Page 1


LETTER FROM  THE  SECRETARY-­‐GENERAL:     Hello  again,   I  am  Sreekar  Reddy,  a  fourth  year  mechanical  engineering  student  of  CBIT,  I  was  introduced  to   MUNs  at  CBIT  beginning  as  a  director  in  the  2011  edition  and  currently  serving  my  second  term   as   Secretary   General   of   this   great   conference   ,   needless   to   say   it   is   indeed   an   honour   and   a   privilege.   For  two  years  we  have  stood  up  and  redefined  MUN  conferences  in  India,   For  two  years  we  have  led  the  way  with  innovation.   We  wanted  to  deliver  a  phenomenon   We  wanted  to  be  the  difference.   For   two   editions   now   we   have   been   and   done   all   that   but   we   come   back   for   the   third   time   promising  the  same  and  even  more.   When   a   team   creates   something   spectacular   it   leaves   a   greater   responsibility   in   the   hands   of   the  next  team,  it  leaves  a  legacy,  a      legacy  that  must  continue.   Moving  forward  with  this  responsibility  on  our  shoulders  we  would  assure  the  participants  who   have  supported  us  since  2011  that  the  best  is  yet  to  come  and  to  those  who  have  missed  the   last   two   editions   we   would   like   to   tell   you   that   its   never   too   late   to   be   a   part   of   something   that   shall  become  a  collection  of  memories  to  cherish.   To  put  it  simply,  hello  delegate,  welcome  to  CBITMUN.   Sreekar  Reddy   Secretary  General   CBITMUN      


LETTER FROM  THE  JUDGE  :     Hello  



I am  Harshavardhan  Ganesan,  a  fourth  year  law  student  of  ILS  Law  Pune,  and  the  sole  judge  at  this  year's   ICC  at  CBITMUN.  I  welcome  you  all  and  look  forward  to  a  very  exciting  couple  of  days.   MUNs   for   me   have   always   been   more   than   just   break   night   parties   or   meeting   new   people,   it   always   gave  me  the  chance  to  learn,  innovate  and  push  myself  to  the  limits,  which  is  what  I  hope  to  do  at  the   council  as  well.  The  Procedure  Guide  will  show  you  that  the  ICC  has  a  separate  format,  which  is  quite   distinct  from  other  councils  in  the  MUN.  Please  make  yourselves  with  the  Procedure  Guide,  as  well  as   use   the   Study   guide   to   further   enrich   your   knowledge.   I   assure   you,   with   proper   dedication   and   research,  the  ICC  at  CBITMUN,  will  be  the  best  council  you  have  ever  been  a  part  of.   To  put  it  simply,  hello  counsel,  welcome  to  CBITMUN.   Harshavardhan   Judge  

Ganesan ICC  


INTRODUCTION:     ‘Be  the  change  you  wish  to  see  in  the  world’                                                                                                  -­‐Mahatma  Gandhi  .     Today,  well  into  the  21st  Century,  people  still  seem  to  be  heeding  that  advice.  The  ‘Arab   Spring’,  as  it  has  been  coined,  is  the  struggle  of  tens  of  thousands  of  Arab  youth  to  see  their   world  change.  They’re  venting  their  dissatisfaction  against  the  rule  in  their  countries,  against   the  lack  of  opportunities  to  a  better  life.       These  rants  have  not  been  quiet.  These  rants  have  echoed  all  through  the  world  and  now,   everyone  seems  to  be  fighting  their  cause.  The  governments  of  these  states  wish  to  deal  with   things  their  way,  preserving  their  sovereignty.  Now  these  ‘ways’  have  worried  Human  Rights   watchdogs  the  world  over.  Amid  reports  of  brutal  crimes  being  committed  on  their  soil,  crimes   that  strip  an  individual  of  his  dignity,  of  his  right  to  expression,  the  Arab  leaders  have  a  lot  to   answer  for.  Or,  do  they?     The  world  as  a  whole  has  never  been  closer.  But  does  that  give  the  international  committee  the   right  to  interfere,  to  overrule  the  Head  of  states  on  their  own  soil?  Derision  will  always  be  a   part  of  a  growing  world  and  there’ll  always  be  those  opposed  to  a  certain  decision,  a  certain  

rule. So  does  this  warrant  impeaching  the  sovereign  right  of  states  embroiled  in  unrest,  thereby   terming  their  governments  incompetent  of  improving  things?       The  International  Criminal  Court  has  been  convened  to  decide  if  Saif  al-­‐Islam  Gaddafi  (Libya)   and  Bashar  al-­‐Assad  (Syria)  have  abused  their  powers  and  meted  out  inhumane  treatments  to   their  own  citizens,  or  been  victimised  for  vested  interests  by  unverified  reports.  If  found  guilty,   what  is  the  punishment  that  would  befit  the  crime?  If  not,they  deserve  to  be  absolved  of  all   blame  and  need  to  be  trusted  to  make  decisions  keeping  in  mind  the  best  interests  of  their   people.    

Prosecutor vs.  Bashar  al-­‐Assad                  

STATEMENT OF  THE  PROBLEM:     The  Syrian  Arab  Republic  has  been  embroiled  in  intense  violence  and  bloodshed  since  2011.   Any  opposition  has  been  dealt  with  by  fierce  military  action,  making  thousands  of  innocent   civilians  scapegoats  to  the  raging  civil  war.  The  UN  has  reported  9000  deaths  and  14000   detainees  so  far,  a  far  cry  from  the  government’s  official  figure  of  3338  deaths-­‐  2493  civilians   and  1345  soldiers.  The  six-­‐point  peace  plan  suggested  by  former  UN  Secretary-­‐  General  Kofi   Annan  too,  has  failed  to  reap  dividends.  Any  possibility  of  talks  between  the  warring  sides  is   stalemated,  the  opposition  wants  a  complete  overhaul  of  the  regime,  while  Assad  is  only  ready   to  anything  that  involves  him  staying  on.       It  is  high  time  the  crisis  is  dealt  with.  It  is  time  someone  is  made  accountable  to  the  lives  lost.   How  long  can  the  international  community  stay  mute  while  refugees  keep  piling  up,  while   people  of  the  world  are  stripped  of  their  right  to  live.  The  ICC  has  been  convened  to  decide   whether  or  not  Bashar  al-­‐Assad  is  guilty  of  the  deaths  and  torture  of  Syrians  trapped  in  the   incessant,  brutal  violence.       The  idea  of  making  a  Head  of  State  responsible  for  crimes  committed  on  his  own  soil  is  not   completely  preposterous  ,what  with  the  ICC  almost  done  with  the  trial  of  Laurent  Gbagbo  of   Cote  D’  Ivoire  or  the  Ivory  Coast  and  the  referral  of  Saif  al-­‐Islam  Gaddafi,  though  not  the  Head   of  State  but  wielding  poxy  powers  through  his  father’s  rule,  for  Crimes  against  Humanity  on   Libyan  soil.  What  now  lies  before  the  court  is  on  the  face  simple  decision  of  innocence  or  guilt   masking  the  more  complex  issue  of    sovereignty  or  international  accountability.  If  the   allegations  against  Assad  prove  true,  the  decision  gets  tougher-­‐  Is  the  Head  of  State  within  his  

rights to  completely  put  down  civil  unrest  as  he  deems  fit  ?  Or  must  there  be  a  limit  imposed  by   international  institutions  based  on  the  laws  of  human  rights,  of  dignity,  and  of  democracy?     For  media  coverage  on  the  unrest  in  Syria,  refer­‐unrest/    

Syria over  the  years:     Syria  was  created  by  the  French  in  1920  and  remained  in  their  control  till  after  the  World  War  II   in  1946,  when  the  French  troops  finally  withdrew.  After  this,  Syria  struggled  for  nearly  two   decades  with  its  political  turmoil.  The  major  challenges  Syria  faced  during  this  time  frame  were   ethnic  division  and  the  political  instability.       The  population  in  Syria  is  more  or  less  similar  to  other  Middle  Eastern  countries.  90%  of  22.5   million  inhabitants  of  the  state  are  ethnic  Arabs,  followed  by  9%  of  Kurds  and  small  minorities   of  Armenians,  Circassians  and  Turkmens.  The  sectarian  religious  differences  seem  to  be  more   important  for  the  current  situation  in  Syria  as  these  previously  determined  the  political   orientation  of  the  ruling  regime.  Over  70%  of  the  population  are  Sunni  Muslims  who  form  the   majority  community  in  Syria.  Furthermore  there  are  Alawites  (12%),  Druze  (4%)  and  a  small   minority  of  Ismailis  who  Originate  from  the  Shia  branch  of  the  Islamic  religion.  The  Christian   minority  plays  also  an  important  role  with  about  10%  members  of  the  total  Syrian  population.       Understandably,  during  the  early  years  Syria  was  under  the  control  of  the  Sunnis.  The  Ba’ath   revolution  put  an  end  to  the  rule  of  Sunni  urban  elite  and  instead  included  people  from  all   other  minor  sectors  in  the  country.  The  Ba’ath  party  established  by  Hafez  al-­‐Assad  solved  the   problem  of  political  instability.  It  gained  support  from  the  security  forces  and  from  all  the  other   minor  sects  of  Syria.  Assad  overtook  the  regime  in  November  1970.       The  main  policy  which  he  followed  was  Secularism.  He  strived  for  nearly  three  decades  to  uplift   Syria  from  a  weak,  ineffectual  entity  lacking  legitimacy  to  a  regional  powerhouse  led  by  a   strong  and  stable  regime,  respected  both  at  home  and  abroad.       Hafez  built  up  his  regime  with  most  of  the  officials  from  his  Alawite  community  and  a  few  from   the  other  sects  who  he  thought  were  loyal.  He  gave  equal  importance  to  the  minority   population  by  providing  them  economic  reforms  and  giving  them  the  right  to  state  their  views.   He  gave  assurance  to  other  sects  of  people  by  establishing  various  organizations  like  the   worker’s  Union  and  farmer’s  Union,  thereby  legitimising  his  regime  and  guaranteeing  himself   support  from  various  sectors.    

He established  an  authoritarian  rule  for  over  30  years.  Syria  progressed    under  his  rule  in  the   seventies.  Any  critics  of  his  policies  were  easily  suppressed.  Major  challenges  arose  in  the  late   seventies,  when  the  Sunni  Muslims  became  fed  up  of  the  secular  policies  implemented  by   Hafez.  In  1980,  an  assassination  of  Hafez  thwarted.  This  was  a  result  of  not  only  religious   differences  between  the  Alawite  regime  and  the  Sunni  Muslim  Brotherhood,  but  also  of  the   level  of  repression  imposed  by  the  Assad  regime  on  the  opposition.Any  opposition  activities   have  been  made  impossible  and  have  faced  harsh  responses  by  the  regime  .       Hafez  tried  to  suppress  the  dissent  using  military  force.  He  succeeded  in  doing  so  by  crushing   the  members  of  Muslim  Brotherhood  in  the  city  of  Hama  and  this  was  a  called  the  HAMA   Massacre  leaving  many  civilians  dead  and  wounded.  It  was  one  of  the  most  tragic  massacres  in   Syria’s  checkered  history.     During  the  nineties,  Hafez  had  to  face  a  lot  of  problems  he  couldn’t  handle  and  though   attempts  were  made  to  cope  up  with  the  exploding  globalization,  he  failed  miserably.  This  led   Syria  back  into  a  pitiable  position  with  problems  like  poverty  and  unemployment.  The  GDP  of   the  country  fell  down  drastically.     Bashar  al-­‐Assad  overtook  the  regime  on  26  June  2000.  At  34,  critics  argued  that  he  was  far  too   young  and  inexperienced  to  lead  a  state  in  turmoil.  They  claimed  that  he  was  chosen  only  due   to  lack  of  viable  options.  Nevertheless,  he  secured  97.29%  majority  and  his  candidacy  was   accepted.  Bashar  faced  severe  problems  of  economy  and  dissent  over  the  last  13  years  of  his   rule  and  is  today  asked  by  most  of  the  international  community  to  step  down  in  light  of  various   human  rights  atrocities  being  carried  out  on  Syrian  soil.     During  his  inaugural  speech  in  2000  he  famously  quoted,  “I  shall  try  my  very  best  to  lead  our   country  towards  a  future  that  fulfills  the  hopes  and  legitimate  ambitions  of  people.”  This   statement  proved  ironic.  The  people’s  hopes  not  only  remain  unfulfilled  but  they  are  dashed  as   the  political  situation  worsened  into  what  the  Human  Rights  Watch  would  term  as  a  “wasted   decade.”  Al-­‐Assad  still  has  Syria  under  state-­‐controlled  media,  a  monitored  internet  and  prisons   filled  with  dissidents.            

WHY THE  UNREST?     With  everything  happening  in  Syria,  it  is  easy  to  lose  track  of  what  sparked  off  the  agitations  in   the  first  place.  Was  it  just  the  phenomena  of  the  ‘Arab  Spring’  or  was  there  long-­‐standing   resentment  and  suppressed  dissatisfaction?    

The dissent  started  due  to  economic  challenges  caused  by  demographic  crisis,  poor  family   planning  ,  negative  economic  growth,  crumbling  infrastructure  and  welfare  system,  accelerated   urbanization  and  rising  unemployment.Although  Syria’s  GDP  expanded,  Bashar  cut  subsidies  to   the  poorest  and  monopolized  government  contracts,  giving  them  to  members  of  his  Alawite   community.  The  excesses  of  capitalism  became  obvious  and  fuelled  resentment  among  the   Sunni  youth.  He  increased  imports,  stimulated  investments,  developed  banking  services  and   attempted  to  create  a  common  Arab  common  market  to  integrate  Syria  in  the  world’s   economy.  According  to  the  official  Presidential  website,  he  has  built  free-­‐trade  zones,  licensed   private  newspapers  and  universities,  fought  government  waste  and  corruption,  and  brought   about  social  and  economic  reform.  The  entire  time  though,  the  Ba’ath  party’s  socialist  roots   hindered  maximum  progress  in  what  had  essentially  become  a  free  market  economy.     The  Syrian  regime  in  response  launched  a  brutal  crackdown  on  the  agitators.  They  claim  that   the  opposition  forces  are  disguised  terrorists,  trying  to  destabilise  the  state.  Four  days  after   revoking  the  emergency  rule  in  April  2011,  the  Syrian  regime  sent  hundreds  of  troops  into   Daraa  for  a  wide-­‐scale  crackdown.  Since  then,  the  agitations  have  transitioned  into  an  intense   civil  war  between  the  regime  and  armed  rebels,  many  of  whom  have  defected  from  the  army.   By  the  summer  of  2012,  the  violence  gripped  the  entire  country,  including  capital  city  Damascus   and  Syria’s  largest  city  Aleppo.     The  Ba’ath  Party  has  been  ruling  Syria  for  4  decades  now,  and  the  citizens  have  finally  had   enough.Today,  Assad  is  at  the  centre  of  a  violent  uprising  that  has  caught  the  attention  of  the   entire  world.In  reponse,  Assad  ended  the  48-­‐year  old  state  of  emergency  in  April  2011  and   passed  by  referendum,  a  new  constitution  calling  for  multiparty  elections  in  February  2012,  but   still  refuses  to  step  down,  which  is  the  bone  of  contention  with  the  rebel  factions.  The  military   troops  continue  to  fire  at  will  and  detain  and  torture  protesters  .     CNN  media  report:­‐101/index.html    

THE DEMANDS:   To  put  it  simply,  the  demands  of  the  protesters  and  Assad’s  response  to  them  have  been  as   follows:     Fall  of  the  regime:  There  has  been  no  clear  intention  that  al-­‐Assad  intends  to  step  down.  He   refuses  to  negotiate  any  solution  that  involves  him  to  abdicate  his  position  as  the  Head  of  State.      

End to  the  48-­‐year  emergency  law:  The  law  was  revoked  on  21  April  2011,  but  Syrian  forces   continue  to  fire  upon,  arrest,  and  detain  civilians.     Immediate  end  to  extrajudicial  killings  and  torture:  The  President  has  rejected  UN  allegations  of   Syrian  security  forces  committing  crimes  against  humanity  such  as  rape,  torture,  killings,  and   deprivations  of  liberty.  He  claims  reports  to  be  exaggerated,  biased  and  formulated  by  sources   with  vested  interests  and  plays  down  the  number  of  casualties.     Release  of  political  prisoners:  Amnesties  were  offered  in  May  2011,  June  2011,  and  January   2012.  Officials  have  released  thousands  but  at  least  37,000  still  remain  in  custody,  according  to   human  rights  activists.     Transition  to  a  free,  democratic  pluralist  society:  On     26  February  2012,  voters  approved  by  referendum  a  new  constitution  establishing  a  multi-­‐party   government  that  limited  the  president  to  two  seven  year  terms.  On  14  March  2012,  al-­‐Assad   announced  parliamentary  elections  for  7  May  2012.  The  opposition  has  rejected  these   proposals,  desiring  a  more  rapid  turnover  and  the  stepping  down  of  al-­‐Assad.    

BLOW-­‐BY-­‐BLOW:   The  protests  were  caused  by  longstanding  lack  of  satisfaction,  but  the  Arab  Spring  fever   certainly  added  fuel  to  the  fire.  The  use  of  social  networking  sites  like  Facebook,  Youtube  and   Twitter  by  Syrian  youth  saw  a  sudden  rise,  and  regional  slogans  such  as  “the  people  demand   the  end  of  the  regime”  became  wildly  popular.When  Libyans  succeeded  in  ousting  General   Muammar  Gaddafi  from  leadership,  the  Syrians  decided  to  do  the  same,  using  the  pre-­‐Ba’ath   national  flag  as  their  identifying  banner.     January  2011:     Hasan  Ali  Akleh  sets  himself  afire,  venting  dissatisfaction  at  the  regime.  This  triggers  the  whole   uprising  in  Syria.       March  15th  2011,  Deraa:   Demonstrations  start  in  Deraa  ,  sparked  by  arrest  of  a  group  of  teenagers  who  were  accused  of   drawing  political  graffiti  with  oppositional  narrative.  Killing  of  a  few  demonstrators  by  the   security  forces  invoked  anger  and  the  protests  gradually  spread  across  the  country.   Demonstrators  demanded  the  release  of  political  prisoners,  but  were  shot  dead  by  security   forces,  triggering  unrest  that  has  now  gripped  the  Syrian  Arab  Republic.          

March 29  2011:   The  Syrian  government  resigns,  with  Assad  staying  on  and  electing  the  new  government.  This   does  not  satiate  the  protesters.     April  19  2011:   The  Emergency  Law  is  formally  lifted  as  a  concession  to  the  protesters.  Four  days  after  this   though,  hundreds  of  troops  were  sent  to  Daraa  on  a  wide-­‐scale  crackdown.  Soldiers  continue  to   fire  at  will  and  detain  protesters.       April  22  2011,  Deraa:   Troops  in  Deraa  crack  down  on  protesters,  killing  more  than  70  of  them.       June  3-­‐6  2011,  Jisr  Al-­‐Shughouur:     Tens  of  security  forces  are  killed  by  armed  gangs  in  Jisr  Al-­‐Shughour.  This  incident  indicated   that  the  protests  changed  into  an  armed  conflict.         3-­‐6  June  2011,  Turkey:   The  Syrian  Government  states  that  nearly  120  Military  personnel  were  killed  in  north-­‐western   town  of  Jisr  al-­‐Shughour.It  also  stated  that  the  government  is  facing  a  armed  revolution  than  a   peaceful  demonstration.       October  3  2011:   The  opposition  bloc  Syrian  National  Council  is  formed.     November  12  2011:   The  Arab  League  suspends  Syria  stating  that  it  failed  to  implement  Arab  peace  plan  and   imposed  sanctions.       January  2012,  Damascus:     Almost  7000  rebels  put  down,  by  the  Syrian  national  troops  in  a  small  suburb  outside   Damascus.  These  rebels  led  by  Riyad  al-­‐Assad  were  poorly  armed  and  trained.     February  26,  2012:   The  constitution  referendum  is  held  with  voters  approving  the  open  political  competition.       February  -­‐  March  2012,  Homs:   Syrian  forces  crack  down  on  the  city  of  Homs  with  heavy  bombardment  and  the  death  toll   estimated  at  700  .  

March 16,  2012:   The  Kofi  Annan  Peace  Plan  for  Syria  is  submitted  to  the  UN       April  16  2012:   The  first  UN  observers,  a  group  of  just  six,  begin  to  work  to  monitor  the  situation  on  the  ground   as  part  of  the  Annan  peace  plan.  Their  numbers  increased  to  nearly  300  over  the  following   weeks,  but  with  violence  continuing  to  escalate  they  suspended  their  work  on  16  June.           May  7,  2012:   Syrian  parliamentary  elections  are  held  and  boycotted  by  the  opposition.  The  Ba’ath  party   wins  by  a  vast  majority.       July  18,  2012  Damascus:   Syrian  defense  minister  Daoud  Rajiha  and  his  deputy  (Bashar  al-­‐Assad’s  brother-­‐in-­‐law)  are   killed  in  a  suicidal  attack.  It  showed  that  the  opposition  was  able  to  get  closer  to  the  regime   officials.     The  protests  continued  further,  despite  the  Syrian  army  being  deployed  in  most  of  the   rebellious  cities.  The  regime  continued  a  violent  crackdown  on  protesters  and  began  arresting   anti-­‐regime  activists  in  their  homes  in  one  neighbourhood  of  Homs.  Syrian  troops  raided   dormitories  of  the  Aleppo  University,  in  a  bid  to  stop  the  anti-­‐  Assad  protests  towards  the  end   of  2011.  This  resulted  in  the  death  of  4  students.     Contrary  to  rebel  belief,the  FSA  is  referred  to  as  a  terrorist  group  by  the  Syrian  government,   which  cites  instances  of  FSA  lining  up  and  executing  point-­‐blank  believed  “regime  supporters”   in  a  mock  “drumhead  trial”  based  on  Sharia  law.  FSA  has  also  been  linked  to  al-­‐Qaeda  according   to  several  sources,  several  of  which  report  a  video  of  FSA  leaders  brandishing  CIA-­‐furnished  AK-­‐ 47s  with  al-­‐Qaeda  flags  in  the  background.  Joseph  Holiday,  an  analyst  with  the  Institute  for  the   Study  of  War  summarizes  this  murky  scenario:   “The  emergence  of  Al  Qaeda-­‐linked  terrorist  cells  working  against  the  regime  poses  risks  to  the   United  States  and  a  challenge  to  those  calling  for  material  support  of  the  armed  opposition.  It’s   something  to  keep  an  eye  out  for,  the  convergence  of  Iraq  and  Syria.  As  the  Syrian  government   loses  the  ability  to  project  force  on  the  periphery  of  its  territory,  what  you’re  going  to  see  is  an   emboldened  Sunni  opposition  emerging  in  Nineveh  and  Iraq.”    

The consequence  of  violence  and  multiple  sanctions  from  the  West  and  the  Arab  League  is  that   the  Syrian  economy  has  practically  come  to  a  halt.  Their  two  most  profitable  industries—oil  and   tourism—are  at  a  complete  standstill.  According  to  the  International  Monetary  Fund  (IMF),   Syria’s  economy  contracted  by  2%  in  2011,  with  an  unemployment  rate  of  20%  and  inflation  at   11%  by  March  2012.  The  Syrian  pound  has  plummeted  by  more  than  60%  to  the  dollar.  In   February,  the  government  doubled  customs  duties,  raising  both  prices  and  the  prevalence  of   smuggling.  In  Damascus  and  elsewhere,  necessities  such  as  milk,  electricity  and  oil  are  scarce.     As  the  violence  continues  unabated,  many  researchers  claim  that  the  conflict  has  transitioned   from  a  simple  demonstration  for  democracy  to  a  more  complex  geopolitical  proxy  war  against   Iran,  Syria’s  long  time  ally.  Sectarian  complications  resulting  from  a  fight  between  the  Sunni   Muslim  majority  and  the  minority  non-­‐Muslim  Alawite  elite,  also  have  repercussions  for   sparking  Hezbollah  violence  in  Lebanon  and  Iran.  So  far,  the  militant  Hezbollah  group  from   Lebanon  has  been  known  to  be  supportive  of  the  regime.  They  are  alleged  to  have  carried  out   crimes  against  humanity  on  the  behest  of  the  government.  The  regime  continues  to  receive   arms  and  ammunition  from  allies  like  Russia  and  Iran,  who  claim  that  an  Arms  treaty  between   them  is  why  they  do  so.     The  radicalization  of  protests  is  certainly  fueled  by  the  government’s  quick  resort  to  violence,   which  poses  forth  the  thought  of  why  the  government  has  caused  so  many  deaths—ranging   from  harsh  military  interventions  to  killings  at  victims’  funerals—when  they  could  have  made   some  reforms  early  on,  when  protests  were  still  peaceful.  While  many  in  the  regime     dissent  to  the  violence,  most  still  believe,  to  some  degree,  al-­‐Assad’s  claim  that  this  is  another   dissident  movement  like  the  one  his  father  put  down  in  the  1980s  with  brute  violence:  the   rebellion  by  the  Muslim  Brotherhood.  The  blame  is  frequently  placed  by  the  regime  on   “terrorist  groups”  rather  than  peaceful  civilian  protesters.       What’s  worse  is  that  the  opposition  remains  weak  and  divided  into  many  sectors  and  the   international  community  is  struggling  to  come  up  with  a  stronger  response,  due  to  the  support   Syria  enjoys  from  major  players  such  as  Russia,  China,  and  Iran  while  Assad  enjoys  a  fiercely   loyal  army  and  support  from  the  elite  sectors  of  the  population-­‐  like  Christians,  Alawites  and   businessmen.     Due  to  “increasing  militarization  on  the  ground”  and  “clear  lack  of  unity”  at  the  U.N  Security   Council,  Kofi  Annan  resigned  as  the  U.N  and  Arab  League  Joint  Special  Envoy  to  Syria.­‐annan-­‐resign/index.html     CNN  timeline:  From  uprising  to  civil  war:­‐timeline/index.html  

The Opposition:       1.Syrian  National  Coalition:   The  Major  opposition  in  Syria  is  Syrian  National  Coalition  (SNC).It  was  formed  on  11  November   2012  at  a  conference  of  opposition  groups  held  in  Doha,  Qatar.  It  consists  of  all  the  major   oppositions  in  the  Syrian  crisis.  It  has  been  working  since  inception  to  overthrow  the  regime  of   Bashar  al-­‐Assad.  SNC  mostly  includes  the  Sunni  Muslims  who  are  working  against  Assad.       2.National  Coordination  Body  for  Democratic  Change:   It  is  based  on  an  opposition  bloc  inside  Syria  and  includes  many  long-­‐term  dissidents,  who  are   allegedly  wary  of  Islamists  within  the  SNC.  Unlike  SNC,  the  NCB  is  willing  to  negotiate  with   Assad’s  regime  and  opposes  foreign  intervention.       3.Apart  from  these  there  are  many  other  small  ethnic  groups  which  also  play  a  major  role  in  the   crisis.    

CHARGES AGAINST  al-­‐ASSAD:     An  advanced  unedited  report  of  the  twenty-­‐third  session  of  Human  Rights  Council,  dated  4  June   2013  encompasses  the  various  crimes  committed  by  the  Government  forces  and  it’s  affiliated   militia.­‐HRC-­‐23-­‐58_en.pdf     The  various  crimes  Assad  is  answerable  for  can  be  enumerated  as  follows:     A.  Crimes  against  Humanity:     1.            Murder:    A  peaceful  protest  started  in  a  small  city  in  Syria  called  Deraa  when  Hasan  Ali  Akleh  set  himself   afire  in  January  2011  to  protest  the  Syrian  government’s  stalled  reforms.  Within  a  span  of  two   months  the  movement  gathered  force  and  all  factions  began  to  protest  against  Assad’s  rule.   In  January  2011  police  shot  and  killed  four  marchers  and  arrested  nearly  35  people.       Just  over  a  month  ago,  OHCHR  reported  that  at  least  92,901  people  had  been  killed  between   March  2011  and  the  end  of  April  2013.      

Source:     file:///D:/Documents%20and%20Settings/Administrator/Desktop/un%20report.html       Though  Assad  was  the  Commander  in  Chief  of  The  Army  he  was  in  no  position  to  control  the   situation,  instead  he  allegedly  passed  orders  for  firing  which  is  a  clear  violation  of  Human   Rights.He  can  be  tried  under  Article  7(1)(a)  which  falls  under  the  category  of  crimes  against   humanity.       2.            Torture:    During  the  protests  Syrian  troops  arrested  many  civilians  including  children  and  women,  threw   them  in  jails  and  tortured  them.  The  Human  Rights  council  set-­‐up,  a  13-­‐member  mission,   headed  by  Deputy  High  Commissioner  for  Human  Rights  Kyung-­‐wha  Kang,  gathered   corroborative  eyewitness  statements  with  respect  to  numerous  summary  executions  which   included  353  named  victims  and  describes  the  inappropriate  use  of  force  by  Syrian  military  and   security  forces  and  the  way  in  which  all  the  detainees  were  tortured  by  Syrian  authorities.   Torture  became  a  common  issue  in  all  the  detention  centres  and  prisons.  Many  civilians  put  in   these  centres  were  kicked,  slapped  and  verbally  abused.  Out  of  these  civilians  there  was  one   who  stated  that  “Death  was  far  better  than  the  torture”.                           This  can  be  contested  under  article  7(1)(f)  of  The  Rome  Statute.     Source  :                           Article  from  UN  news  centre         file:///D:/Documents%20and%20Settings/Administrator/Desktop/United%20Nations%20News %20Centre%20-­‐ %20Syrian%20crackdown%20on%20protesters%20may%20amount%20to%20crimes%20agains t%20humanity%20%E2%80%93%20UN%20report.htm#.UgpDuNKmhR0       3.    Enforced  Disappearance  of  Persons  :        Unrest  in  the  Syrian  Arab  Republic  has  been  mounting  since  March  2011,  leading  to  the   displacement  of  tens  of  thousands  of  civilians.  As  of  June  2012,  more  than  78,000  people  are   estimated  to  have  fled  to  neighboring  Jordan,  Lebanon,  Turkey  and  Iraq,  putting  an  increasing   strain  on  the  governments  and  host  communities.Large  numbers  of  individuals,  mainly  young   men,  were  arrested  by  the  Government  and  affiliated  militia-­‐controlled  checkpoints  throughout   the  country  including  in  Shin,  Homs,  Nawa,  Daraa;  and  in  Qatana,  Damascus,  and  held  for  

prolonged periods.  Some  were  taken  to  unknown  locations  and  have  not  been  heard  from   since.   This  can  be  contested  under  Article  7(1)(k)  of  the  Rome  Statute.     Source  :  Official  UNHCR  document     file:///D:/Documents%20and%20Settings/Administrator/Desktop/UNHCR%20-­‐ %20Syria%20Emergency%20-­‐%20Background.htm                     4.    Inhumane  acts  of  inflicting  serious  bodily  injury  and  suffering  :   The  Syrian  government  tried  its  level  best  to  suppress  the  protest  by  indulging  to  inhumane   acts  of  torturing  civilians.  The  protesters  were  seriously  injured  and  most  of  them  later  died.   This  can  be  tried  under  Article  7(1)(k)  of  the  Rome  Statute.  Nearly  566  people  died  after  being   seriously  injured  from  the  month  of  April,  2013.  Civilians  fleeing  the  attack  appear  to  have  been   targeted  and  killed.  Eleven  members  of  the  Al-­‐Itmah  family  and  seven  members  of  the  Al-­‐ Nassar  family  were  killed  when  their  cars  were  hit  by  shells.         Source:  UN  report­‐HRC-­‐23-­‐58_en.pdf       5.    Deprivation  of    Liberty  :   Government  forces  continue  to  use  deprivation  of  liberty  as  a  weapon  of                  war,  and  to   collectively  punish  localities  perceived  to  be  supporting  the  armed  opposition.  Family  members   of  alleged  armed  group  members  are  arrested  and  detained.  Government  forces  routinely   arrest  and  detain  persons  as  punishment  for  exercising  their  basic  rights.  In  mid-­‐January,   following  a  peaceful  demonstration  in  Al-­‐Suwayda,security  forces  conducted  mass  arrests.   Some  of  those  arrested  were  children  as  young  as   12.       6.    Sexual  Violence:    Sexual  violence  has  been  persistent  throughout  the  conflict.  There  were  many  incidents  in   which  women  were  threatened  by  gang  rape  during  interrogation.       Source:­‐HRC-­‐23-­‐58_en.pdf      

Rape and  other  inhumane  acts,  as  crimes  against  humanity,  have  been  committed  by   Government  forces  and  affiliated  militia.  Rape,  torture  and  inhumane  treatment  are   Prosecutable.         B)  War  crimes:     1)  Massacre:    [Article  8(2)(c)(i)]     OHCHR  reported  that  at  least  92,901  people  had  been  killed  between  March  2011  and  the  end   of  April  2013.  The  analysis  used  a  rigorous  methodology,  confirming  each  casualty  by  name,   place,  and  date  of  death,  and  cross-­‐referenced  this  information  with  at  least  three  separate   sources  of  data.  Out  of  the  92,901  individuals  killed,  at  least  6,561  were  minors,  1,729  of  whom   were  under  ten.   There  were  nearly  17  incidents  which  potentially  met  the  definition  of  a  massacre  within  a  time   span  of  two  months  i.e.  from  April  2011  to  May  2011.  All  these  incidents  were  reported  with   eyewitnesses  by  the  team  from  the  UN.   In  it’s  latest  report,  the  Commission  of  Inquiry  set-­‐up  by  the  United  Nations  noted  that  a   number  of  incidents,  potentially  amounting  to  massacres,  took  place  between  January  and  May   2013,in  which  nearly  200  women  and  children  were  mutilated  and  burned.     The  Syrian  government  has  been  attacking  various  cities  and  killing  civilians  in  large  numbers.   Many  appeals  have  been  made  by  The  UN  through  various  resolutions  to  stop  the  brutal  killing,   but  the  Syrian  government  refuses  to  take  these  into  consideration.   Dates  on  which  various  cities  were  attacked  are  given  below:                                                                  Deraa                             (March  27,  2011)                      Banias                       (May  7,  2011)            Homs                         (May  9,  2011)                      Damascus           (May  12,  2011)     Source:  file:///D:/Documents%20and%20Settings/Administrator/Desktop/un%20report.htm     United  Nations  Human  Rights  document.   A  report  presented  by  human  rights  council:­‐HRC-­‐23-­‐58_en.pdf     2)  Other  Unlawful  Killing:     [Article  8(2)(c)(i)]    

Patterns of  summary  execution  and  murder  have  emerged  in  recent  times.  Detained  persons   believed  to  be  opposition  sympathizers  are  the  most  frequent  victims  of  such  crimes.  Revenge   killings  have  become  increasingly  common  and  are  a  direct  violation  of  the  prohibition  on   reprisals.  Killing  civilians  by  sniper  fire  and  killing  of  hostages  and  detainees  when  a  detention   centre  comes  under  attack  are  noted  patterns  of  violations  by  both  pro  and  anti-­‐Government   groups.   Nearly  200  bodies  have  been  recovered  from  Aleppo’s  Queiq  waterway  since  81  bodies  were   first  discovered  there  on  29  January,  2011.  Apart  from  these  there  were  many  people  who  were   not  identified.  There  were  some  incidents  where  civilians  were  sentenced  and  executed   without  due  process.     Source:    A  UN  report       3)  Cruel  Treatment  of  civilians:          [Article  8(2)(c)(i)]     Government  forces  and  affiliated  militia  have  moved  to  uproot  armed  opposition  groups  from   Al-­‐Qusayr  and  Talkalakh  in  the  Homs  governorate,  Aleppo,  Damascus,  and  rural  Damascus.   Government  forces  carry  on  with  indiscriminate  and  disproportionate  shelling  and  aerial   bombardments,  using  ,among  other  weapons,  tactical  ballistic  missiles,  cluster  and  thermobaric   bombs-­‐all  causing  extensive  damage  and  casualties  if  used  in  densely  populated  areas.  As  a   result,  hundreds  of  civilians,  including  women  and  children  were  killed,  thousands  injured,  and   tens  of  thousands  displaced.  Many  displaced  in  parts  of  Homs  and  rural  Damascus  remain   under  siege  and  face  miserable  humanitarian  conditions.   The  cruel  treatment  of  civilians  first  started  when  the  army  first  attacked  the  city  of  deraa  on   march  27th  2011.  Government  forces  attacked  Sanamayn  city,  Daraa,  on  10  April.   Approximately  300  fighters  from  the  opposition  Martyrs  of  Al-­‐Sanamayn  Brigade  were  inside   the  city.  As   per  observed  patterns,  the  attack  began  with  shelling  followed  by  a  ground  invasion.Suffering   from  a  lack  of  weapons  and  ammunition,  the  armed  group  withdrew  from  the  city  after  heavy   losses.     Source:  UN  OHCHR  document­‐HRC-­‐23-­‐58_en.pdf     UN  report­‐HRC-­‐23-­‐58_en.pdf     4)  Intentionally  directing  an  attack  against  a  civilian  population  :  

[ Article  8(2)(e)(v)  ]         The  Syrian  government  has  repeatedly  attacked  civilian  areas  indiscriminately  in  an  effort  to   tackle  the  opposition.  Starting  from  February  2012  to  July  2012  many  civilian  dominated  areas   like  Homs  and  Damascus  were  attacked  and  the  government’s  usage  of  air  and  artillery  strikes   was  proved.     Source:­‐HRC-­‐23-­‐58_en.pdf     5)  Pillaging  and  Destruction  of  Property:   The  ever-­‐increasing  refugee  population  left  behind  belongings,  which  have  then  been   appropriated  by  soldiers  and  armed  groups.  Fleeing  families  attempting  to  take  their   possessions  with  them  frequently  have  them  stolen  at  checkpoints  or  by  thieves  taking   advantage  of  the  lawlessness  that  has  engulfed  these  camps.  While  vast  amounts  of  property   have  been  destroyed  as  a  result  of  shelling,  a  violation  is  recorded  when  reasonably  believed  to   be  a  deliberate  targeting  of  an  opponent’s  property.   Both  pillage  and  deliberate  property  destruction  are  war  crimes.     Today,  Bashar-­‐al-­‐Assad  can  be  contested  on  several  counts  of  the  International  Criminal  Court   Rome  Statute,  which  can  be  broadly  classified  into  ‘Crimes  against  Humanity’  and  ‘War  Crimes’.     1. Crimes  Against  Humanity:     (As  defined  under  the  International  Criminal  Court  jurisdiction            admissibility  and  applicable   law  article  7,1(a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h,k))     ● Murder-­‐  Article  7(1)(a)   ● Deprivation  of  Liberty-­‐  Article  7(1)(e)   ● Torture-­‐  Article  7(1)(f)   ● Persecution  against  an  identifiable  political  group-­‐  Article  7(1)(h)   ● Enforced  disappearances  of  persons-­‐  article  7(1)(i)   ● Inhumane  acts  of  inflicting  serious  bodily  injury  and  suffering-­‐  Article  7(1)(k)   ● Deportation  or  forcible  transfer  of  population.                2.  War  Crimes:     (As  defined  under  the  International  Criminal  Court  Rome  Statute  part  II  jurisdiction  admissibility   and  applicable  law  Article  8,1,2(a,e)  )  

● UN finds  that  the  Syrian  government  is  responsible  for  the  death  of  more  than  100   civilians  on  25  May  in  Houla.   ● Murder-­‐  Article  8(2)(c)(i)   ● Cruel  treatment  of  civilians  -­‐  Article  8(2)(c)(i)   ● Intentionally  directing  an  attack  against  civilian  population-­‐Article  8(2)(e)(i)   ● Pillaging-­‐  Article  8(2)(e)(vi)   ● Inducing  rape-­‐  Article  8(2)(e)(vi)   ● Wilful  killing   ● Extensive  destruction  and  appropriation  of  property  not  justified  by  military  necessity   and  carried  out  unlawfully.        

PREVIOUS UN  AND  ICC  ACTIONS  ON  SYRIA:     “We  are  not  only  watching  the  destruction  of  a  country  but  also  of  its  people.”   Emergency  Relief  Coordinator  Valerie  Amos  in  Security  Council  briefing  on  Syria,  16  Jul  '13  

● UN  urges  humanitarian  access  to  thousands  trapped  by  intense  fighting.   ● UN  finds  that  the  Syrian  government  is  responsible  for  the  death  of  more  than  100   civilians  on  25  May  in  Houla.   ● On  17  August  2012,  UN  Secretary-­‐General  Ban  Ki-­‐moon,  along  with  Arab  League   Secretary-­‐General  Nabil  ElAraby,    announced  the  appointment  of    Lakhdar  Brahimi  as   their  Joint  Special  Representative  for  Syria.     16  FEBRUARY   2012A/RES/66/253  

This General  Assembly  resolution  condemned  the  violence  in  Syria,  endorsed  the  Arab   League’s  22  January  on  a  Syrian  political  transition,  and  requested  the  Secretary-­‐General  to   appoint  a  special  envoy  for  Syria.­‐6D27-­‐4E9C-­‐8CD3-­‐ CF6E4FF96FF9%7D/Syria%20A%20RES%2066%20253.pdf     ● As  tens  of  thousands  flee  violence  in  Syria,  the  UN  and  its  humanitarian  partners  issued   an  appeal  in  March  2012  for  US$84  million  to  support  Syrian  refugees  in  response.  

UN agencies  &  humanitarian  partners   1. Children  –  UNICEF   2. Food  –  FAO  |  WFP   3. Humanitarian  Coordination  –  OCHA,Reliefweb   4. Population  –  UNFPA   5. Refugees  –  UNHCR     16  JULY   2013S/PV.7000  

This was  a  public  briefing  on  the  humanitarian  situation  in  Syria  by  OCHA,  UNHCR  and  UNHCHR.   Iraq,  Lebanon,  Syria  and  Turkey  also  participated.­‐6D27-­‐4E9C-­‐8CD3-­‐ CF6E4FF96FF9%7D/s_pv_7000.pdf   ● With  human  rights  violations  at  the  heart  of  the  Syrian  crisis,  the  UN  has  called  for  an   immediate  end  to  violence;  release  of  political  prisoners;  impartial  investigations  to  end   impunity,  ensure  accountability  and  bring  perpetrators  to  justice;  and  reparations  for   the  victims.     6  JULY   2012A/HRC/RES/20/22  

The Human  Rights  Council  adopted  this  resolution  which  condemned  the  gross  human   rights  violations  and  indiscriminate  targeting  of  civilians  in  Syria  by  government  authorities   and  the  Shabiha.­‐6D27-­‐4E9C-­‐8CD3-­‐ CF6E4FF96FF9%7D/Syria%20A%20HRC%20RES%2020%2022.pdf     ● UN  Supervision  Mission  in  Syria  (UNSMIS)   The  UN  Supervision  Mission  in  Syria  (UNSMIS)  was  established  by  the  Security  Council  on  21   April  2012,  through  resolution  2043,  to  monitor  a  cessation  of  armed  violence  by  all  parties  and   to  support  implementation  of  Joint  Special  Representative  Kofi  Annan's  "Six-­‐point  plan"  to  end   the  conflict  in  Syria.    Intensified  armed  violence  across  the  country  forced  UNSMIS  to  suspend    

its activities  on  15  June  2012.  On  20  July  2012,  the  Security  Council  decided  to  extend  the   Mission  for  a  final  30  days,  stressing  that  any  further  extension  would  be  possible  only  "in  the   event  that  the  Secretary-­‐General  reports  and  the  Security  Council  confirms  the  cessation  of  the   use  of  heavy  weapons  and  a  reduction  in  the  level  of  violence  sufficient  by  all  sides''  to  allow   the  UNSMIS  monitors  to  implement  their  mandate.  As  those  conditions  were  not  met,  the   Mission's  mandate  came  to  an  end  at  midnight  on  19  August  2012.     21  APRIL  2012S/RES/2043  This  resolution  established  UNSMIS.­‐6D27-­‐4E9C-­‐8CD3-­‐ CF6E4FF96FF9%7D/Syria%20SRES%202043.pdf   20  JULY  2012S/RES/2059  This  resolution  extended  UNSMIS  for  a  final  period  of  30  days.­‐6D27-­‐4E9C-­‐8CD3-­‐ CF6E4FF96FF9%7D/Syria%20SRES%202059.pdf   ● Through  his  good  offices,  the  Joint  Special  Envoy  Kofi  Annan  sought  to  promote  a   peaceful  solution  to  the  crisis  in  line  with  the  aspirations  of  the  Syrian  people.  He   represented  the  UN  and  the  Arab  League  in  what  Secretary-­‐General  Ban  Ki-­‐moon  said   were  "selfless  efforts  and  contributions  to  the  search  for  peace  in  Syria.     21  MARCH   2012S/PRST/2012/6  

This presidential  statement  supported  the  Joint  Special  Envoy’s  six-­‐point  plan  for   mediation  of  the  Syrian  crisis.­‐6D27-­‐4E9C-­‐8CD3-­‐ CF6E4FF96FF9%7D/Syria%20S%20PRST%202012%206.pdf   ● The  Joint  Special  Envoy  (JSE)  convened  a  meeting  of  the  Action  Group  for  Syria  in   Geneva  on  30  June  2012.  

● In February  2012,  the  Independent  International  Syrian  Investigation  Committee  set  up   by  the  UNHRC  ruled  that  the  situation  in  Syria  was  on  the  brink  of  war  and  the  unrest   had  reached  intensity  enough  to  term  it  a  ‘civil  war’.   ● GA  resolution  dated  15  May  2013,  condemning  indiscriminate  violence  perpetrated  by   the  Syrian  government  on  it’s  own  citizens  and  welcoming  formation  of  National   Coalition  for  Syrian  Revolutionary  and  Opposition  Forces.   ●

15 MAY  

Strongly condemned  the  Syrian  government’s  indiscriminate  violence  against   civilian  populations  and  welcomed  the  establishment  of  the  National  Coalition   for  Syrian  Revolutionary  and  Opposition  Forces  as  interlocutors  needed  for  a   political  transition.  

2013A/RES/67/262­‐6D27-­‐4E9C-­‐8CD3-­‐ CF6E4FF96FF9%7D/a_res_67_262.pdf   ● Switzerland  requests  the  Security  Council  to  refer  situation  in  Syria  to  ICC.  Syria   responds  with  a  letter  to  the  President  of  the  Security  Council.   ●

17 JANUARY   2013S/2013/30  

This letter  from  Syria  to  the  President  of  the  Security  Council  was  in  response  to  a   previous  letter  (S/2013/19)  from  Switzerland  requesting  the  Council  to  refer  the   situation  in  Syria  since  March  2011  to  the  ICC.­‐6D27-­‐4E9C-­‐8CD3-­‐ CF6E4FF96FF9%7D/s_2013_30.pdf   ● 13  August  2013  –  The  United  Nations  team  probing  the  alleged  use  of  chemical  weapons   in  Syria  has  completed  all  the  necessary  logistical  arrangements  for  its  visit  to  the   country  and  is  now  awaiting  the  Government’s  acceptance  of  the  modalities  for  the   mission,  the  world  body  announced  today.           ●

25 MARCH   2013S/2013/184  

This letter  from  the  Secretary-­‐General  informed  the  Council  of  his  intention  to   conduct  an  investigation  into  the  alleged  use  of  chemical  weapons  in  Syria.­‐6D27-­‐4E9C-­‐8CD3-­‐ CF6E4FF96FF9%7D/s_2013_184.pdf ● UN  High  Commissioner  for  Human  Rights  Navi  Pillay  on  2  August  2013  urged  an   independent  investigation  into  whether  war  crimes  had  been  committed  when  armed   opposition  groups  in  Syria  allegedly  executed  dozens  of  captured  Government  soldiers   in  the  northern  province  of  Aleppo  last  month.            

THE ICC  INTERVENTION:     UN  rights  investigators  found  the  crackdowns  on  civilian  protesters  to  “amount  to  crimes   against  humanity”  and  recommended  referring  the  case  to  the  ICC.       Carla  Del  Ponte,  former  chief  prosecutor  for  the  international  criminal  tribunal  for  the  former   Yugoslavia  ,  working  on  a  rolling  UN  inquiry  into  Syria  said  that  high  level  perpetrators  have   been  identified  and  it’s  time  for  the  Hague  court  to  act.  She  says,  “Now  really  it’s  time,  we  have   a  permanent  court,  the  international  criminal  court  ,  who  are  ready  to  take  this  case.”  del  Ponte   also  quotes,  “Of  course  we  were  able  to  identify  the  high-­‐level  perpetrators.”  These  people   were  “in  command  responsibility...deciding,  organizing  ,planning  and  aiding  and  abetting  the   commission  of  crimes.”     The  UN  inquiry  led  by  Brazilian  Paulo  Pinheiro  has  been  chasing  the  chain  of  command  to   establish  criminal  responsibility.  UN  High  Commissioner  for  Human  Rights,  Navi  Pillay  places  the   number  of  fatalities  in  Syria  close  to  70000  since  March  2011.  Pinheiro  accepts  the  impasse   between  the  five  veto-­‐wielding  members  of  the  UNSC  at  New  York.  “We  are  in  close  talks  with   the  five  permanent  members  and  with  all  members  of  the  Security  Council.  But  we  don’t  have   the  key  that  will  open  the  path  to  cooperation  inside  the  Security  Council.  ”  The  investigators’   report  covering  crimes  till  mid-­‐January  2013  was  based  on  445  interviews  of  victims  and   witnesses  based  abroad,  as  they  haven’t  yet  been  allowed  into  Syria.     The  UN  report,  citing  corroborating  satellite  images  ,  sated  that  the  government  has  been   carrying  out  shelling  and  air  strikes  across  Syria.  "Government  forces  and  affiliated  militias  have   committed  extrajudicial  executions,  breaching  international  human  rights  law.  This  conduct  also   constitutes  the  war  crime  of  murder.  Where  murder  was  committed  as  part  of  a  widespread  or   systematic  attack  against  a  civilian  population,  with  knowledge  of  that  attack,  it  is  a  crime   against  humanity,"  it  said,  adding  that  these  forces  have  been  targeting  even  funeral    

processions to  spread  maximum  “terror”  among  civilians.  The  report  continued  to  state  that   the  rebels  too,  have  been  responsible  for  war  crimes.  These  include  murder,  torture,  hostage   taking  and  using  children  under  15  in  hostilities.  But  these  violations  have  not  yet  reached  the   intensity  as  of  those  committed  by  the  government  and  affiliated  militia.     The  international  committee  remains  stalemated  on  the  issue,  and  various  options  to  end  the   crisis  are  being  explored.  These  options  range  from  diplomacy  to  more  coercive  actions  like   economic  sanctions  and  military  force.  There  have  also  been  calls  for  judicial  intervention  by   the  ICC  .       Over  the  past  few  months,  calls  have  been  getting  louder  for  intervention  by  the  ICC  .   Ambassador  of  France,  Francois  Zimeray  said  in  July  2012  that  there  was  “enough  evidence”   from  reports  of  systematic  brutality  that  warrants  ICC  intervention  in  Syria.  Among  the  reports   was  one  published  by  Human  Rights  Watch,  documenting  an  ‘archipelago’  of  27  torture  centres   around  Syria,  including  locations  and  names  of  half  the  commanding  officers  in  charge  of  them.   The  US  and  France  are  most  ardent  in  pursuing  this  case  .  French  President  Francois  Hollande   pledged  “no  immunity  for  crimes”  of  Syrian  leaders  and  US  Secretary  of  State  Hillary  Clinton   insisted  matter  of  persecution  is  “not  a  matter  of  if,  but  when”.     The  non-­‐judicial  options  on  the  table  to  halt  the  unrest  in  Syria  are  arguably  not  viable.  The   UNSC  is  unable  to  act  as  three  of  it’s  permanent  members-­‐The  USA,  Russia  and  China-­‐  can’t   arrive  at  a  mutually  acceptable  decision.  The  US-­‐led  coalition  keeps  proposing  various   resolutions,  designed  to  end  Assad’s  regime  including  imposing  economic  sanctions.  They   believe  that  the  mass  atrocities  attributed  to  Assad  have  stripped  him  of  any  right  to  rule  the   state.  Russia  and  China  staunchly  oppose  these  resolutions  on  the  grounds  that  they  are  biased,   placing  primary  blame  on  the  Assad  regime  and  not  acknowledging  the  oppositions’  role  in  the   scores  of  lives  lost.  They  uphold  the  policy  of  non-­‐intervention  in  the  domestic  affairs  of  a  state.   Today,intervention  really  means  a  change  of  regime  in  Syria.  Russia  and  China  believe  that  this   would  destabilize  not  only  the  State  of  Syria  but  the  entire  region  as  well,  posing  a  far  greater   threat  to  human  security.  Both  sides  mask  their  strategic,  utilitarian  considerations  under  the   guise  of  Humanitarian  benefits.  The  impasse  revolves  around  non-­‐military  intervention.  Arriving   at  an  accord  for  UN-­‐sanctioned  military  action  is  highly  improbable.  Russia  and  China  believe   that  authorising  military  force  to  protect  civilians  transformed  into  an  instrument  for  the   pursuit  of  political  objectives.    However,  there  have  been  various  allegations  of  the  Syrian   regime  receiving  arms  from  it’s  state  backers.     Acting  out  of  frustration  due  to  inaction  by  the  UN,  57  states  have  urged  the  UNSC  to  refer  the   case  to  the  ICC.  These  countries  state  that  the  UN  Commission  of  Inquiry  has  already  uncovered  

evidence of  Human  Rights  violation  in  Syria  and  any  further  delay  is  illogical.  Furthermore,  Syria   has  not  heeded  to  calls  from  international  community  to  pursue  justice  for  these  alleged   crimes.  They  conclude  that    "[w]ithout  accountability…  there  will  be  no  sustainable  peace  in   Syria".  (     On  16  July  2012,  the  International  Committee  for  Red  Cross(ICRC)  officially  called  the  conflict  in   Syria  a  ‘civil  war  for  the  entire  region’.  The  ICRC  has  been  officially  charged  with  monitoring   adherence  to  the  rules  of  war  in  many  crisis  situations.  As  a  result,  International  Humanitarian   Laws(IHL)  applies  everywhere  there’s  a  clash  between  the  government  and  opposition  forces.     In  order  to  claim  IHL,  the  ICRC  needed  to  prove  three  conditions:  duration,  intensity,  and   organization  of  the  conflict.  With  a  prolonged  crisis,     heaven  weaponry,  and  oppositional  unity,  all  these  conditions  were  deemed  by  the  ICRC  to   have  been  met.  The  IHL  includes  the  Joint  Third  Article  of  the  Geneva  Convention  of  1949,   which  orders  humane  treatment  of  those  who  can’t  take  part  in  the  conflict  for  reasons  like   surrender,  illness,  being  wounded  and  being  captured.     The  conditions  to  be  met  under  the  Geneva  Conventions  for  the  protests  in  Syria  to  be  deemed   ‘internal  armed  conflict’  are:   ● Non-­‐state  groups  must  carry  out  protracted  and  widespread  hostilities  and,   ● These  groups  must  be  organized.     The  Syrian  Armed  Opposition,  under  the  umbrella  of  the  Free  Syrian  Army  fulfills  both  these   requirements  and  thus  the  conflict  can  be  judged  under  the  domain  of  the  International   Humanitarian  Law.         There  is  enough  ground  for  ICC  intervention,  but  a  lot  more  needs  to  be  found  to  establish  guilt   beyond  a  shadow  of  a  doubt.  Crimes  have  happened,  but  can  they  be  traced  to  the  highest  level   of  Bashar  al-­‐Assad?  Can  he  be  held  guilty  for  all  the  lives  lost,  all  the  inhumane  treatments  of   civilians?    

LEGAL ASPECTS  OF  THE  ICC  INTERVENTION:     The  UNSC  has  to  refer  the  Syrian  situation  to  the  ICC  in  order  for  the  ICC  to  investigate  potential   violations  of  international  law  there.This  is  because  Syria  has  not  ratified  the  Rome  Statute  and   hence  the  ICC  will  have  jurisdiction  only  if  Syria  refers  itself  or  the  UNSC  does.  For  this   committee,  it  is  to  be  assumed  that  through  diplomacy  and  a  worsening  of  violence,  China  and   Russia  have  been  convinced  to  cede  their  public  support  of  the  regime  in  an  effort  to  put  an    

end to  the  violence.  The  Prosecutors  and  Defenders  have  to  believe  that  Russia  and  China  have   conceded  their  geopolitical  interests  in  order  to  refer  the  docket  to  the  ICC.  Though  they  have   close  economic  and  political  ties  with  Syria,  this  assumption  is  not  far-­‐fetched.  Such  a  referral   has  been  steadily  gathering  momentum  and  is  definitely  a  possibility  in  the  near  future.  The   UNSC  has  earlier  referred  two  cases  with  the  support  of  China  and  Russia-­‐  Libya’s  Saif  al-­‐Islam   Gaddafi  and  Sudan’s  Omar-­‐al-­‐Bashir.         The  UNSC  referral  would  be  very  similar  to  the  one  issued  over  the  Libyan  situation.  Both  these   cases  give  no  jurisdiction  to  the  ICC  without  the  UNSC  referral.  However,  in  that  instance,  the   SC  managed  to  coalesce  around  the  idea  of  a  referral  giving  the  ICC  only  limited  jurisdiction.  For   one  thing,the  ICC  couldn’t  investigate  actions  of  non-­‐State  parties.  This  sort  of  limited  access   would  do  more  harm  than  good  as  accepting  restrictions  like  these  would  compromise  the   Courts’  independence  and  integrity.       Some  have  argued  that  an  ICC  referral  could  be  used  as  bargaining  chip  for  Assad  to  step  down.   Such  bargains  politicise  what  is  supposed  to  be  a  neutral  body  and  undermine  equality  before   law.  Passing  the  buck  on  to  the  ICC  to  do  what  the  international  community  is  unable  or   unwilling  to  do  can  cause  serious  long  term  damage  not  only  to  the  ICC  itself,  but  to  the   effectiveness  of  international  law  more  broadly.  The  ICC’s  credibility  has  already  been   challenged  seeing  as  how  all  8  of  it’s  cases  are  from  Africa.  Such  sentiments  can  erode  the   Court's  ability  to  prosecute  serious  violations  of  international  law,  impairing  in  the  long  run   civilian  protections  that  form  the  foundation  of  contemporary  international  law.     The  Syrian  crisis  is  vague.  There  are  numerous  reports  from  the  media  and  defectors  alike,   holding  the  regime  responsible  for  the  onslaught.  That  being  said,  the  authenticity  of  these   claims  and  the  motives  behind  them  need  to  be  duly  verified.  These  defectors,  being  in  exile,   have  vested  interests  in  overthrowing  the  Ba’ath  regime  and  so  their  objectivity  may  be   considered  dubious  at  best.  Many  news  sources  too,  have  biased  intentions  and  can  not  be   considered  reliable  evidence.     The  Court  effectively  renders  Syrian  national  courts  incapable  of  trying  it’s  own  Head  of  State   and  also  in  a  special  tribunal  set  up  by  the  UN.  The  crisis  is  ongoing  and  new  facets  of  it   continue  to  emerge.  The  international  committee  as  a  whole,  continues  to  receive  conflicting   reports  from  the  opposition  forces,  the  Syrian  government  ,  states  and  organizations  that  are   both  pro-­‐Syria  (Iran,  Russia)  and  anti-­‐Syria  (USA,  France).  Objectivity  needs  to  be  maintained   while  examining  all  evidence  and  witness  reports.  The  decision  must  be  clear  and  in  light  of  all   evidence,  from  both  sides  of  the  conflict.  It  is  this  evidence  that’ll  either  exonerate  Assad  or  

find him  guilty  on  all  counts.  If  the  Court  does  intervene,  it  must  exercise  restraint  as  the   situation  is  sensitive.     Finally,  an  ICC  investigation  on  its  own  is  not  going  to  stop  the  atrocities  in  Syria.  The  scale  of   destruction  and  pain  there  strains  comprehension,  yet  is  beyond  the  mission  and  capacity  of   the  ICC  to  address.  The  international  community  as  a  whole  needs  to  be  engaged  in  a  more   unified  and  meaningful  manner  if  it  is  serious  about  ending  civilian  suffering.  The    ICC  can’t  be   convened  as  simply  a  means  to  an  end.  The  choice  is  between  two  unfavourable  options  and   the  ICC  can’t  be  expected  to  satisfy  everybody  or  for  any  one  side  to  wash  its  hands  off  the   verdict.  Such  expectations  are  not  only  unrealistic,  they  also  threaten  to  weaken  international   law.       The  ICC  is  unbiased  and  does  not  take  sides.  What  it  implies  that  the  opposition  in  Syria  is  also   liable  for  prosecution.  the  law  applies  equally  to  both  sides,  regardless  of  their  powers  or   statuses.  Compromises  on  this  basic  principle  will  diminish  legitimacy  and  effectivity  of  the   council.   As  this  session  is  convened  to  try  Assad,  its  sole  purpose  is  to  decide  if  he  is  directly  responsible   for  all  the  crimes  committed.  Though  the  UNSC  can  refer  cases  to  the  ICC,  it  is  not  a  UN  organ   and  is  an  independent  entity.  It  is  from  this  independence  that  the  ICC  can  promote   international  law.      

RULES OF  PROCEDURE:       The  guide  explains  the  rules  in  simple  prose,  and  the  explanation  roughly  follows  the  course  of   the  ICC  at  CBITMUN.     It  is  extremely  important  to  develop  a  thorough  working  knowledge  of  the  rules,  including   when  they  should  be  introduced,  and  in  what  capacity.  The  rules  of  procedure  are  enforced  to   facilitate  the  efficient  workings  of  the  committee,  not  to  hinder  them.  Therefore,  the  Director,   Assistant  Judge  and  Judge  reserve  the  right  to  rule  motions  out  of  order  which  may  be   considered  dilatory  or  disruptive  to  the  committee  proceedings.  In  this  respect,  one  of  the   quickest  ways  for  a  delegate  to  alienate  him/herself  within  a  committee  is  to  be  labelled  as   someone  who  attempts  to  disrupt  committee  proceedings  with  the  introduction  of  redundant,   inappropriate,  or  time-­‐consuming  motions.     Section  I  –  Proceedings  before  the  Court   ● The  official  language  of  the  Court  is  English.  

● The trials  will  comprise  two  judges  and  two  assistant  directors  along  with  5  Prosecution   Attorneys  and  5  Defense  Attorneys.   ● The   Judges’   opinions   are   confidential   and   will   not   be   disclosed   to   the   Parties   or   the   other  Judges.   ● The  oral  phase  (Hearing)  consists  of  the  pleadings  by  each  intervening  party.   ●        Each  Side  would  be  represented  by  5  attorneys  each.   ● Every  attorney  must  take  the  floor  at  least  once.   ● The  total  time  of  each  party’s  plea  is  15  minutes,  during  which  the  speaker  may  not  be   interrupted   by   any   other   attorney.   However   he   may   be   interrupted   by   the   judges   themselves.   ●  On  request  and  on  expiration  of  the  total  time,  the  President  may  allow  one  extension   of  no  more  than  15  minutes.   ●  At  the  end  of  each  party’s  plea,  any  of  the  Judges  may  pose  questions  in  order  to  clarify   the  case.   ● If   there   is   not   sufficient   time   remaining   during   the   pleading   sessions,   these   may   continue  into  the  Q&A  session.   ● At  the  end  of  oral  pleadings,  in  the  allotted  time,  there  shall  be  a  Q&A  session.   ● During  this  session,  any  of  the  counsellors,  as  well  as  the  judges  may  pose  questions  to   the  other  Parties  regarding  the  case,  in  order  to  clarify  their  positions.     Section  II-­‐  Post  Proceedings     The   Director   of   the   Court   shall   have   authority   to   ensure   the   observance   of   the   Rules   of   Procedure  during  the  oral  phase.  To  this  end,  the  President:   ●  Declares  the  opening  and  closing  of  each  session.   ●  Gives  the  floor  to  Parties.   ●  Calls  the  house  to  order.   The   Q   &   A   session   rules   will   proceed   according   to   the   usual   way   in   which   Points   of   Information  are  taken  in  an  MUN.   Further,  there  will  be  a  moderated  caucus,  to  sum  up  each  individual's’  position.   ● After   having   heard   each   party,   posed   questions   and   observed   the   Q&A   session,   the   Judges  shall  withdraw  for  deliberations.   ● The  Judges’  deliberations  are  confidential.   ● All  further  rules/procedures  will  be  at  the  discretion  of  the  bench.