Before explaining the DroitVP's mandate, it would be best to describe the present state of the international law.  First of all, the International Laws are actually official agreements between States, each State is supposed to respect these on the basis of good will and mutual trust.  Otherwise said, this kind of law is not exactly like the law we know within our societies; they are very rarely obligatory laws that States must abide by at all cost.  The best example is the fact that a State, during any dispute can, more often than not, legally refuse the 'competence' of an international court of justice if it does not wish to stand accused before it.  In summary, the International Court of Justice (ICJ)* is therefore a voluntary way of solving disputes; it is not an obligatory system (there are some exceptions where a State has the legal obligation of recognizing the jurisdiction of a court).  Indeed, States do have international obligations and laws do exist (eg.: international treaties) but, in practice, international justice does impose it's will to States.  In general, international justice not repress violations of the international law, but it helps States negotiate their conflicts by settling the case by virtue of the international law.
     * Not to be confused with the International Criminal Court (ICC)
     * To know about the ICJ, the ICC, etc., we recommend our texte which explains what legal recourses exist with a real example of a Crime of war  In French only

     Then why do States wish to respect these international treaties and conventions?  The international law is a political will to normalize relations between nations.  It is a kind of association of States which offers mutual security: they accept to play by the same rules in order to avoid conflicts and to simplify international relations.  Moreover, there is also a question of international reputation.  If a State often violates the International Law, other nations (ex: governments, investors, etc.) will no longer wish to maintain diplomatic and commercial ties since they will no longer trust this State.

     The DroitVP began it's existence when Quebecers (people from Quebec-Canada) took to heart the struggle against the criminal blockade imposed upon the entire Iraqi civil society.  This brought us to realize the extent to which Humanitarian Laws and the supposed international "justice" system do not yet exist and are applied only to the weakest countries.  Indeed, it is grossly obvious that U.S. officials and military officers are, for example, totally immune to the Humanitarian Laws; they have committed an uncounted number of Crimes of War that they judged necessary for reasons of "strategy" and it is not presently possible to bring them before a court of law.  For example, during the bombing of the Gulf War, the Coalition destroyed water treatment plants; necessary for the life of the population.  It is not necessary to be an expert to know that the innocents are those who have died.  As another example, let us also look at the destruction of the Serbian television station during the Kosovo War.  The sixteen (16) civilians that worked there at that moment are all dead.  Not a single warning and no effort to bomb the station at night when the people would not have been at work.  This was done totally on purpose.  This is undeniably a Crime of War.  Please note that the DroitVP is not declaring that war can be just if "well done", "done properly" or "clean", but we do declare that 'western' States sometimes do not even respect the minimum of civility and humanity.

     But why do western States commit Crimes of War?  If they believe it is strategic for economic or military reasons and, most of all, if they can get away with it on a political level, this may seem advantageous to them since they will never be really condemned by justice.  We cannot speak of a system of Law if some powerful are above the law.  We cannot either hope of imposing these to others if we, ourselves, violate them when it serves our interests.

   However, there are obligatory limits that form the base of the International Law which are named the "peremptory or imperative norms" (Latin: Jus cogens); that is to say norms from which no derogation (violation) is permitted.  In theory, for example, States must try to solve their disputes through peaceful means, they must not use terrorist methods, etc.  Considering the aims of the DroitVP, we must specify that according to the justice system that the world community has given itself, there are absolutely no justifications possible for a Crime against Humanity, neither political, economic, strategic or anything else.  Yet, the reality of it all is complex, it is not a simple thing to impose these norms in an international system where the law of "might makes right" surfaces once in a while.  Therefore, although the creation of the (permanent) International Criminal Court (ICC) is technically a step forward, with the present state of the United Nations, international justice is never in any way impartial.  Unfortunately, it is too often UN Security Council (only 15 countries of which 5 powerful ones have excessive power in terms of vote) which identifies threats to international peace and security and also crimes against humanity, yet the permanent members of the Council (China, France, United Kingdom, United States and Russia) are the greatest purveyors of weapons worldwide(!) for example.  The permanent members of the Council can often avoid international justice and they decide according to their political interests of the moment.

The role of such a network...

     The DroitVP is a network of individuals and groups wishing to cooperate together for various citizen based (non gov.) campaigns against murderous policies and who wish to promote the obligatory respect of the Humanitarian Laws.  Ideally, while also wanting the sovereignty of democracies and cultures, it is certain that we would like the Humanitarian Laws to be truly considered an obligatory criminal code, that is to say that it would be possible to condemn those guilty of Crimes of War, etc.  Although this is not the reality as of now, we believe that through the world public opinion, it is possible to pressure States.  Indeed, they have a reputation to protect.  Our priority is to especially influence western governments since they are the ones most immune to international justice.

How?

I) Alternative source of information :
By offering quality information about various crises where the rights of peoples and civilian populations are violated ;

II) Activism :
    By activism, we mean the active and non-violent participation of citizens within their society with the aim of explicitly demanding (advocating), at the very least, the respect of the International Humanitarian Laws.

Why this network ?

     All in all, the DroitVP exist since a need is being felt to fill a terrible void in our so-called democracy; a void in which we let our elected representatives do anything when it comes to international military interventions.  Above and beyond the laws that should apply even during armed conflicts, the purpose is to demand of our governments that they respect the fundamental Human Rights of peoples.  We hope to encourage the citizens of the world to empower themselves with the Humanitarian Laws so as to demand of States the respect of the right to life of Peoples (nations), for example, by demanding that they retract from policies or interventions that have genocidal effects.  We do not know of many citizen-groups who advocate the respect, by our elected bodies, of the rights of Peoples and of the International Humanitarian Laws (most advocate individual Human Rights).  That is why we feel the DroitVP is pertinent and necessary.

     Amnesty International, for example, focuses on political freedom and avoids contesting policies per say and even less those from the Security Council (e.g.: until the years 2000-2001, AI did not wish to discuss publicly the economic sanctions against Iraq).  The DroitVP is a supporter of AI and is in no way in competition, but our network plays a complementary role by openly criticising policies judged, for example, to be contrary to the principals of the Humanitarian Laws.

     Much like the United Nations, the International Red Cross prefers to adopt a "discrete" approach, that is to say they discretely contact governments rather than exert pressure publicly, for example, by avoiding to name the alleged guilty.  As can be read on their web site, this is quite legitimate, since their main purpose is to be able to freely help the victims where they are (i.e. The Red Cross does not wish to be hated by governments).  Again, the aim of the DroitVP is to publicly criticize and name clearly those States that are guilty of violations as well as the accomplices.

___ The DroitVP's Charter

    In fact, instead of a Charter, for the moment we have

___ A comment about the concept of a Civic Network

Who am I?  Who is the Webmaster / Coordinator ?

     The fact that governments deploy so much effort to manipulate the public opinion proves that we have a very real impact upon them.  The talk of defeatism and powerlessness spoken by many citizens is, from my perspective, a convenient way of not feeling concerned and of not acting.  Yet, it seems to me that the only people that can impose international laws and Human Rights to governments, are the citizens themselves.  Beyond State sovereignty, what we need is the democratic sovereignty and true cooperation between peoples.    - Michaël Lessard