Suchergebnisse

Mediation is proving to be an effective way to manage conflicts in aconstructive way. But mediation not only helps to solve specific problems, because its potential encompasses aspects of greater complexity. Thus, mediation helps us to know ourselves better, to better understand others, and to use what we have learned to better manage future conflict situations. In asociety where there is no culture of agreement and where there is no education in the field of emotions, mediation becomes an adequate and effective tool to resolve conflicts in apeaceful and constructive manner. On the other hand, mediation allows the parties to take responsibility for the resolution of their own conflict, to be active agents in the process. The greater the citizens' participation in the different decision making processes, the more democratic asociety will be. That is why, in the restoration of social peace, citizenship should play arole as an active agent, and mediation is asuitable instrument for this purpose because the individuals in conflict find the way to solve it without third party impositions. ; Mediation is proving to be an effective way to manage conflicts in aconstructive way. But mediation not only helps to solve specific problems, because its potential encompasses aspects of greater complexity. Thus, mediation helps us to know ourselves better, to better understand others, and to use what we have learned to better manage future conflict situations. In asociety where there is no culture of agreement and where there is no education in the field of emotions, mediation becomes an adequate and effective tool to resolve conflicts in apeaceful and constructive manner. On the other hand, mediation allows the parties to take responsibility for the resolution of their own conflict, to be active agents in the process. The greater the citizens' participation in the different decision making processes, the more democratic asociety will be. That is why, in the restoration of social peace, citizenship should play arole as an active agent, and mediation is asuitable instrument for this purpose because the individuals in conflict find the way to solve it without third party impositions.

Operations under the auspices of the Security Council mandate span over 70 years. Repeatedly involved in resolving armed conflicts, they have made a significant contribution to ensuring security and stability around the world. In practice, they have taken the form of operations by individual states, coalitions, other international organizations or simply as United Nations missions composed of contingents provided by Troop Contribution Countries (TCC). While operations under the auspices of the United Nations have been involved on several occasions in offensive activities under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations, and the question of responsibility for these actions has been the subject of many legal analyses and judgments, missions organized by the United Nations are always recognized as neutral, and their activities as conciliatory and focused on monitoring the cessation of hostilities, or supervising the disengagement between the parties of the conflict, with the use of force limited to self-defence. Thus, such operations benefited from legal protection, and any action against them was considered a violation of international law. The current engagement of United Nations goes far beyond the traditional understanding of peacekeeping operations. UN missions are frequently authorized to employ all necessary means, up to and including the use of lethal force or even neutralization of the armed group. This creates a situation where in the light of International Humanitarian Law, such actions can be recognized as involvement in armed conflict. This article is intended to show the problems that the international community will soon face to in using United Nations' missions as an instrument for resolving armed conflicts and as a tool for restoring peace and providing stability and securityin the area of operations. It presents the processes of decision-making and subordination, which in some circumstances might result in the United Nations missions being deprived of legal protection and, in addition, made liable for non-compliance with the provisions of International Humanitarian Law. ; Operations under the auspices of the Security Council mandate span over 70 years. Repeatedly involved in resolving armed conflicts, they have made a significant contribution to ensuring security and stability around the world. In practice, they have taken the form of operations by individual states, coalitions, other international organizations or simply as United Nations missions composed of contingents provided by Troop Contribution Countries (TCC). While operations under the auspices of the United Nations have been involved on several occasions in offensive activities under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations, and the question of responsibility for these actions has been the subject of many legal analyses and judgments, missions organized by the United Nations are always recognized as neutral, and their activities as conciliatory and focused on monitoring the cessation of hostilities, or supervising the disengagement between the parties of the conflict, with the use of force limited to self-defence. Thus, such operations benefited from legal protection, and any action against them was considered a violation of international law. The current engagement of United Nations goes far beyond the traditional understanding of peacekeeping operations. UN missions are frequently authorized to employ all necessary means, up to and including the use of lethal force or even neutralization of the armed group. This creates a situation where in the light of International Humanitarian Law, such actions can be recognized as involvement in armed conflict. This article is intended to show the problems that the international community will soon face to in using United Nations' missions as an instrument for resolving armed conflicts and as a tool for restoring peace and providing stability and securityin the area of operations. It presents the processes of decision-making and subordination, which in some circumstances might result in the United Nations missions being deprived of legal protection and, in addition, made liable for non-compliance with the provisions of International Humanitarian Law.

The terrorist attacks on 11 September 2001 by the terrorist organization Al-Qaeda on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, initiated a series of changes in U.S. security policy. The amount of power the executive government, special services and police had was greatly extended in the name of the war on terror. A country that used to be characterized by openness, commitment to freedom and civil liberties, has become a country that spies on its own citizens. It has turned out that "the police of the world" do not comply with international law themselves and use torture against people suspected of terrorist activities. ; The terrorist attacks on 11 September 2001 by the terrorist organization Al-Qaeda on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, initiated a series of changes in U.S. security policy. The amount of power the executive government, special services and police had was greatly extended in the name of the war on terror. A country that used to be characterized by openness, commitment to freedom and civil liberties, has become a country that spies on its own citizens. It has turned out that "the police of the world" do not comply with international law themselves and use torture against people suspected of terrorist activities.

Zamachy terrorystyczne przeprowadzone 11 września 2001 r. przez organizację Al-Kaida na World Trade Center i Pentagon, zapoczątkowały szereg zmian w polityce bezpieczeństwa USA. Poszerzono uprawnienia władzy wykonawczej, służb specjalnych i policji w zakresie wojny z terroryzmem. Z państwa charakteryzującego się otwartością, przywiązaniem do wolności i swobód obywatelskich, Stany Zjednoczone Ameryki przekształciły się w kraj inwigilujący własnych obywateli. Jak się okazało "policjant świata" sam nie przestrzegał prawa międzynarodowego i stosował tortury wobec osób podejrzanych o prowadzenie działalności terrorystycznej. ; The terrorist attacks on 11 September 2001 by the terrorist organization Al-Qaeda on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, initiated a series of changes in U.S. security policy. The amount of power the executive government, special services and police had was greatly extended in the name of the war on terror. A country that used to be characterized by openness, commitment to freedom and civil liberties, has become a country that spies on its own citizens. It has turned out that "the police of the world" do not comply with international law themselves and use torture against people suspected of terrorist activities.

One striking aspect of the coronavirus crisis was the poor response of the right-wing populist leaders to the pandemic in countries such as the US, Britain, and Brazil. Despite this fact, the continuing voter support right-wing populist leaders attract across countries with different socio-economic traits is puzzling. In this paper, we argue in favour of a cognitive anthropological view of populism scholarship. Cognitive and evolutionary anthropology shows that mental systems common to all humans shape the way we understand the world, making some ideas more plausible than others regardless of their levels of accuracy. Even though the action of 'building a wall' to keep illegal migrants away can prove ultimately unfeasible and does not address real immigration issues, due to our cognitive evolution, it makes intuitive sense as a plausible option to reducing immigration. Populist leaders exploit our cognitive intuitions by providing such intractable but oftentimes intuitively-plausible ideas in order to get elected or to promote preferred policies. Furthermore, we intuitively admire powerful individuals and tend to defer to authoritative and charismatic figures as an evolutionary strategy for acquiring valued skills and negotiating hierarchies. As a result, by committing to the intuitively-plausible policies populist leaders promote, such as 'building a wall', they give additional credence to the political beliefs that are based on our cognitive intuitions, effectively increasing their plausibility for the "common folk".

War and peace have perpetually alternated in history. Consequently, peace has always been seen as an endless project, even a dream, to be in brotherhood realized by all members of international community. Since the XVII century the elimination of war and armed conflict has been a political and humanitarian objective of all nations in the world. Both the League of Nations and the United Nations were conceived with the spirit of eliminating the risk of war through the promotion of peace, cooperation and solidarity among Nations. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the subsequent human rights instruments were drafted with a sincere aspiration of promoting the value of peace and human rights worldwide. International practice shows the close linkage between the disregard of human rights and the existence of war and armed conflict. It follows that the role of human rights in the prevention of war and armed conflict is very important. Since 2008 the Human Rights Council has been working on the "Promotion of the right of peoples to peace." Pursuant resolutions 20/15 and 23/16 and 27/17 the Council decided firstly to establish, and secondly and thirdly to extend the mandate of the open-ended working group (OEWG) aimed at progressively negotiating a draft United Nations declaration on the right to peace. The OEGW welcomed in its second session (July 2014) the approach of the Chairperson- Rapporteur, which is basically based on the relationship between the right to life and human rights, peace and development. Consequently, this approach could be developed during the third session of the Working Group (April 2015). At its 8th meeting, on 24 April 2015, the Group adopted the draft report on its third session ad referendum and decided to entrust the Chairperson- Rapporteur with its finalization. ; Wojna i pokój stale zmieniały bieg historii. W konsekwencji, pokój postrzegany był jako marzenie, niedokończony projekt, możliwy do osiągnięcia jedynie dzięki braterstwu wszystkich członków społecznoœci międzynarodowej. Od XVII wieku eliminacja wojny i konfliktów zbrojnych była politycznym i humanitarnym celem wszystkich narodów. Zarówno Liga Narodów, jaki Organizacja Narodów Zjednoczonych powołane zostały w dążeniu do wyeliminowania ryzyka konfliktów przez promocję pokoju, współpracy i solidarnoœci między narodami. Powszechna Deklaracja Praw Człowieka i kolejne międzynarodowe akty prawne gwarantujące ochronę praw człowieka, przyjęte zostały jako wyraz dążenia do promowania wartoœci podstawowych, za jakie uznano pokój i prawa człowieka. Praktyka międzynarodowa pokazuje zależność między naruszaniem praw człowieka a pojawianiem się wojen i konfliktów zbrojnych. Jasnym jest więc, że w zapobieganiu konfliktom zbrojnym istotne znaczenie ma ciągłe podkreślanie wagi praw człowieka. Od 2008 r. Rada Praw Człowieka ONZ podejmuje prace nad promocją prawa człowieka do pokoju. W myœl rezolucji 20/15, 23/16 i 27/17 Rada zdecydowała o ustanowieniu, a następnie o rozszerzeniu mandatu grupy roboczej (tzw. OEWG), której aktywność skierowana jest na opracowanie projektu deklaracji w prawie prawa do pokoju. Podczas drugiej sesji w lipcu 2014 r. eksperci zaakceptowali propozycję Przewodniczącego, wskazującą na związek między prawem do życia, prawami człowieka, pokojem i rozwojem. To podejœcie zostało rozwinięte podczas trzeciej sesji grupy roboczej w kwietniu 2015 r.

The article poses a question about the current meaning of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The starting point is the analysis of the legitimacy of the Declaration, which leads to the conclusion that the support for it has not been eroded by the passage of time, but has indeed gained strength. The Declaration's message on the universality of human rights is taken from the perspective of the controversy surrounding this principle during the drafting process and in the light of the subsequent debates related to the Second World Conference on Human Rights in Vienna in 1993. The Declaration and Programme of Action not only stressed that the universal nature of human rights is beyond question, but also pointed to the importance of national and regional specificities, and various historical, cultural and religious conditions that, however, do not relieve states, regardless of their political, economic and cultural systems, of the obligation to promote and protect all human rights. The InterAction Council's initiative to develop a Universal Declaration of Human Responsibility is presented as an attempt to reconcile different doctrinal and political positions with regard to the universality of human rights. The conclusion of these considerations is the expectation that the already visible tendency to absorb various philosophical, doctrinal and cultural traditions in order to enrich human rights justifications will prevail over attempts to question the universality of rights in the name of regional or other distinctions. The Universal Declaration was also a testimony to the holistic approach to human rights, encompassing economic, social, cultural, as well as personal and political rights. The subsequent winding road in attitudes to the two main categories of rights at the international arena ultimately led to the return of the spirit and letter of the Declaration and the recognition of equality of all rights in the legal and institutional-procedural dimensions. Various aspects of the Declaration's binding force ...