air base Nagurskoya is located.
GIUK gap: The ‘gaps’ between Greenland and Iceland, and Iceland and the UK,
respectively, are the only means for vessels to enter the Atlantic Ocean from the
Arctic and vice versa, making it a strategically important area.
Spitsbergen: the largest island of the Svalbard archipelago and the only
permanently inhabited one.
Svalbard: An officially Norwegian archipelago, north of the European mainland
in the Arctic Sea. It was first discovered by the Dutch, and has since mainly
housed Norwegians and Russians who have set up coal mines there, which are
mostly regarded as a reason for their presence.
UNCLOS: The United Nations Convention on the Laws of the Sea is a treaty, or
agreement (its exact parameters are sometimes disputed) defining the rights and
responsibilities of the world’s oceans and waterways. While 168 countries are
party to the agreement, only 157 have signed it, and only 60 have ratified it.
Terms in UNCLOS such as the several types of waters as defined by the
agreement, Continental Shelf, etcetera, are defined later under the UNCLOS
section.
8In order to discuss the promotion of sovereignty in the Arctic region, one needs
to understand the current claims and disputes to territory in the area. And in
order to understand these, one first needs to understand the international laws
and agreements in place to define the maritime territories that can be claimed
by states. Within the UN, laws regarding maritime borders, states’
responsibilities in maritime zones, and laws regarding resource management
and extraction, wildlife protection, and matters of security are defined under
UNCLOS, or the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. This
convention is the result of the third UN conference on the law of the sea, taking
place between 1973 and 1982, and went into effect in 1994. Of the 168 nations
that are party to the convention, 157 have signed it, but crucially, only 60 have
ratified it.
While named as being a ‘Law’, UNCLOS can in reality best be defined as a
comprehensive international treaty, which some nations choose to sign, ratify
and adhere to, and others do not. The United States for example is a major
nation which is not a party to the treaty and has not signed or ratified it. This can
create problematic situations and international tensions. For example, the
ongoing dispute in the Eastern Mediterranean Sea is partly caused by the fact
that Greece and the EU accept and are party to the treaty, while Turkey is not
and therefore refers to older agreements, causing overlapping territorial claims
of Greece and Turkey. As we will see later, these kinds of conflicts exist in the
Arctic region too.
The most important agreements in UNCLOS are the limits and definitions set to
different maritime zones. The agreement also includes specific rules for different
maritime zones regarding right of passage, the exploitation of different
resources, protection of the environment, and scientific research. We will briefly
describe all the different concepts.
9Baseline
UNCLOS defines a line along the coast of a state from which their maritime
territories are measured. This line normally
follows the low-water line of a coast (meaning
the average low water measured during
Spring, when tide is greatest). However in
practice the baseline also often consists of
simplified, straight lines, to include a nation’s
islands and jagged coastline. This is
illustrated by figure x, which shows Chile’s
baseline.
Internal waters
As can be seen in figure x, drawing straight
baselines along an unstable, fringing
coastline which also includes islands means
some waters will end up on the land side of
the baseline. These waters are known as internal waters. The state is free to set
their own laws regarding these waters and may freely use any resource. Foreign
vessels have no right of passage.
Territorial waters
The first twelve nautical miles (4 miles,
22 kilometres) measured from a state’s
baseline are their territorial waters. In
this area, the state is free to set their own
laws, use any resource. All vessels do
however have the right of innocent
passage; this means passing through
the waters in a manner “not prejudicial
to the peace, good order or the security”
of the coastal state.
Contiguous zone
The second twelve nautical miles,
starting at the edge of the territorial
waters, are a state’s contiguous zone. In
this area the coastal state can enforce
laws in four specific areas in order to
ensure compliance with these laws in
the territorial waters. These four areas
are customs, taxation, immigration and pollution. In practice this generally
10means that any vessels can be apprehended in the contiguous zone in regard of
these four areas in order to protect the territorial waters. For example, if a vessel
is seemingly headed towards the territorial waters with illegal immigrants on
board, they may be apprehended in the contiguous zone.
Exclusive Economic Zone
One of the two more relevant concepts in UNCLOS for the arctic region is a
state’s Exclusive Economic Zone, or EEZ. The EEZ extends 200 nautical miles
from a state’s baseline (including the territorial and contiguous zones), or, where
the 200 nm zones of two states overlap, the middle point between the two states.
In this area, the state is allowed to exploit any natural resources, including oil
drilling and fishery. States are also allowed to mine and collect minerals on the
seabed, but this has to be authorized by the International Seabed Authority (ISA)
Generally, all vessels and aircraft have the right to pass through this zone, and
any state can lay pipes or cables on the seabed.
Continental shelf
Most issues over maritime
territorial disputes arise from
states’ claimed continental
shelves. In geological terms the
continental shelf is that part of a
landmass under relatively
shallow waters. The legal
definition differs slightly; within
UNCLOS, it refers to the
physical extension of the
landmass underwater beyond
the 200 nautical miles (EEZ) mark. Thus, in geological terms, a small island may
not have a physical continental shelf of 200 nm; however the island still holds
the right to a 200 nm EEZ. Reversely, if a state feels that their landmass physically
extends beyond the 200 nm mark, they may submit an application for extension
to UNCLOS. This extension gives them the exclusive right to any resources on
and below the seabed of this continental shelf area. This can thus be valuable in
areas with minerals on the seabed, or hydrocarbons (oil and gas) below the
seabed. This continental shelf area can reach a maximum of 350 nm from the
states’ baseline, and can also not exceed 100 nm from the point where the shelf
is at a depth of greater than 2500 metres.
Beyond the continental shelf
All waters beyond the 200 mile EEZ are known as international waters, or the
high seas. These waters are free to all that wish to travel through them, including
11military vessels. Several treaties have established other bodies of water as
having similar legal statuses to international waters, such as the Danish Straits
(open to all commercial and military vessels)
Svalbard
Svalbard is an archipelago in the Arctic sea, north of Norway. Although it is
administered by Norway, is an unincorporated territory, the islands of which the
archipelago exists are open for all to settle and perform economic activities on.
This arrangement is stipulated in the 1920 Svalbard treaty, and in theory holds
for any of the 46 signatories to the treaty. Both Norway and Russia have, since
the early 20th century until this very day, mined coal on the island, even though
several political economic experts have commented that these mines are not
even slightly economically profitable or even viable. Russia is slowly closing
down their coal mines, but on the other hand boosting spending on the touristic
and cultural sector in the Russian settlements on the island, clearly signalling
their intent to stay. Arguably, all these means are ways for the countries to justify
their presence in the area and claim sovereignty to some degree. A question for
the UNSC to answer is whether this arrangement can last into the future, and
what solutions there might be to potential problems.
Military presence of several nations in the Arctic region has increased in the last
few years. As more sea ice melts and reserves of oil and gas become slimmer
elsewhere, and with the ongoing globalization the world is subjected to, the
economic and strategic advantages of the region are becoming clearer day by
day. Several countries have clearly and openly expressed their intention to
increase their presence in the region and this will undoubtedly have an effect on
issues surrounding sovereignty and international relations. The actions and
statements of several countries are outlined below; delegates of the UNSC must
of course be aware that these are not the only relevant parties in the conflict.
The several branches of the US defensive forces have all recently come with their
own strategies and goals regarding the Arctic region. The new US Navy strategy
for the region focuses on the “day-to-day competition” and specifically marks
the different interests that Russia and China might have and the threats they may
pose. It names the control of increasingly accessible resources and sea routes
and the increasing military presence of other countries as the main challenges.
Meanwhile the US Army too has a new strategy, named “Regaining Arctic
12Dominance”, calling for the rebuilding of the US’ military capabilities in the
region.
Several current examples of US presence include the start of the stationing of
US Bomber aircraft north of the Arctic circle for the first time, which now
participate in joint exercises together with the Norwegian Air Force, or a likely
deal between Norway and the US for the latter to use a disused cold-war era
submarine base again. Currently there are other, more cumbersome
arrangements in place for US submarines to be bale to dock in Norway. In
response to a new potential Russian threat by submarine, especially around the
GIUK gap (See: Russia) the US has reactivated parts of its fleets and patrols more
frequently.
Although the US seems to be expanding at a faster rate in the Arctic, the Russian
federation was much earlier than it and is already more militarily established.
Frequent submarine exercises, on the largest scale since the cold war, take place
under the Arctic Sea and around Spitsbergen. The tests are seen as a test for US
and NATO’s forces in their capability to track and attack these boats as they can
submerge themselves deeper and longer than ever before. This especially holds
for the so-called GIUK gap; the entrance to the Arctic Sea from the Atlantic which
ships have to cross, either between Greenland (G) and Iceland (I) or between
Iceland (I) and the United Kingdom (UK).
Russia’s most northernmost military outpost is located at Nagurskoya, on the
Russian archipelago of Franz Josef, and is also their most important base in the
Arctic. Russia has recently lengthened the runway at this base in order for it to
accommodate heavier aircraft, and reports and rumours have emerged of plans
to host a permanent squadron of the Russian air force at this base.
China does not have many current military interests in the region, nor is it
particularly active in it. It does however have major strategic economic interest
in the region. It has defined its plans and goals to establish shipping routes
through the area under the Polar Silk Road, the Arctic naval branch of their wider
Silk Road policy. Within this context, China has defined its role in the region as
that not of an Arctic state (which it is not) but as a “Near-Arctic State”.
Canada is the nation with most of its territory in the Arctic. It therefore comes as
no surprise that it has in great detail defined its goals and strategy for the region.
Like other countries, Canada makes conflicting territorial claims with other
13countries, in this case the US, Russia, Denmark and Greenland. These claims to
sovereignty have been described by Canada’s previous prime minister Harper
as their main, and non-negotiable, priority.
14A resolution on the topic of promoting sovereignty in the Arctic region should
cover several issues. It should outline directions, if not outright solutions, to the
disputed territories and surrounding issues. Delegates could perhaps look at
addressing or trying to give directions to solving disputes in UNCLOS and its
subsequent regulations itself, but should bear in mind that this would be more
suited to a separate UNCLOS meeting, and it would mainly be the UNSC’s task
to assess this if it directly affected security. Depending on mainly the delegates
representing countries that are not or less militarily active in the region,
statements surrounding limiting, monitoring or otherwise addressing the
increase of military presence can also be made. Although the issue is by nature
of course directly related to the issues of climate change, and also caused by it,
we expect delegates to try and focus on the topic: promoting sovereignty. This
can of course include the aspects of environmental damage and how these relate
to culture, human society, and thus on potentially threatening sovereignty.
Delegates are encouraged to research how their own country views the current
agreements. with the main focus of course on UNCLOS, and if they have specific
views on the individual disputes in the region. Following from this they are more
generally urged to research their countries’ general strategic or other interests
in the past, currently, and potentially in the future. As an example, a country like
the Netherlands might not seem directly involved, but the reliance of their
economy on sea trade means they will definitely have an interest in potential
shipping routes across the Arctic. Delegates representing countries that are not
one of the 7 countries within the Arctic circle with their own military presence
are encouraged to specifically focus on their military and strategic alliances, both
in formal forms like NATO or bilateral agreements but also through other means
such as economic or military reliance, strategy, more informal agreements, and
the general future direction of the country’s strategic interests.
15The Islamic State, most commonly known as ISIS, arises from the remains of
former terrorist group Al Qaeda in Iraq. It was founded in 2004 by Abu Musab al
Zarqawi. After the mobilisation of United States troops into the country in 2007,
the organisation passed to a background place, but, in 2011, they came back into
the front picture and took advantage of the country's instability to carry out
different attacks in Iraq, as well as started moving towards Syria. As the civil war
started in Syria, ISIS fought against Syrian forces, gaining territory and adepts
within the society, also changing officially its name to ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq
and Syria).
The organisation implanted the Sharia law thorughout the extension of the
territories they had taken, it is a strict Islamic religious law, based on Islamic
traditions and practices.
In 2014, the organisation had taken control of Falluja, Mosul and Tikrit in Iraq,
some of the country's most important cities. Because of that, the organisation
declared itself as a caliphate. During this period, as the organisation grew more
violent and more radical in terms of religion, former terrorist group Al Qaeda
broke ties with ISIS and condemned some of the attacask they had carried out.
From this period on, ISIS became well known around the world for the brutality
of its actions, which were immortalized in videos, posted on social media such
as YouTube, available for people all around the world to see. Some say that this
is what caused the rising of new adepts around the world, who were crucial for
the international chapter of this organization.
• May 2014: A single shooter identified as Mehdi Nemmouche opened fire
at the Jewish Museum in Brussels, Belgium, and killed a total of 4 people.
• October 2014: Two soldiers are run down by a car in Canada, one of them
dies.
• October 2014: A soldier is shot dead in the National War Memorial, the
shooter storms the parliament in Ottawa, Canada.
• November 2015: Bombers and shooters perpetrated an attack in the
streets of Paris, France, killing 130 people.
• December 2015: A couple opens fire at a Shopping Center, killing 14
people.
16• March 2016: Organised suicide bombers attack a metro station and the
airport in Brussels, Belgium, killing 32 people.
• June 2016: Omar Mateen enters a gay club in Orlando, Florida, USA, and
kills 49 people by opening fire against them.
• July 2016: Mohamed Lahouaiej-Bouhlel drives a truck against people
celebrating Bastille Day in the streets in Nice, France, killing 86 people.
• July 2016: A priest and several members of a church are taken hostages,
in Normandy, France, the priest dies.
• November 2016: Abdul Razak Ali Artan stabbed and ran people over with
a car in Ohio State University, USA, killing 1 person.
• December 2016: Anis Amri runs a Polish truck towards a Christmas market
in Berlin, Germany, killing 12 people.
• March 2017: People in front of the Westminster Palace are ran over by a
car in London, United Kingdom, 6 people are killed.
• April 2017: A truck drives into people in Drottningattan in Stockholm,
Sweden, killing 5 people.
• April 2017: Two police officers are shooted dead in Champs-Elysees, Paris,
France.
• May 2017: A suicide bomber attacks at the end of an Ariana Grande
concert in Manchester, United Kingdom.
• June 2017: A van drives into people in the London Bridge in London,
United Kingdom, afterwards, men emerge from the van and satb people
nearby, 8 people were killed.
• August 2017: A van drives through pedestrians in La Rambla, Barcelona,
Spain, killing 16 people.
• October 2017: A man drives a pickup truck into pedestrians in Manhattan,
New York, USA, killing 8 people.
• February 2018: A man opened fire against an orthodox community in
Dagestan, Russia, 5 women were killed.
• March 2018: Redouane Lakdim orchestrated a planned attack in
Carcassonne and Trebes, in France, killing 5 people.
• May 2018: A single attacker killed a pedestrian with a knife in Paris, France.
• May 2018: Benjamin Herman, a prisoner on permitted leave, attacked
civilians and police officers in Liege, Belgium, killing 4 people.
• December 2018: A man opened fire against civilians in a Christmas market
in Strasbourg, France, killing 5 people.
• December 2018: An explotion caused by ISIS in a building causes 42
deaths in Russia.
• November 2020: A single attacker kills 4 people in Vienna, Austria
17This list is only of the attacks perpetrated by ISIS in the eastern world, but it is
calculated that ISIS has taken over 9000 lives throughout the world, although,
this will always remain a question unanswered as there may be a lot more
deaths.
The European Union and the United States of America both have condemned
their attacks. Also, they have been looking for ways to prosecute ISIS attackers,
as they are not prosecuted in the Islamic State, nor Iraq or Syria. Therefore, their
crimes would not be punished nor important in regards to the law.
That is why, the international community has joint forces to address how to
prosecute ISIS criminals and make them pay for their crimes.
Foremost, the Human Rights Watch, has made a report on the accountability of
ISIS crimes in Iraq. In this report, HRW has found that there are significant flaws
in the prosecution of ISIS members. This is so, as they are being severely judged
no matter their real implication in the organization. That meaning, simple
affiliates, that do not take part in any way of the attacks, who are sometimes
children, are bing judged the same way as organizers of the attacks, receiving
the same fatal ending: execution.
With this information, it is not clear if the attackers should stand trial as well as
the brains behind the attacks. Although most of the International community
agrees that attackers have the same fault as the organizers behind them, it is an
interesting approach the one behind judging the organizers more severely than
lower rank members of the organization. The HRW has established that a reason
to judge them differently would be to promote future reintegration and
reconciliation, overall, within the Iraqi community. This is an interesting
approach that would be very interesting to tackle.
A very important arrest was made last year, during the pandemic lockdown. The
Spanish police found one of the most wanted ISIS members hiding out in a
rented flat.
A great number of arrests have been conducted throughout the globe. Some of
them were for people who were suspected of collaborating or aiding ISIS in any
way, some others were for people whoe were known to either have taken part in
the attacks, or have organized them, they usually flee the country they attack on
or go into hiding until they are found. All these people were judged by national
courts and prosecuted under the crimes of terrorism, domestic terrorism or
18taking part in criminal organizations. There is a lot of information out there,
looking into some of it can be useful in order to know what legal figures are
being used and how to use them in an international frame.
• May 2014: The subject is currently in custody, after being extradited to
Belgium, and pending trial regarding Belgium law.
• October 2014: The subject was shot dead during the police chase.
• October 2014: The subject was shot dead inside the Parliament building.
• November 2015: All subjects were killed in the scene.
• December 2015: The subjects were shot dead by the police in the scene.
• March 2016: Three subjects were shot dead by the police in the scene,
other subjects fleed and are being sought by the police.
• June 2016: The subject was shot dead by the police in the scene.
• July 2016: The subject was shot dead by the police in the scene.
• July 2016: Both subjects were shot dead by the police in the scene.
• November 2016: The subject was killed by the police in the scene.
• December 2016: The subject fled to Italy and was found there later on and
shot dead by the police.
• March 2017: The subject was killed by the police in the scene.
• April 2017: The subject was arrested and is still under custody, awaiting
trial regarding the Swedish law.
• April 2017: The subject was shot dead by the police in the scene.
• May 2017: The subject died in the bombing.
• June 2017: The subjects died or were shot by the police in the scene.
• August 2017: Three of the subjects were killed by the police, one is still
being sought.
• October 2017: The subject was taken into custody, awaiting trial regarding
the USA law.
• February 2018: The subject was shot dead by the police in the scene.
• March 2018: The subject was shot dead by the police in the scene.
• May 2018: The subject was shot dead by the police in the scene.
• May 2018: The subject was shot dead by the police in the scene.
• December 2018: The subject was shot dead by the police two days later
after being found after fleeing the scene.
• December 2018: The subject died in the explosion.
• November 2020: The subject died in the scene, shot dead by the police.
19There are different options for the International Community to take to try to
prosecute the crimes.
International crimes can be prosecuted in domestic tribunals if the crimes were
perpetrated within the borders of said countries. This would only make sense if
the national community believes it is useful, however, as explained in the next
paragraph, domestic tribunals must be overviewed by international supervision.
However, without international supervision, criminals cannot be granted a fair
trial that guarantees their human rights. For instance, the court that judged
Sadam Hussein was accused of not being impartial and being highly influenced
by him being in the power for many years. In Syria, even though there has not
been a history of similar cases, it is likely that the trials will not be impartial. All
in all, both countries would have to agree on the decision they take over their
trials when it comes to making a verdict, and it is unlikely this will happen, as
each country has its own religious and ethnical particularities. Also, neither of
the countries are capable of handling cases as big and complex as this one, that
is why domestic tribunal is not seen as a viable nor fair solution to prosecuting
ISIS criminals.
It has the jurisdiction to perform trials on individuals accused of genocide or
crimes against humanity, among others. They can initiate prosecution by referral
of the Security Council.
The Court has some characteristics of its own:
The judges ensure that the trials conducted are fair.
The Office of Prosecution is an independent organ from the Court, and they are
the only ones who can bring forward a case to be judged in the Court.
The Defendants’ rights are always overviewed and protected, and their right to
fair, public procedures, as well as trials in a language they can understand are
always respected.
20The victims are invited to participate in the process and their voices are heard in
the Court.
The participating victims and witnesses are always protected by operational and
procedural measures.
The Court secures two-way direct communication with the affected communities
in order to protect them and evaluate the well being of the communities after the
processes have ended.
The Court judges four different types of crimes, which are:
Genocide: It means that it is meant to destroy a part or a whole national,
ethnic, racial or religious group by killing, harming bodily or mentaly,
imposing methods to prevent births, among others, to the members of
said group.
Crimes against humanity: It means serious violations or crimes committed
to a large scale civil population. There are 15 different forms listed in the
Rome Estatute, some of them include: Murder, rape, imprisonment,
enforced dissapearences, enslavement, sexual slavery, torture, apartheid
and deportation, among others.
War crimes: It means grave violations of the Geneva convention, some of
which include: The use of child soldiers, killing or torture of civilians or
war prisoners, intentional attacks towards hospitals or historic
monuments, among others.
Crime of aggression: It means the use of armed force from a State against
the sovereignty or independence of another State.
The Court may judge any crime of the above stated that has occurred after the
1st of July 2002. Also, those committed by a State Party national, on its territory,
or in a State that has accepted the jurisdiction of the Court. Foremost, those
referred by the United Nations Security Council.
The Security Council has the power to create an International Tribunal ad hoc if
it detects grave violations to the Geneva Convention. Two tribunals have been
created so far in history: one for the civil war in Rwanda in 1994 and another one
for the crimes occurred in former Yugoslavia in the 1990s. By establishing such
a Tribunal, both Iraq and Syria would have to cooperate and follow the decision
of said International Tribunal.
21Delegates must address the issue by stating in a resolution whether or not they
will encourage the creation of an international court, and if so, an extensive
document on the rules and procedures governing said tribunal.
Delegates are expected to know about international law and to be able to handle
it and make a correct use of it during the debate. For further reading, please
contact us chairs and we will provide useful material.
Delegates are expected to address different approaches to the matter,
considering the social and cultural background of the organization, the types of
criminals (or not) that are within it, and the future they would/wouldn't have after
their sentences, if they are sentenced/trialed.
• Is an International Court going to be established? If so:
o Who would be the judges?
o Where would it be geographically located?
o Who would stand trial?
o What International organizations would overview it?
o What rules would be followed in the trials?
• If no International Court is to be held, what other options are there going
to be managed?
• Is the International Court of Justice going to be considered?
• What will the United Nations Security Council’s involvement will be?
• Will there be judgement towards the national security forces that shot
dead the subjects in different countries?
• What will happen with subjects awaiting trials regarding different
domestic law around the world?
22https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/pm-risks-isolation-with-imaginary-arctic-
threats/article16462766/
https://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/18/world/europe/18herbert.html
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-02-26/norway-wealth-fund-ban-
proves-no-hurdle-for-arctic-coal-mining
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=sYlfczJF8-
QC&pg=PA235&lpg=PA235&dq=Canada++north+pole+1925+Northwest+Territories
+Act&source=bl&ots=ZgABkn5FIl&sig=hIklKEW4Hx8NBEZN2jLqqzuacls&hl=en&sa
=X&ei=aH8KU86ABIjr0gGoiYDwBQ&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=Canada%20%20n
o&f=false
https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/proclamation-2667-policy-the-united-
states-with-respect-the-natural-resources-the-subsoil
https://www.jstor.org/stable/2195594
https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1310&dat=19690915&id=GeFVAAAAIBA
J&sjid=3eADAAAAIBAJ&pg=6793,3313185&hl=nl
https://apnews.com/article/5971839bacb28f7c7825e27ce5d1ed4f
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6927395.stm
https://www.un.org/securitycouncil/es/content/what-security-
council#:~:text=El%20Consejo%20de%20Seguridad%20celebr%C3%B3%20su%20
primera%20sesi%C3%B3n,Sede%20de%20las%20Naciones%20Unidas%20en%20
Nueva%20York.
https://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/03/world/europe/03arctic.html?_r=0
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/37043/this-is-the-cave-facility-in-
norway-that-u-s-navy-submarines-could-soon-operate-from
https://ippreview.com/index.php/Blog/single/id/649.html
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/arctic-sovereignty-non-negotiable-harper-
1.866786
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/35899/russia-is-extending-the-runway-
at-its-arctic-base-could-support-tactical-jets-bombers
https://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/conventions/8_1_1958_contine
ntal_shelf.pdf
23https://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/closindx.ht
m
https://treaties.un.org/pages/ViewDetailsIII.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=XXI-
6&chapter=21&Temp=mtdsg3&clang=_en
https://www.law.upenn.edu/live/files/5875-prosecuting-isis
https://www.hrw.org/report/2017/12/05/flawed-justice/accountability-isis-
crimes-iraq
https://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/HRC/RegularSessions/Session28/Docume
nts/A.HRC.28.69_E.doc
https://www.thelocal.es/20200422/spanish-police-arrest-british-rapper-turned-
isis/
https://www.wilsoncenter.org/article/timeline-the-rise-spread-and-fall-the-
islamic-
state#:~:text=The%20Islamic%20State%20%E2%80%93%20also%20known,beg
an%20to%20reemerge%20in%202011.
https://www.history.com/topics/21st-century/isis
https://es.statista.com/estadisticas/585199/numero-de-muertes-causadas-por-
los-grupos-terroristas-mas-mortales-del-mundo/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_linked_to_ISIL
https://www.bbc.com/mundo/noticias-internacional-40969510
https://www.icc-cpi.int/about/how-the-court-works
https://www.icc-cpi.int/about
24You can also read
