OAKMUN 2024

Background Guide

UNHRC
Discussing the extrajudicial
killings of vulnerable minorities
 Table of Contents
1 Table of Contents ... 1

2 Letter from the Executive Board ... 2

3 Rules of Procedure (RoP) ... 3

4 Introduction to the Committee ... 10

5 Introduction to the Agenda ... 11

6 Important Definitions and Legalities ... 12

7 Stakeholders ... 15

8 Past International Actions ... 18

9 Possible Strategies and Approaches ... 22

10 Case Studies ... 23

11 QARMAs ... 25

12 Reference Links ... 26

1
 Letter from the Executive Board

Dear Delegates,
It gives us great honor and immense pleasure to welcome you all to the United Nations
Human Rights Council at OAKMUN’24. As representatives of member nations of the
UNHRC, you are tasked with debating, deliberating, and reaching a consensus on the
agendas at hand.
This background guide has been designed to help you get started on your research.
However, this document shouldn’t be your only source of research. Building upon the
outlook presented by this guide, you are expected to carry out your own research
through authentic sources and make sure to engage in comprehensive and pragmatic
debate throughout the sessions.

The Executive Board will not interfere in the flow of debate unless absolutely required.
Therefore, the onus to ensure that the committee does not stagnate lies on the delegates.
We strongly believe that with good research, the delegates will be able to steer the
committee in the right direction.
Please do not hesitate to get in touch with the Executive Board at any time before or
during the conference in case you have any queries about the agenda or the rules of
procedure. Further, we have added one addendum to this letter that talks about the
nature of evidence entailed in this simulation.

We request the delegates not to view this conference as a zero-sum game. Model UN
conferences are collaborative rather than competitive and we would like to keep this
spirit alive during our committee. Our goal isn’t to solve the world’s problems in three
days, but rather to educate ourselves about them, thereby ensuring that we go on to
become a generation of sensitised leaders, equipped with the skills and will to make our
world a better place. With that being said, we wish you all good luck and eagerly look
forward to the conference.

Warm regards,
Samiksha VB - Chairperson (samikshavb@[Link])
Vivaan Sheth - Vice Chairperson (vivaansheth5@[Link])
Suhani Singh - Moderator (suhanipsingh@[Link])
Myra Kulkarni - Moderator (myramayur@[Link])

2
 Rules of Procedure - RoP (UNA-USA)

Rules of procedure refers to the set of rules and conduct that delegates are expected to
follow and maintain during the entirety of the conference in order to ensure that decorum
is maintained. This committee would follow the UNA-USA format of rules and
procedure.

Addendum 1: Nature and Proof of Evidence

Documents from the following sources will be considered as credible proof for any
allegations made in committee or statements that require verification

1. Reuters: Appropriate Documents and articles from the Reuters News agency will be
used to corroborate or refute controversial statements made in committee.

2. UN Documents: Documents by all UN agencies will be considered sufficient proof.

Reports from all UN bodies including treaty-based bodies will also be accepted.

3. National Government Reports: Government Reports of a given country used to

corroborate an allegation on the same aforementioned country will be accepted as
proof. The documents stated above will hold a binding nature of the establishment.

4. Other sources like Wikipedia, Amnesty International, or newspapers like the

Guardian, and so on and so forth will not be accepted as credible proof; but may be
used for a better understanding of any issue and even be brought up in debate if the
information given in such sources is in line with the beliefs of a government or a
delegate.

3
Flow of committee
1. Motion to begin formal session - To put this motion in order, the delegate of (portfolio)
puts forward a motion to begin formal session.

2. Motion to set agenda - To put this motion in order, the delegate of (portfolio) puts
forward a motion to set the agenda of the committee.

3. Motion to begin roll call - To put this motion in order, the delegate of (portfolio) puts
forward a motion to begin roll call. During roll call the delegate can either say “Present”
or “Present and Voting”. Note - If a delegate chooses to say “Present and Voting” then
the delegate cannot abstain from voting for the resolution at the end of the committee. If
the delegate votes “Present and voting” on the first day, their stance cannot be changed to
“Present” during the rest of the conference. Meanwhile if they choose to say “Present” on
the first day, a delegate can choose to change their stance to “Present and voting” during
the rest of the conference.

4. Motion to open the GSL (General Speakers List) - To put this motion in order, the
delegate of (portfolio) raises a motion to establish the General Speakers List.

5. Motion to move into Moderated Caucus - To put this motion in order, the delegate raises
a motion to suspend formal debate/session and move into a Moderated Caucus on the
topic “xyz” for a time period of “xyz” minutes allotting “xyz” minutes/seconds per
speaker.

6. Motion to move into Unmoderated Caucus - To put this motion in order, the delegate of
(portfolio) raises a motion to suspend formal session and move into an unmoderated
caucus for a time period of “xyz” minutes.

4
7. Motion to adjourn committee - To put this motion in order, the delegate of (portfolio)
puts forward a motion to adjourn committee session.

8. Motion to resume committee - To put this motion in order, the delegate of (portfolio)
puts forward a motion to resume committee session.

9. Motion to present Draft Resolution (or any other documentation) - To put this motion
in order, the delegate of (portfolio) puts forward a motion to introduce “resolution name”.
Note - In order to introduce amendments, the delegate of (portfolio) raises a motion to
move into amendments for the “resolution name”. In order to vote on the resolution the
delegate of (portfolio) raises a motion to table “resolution name” for the voting
procedure. Delegates can either vote “Yes” or “No”, if their voting stance is “Present in
Voting”. However if their voting stance is “Present”, delegates can choose to abstain from
voting in the resolution.

General MUN Terms

Motions – It is a call to take a decision by a delegate that will affect the entire committee.

Points – Used to bring something of non-substantive importance to notice in committee

and ask questions.

Yields – Utilising extra speech time left after a GSL speech.

Executive Board – They will facilitate debate within the Committee and are usually
seated at the very front.

Blocs - Different groups that have similar ideas and opinions about the topics. In the real
UN, there are regional blocs, but delegates can choose to build their own blocs in the
Model UN. These blocs will typically work together to create a draft resolution.

Lobbying – Informal discussion with fellow delegates before and after the MUN sessions
regarding the agenda, bloc positions, etc.

Quorum – The minimum number of delegates required to begin a committee session

(1/5th of total strength).

5
Debate in MUN Conference
In a MUN conference, debate is of two types -
1. Formal debate - which consists of the General Speakers List (GSL)
2. Informal debate - which consists of Moderated Caucus and Unmoderated Caucus.

General Speakers List (GSL)

The GSL is a non exhaustive list, if it is exhausted the committee concludes.
It has a default speaker time of 90 seconds
It is generally an introductory speech in relation to the agenda, but with the flow of
the committee it is recommended to shape the speech in accordance to what is being
discussed in regards to the committee.
Points of information (POI’s) can be brought up during GSL speeches. (Points
explained below)
If the delegate finishes their speech before their speaker time ends, the delegate can
yield the remaining time in four ways -
1. Yield to the Executive Board - In this case the Executive Board may decide on how
the time can be used.
2. Yield to Questions - In order to allow questions from the committee.
3. Yield to Comments - In order to allow comments from the delegates present in
committee.
4. Yield to another delegate - In this case the delegate can yield their remaining time to
another delegate, for their own benefit.

6
Moderated Caucus:
In a moderated caucus a more specific line of speeches is followed in relation to a sub
agenda or subtopic.
It is time sensitive, which means that it will elapse.
Points of information and yielding will not be allowed in a moderated caucus.
Points of orders will be entertained in a moderated caucus.
These speeches made by delegates carry a high weightage compared to all the other
speeches in committee.
The time limit cannot be more than 2 minutes individual speakers time, and 20
minutes for total, but can be extended by half the time of the previous moderated
caucus.
If the delegate is not recognized to speak, a delegate can send in their points through
substantive chits.

Format of substantive chit:

Substantive Chit

To : Executive Board

From : The delegate of (portfolio)

Include points not being brought up in

committee in the chit

Unmoderated Caucus:

Delegates engage in more informal discussions, usually get up and talk to each other
and without chairperson intervention.
Usually used for discussion regarding the Draft Resolution, Resolution, Working
Paper or to come up with a road-map for the committee.
Time sensitive, which implies that it also lapses.
The Delegate of XYZ would like to suspend formal debate and motions to move into
an Unmoderated Caucus for a total time period of ______ minutes. (not more than 20
minutes)
Can be extended by half the time of the previous Unmoderated Caucus.

7
Points
Point of Information: Used to ask questions on the speech that just ended. Follow-ups
may be granted according to the discretion of the Executive Board. The delegate must
present the question to the Executive board. For example, “The delegate of xyz stated
quote ‘insert what the delegate said in their speech that you have a question on’. The
delegate of (your portfolio) would like to ask the delegate of xyz ‘your question’.”

Points of Order: Used to point out a flaw in a delegate’s speech. It will either be a
Factual Inaccuracy or a Logical Fallacy. A Point of Order of Factual inaccuracy
would be pointing out any factual flaws in the delegate's speech. These must also be
raised to the Executive board. An example would be, “The delegate of (your portfolio)
would like to raise a Point of Order, Factual Inaccuracy/Logical Fallacy. ‘State the
incorrect fact stated or the flaw in logic’.”

Point of Personal Privilege: Anything regarding yourself and the environment. (Going
to the bathroom, Switching off the fans, etc.) This is the only point that can trump
anything else in committee, i.e. you can interrupt speeches, etc. if you are raising this
point.

Point of Parliamentary Enquiry: Questions regarding the flow of committee and rules
of procedure.

Documentation:
Working Paper (Draft Resolution but not in format)
Draft Resolution
Substantive chits

8
Resolution:
A resolution can contain only the solutions which are being brought about during
committee sessions.
Sponsors – Usually the authors of the DR/R. Must vote in favour of the document
when put up for a vote. They CANNOT become a signatory to any other resolution.
Signatories – Neither support not agree with the document, but would like to see it
presented in committee. Have no obligation to vote for the document and one delegate
can be a signatory to multiple resolutions. Every DR/R must have at least 1/3th of the
total members of committee as signatories to even be presented.
Clauses – Preambulatory and Operative Amendments – Non-Substantive and
Substantive → Friendly and Unfriendly and additions, Modifications or Deletions.
Voting → Yes, Yes with Rights, No, No with Rights, Abstention.

9
 Introduction to Committee
(UNHRC)
United Nations Human Rights Council

The United Nations Human Rights Council is the main UN body concerned with human
rights and humanitarian matters. This includes the promotion and protection of human
rights worldwide, addressing human rights violations, and making recommendations and
treaties in order to mitigate them. They cover all thematic human rights issues and
situations that require its attention, year-round.

It was established in 2006 by the United Nations General Assembly and comprises 47
member states that are elected by the 193 countries in the UNGA. Each member has a 3-
year term, and as of now, 123 of the 193 members have served as UNHRC member states.
Equal representation from the five United Nations Regions (Africa, Asia-Pacific, Eastern
Europe, Latin American and Caribbean, and Western European and Others) is ensured,
and the rotating membership reflects the UN’s diversity and gives it legitimacy in terms of
fair representation of international human rights violations. So far, it has adopted 1,481
resolutions.

The HRC’s mandate is to promote “universal respect for the protection of all human
rights and fundamental freedoms for all” and “address situations of violations of human
rights, including gross and systematic violations, and make recommendations thereon.”

10
 Introduction to the Agenda
“Deliberating upon extrajudicial killings of vulnerable communities”

In all its essence, this agenda is based on the varying perspectives of countries on the
killings of vulnerable populations, such as ethnic, religious, racial, gender and sexual
minorities outside of laws, or by non-state actors, on an international background.

Currently, around the world, there are multiple cases of unlawful and extrajudicial killings
of specifically targeted vulnerable communities. This calls into question the most
fundamental human right - the right to life, without which no other human right can be
upheld. Extrajudicial, summary (when a person is accused of a crime, and killed
immediately, without a full and fair trial), and arbitrary (when a person is killed by a
government order without any judicial or legal process) executions, violate this right.

This committee aims to examine the role of governments in mitigating and managing the
violation of the right to life, while contributing feasible intergovernmental solutions that
aid in the prevention and provision of rightful consequences of extrajudicial killings. This
may be in terms of the dissolving and incarceration of non-state threats and actors, or in
regards to the responsibilities of external parties, organizations and countries to uphold
international humanitarian mandates by adequately handling violators, through
sanctions, operations, and legislation.

11
 Important Definitions
1. Extrajudicial Killings: According to the UNHCR, The deliberate killing of
individuals outside of any known legal framework.

2. Vulnerable Communities: Communities which include, but are not limited to,
women, racial or ethnic groups, low-income individuals and families, individuals
who are incarcerated and those who have been incarcerated, individuals with
disabilities, individuals with mental health conditions, children, youth and young
adults, seniors, immigrants and refugees, individuals who are Limited English
Proficient (LEP), and lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and questioning
(LGBTQQ) communities, or combinations of these populations.

3. Impunity: Refers to the failure to hold perpetrators accountable for their

actions, allowing them to avoid legal prosecution, punishment, or responsibility
for crimes committed, including extrajudicial killings.

4. State Actors vs. Non-State Actors:

State Actors: Individuals or groups who represent the government or hold
official authority (e.g., police, military, intelligence agencies). They often
carry out extrajudicial killings in the name of national security or political
order.
Non-State Actors: Individuals or groups that operate independently of the
government, such as insurgents, militias, or terrorist organisations.

5. Arbitrary Detention: Occurs when an individual is detained or imprisoned

without following the legal process, often without proper charges, evidence, or
access to legal defence.

12
 Legalities

In this particular context, every stakeholder contributes distinct concerns, goals, and
influences that influence the conversation surrounding extrajudicial murders.

1. International Humanitarian Law (IHL) - The International Humanitarian Law, according

to the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), is a set of rules that seek to limit
the effects of armed conflict. It lays out the responsibilities of states and non-state armed
groups during an armed conflict. Facets of the IHL, among other measures, prohibit
collective punishment, extrajudicial killing, torture, destruction of property and population
transfer (whether deportation of enemy population or transfer of the occupying power's
population into occupied territory).

2. Universal Declaration on Human Rights (UDHR) - The Universal Declaration of Human

Rights (UDHR) is a milestone document in the history of human rights, adopted by the
United Nations General Assembly on December 10, 1948. It was drafted in response to the
atrocities of World War II, with the aim of setting a common standard for protecting the
fundamental rights and freedoms of all individuals across the world. Some applicable
Articles of the UDHR to this agenda include, but are not limited to:
Article 3: Right to life, liberty, and security
Article 5: Prohibition of torture and cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment
Article 10: Right to a fair trial

3. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) - The International

Covenant on Civil and Political Rights is a multilateral treaty that commits nations to
respect the civil and political rights of individuals, including the right to life, freedom of
religion, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, electoral rights and rights to due process
and a fair trial. Some applicable Articles of the UDHR to this agenda include, but are not
limited to:
Article 6: Right to life and the Prohibition of arbitrary deprivation of life
Article 7: Prohibition of Torture and Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment
Article 14: Right to a free trial

4. Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) - The Rome Statute defines war
crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide, including acts of extrajudicial killings as
violations of international law. It provides a framework for prosecuting individuals
responsible for these crimes at the international level.

13
 Legalities
5. International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) - The
International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) is a vital
international human rights treaty that seeks to guarantee individuals' access to economic,
social, and cultural rights necessary for a dignified and fulfilling life. Although primarily
focused on socio-economic and cultural welfare, the ICESCR is indirectly connected to the
issue of extrajudicial killings, particularly in how the deprivation of these rights can lead to
environments where such abuses are more likely to occur. We expect delegates to study this
specific legality and make relevant connections to the agenda being discussed in this
committee.

14
 Stakeholders
In this particular context, every stakeholder contributes distinct concerns, goals, and
influences that influence the conversation surrounding extrajudicial murders.

1. National Governments
Governments of Accused Countries: These administrations frequently reject or minimise
claims of extrajudicial killings. They might use the pretext of upholding law and order,
fighting terrorism, or stopping crime to defend their activities. One tactic for fending off
external pressure is to speak about sovereignty and non-interference.
Governments Promoting Human Rights: A number of states, particularly those in the
Global North or liberal democracies, have made a strong case for extrajudicial killing
investigations and have voiced concerns about human rights abuses. To hold offenders
accountable, they can advocate for international cooperation, resolutions, or penalties.
Fragile or Post-Conflict States: Although these governments may face accusations of
extrajudicial murders, they believe that these measures are a regrettable yet necessary
tactic to maintain stability due to ongoing conflicts, weak state institutions, and
inadequate law enforcement.

2. Civil Society and Human Rights Organizations

Local NGOs and human rights activists: These groups are frequently on the front lines,
recording violations and promoting justice. They strive for international accountability
mechanisms like UN investigations or the involvement of the International Criminal
Court (ICC) and give vital reporting from the ground.
International Human Rights Organisations: Watchdog groups such as Human Rights
Watch, Amnesty International, and others frequently provide in-depth analyses and
initiate efforts to draw attention to extrajudicial executions on a worldwide scale. They
advocate for the imposition of sanctions, enquiries, or special rapporteurs by the UN
and other international organisations.

3. Affected Communities and Vulnerable Groups

Ethnic and Religious Minorities: Certain minority groups, such as ethnic minorities,
indigenous peoples, or religious groupings, are frequently the subject of extrajudicial
executions. These communities are extremely vulnerable because they frequently
experience systemic discrimination and are marginalised in national justice systems.
Political Opponents and Activists: Extrajudicial executions are used in certain nations to
stifle activists, opposition parties, and political dissidents. These people, along with their
allies, might look for recognition on a global scale and advocate for justice.
Women and LGBTQ+ Groups: Targeted violence, including extrajudicial killings, is a
common occurrence for vulnerable gender and sexual minorities. This category includes
violence against LGBTQ+ populations, "honour" killings, and gender-based violence,
all of which need gender-sensitive approaches to justice.

15
 Stakeholders
4. Regional and International Organisations
United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC): Dealing with human rights abuses,
such as extrajudicial murders, is the primary responsibility of the UNHRC. Its processes,
like Special Rapporteurs and Universal Periodic Reviews (UPRs), are essential for
looking into claims and suggesting remedial measures.
International Criminal Court (ICC): In situations where national governments are unable
or unwilling to prosecute those responsible for extrajudicial killings, the ICC may be able
to help hold them accountable. Crimes against humanity, such as systematic extrajudicial
murders, are prosecuted by it.
The Organisation of American States (OAS), the African Union (AU), and Other
Regional Bodies: Regional bodies have the potential to be influential, particularly when it
comes to addressing extrajudicial executions that occur within its member states.

5. Publicity and Investigators

Journalists and Media Organisations: In nations where the government censors or
controls information, the media is particularly important in bringing extrajudicial
executions to light. Independent media outlets and investigative journalists offer proof
and coverage that makes the problem more widely known.
Whistleblowers and Defectors: Extrajudicial killings are occasionally brought to light by
those working for the government or law enforcement. Though they frequently suffer
serious personal risks in doing so, their testimonies can provide vital insider knowledge.

6. International Donors and Development Partners

Donor States and Development Agencies: Nations that offer military support or
development assistance to regimes under suspicion of arbitrary murders risk censure for
their role. Development partners may apply targeted sanctions against people or
governments involved in these infractions, or they may press for accountability measures
as a requirement for continuing assistance.
Multilateral Financial Institutions: The International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the
World Bank, for example, may be asked to withhold payments from governments that
have been linked to grave human rights abuses, such as extrajudicial killings.

16
 Stakeholders
7. Security and Law Enforcement Organisations
National Security Forces: Extrajudicial executions frequently have a direct connection to
law enforcement, military, or paramilitary organisations. They are frequently strong and
resilient to criticism from abroad or from within due to their authority and their
assertions of preserving national security.
Paramilitary and Militia Groups: Non-state entities such as paramilitary groups or
militias may carry out extrajudicial murders in conflict areas or unstable governments,
frequently with the state's implicit or explicit assistance. As part of their efforts to
establish territorial authority, they can potentially target populations that are already at
risk.

8. Corporate Interests and the Private Sector

Corporate Stakeholders: Extrajudicial executions are sometimes connected to corporate
interests, extractive industries, or land disputes. Businesses engaged in infrastructural,
mining, or agricultural projects may be implicated in the targeting of vulnerable or
indigenous populations that oppose exploitation or relocation.
Corporate responsibility Movements: Human rights activists and non-governmental
organisations frequently call for corporate responsibility, asking that multinational
companies and their investors respect human rights norms and abstain from
collaborating with governments that carry out extrajudicial murders.

17
 Past International Actions
United Nations Resolutions and Reports
1. UNGA Resolution 67/168 (2012)
Resolution 67/168 of the United Nations General Assembly of 2012 condemned
extrajudicial, summary, or arbitrary executions. States are asked to take steps to put an
end to and prevent violations of the right to life. The resolution appeals for thorough
and proper investigations into perpetrators who allegedly committed the offense;
assurance of the accountability of those perpetrators; and proper deliverance of justice
to the victims. The United Nations General Assembly Resolution accords support to
the efforts of the UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial executions, emphasizing
protection in particular of vulnerable groups such as human rights defenders and
journalists.

2. UN General Assembly Resolution A/RES/77/218 (2022) is titled "Extrajudicial, Summary,

or Arbitrary Executions"
UN General Assembly Resolution A/RES/77/218 (2022) reaffirms condemnation of
extrajudicial, summary, or arbitrary executions and urges states to prevent and
investigate such killings, ensuring accountability for perpetrators. It emphasizes the
protection of vulnerable groups, including human rights defenders, journalists, and
minorities, particularly in conflict zones. The resolution supports the continued role of
the UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial executions and calls for enhanced
cooperation between states and international human rights mechanisms, with regular
reporting on measures taken to prevent these violations.

3. UNHRC resolution A/HRC/RES/15/5

UN Human Rights Council Resolution A/HRC/RES/15/5 (2010) renews the mandate
of the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary, or arbitrary executions for three
years, tasking them with investigating and reporting on unlawful killings worldwide.
The resolution emphasizes the importance of states taking preventative measures,
ensuring accountability, and fully cooperating with the Special Rapporteur, including
facilitating country visits. It calls for regular reporting to the Human Rights Council
and General Assembly, focusing on patterns of extrajudicial executions and promoting
accountability to protect the right to life.

18
 Past International Actions

United Nations Resolutions and Reports

4. Appointment of Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial summary or arbitrary executions
In 1982, the UN Commission on Human Rights, on the suggestions of its Sub-
Commission, recommended that an expert be appointed to investigate and report on
"summary and arbitrary" executions (killings without legal process). The UN Economic
and Social Council agreed to this, and they created a special role to investigate such
killings. They appointed S. Amos Wako, a lawyer from Kenya, as the first Special
Rapporteur (expert investigator). His task was to produce detailed reports on the
murders happening around the world.

In 1992, Wako was relieved and succeeded by another lawyer, Bacre Waly Ndiaye of
Senegal. The same year, the name of the mandated field of work was altered to include
"extrajudicial, summary, or arbitrary executions." The alteration was critical because it
had expanded the inquiry scope, not only for extrajudicial, summary, or arbitrary
executions but also for any violation of the right to life under international law.

19
 Past International Actions
Regional Human Rights Courts

1. Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACHR):

The court has ruled on numerous cases of extrajudicial killings in Latin America,
including those related to state violence, paramilitary groups, and police misconduct. It
has issued landmark rulings, such as the case of Velásquez-Rodríguez v. Honduras (1988),
where the state was found responsible for enforced disappearances, setting a precedent for
accountability in cases of state-sponsored killings.

2. European Court of Human Rights (ECHR):

The court has dealt with cases of extrajudicial killings, particularly in conflict zones, as in
Khashiyev and Akayeva v. Russia (2005), where the court found Russia responsible for
unlawful killings during military operations in Chechnya, emphasizing the state's duty to
investigate such incidents.

3. African Court on Human and People’s Rights (AfCHPR):

The court has proceeded over several important cases on human rights abuses, state
violence and extrajudicial killings, namely the Ingabire Victoire Umuhoza v. Republic of
Rwanda (2017) case, where the court found that Rwanda violated several rights under the
African Charter, including the right to life and freedom of expression. While the case itself
focused on political repression, the court’s decision underscored the broader obligation of
states to ensure the protection of life and prevent extrajudicial killings, setting a precedent
for accountability in cases of political violence and state-sponsored repression in Africa.

4. UN Human Rights Council’s Universal Periodic Review (UPR)

Established in 2006, the UNHRC Universal Periodic Review is a unique mechanism that
aims to provide an integral assessment of the human rights situations in various member
nations of the UNHRC. The review is a state-led process, based on reports from the state
under review, UN information, and input from civil society. The UPR provides
recommendations on a variety of human rights crises, including laws for the protection
and betterment of vulnerable groups, which states are expected to act upon. The inclusive
nature of the process ensures that civil society and NGOs play a role in highlighting
concerns. In the context of extrajudicial killings, the UPR is instrumental in bringing
these violations to international attention, pressing states to investigate and prevent such
unlawful actions, and holding them accountable for ensuring justice and safeguarding the
right to life.

20
 Past International Actions

Regional Human Rights Courts

5. International Advocacy by Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs)
International advocacy by non-governmental organizations (NGOs) plays a vital role
in combatting extrajudicial killings worldwide by raising awareness, promoting
accountability, and influencing policy changes. NGOs serve as a bridge between
affected communities and the international community, documenting cases of
extrajudicial killings and providing crucial evidence that highlights systemic abuses.
Through detailed reports, investigations, and the collection of testimonies, NGOs
bring attention to these violations, informing both the public and decision-makers
about the urgency of the situation.

21
 Possible Strategies and Approaches

Strengthening Legal Frameworks

Ratification and implementation of guiding Human Rights treaties such as the ICCPR,
CRC, and UDHR can help combat widespread extrajudicial killings.
Effective enforcement laws must be adopted domestically by member nations of the
UNHRC to prevent extrajudicial killings and hold perpetrators accountable.

Capacity Building for Law Enforcement

Training Programs: Law enforcement agencies should undergo training focused on
human rights standards, the appropriate use of force, and community policing
strategies. This training should also cover the importance of protecting vulnerable
populations.
Enhanced Investigative Skills: Training for prosecutors and investigators can improve
their ability to handle cases of extrajudicial killings effectively. This includes
understanding forensic best practices and legal frameworks surrounding such cases.

International Cooperation
Support from International Bodies: Engaging with international organizations such as
the UN can provide countries with resources, expertise, and monitoring mechanisms to
combat extrajudicial killings effectively. Countries can benefit from best practices
shared by others facing similar challenges.
Human Rights Defender Support: Protecting human rights defenders who investigate
or expose extrajudicial killings is crucial. This includes providing them with security
measures and legal support.

22
 Case Studies
Global records of extrajudicial executions that target vulnerable communities show grave
abuses of human rights. A few case studies that highlight these concerns, including the
circumstances are as follows

China
The treatment of Uyghurs and other Turkic Muslims in Xinjiang has drawn international
condemnation for systemic abuses. Since the 2014 "Strike Hard Campaign against Violent
Terrorism," the Chinese government has arbitrarily detained over a million Uyghurs in
internment camps. Reports of extrajudicial killings, torture, and forced labor are widespread
within these facilities. Human Rights Watch documented cases of such killings, particularly
following protests and crackdowns on dissenters. In 1997, after a protest, there were mass
arrests and killings of Turkic Muslims by state security forces. Alongside this, Chinese
authorities have sought to suppress Uyghur culture and religion, destroying mosques and
severely restricting religious practices, exacerbating the community's vulnerability.

India
Extrajudicial killings, particularly in the context of police encounters, have faced significant
scrutiny. A well-known case is the 2019 Hyderabad encounter, where police killed four men
accused of gang rape and murder, sparking debates about justice and due process. Despite
guidelines from the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), such killings continue
under the guise of counter-terrorism operations, particularly against groups like Naxalites.
This highlights concerns about impunity, with many cases going unpunished due to political
influence and weak enforcement mechanisms.

Afghanistan
Since the Taliban regained control in 2021, reports have emerged of extrajudicial killings,
targeting ethnic minorities and dissenters. The UN Special Rapporteur has documented
ongoing arbitrary arrests, detentions, and killings, particularly against Hazaras and other
minority groups. These actions are part of broader persecution that may constitute crimes
against humanity, including targeted killings of former government officials and activists.

Myanmar
Myanmar's Rohingya community has suffered severe extrajudicial killings, particularly
during the military's 2017 operations in Rakhine State. Thousands of Rohingya were killed,
with the military targeting them based on ethnicity and religion. The UN has characterized
these actions as ethnic cleansing, calling for accountability for the atrocities committed
against the Rohingya.

23
 Case Studies
Nigeria
Extrajudicial killings are prevalent, especially against ethnic minorities and communities
involved in resource-related conflicts. Nigerian security forces have been accused of killings
during operations against Boko Haram and in farmer-herder clashes. Reports indicate that
over 13,000 Nigerians were killed extrajudicially between 2011 and 2021, with marginalized
communities bearing the brunt. Impunity for security forces is widespread, as investigations
into these killings are rarely conducted.

Syria
Extrajudicial killings are rampant amid the ongoing civil war, with government forces and
various factions committing widespread human rights violations. The Syrian Network for
Human Rights reported over 700 extrajudicial killings in 2021 alone, many targeting
dissenters or suspected opposition members. Ethnic and religious minorities, including
Kurds and Sunni Arabs, have been particularly affected by the violence.

Egypt
In Egypt, extrajudicial killings have been used to suppress political dissent. Human Rights
Watch has documented numerous instances of Egyptian authorities executing activists,
journalists, and members of the Muslim Brotherhood without due process, often under the
pretext of counter-terrorism. Despite international criticism, these practices continue with
little accountability within Egypt’s judicial system.

This background guide is meant to be a starting point for your research, and it only provides
a few case studies or examples that are pertinent to the topic. It is highly recommended that
delegates investigate further incidents as well as additional circumstances and instances
linked to the agenda, as it has a very broad scope. Comprehensive research is necessary to
grasp the issue's wider context and to prepare for an informed and effective debate during
the conference.

24
 QARMA
Questions A Resolution Must Answer

What are the underlying systemic factors, such as political, social, or economic conditions,
that contribute to the prevalence of extrajudicial killings targeting vulnerable
communities?
What provisions should be made to ensure the rehabilitation, restitution, and access to
justice for affected communities?
What specific measures should be taken to ensure accountability for perpetrators of
extrajudicial killings, particularly in cases involving state actors, law enforcement, or
armed non-state groups?
What preventive frameworks and mechanisms can be established or strengthened to avert
future incidents of extrajudicial killings, especially in high-risk regions?

25
 Links for Further Research
[Link]
[Link]
[Link]
[Link]
[Link]
[Link]
[Link]
[Link]

26