Writ of summons - Van Diepen Van der Kroef

‘(…) confirm that Article I does impose distinct obligations over and above thoseimposed by other Articles of the Convention. In particular, the Contracting Partieshave a direct obligation to prevent genocide.’400. As has been set out above, the duty to prevent genocide is also recognised undercustomary law. This applies moreover to the UN and for the troops dispatched by it(see, A. Simon, op. cit., page 159 et seq.). As the UN exercised a definite control andsovereignty in a Safe Area, the obligation to prevent the commission of the crime ofgenocide in a Safe Area applies to the UN (A. Simon, op. cit., page 162).401. The UN states further in the UN Report under number 501:‘The international community as a whole must accept its share of responsibility forallowing this tragic course of events by its prolonged refusal to use force in the earlystages of the war. This responsibility is shared by the Security Council, the ContactGroup and other Governments which contributed to the delay in the use of force, aswell as by the United Nations Secretariat and the mission in the field.’The then Secretary-General also acknowledged by this that the UN had a duty to act.This obligation to prevent genocide was again repeated by the Secretary-General of theUN on 26 January 2004 during the Stockholm International Forum:‘To sum up, Ladies and Gentlemen, as an international community we have a clearobligation to prevent genocide.’402. As set out above, both the UN and the State of the Netherlands exercised effectivecontrol, which entails that the obligation under Article I of the Genocide Convention toprevent genocide rested on both the UN and the State of the Netherlands. The scope ofthat obligation will be addressed below.403. Article VIII of the Genocide Convention provides that every Party to the Convention isentitled to call upon the UN, with a view to preventing and suppressing acts of© Van Diepen Van der Kroef Advocaten 2007www.vandiepen.com167