6.6 Does Operation Restore Order warrant evoking the principle of “Responsibility to Protect”? The Responsibility to Protect published in December 2001 by the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty, outlines the core principles of how the United Nations and the wider international community should react when nations are degenerating into chaos. The principles were derived in direct response to the world’s failure to intervene in Rwanda, and the controversial interventions in Somalia, Bosnia and Kosovo. The basic principles the Commission arrived at are: e. State sovereignty implies responsibility, and the primary responsibility for the protection of its peoples lies with the state itself; and f. Where a population is suffering serious harm, as a result of internal war, insurgency, repression or state failure and the state in question is unwilling or unable to halt or avert it, the principle of non-intervention yields to the international responsibility to protect. 136 The substance of the responsibility to protect is the provision of life-supporting protection and assistance to population at risk. According to the report this responsibility has three integral and essential components: responsibility to react; responsibility to prevent; and the responsibility to rebuild after the event. With an estimated 700,000 people directly affected through loss of shelter and livelihoods, the mission sought to establish both the willingness and ability of the Government to protect its citizens, having clearly caused them to suffer in large numbers through the destruction of shelter and livelihoods. The Government, in apparent response to the crisis it had created, launched Operation Gerikai (Reconstruction and Rebuilding). The government’s response to the crisis has been discussed above and illustrates, to a large extent, recognition of its responsibility to protect its citizens. The issue remaining for the UN, however, is whether the Government of Zimbabwe is able to offer effective assistance to its people in practical terms. It is the view of the Special Envoy that the scale of the problem is too large and exceeds the present ability of the Government to address the basic needs of those affected by Operation Restore Order. The international community has a responsibility to protect those affected. The impact will not be easy to redress and requires immediate large-scale and unconditional humanitarian assistance to protect those in need. 6.7 Does Operation Restore Order Raise Issues Under the Rome Statute? Several submissions received during the mission contend that the actions of the Government, in forcibly uprooting hundreds of thousands of its citizens from their homes, meets the criteria of a “crime against humanity”, as defined by Article 7 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.137 It is important to note that this issue was not covered by the Special Envoy’s mandate. Zimbabwe is not a State Party to the Rome Statute therefore any referral would need a Security Council Resolution. The Terms of reference did not provide for the mission to assess the need for Security 136 137 Report of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty para 2.30 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court 1998 Entered into Force 2002.. 64