The permanent five (P5) members of the United Nations Security Council ? China, France, Russia, the UK, and the USA - have a firm duty to prevent genocide in light of the due diligence standard under conventional, customary, and peremptory international law. This perceptive book explores the positive obligations of these states to act both within and without the Security Council context to prevent or suppress imminent or on-going genocide. John Heieck successfully argues why the duty to prevent genocide is not only a customary, but also an absolute norm of international law, and analyses the scope of the due diligence standard regarding the duty to prevent genocide. In doing so, he considers the ramifications of this on the actions of the P5 members of the Security Council, both within and outside of this eminent body. Significantly, Heieck proposes a legal test for identifying jus cogens norms, and explores the effect of these on the actions and omissions of specifically identified members of the United Nations (UN). Topical and insightful, A Duty to Prevent Genocide will be an important read for both academics and students of international law and politics who wish to further understand the legal nature of the duty of the P5 members to prevent genocide. It will also provide valuable insights for policymakers of the P5 member states.

The history of international law is replete with concepts that have generated change: individual criminal responsibility, common heritage of mankind and sustainable development to name but a few. These are concepts that have influenced the scope, structure and purpose of international law. This book explores the extent to which Responsibility to Protect (R2P) possesses the same transformative potential, showing how R2P shifts our understanding of both the potential and practice of international law. Responsibility to Protect is both an ambitious and an ambiguous concept in international law. Ambiguity creates space for debate and the potential for legal development, but it may also generate misunderstanding, false expectations and uncertainty. Despite its ambiguity, R2P has quickly found a place within international legal texts. At the same time its ambiguity or rather the tensions the concept generates has also helped generate an enormous range of scholarship. This collection of essays presents a more fundamental critical evaluation of R2P, exploring how it interacts with existing concepts and values, and how this influences normative developments within international law. In particular, the essays explore the influence of R2P upon sovereignty as responsibility, the continued advance of positive human rights obligations and the safeguarding of international community interests.These themes are explored in a range of essays written by new and established scholars. The essays explore the moral and political foundations of R2P, the expansion of R2P to non-state actors, and the interaction between R2P and certain branches of international law, such as use of force, responsibility as liability, humanitarian law and international criminal law.