Post-Conflict Peace-Building: Establishment of the Human Rights Ombudsman
In the post Cold War period, armed conflict continues to proliferate. Inter-state conflict, however, is the exception. Civil conflict — based on ethnic, religious, political and other differences — is common.1 War-torn societies suffer from a variety of domestic weaknesses, including state institutions that are flawed or have been destroyed, human rights abuses and breakdown in the rule of law. After the conflict ends, reconstruction of state and societal sectors needs to occur to prevent the state from slipping back into armed conflict. The concept of post-conflict peace-building developed in the 1990s, often associated with internationally-brokered peace agreements.2
From Danzig to East Timor and Beyond: The Role of International Territorial Administration
The United Nations is currently engaged in one of its most ambitious roles ever: the administration of two territories—Kosovo and East Timor. Attention has focused on the challenges raised by the performance of this role, such as international officials' need for new skills and experience. It has also focused on the problems caused by the context of administration, in which local governmental institutions must be constructed or reconstructed before they can be administered. However, a more profound question needs to be asked as well: why is the United Nations there at all? This piece analyzes the official reasons put forward to explain the deployment of international organizations in the administration of territory. It challenges the popular idea that the Kosovo and East Timor projects are unique. Actually, the involvement of international organizations in varying degrees of territorial administration has a long history, stretching back to the start of the League of Nations. Moreover, it includes at least three further current examples: the administration of camps housing refugees and internally displaced persons by the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR); the operation of material assistance programs by international organizations in various territories; and the conduct of governmental activities by the Office of the High Representative of the International Community (OHR) in Bosnia and Herzegovina. I argue that the current projects are the latest manifestations of a policy institution that is used to serve two purposes rooted in certain ideas of international law. Valuable lessons for current and future projects can be learned from the way this institution has served these purposes in the past. The piece begins by briefly establishing how the international administration projects operate. Drawing on historical precedents, I then analyze the official justifications put forward for the projects, establishing what purposes the projects are supposedly set up to serve. I argue that these projects are framed in terms of a response to two problems, each related to administration in the territory concerned. In the first place, they attempt to address a perceived "sovereignty problem" regarding the identity of those local actors exercising administrative control. In the second place, they attempt to address a perceived "governance problem" regarding the conduct of governance by local actors. After a detailed analysis of the different circumstances in which these purposes have been invoked in relation to the institution, the relationship between the institution and three other international policy institutions is explained. This study focuses on international organizations, as such actors are understood in international law. As regards the administration of post-1945 Germany and Austria, I include the Allies within this definition, since the conventional view is that, although in certain respects control was divided between the individual members of the
Inequality trends in health and future health risk among English children and young people, 1999–2009
Objective To investigate trends in health inequality among children and young people between 1999 and 2009, using outcomes consistent with the current NHS reforms. Design/data Secondary analysis of participants aged 0–24 in the Health Surveys for England (HSE) undertaken in 1999, 2004, 2006 and 2009. Main outcome measures Changes in the absolute and relative risks of four health outcomes by deprivation tertiles, based on occupation of the head of household ▸ self/parent-reported general health, ▸ presence of a long-standing illness (LSI), ▸ obesity ▸ smoking. Results No indicator showed a reduction in relative or absolute inequality between 1999 and 2009. For children (0–12 years), the relative risk comparing the most and least deprived tertiles increased significantly for poor general health (1999:1.6 (95% CI 1.2 to 2.2); 2009:3.9 (2.4 to 6.2), while the absolute difference in LSI prevalence(%) increased from 1.3 (−2.9 to 5.5) to 7.4 (3.6 to 11.4). Among young people (13–24 years), the absolute difference in LSI prevalence increased from −5.9 (−10.9 to −1.1) to 3.1 (−4.1 to 10.7). Absolute inequality in having tried smoking among children aged 8–15(%) increased significantly in the first half of the decade before decreasing in the second half (1999:3.3 (−1.1 to 7.7); 2004:14.1 (9.6 to 18.8); 2009:4.1 (0.1 to 8.8)). However, the increase in absolute inequality for smoking prevalence among young adults (16–24 years) was maintained throughout the decade (1999:−7.0 (−15.6 to 1.3); 2004:11.6 (3.7 to 20.0); 2009:8.2 (−0.3 to 16.9)). Conclusions The national programme between 1999 and 2009 was not successful in reducing inequality in four key indicators of health status and future health risk among children and young people. Some inequality measures for general health, LSI prevalence and smoking increased over this time.