UNIVERSITE CATHOLIQUE D’AFRIQUE CENTRALE

INSTITUT CATHOLIQUE DE YAOUNDÉ

FACULTÉ DE SCIENCES SOCIALES ET DE GESTION
Académie de la Paix et des Droits de l’Homme en Afrique Centrale

MASTER DROITS DE L’HOMME ET ACTION HUMANITAIRE

THE PROTECTION OF THE DIGNITY OF THE

HUMAN PERSON IN PEACE AGREEMENTS IN
THE CENTRAL AFRICA REGION

A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE

REQUIREMENTS FOR THE AWARD OF THE MASTER’S OF LAWS (LLM) IN HUMAN
RIGHTS AND HUMANITARIAN ACTION

Presented By
CHE MFOMBONG HOWARD
Bachelor of Arts in Philosophy, Bachelor of Divinity in Theology

Directed by
Philip OKIE TABI, PhD.
Lecturer
Université Catholique d’Afrique Centrale

Supervised by
Jean Didier BOUKONGOU
Full Professor of Law
Université Catholique d’Afrique Centrale

Academic Year: 2018-2020

 NOTICE

The Université Catholique D’Afrique Centrale does not intend to grant any endorsement or
disapproval of the opinions expressed in this dissertation. These must be considered as specific
to its author.
 DEDICATION

To my Family and godchildren

ii
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I wish to render immense thanks to the Triune God who is the source of all wisdom and
all that is good. Through His inspiration, I have been able to conceive this work and bring it to
what it is today. I also acknowledge the efforts of Prof. Jean Didier BOUKONGOU and the
Education team of Université Catholique D’Afrique Centrale for their sedulous and proficient
zeal in educating the world towards the protection of Human Rights. In this light, I must make
mention of Dr Philip Okie Tabi who, as my director, has sleekly directed me towards a sound
exposition of this work. Dr Rodrique Mohingou, my initial director, who began this work with
me, deserves appreciation for assisting me patiently and closely. Madam Yango Nadine Mirelle
also deserves appreciation for always being available whenever I needed assistance in every
dimension of studies.
My parents, brothers and sisters are not left out: Professor Godlove Ambe Musongong,
Mrs Immaculate Musongong, Mrs Ndofor Helen, Prof. Ndofor Harriet, Mrs. Ndofor Adeline, Mr
Ndofor Gabriel, Mr Ndofor Calemba, Mrs Claudia Mehta Musongong, Miss Afanui Chefung
Musongong, Miss Dolly Meti Wazwe Musongong. These have been by my side as long as I can
remember, and have not spared their energies in rendering support to me in every capacity. In the
same context, I must mention Mr Fai Yengo Emmanuel, and Mr Bela Takom who have been
brothers and pillars in every dimension behind my studies and research in Yaoundé.
I wish to make mention of some men of excellence namely: M. Francis Fonye and M. Fai
Yengo Francis who have given me patriarchal care throughout my higher academic formation. I
wish to also extend gratitude to my friends who have supported me in one way or another with
respect to this work: Rev. Fr. John Berinyuy, Sr, Kiven Vernyuy, Conrad Tankou MD, Lobga
Babila MD, Sr Beatrice Bi, Rev. Fr. Patrick Mbih Atang, Rev. Fr. Francis Tche, Rev. Fr. Alfred
Ngalim-Wirbir, Rev. Fr. Anselm Yofendeh, Rev. Fr James Chikiezie, Rev. Angu Niba, Mr
Christian Atangana, and Derrick Fortaboh, Damtchou Sylvanie Calixte and Mbangowah Elvis.

May God grant you all an abundance of blessings.

CHE MFOMBONG Howard

iii
 ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

ACHPR - African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights

APRD - Popular Army for the Restoration of Democracy
BER - Business Environment Reform
CAR - Central African Republic
CEMAC - Central African Economic and Monetary Community
CEN-SAD - Community of Sahelian Saharan States
COMESA - Common Market for Eastern and Southern African States
DRC - Democratic Republic of Congo
EAC - Eastern African Community
EASF - Eastern Africa Standby Force
ECCAS - Economic Community of Central African States
ICCPR - International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
ICD - Inter-Congolese Dialogue
ICESCR - International Covenant on Economic Social Cultural Rights
ICRC - International Committee of the Red Cross
MPLA - Mouvement Populaire de Libération de l’Angola
PSRP - Political Settlements Research Programme
REC - Regional Economic Communities
SADC - Southern African Development Community
UDHR - Universal Declaration of Human Rights
UNITA - Union Nationale pour l’Indépendance totale de l’Angola

iv
 ABSTRACT
This work examines the vital role of the awareness of the concept of “Human Dignity” in
the establishment of peace agreements in the Central Africa Region. The relationship between
Human Dignity and Peace Agreements may not be evident, for it is not immediate. In this light
the mediated relationship which is between Human Dignity and Human Rights, and then Human
Rights and Peace Agreements is established. A syllogism, therefore, shows the relationship
between Human Dignity and Peace Agreements. Human Dignity is the foundation on which
Human Rights is built and most Peace Agreements aim at serving the rights of man.
Most Peace Agreements, which have been signed in the Central Africa Region have
failed to attain their objectives. This is as a result of the fact that the agreements have failed to
satisfy the needs of the parties concerned. This work establishes clearly that most Peace
Agreements fail because they have been divorced from a proper understanding of the concept of
Human Dignity, which is the heart beat of Human Rights. This concept is resonant in the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant for Civil and Political
Rights, International Covenant for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, as well as a good
number of Conventions and State Constitutions in the world. It is rather unfortunate that this
concept becomes redundant and becomes only a presumption when coming to the drawing of
Peace Agreements. It is the purpose of this work to stress the importance of enforcing the
concept of “Human Dignity” as the basis on which all Peace Agreements may be established.
Every Peace Agreement should serve the interest of the common good of man as an end and not
as a means to an end. Business interests and Political interests should be seen only as a means to
attain the proper respect for the dignity of man. Unless the people in a society feel respected and
fairly treated, there would never be peace in that society. Peace must not only be seen as the
absence of war. Once there is no tranquillity amongst the people who make up a community,
there is always a tendency that armed conflict may arise.
Therefore, there is an urgent importance for institutions and States to reawaken an active
awareness of the concept of “Human Dignity” both as it is understood in the traditional cultural
context of the indigenes, and also as it is understood in the global philosophical context; that is,
the inherent worth and/or value of the human being which transcends all external accidental
qualities. Once this is understood and people see each other as fellow human beings, then there is
a concrete foundation for the establishment and implementation of a peace agreement.

v
 Key Words: Human Dignity, Peace, Inherent Worth.

RESUME
Ce travail examine le rôle vital de la prise de conscience du concept de «Dignité Humaine» dans la
mise en place des accords de paix dans la Région Afrique Centrale. La relation entre la Dignité
Humaine et les Accords de Paix n’est peut-être pas évidente, car elle n'est pas immédiate. Dans cette
optique, la relation de médiation entre la Dignité Humaine et les Droits de l’Homme, puis les accords
sur les Droits de l’Homme et la Paix est établie. Un syllogisme montre donc la relation entre la Dignité
Humaine et les Accords de Paix. La Dignité Humaine est le fondement sur lequel se fondent les Droits
de l’Homme et la plupart des Accords de Paix visent à servir les Droits de l’Homme. La plupart des
accords de paix signés dans la région de l'Afrique Centrale n’ont pas atteint leurs objectifs. Cela est dû
au fait que les accords n’ont pas répondu aux besoins des parties concernées. Ce travail établit
clairement que la plupart des Accords de Paix échouent parce qu'ils ont été dissociés d’une bonne
compréhension du concept de Dignité Humaine qui est le battement de cœur des Droits de l’Homme.
Ce concept résonne dans la Déclaration Universelle des Droits de l’Homme, le Pacte International
Relatif aux Droits Civils et Politiques, le Pacte International Relatif aux Droits Economiques, Sociaux
et Culturels, ainsi qu’un bon nombre de conventions et de constitutions d’États dans le monde. Il est
plutôt regrettable que ce concept devienne superflu et ne devienne qu’une présomption lors de
l’élaboration des accords de paix. Le but de ce travail est de souligner l’importance de faire respecter le
concept de «Dignité Humaine» comme base sur laquelle tous les Accords de Paix peuvent être établis.
Tout Accord de Paix doit servir l’intérêt du bien commun de l’homme comme une fin et non comme
un moyen pour une fin. Les intérêts commerciaux et les intérêts politiques ne doivent être considérés
que comme un moyen de parvenir au respect de la dignité humaine. À moins que les gens d'une société
ne se sentent respectés et traités équitablement, il n’y aura jamais de paix dans cette société. La paix ne
doit pas seulement être considérée comme l’absence de guerre. Une fois qu’il n’y a pas de tranquillité
parmi les personnes qui composent une communauté, il y a toujours une tendance à ce qu’un conflit
armé puisse survenir. Par conséquent, il est urgent que les institutions et les États réveillent une prise de
conscience active du concept de «Dignité Humaine» à la fois tel qu’il est compris dans le contexte
culturel traditionnel des indigènes et également tel qu’il est compris dans le contexte philosophique
mondial; c’est-à-dire la valeur inhérente et / ou la valeur de l'être humain qui transcende toutes les
qualités accidentelles externes. Une fois que cela est compris et que les gens se considèrent comme des

vi
êtres humains, il existe alors une base concrète pour l’établissement et la mise en œuvre d'un accord de
paix.
Mots clés: Dignité Humaine, Paix, Valeur Intrinsèque
SUMMARY
GENERAL INTRODUCTION......................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
PART I: THE LEGAL, POLICY, PHILOSOPHICAL AND INSTITUTIONAL
FRAMEWORKS FOR THE PROTECTION OF HUMAN DIGNITY IN PEACE
AGREEMENTS.............................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
Chapter 1: An Understanding of the Concept of “Human Dignity” in Legal Instruments....Error!
Bookmark not defined.
A. The Philosophical Understanding of “Human Dignity”. Error! Bookmark not defined.
B. The Use of “Human Dignity” in Legal Instruments.......Error! Bookmark not defined.
Chapter 2: The Relationship between Human Dignity and Human Rights..Error! Bookmark not
defined.
A. Human Dignity as the Foundation of Human Rights......Error! Bookmark not defined.
B. Human Dignity as the Goal of Human Rights................Error! Bookmark not defined.
PART II: A CRITICAL EVALUATION OF THE PLACE OF HUMAN DIGNITY IN PEACE
AGREEMENTS.............................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
Introduction................................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
Chapter 3: The Nature of Peace Agreements.................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
A. Types of Peace Agreements............................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
B. Components of Peace Agreements..................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
Chapter 4: Protection of Human Dignity in Peace Agreements....Error! Bookmark not defined.
A. Negotiating Justice: Human Dignity and Peace Agreements........Error! Bookmark not
defined.
B. Peace through a healing transformation of Human Dignity..........Error! Bookmark not
defined.
Conclusion.................................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
GENERAL CONCLUSION..........................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
Selected Bibliography....................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

vii
viii
GENERAL INTRODUCTION
 1. BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY
War and Conflict are a demise that have wracked humanity for as long as the history of
humanity can be traced. The world has always known, in its history, wars that ranged from tribal
wars, to civil wars, to international wars as wide as continental wars (as was the case with the
World Wars). However, these wars only leave man with regrets and scars that scare him from
looking back at his own history. The silent voice that speaks within man after monstrous
violence (also known as the conscience 1) calls for a longing for peace and an avoidance of
further violence. In 1919, for example, Paris could be considered the Capital of the Universe, for
it was there that the Paris Peace Conference was held where plenipotentiaries came together as
“builders of peace” making an effort to reconcile the disparity that had been created by ravages
of war.2
Since then, Peace has been a human longing especially after the Second World War
where the quest for the restoration of the dignity of man became a universal priority. Human
Dignity entered the field of human rights rather late and was generally seen as a response to the
atrocities committed during World War II. This was clearly marked with the drawing up of the
Charter of the United Nations in 1945, the Universal Declaration on Human Rights in 1948 and
many other specific human rights treaties. These, therefore, proposed to world nations regular
methods through which they can live in peace and harmony and resolve conflict when it arises.
The concept of “human dignity” has been at the centre of it all since then. 3 The coming of
Independence of African Countries, did not grant them immunity to these seemingly traditional
problems of war and peace. This was highly evident in francophone Africa and to be more
specific, Central Africa Region and these States after obtaining their independence founded the
OAU in 1963.4 They later adopted the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights at Nairobi
in 1981. Africa, therefore in addition to other international instruments, had its own juridical and
diplomatic ways of resolving conflict and maintaining peace. It is in the quest for the
maintenance of peace and the inherent desire to restore the seemingly lost dignity of the human
person that treaties and agreements came into play. In this dissertation, one would seek to

1
See, FAGOTHEY Austin, Right and Reason, The C.V. Mosby Company, Saint Louis 1976, p208.
2
MACMILLAN Margaret, Les Artisans de la Paix, Paris : John Murray, 2006, p15.
3
The concept of Human Dignity keeps recurring rhythmically and is at the centre of the whole concept of human
rights. See the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948, Foreword by Ban Ki-Moon, Introduction by Zeid
Ra’ad Al Hussein, Preamble and Articles 1, 22, p23.
4
The OAU was later replaced by the AU in 2002.

2
consider how the dignity of the human person can be protected in peace agreements within the
Region of Central Africa.

2. CONTEXT OF THE STUDY

The protection of the dignity of the human person in peace agreements in Africa, is
gradually becoming a priority among the concerns of the international communities. This is
because even with the signing of Cease-fire agreements and other Peace Agreements in Africa,
the violations of human rights still emerge. The dignity of the human person remains a victim.
“War as sustained combat between political communities is a moral evil.” 5 War signals
the breakdown of law and order, and develops a deadly dynamic of its own. Conflicts are no
longer settled by moral reasoning, legal adjudication or political negotiation, but by well-
organized armed forces. War always goes along with death and destruction. Troops are moved
strategically to overcome violent resistance and to defeat an enemy. As a rule, not only fighters
are victimized on the battlefield, but entire societies suffer. The number of non-combatants dying
from the direct and indirect consequences of sustained combat such as economic shortages,
famines, displacement or disrupted healthcare and social security systems by far exceeds military
casualties.6 Additionally, warfare goes along with the categorization, and, in most cases,
dehumanization of opponents. Adversaries are no longer considered individual human beings,
but enemies who may be killed without further justification. Given the recent increase in ethnic
conflicts, the traditional distinction between combatants and non-combatants blurs even further.
War was never restricted to the battlefield, but today’s wars, more than ever, target civilian
populations. Depending on the severity of the fighting and the number of atrocities committed, it
takes a generation or more to overcome the social disruptions of war, and to re-establish a robust
peace among former combatants and their successors.
“Human dignity, by contrast, requires the peaceful settlements of disputes among as well
as within societies.”7 Individuals and groups should be treated according to established human
rights standards. They are entitled to live in peace and their legitimate interests should be
protected by appropriate institutions. The distribution of rights and obligations within as well as
among societies should be clearly specified and generally respected. In cases of transgression, a
5
WALZER Michael, Just and Unjust Wars: A Moral Argument with Historical Illustrations, 4th edition, Basic
Books, New York 2006, p43.
6
See, AHLSTRÖM Christer and NORDQUIST Kjell-Åke, “Casualties of Conflict: Report for the World Campaign
for the Protection of Victims of War,” Department of Peace and Conflict Research, Uppsala University, 1991.
7
GEWIRTH Alan, The Community of Rights, University of Chicago Press, Chicago 1996, p69.

3
public authority should intervene to restore justice and to punish the offender if appropriate and
reasonable. As such, the settlement of conflicts by well-recognized human right standards
contradicts their settlement by the use of well-organized armed forces. In fact, human dignity
requires the abrogation of war.
It is in this context, within the Region of Central Africa, that this research would seek to
find out how the dignity of man can be protected during the establishment and observation of
peace agreements. There have been cases where even peacekeeping forces have been noted for
violating the rights of the common people.8

3. SCOPE OF STUDY
Peace agreements are documents which are drawn and implemented across the globe
every decade. As such, they cover a vast field of extension. It would be very challenging to
exhaust all the agreements in the world and the epochs. Therefore, a scope of study would help
define the limitations of this research. This is presented below:
A. GEOGRAPHICAL SCOPE
The Geographical Scope of this work is limited to the countries that make up the Central
Africa Region as defined by the African Union. This would include: Angola, Burundi,
Cameroon, Chad, Central African Republic, Gabon, Republic of Congo, Democratic Republic of
Congo, Sao Tomé & Principe and Equatorial Guinea. The Central African States are all members
of a range of inter-State cooperation initiatives, exploring both and/or political integration. Some
of these overlap other regional initiatives, for example, Common Market for Eastern and
Southern African States (COMESA), the Southern African Development Community (SADC),
the Community of Sahelian Saharan States (CEN-SAD), the Eastern African Community (EAC)
or the Eastern Africa Standby Force (EASF).
Within Central Africa, there are also two important so-called Regional Economic
Communities (RECs); that is, the Central African Economic and Monetary Community
(CEMAC) and the Economic Community of Central African States (ECCAS). 9 Meanwhile
CEMAC is primarily concerned with economic and monetary union, and ECCAS is concerned as

8
Cfr, BEUZE Jean, The Role of Human Rights in Peace Agreements: International Council on Human Rights, 2005,
p4.
9
It is important to note that CEMAC is not actually recognised by the AU to be a full REC. It is rather a grouping
within ECCAS.

4
a common market. These two organisations have both ventured into the realm of peace and
security.
Therefore, the States which are members to the ECCAS and CEMAC are considered in
this work as States of the Central African Region.
B. TEMPORAL SCOPE
Given the large number of peace agreements that have been signed amongst states in the
Central Africa region, it would be practical to consider only those from the year 2000. This is
also in line with the proclamation of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) which,
hopefully, were to have been attained by 2015. These have not been attained in the Central
Africa Region, and have been replaced by the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which
have, as its 16th goal, Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions. This would last until 2020 which is
the year when this research would be completed.
C. SUBSTANTIVE SCOPE
The substantive scope of this work would deal with the subjects of Philosophy of Human
Rights, Peace and Security, as well as, International Humanitarian Law. These three subjects
define the field of extension of resource material necessary for the actualisation of this
dissertation. Furthermore, it would include, in detail, most of the peace agreements which have
been signed from the year 2000 in the region of Central Africa. Inter-State agreements which
involve a State of the Central Africa Region and a State not in the Central African Region would
not be necessarily considered in this work, but may be mentioned for comparison sake. This is to
render the field of interest more feasible. 10 This would be analysed alongside books which dwell
on the concept of Human Dignity and its importance in the drawing up of Peace Agreements.
The United Nations Security Council has a good number of policies and resolutions which it has
promulgated. This also goes in line with those of the African Union Peace and Security Council.
Given that the term “human dignity” carries more of a philosophical base, philosophical books
would also be of use in handling the subject of this work.

4. DEFINITION OF CONCEPTS
To properly approach the topic of this dissertation, it would be important to have a clear
understanding of the main concepts which make up the topic. These would include Human
Dignity and Peace agreements.
10
The Green Tree Agreement between Cameroon and Nigeria would be seen as an exception because of its stability
until recent times with respect to its implementation.

5
 A. HUMAN DIGNITY
Human dignity can denote the special elevation of the human species, the special
potentiality associated with rational humanity, or the basic entitlements of each individual. 
There are, by extension, dramatically different normative uses to which the concept can be put. It
is connected, variously, to ideas of sanctity, autonomy, personhood, flourishing, and self-respect,
and human dignity produces at different times, strict prohibitions and empowerment of the
individual.11 It can also, potentially, be used to express the core commitments of liberal political
philosophy as well as precisely those duty-based obligations to self and others that
communitarian philosophers consider to be systematically neglected by liberal political
philosophy.
The use of human dignity in public international law is a marker for understanding the
moral, legal and political discourse of human dignity. A characteristic expression is found in the
Preamble of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966) whose rights “derive
from the inherent dignity of the human person,” and whose animating principle is “recognition of
the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family
as the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world.” 12 This assertion and others, which
are similar to it, form a common reference point in contemporary literature on human dignity.
Importantly, this “inherent dignity” represents a potential bridge between a number of different
ideas and ideals, namely freedom, justice and peace.
Borrowing, therefore, from the field of Philosophy, Human Dignity can be defined as
“the  right  of a person to be valued and respected for their own sake, and to be treated
ethically.”13 This definition can be considered a foundational definition which would be used in
this work.

D. PEACE AGREEMENTS
A peace agreement (or peace treaty, or accord) is a formal commitment between two or
more hostile parties (usually countries or governments), which formally end a state of war
between the parties.14 Peace Accords can vary considerably. Two examples include, the Paris
Peace Accords that led to the end of the conflict in Cambodia to end international involvement in
11
BEYLEVELD Deryck and BROWNSWORD Roger, Human Dignity in Bioethics and Biolaw, Oxford University
Press, Oxford 2001, p2.
12
CLAASSEN Rutger, “Human Dignity in the Capability Approach,” in The Cambridge Handbook of Human
Dignity. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2014, p12.
13
RAWLS John, A Theory of Justice, Harvard University Press, Cambridge 2009, p23.

6
the war, and a ceasefire to transform military conflict into a political one. In 1996, in Guatemala,
peace agreements provided a framework for political, economic, legislative and social reform
and for the transformation of military structures and institutions. 15 Therefore, a peace agreement
can also be defined as a contract intended to end a violent conflict, or to significantly transform a
conflict, so that it can be more constructively addressed. A peace agreement can be referred to as
“lex pacificatoria” or “law of the peacemaker.” Peace Agreements can be synonymously called
Peace Negotiations. Zartman defines negotiations as “a process of combining conflicting
positions into a common position under a decision rule of unanimity, a phenomenon in which the
outcome is determined by the process.”16 It is an “arrangement entered into by warring parties to
explicitly regulate or resolve their basic incompatibility.” 17 With all this definitions in mind, one
can define a peace agreement as “a contract between parties involved in a conflict which has the
objective to halt the conflict and build sustainable peace for the edification of humanity.”

5. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

A. SCIENTIFIC INTEREST
Inequality remains one of the most challenging issues on the global human rights
agenda. In recent decades, few ideas have received as much attention as that of human rights.
But what, exactly, are human rights? A popular answer characterises them as entitlements that all
human beings possess by virtue of their inherent dignity and that exist independently of legal or
social recognition.18 This definition, which draws a conceptual link between human rights and
dignity, is prominent in scholarly circles, human-rights documents and political discourses more
generally.19 For instance, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) of 1948 refers to
dignity multiple times, and so do the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966)
and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (1966).

14
ANDERLINI Naraghi Sanam, “Peace Negotiations and Agreements,” in Inclusive Security Sustainable Peace: A
Toolkit for Advocacy and Action: Women Waging Peace, 2007, p16.
15
ANDERLINI Naraghi Sanam, “Peace Negotiations and Agreements,” in Inclusive Security Sustainable Peace: A
Toolkit for Advocacy and Action: Women Waging Peace, 2007, p16.
16
ZARTMAN William, Escalation and Negotiation, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2005, p6.
17
WALLENSTEEN Peter - SOLLENBERG Margareta, “Armed Conflicts, Conflict Termination and Peace
Agreements,” in Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, Vol. 34(3), p339-358.
18
DÜWELL Marcus, “Human Dignity: Concepts, Discussions, Philosophical Perspectives” in M Düwell et al.
(eds), in The Cambridge Handbook of Human Dignity: Interdisciplinary Perspectives (CUP 2014), p33.
19
TASIOULAS John, ‘Human Dignity and the Foundations of Human Rights’ in C McCrudden
(ed), Understanding Human Dignity, Oxford University Press, British 2013, p292&304.

7
 In these above mentioned articles, a new understanding of the relationship between
dignity and human rights is proposed; one that reinforces, rather than undermines, their power-
taming function. To do so, it is important to distinguish between dignity as a status, involving
distinctive normative demands (status dignity), and dignity as an inherent property of
individuals, which purportedly justifies ascribing a certain status to them (inherent dignity).
Status dignity and inherent dignity need not always accompany each other: one may hold status
dignity by virtue of possessing properties other than inherent dignity. Definitions of human rights
have focused on inherent dignity. The purpose of this study is to bring out the value that human
dignity has in international law, human rights and in the establishment of peace treaties.

E. SOCIAL INTEREST
Reviewing peace agreements is also a matter of political sustainability. Too often, parties
to a conflict manage to reach an agreement only to soon endanger it with uninspiring
implementation. Just as often, international actors spend the bulk of their energy to help secure
an agreement, but then neglect to monitor or assist its implementation. This is arguably the most
difficult part of the conflict and peace cycle.
It is, therefore, important for society at large and politicians in particular to discuss and
address their existing grievances. Some may feel unfairly treated from the very outset of the
agreement. Others may argue that those responsible for its implementation are not complying
with its spirit. Civil society, academia and different population groups should be part of this
discussion, facilitated by transparent decision making and public information processes. The
purpose of this study would be to see to the good of everyone irrespective of their status. Placing
human dignity at the base of every decision would evade a situation of making some people
being poorly treated and would take into consideration actors from various walks of life.

6. LITERATURE REVIEW
The concept of the dignity of the human person or Human Dignity, as it appears in most
scientific documents, is the base on which human rights law is being constructed and defended.
It is for the sake of this concept that peace, which is the state in which Human Rights are most
respected, is a necessity in every society. This draws the link between peace and human dignity.
The link is a mediated link. Jeremy Waldrone holds that human dignity is the foundation of
human rights. That proposition, or something like it, is found in the preambles of the major

8
human rights conventions, and it is quite common too in the rhetoric of scholars addressing the
subject of rights.20 In the same light, Laura Valentini, in her explanation of the link between
dignity and human rights, asks “but what, exactly, are human rights? A popular answer
characterises them as entitlements that all human beings possess by virtue of their inherent
dignity and that exist independently of legal or social recognition.” 21 These above authors,
establish a link between human dignity and human rights. This research deals with human
dignity and peace agreements. There is a link between Human Dignity and Human Rights, and
there is a link between human rights and peace agreements. Therefore, a link can be drawn
between Human Dignity, which is the foundation of human rights and the establishment of peace
agreements. While the concept of human rights has been incorporated into the study and practice
of peacebuilding as well as into international peace operations, there is significant variation and
inconsistency in how the concept of peace is discussed within the field of human rights. 22 Two
general approaches to human rights and peace appear prominent, based on the website survey
and sample interviews. The first perspective gives human rights preference over peace, and
asserts that respect for human rights may lead to greater peace. These groups tend to see peace
and human rights in more negative terms, as the absence of war, and as fundamental political and
social freedoms governments cannot take from their subjects. The second perspective views
peace as an important component of human rights efforts, using a positive definition of peace
that incorporates social justice and human rights often viewed more broadly in terms of human
security or inclusive of economic and social rights.23
On the other hand, Emily Kidd White writes: “Yet, a number of scholars object to the
presence of dignity considerations in law. For some, the fluctuations in the concept’s juridical
use render it inherently ambiguous, invoked only for the purpose of lending weight to one’s
political or ethical ideals. A less critical interpretation is that dignity is simply a synonym for
other moral principles, such as equality or goodness, and that the term itself adds no value

20
WALDRONE Jeremy, “Is Dignity the Foundation of Human Rights?” in NELLCO Legal Scholarship Repository,
New York University Public Law and Legal Theory.
21
VALENTINI Laura, “Dignity and Human Rights: a Reconceptualisation,” in Oxford Journal of Legal Studies,
Vol. 37, no. 4 (2017), pp. 862–885.
22
BUTCHER Charity and MAIA CARTER Hallward, “Bridging the Gap between Human Rights
and Peace: An Analysis of NGOs and the United Nations Human Rights Council,” in International Studies
Perspectives (2017) 18, p81–109.
23
Ibidem.

9
beyond these concepts.”24 He conclusively holds that “I remain unconvinced that a minimalist
principle of dignity will reduce tensions in the jurisprudence and strengthen the utility of the
concept. This is mainly because I do not see how dignity considerations can be defined so as to
render them outside of political questions about human vulnerability and flourishing.” 25 Quoting
the case of apartheid in South Africa (not in the Central African Region), the South African
Constitutional Court has rejected formal equality, and is in the process of developing a
substantive interpretation of equality based on the protection of human dignity. Evadné Grant
mentions that “critics of this approach have argued that the concept of human dignity is too
indeterminate to provide a stable foundation for equality law and that it promotes an excessively
individualistic conception of equality.”26 However, it is to be noted that the dignity-based
approach has been developed in order to provide a framework within which the actual experience
of parties concerned or victims of human rights violations can be explored.
However, Hampson and Ramsbotham argue that “it is the quality of the negotiation
process that becomes the essential element for peace settlements to be successful.” 27 Before
arranging the conditions for a treaty the barriers to implementation must be adequately addressed
and dealt with. In Nurturing Peace: Why peace settlements succeed or fail, Hampson argues that
the “poor quality of a peace agreement can be a source of implementation failure”. 28 It is also
worth noting that in the Central Africa Region, the chances for peace accords to fail in intrastate
wars are considerably much higher than the possibility to produce sustainable outcomes between
parties in interstate wars.29
Despite this opposition, one must acknowledge the fact that in the human rights legal
documents there is already the presumption of the existence and understanding of the concept of
human dignity. This, therefore, puts human dignity at the centre of everything. There is as such
no reason why it should not be recurrently emphasised during the drawing up and
implementation of peace agreements.

24
KIDD WHITE Emily, There is no such thing as a right to human dignity: A reply to Conor O’ Mahony, Oxford
University Press and New York University School of Law, 2012, p1.
25
KIDD WHITE Emily, There is no such thing as a Right to Human Dignity: A reply to Conor O’ Mahony, Oxford
University Press and New York University School of Law, 2012, p1.
26
See, EVADNE Grant, “Dignity and Equality,” in Human Rights Law Review, Volume 7, Issue 2, 2007, p299-329.
27
OSLER Hampson, Nurturing Peace: Why Peace Settlements Succeed or Fail, Institute of Peace Press,
Washington DC 1996, p23
28
Ibidem.
29
WALTER Barbara, “The Critical Barrier to Civil War Settlement,” in International Organisation, Vol. 51, No. 3,
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1997, p336.

10
 7. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
It is not out of place to consider the proposition that human dignity is the foundation of
human rights. It bears examining for all sorts of reasons: first, on account of the recent revival in
the philosophical study of dignity;30 second, because people continue to disagree about human
dignity, and it is worth looking into any thesis that promises to help us with these disagreements;
third, because dignity claims, if put forward as foundational, may provide a basis for challenging
other values or principles that have also claimed to occupy this foundational ground (like the
principle of utility, for example); 31 and fourth (and this is a reason that takes us in a different
direction), because the very idea of foundations for our political ideals has been called to
question, and what we find out about dignity may confirm (or refute) the proposition that
searching for foundations is more trouble than it is worth.32
Given that Human Dignity stands as a foundational principle in the field of human rights,
it surely should also serve as a fundamental principle in the establishment and implementation of
peace agreement in the region of Central Africa. The question therefore arises:
 How effective is the protection of the dignity of the human person in the
establishment and implementation of peace agreements in the Central Africa Region?
As an addendum to this question, one may also ask the question:
 How far has human dignity been put at the centre of peace agreements in the Region
of Central Africa?

8. HYPOTHESIS
The concepts of human dignity, human rights and peace agreements are increasingly
linked in the study and practice of International Relations and International Law, particularly in
the subfield of International Peace and Conflict Resolution. 33 It is worth noting that a “good”
agreement will result in durable peace; a “bad” agreement will result in delays, setbacks,
or even the collapse of a whole peace process. 34 This research would help at arriving at suitable
conclusions which would establish the importance of human rights
30
ROSEN Michael, Dignity: its History and Meaning, Harvard University Press, Harvard 2012, p12.
31
FLETCHER George, “Human Dignity as a Constitutional Value,” in University of Western Ontario Law Review,
22 (1984) 178.
32
Cfr, Ibidem.
33
BUTCHER Charity and MAIA CARTER Hallward, “Bridging the Gap between Human Rights
and Peace: An Analysis of NGOs and the United Nations Human Rights Council,” in International Studies
Perspectives (2017) 18, 81–109.
34
ARNAULT Jean, “Good agreement? Bad agreement? An implementation perspective,”
Center of International Studies Princeton University, 11th March 2020.

11
  The dignity of the human person has suffered a great level of abuse in the Central
Africa Region and despite its consecration in international instruments and some
Peace Agreements, it has enjoyed little protection. The human person has been
used more as a means to an end which may either be business or political.
 Secondly, the concept of Human Dignity though named in some Peace Agreements
signed in the Central Africa Region, it is hardly the centre or direct objectives of
these agreements. The understanding of Human Dignity is more or less presumed.

9. METHODOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK
After settling on the research question in this work, it is important to carefully consider
the methodological framework, because this will influence the results of the research. After
explaining the method thoroughly, the research technique would also be explained.
A. METHOD OF ANALYSIS: THE LEGAL METHOD
The main method which would be used would be the legal method. This method would
involve both the Dogmatic Method and the Casuistic Method.
The Dogmatic method is applied when studying normative legal material. It consists in
clarifying the meaning and significance of the rule of law, proceeding from its own content. It
would have to do with giving a profound interpretation to legal documents which are related to
human rights law and especially peace agreements. This method would go alongside some other
methods of the social sciences which help to show the effectiveness of the legal instruments in
their role of guaranteeing Human Rights.
The Casuistic Method is a method that extracts theoretical rules from law and reapply
them to existential situations. This would also involve a comparative analysis of the various
instruments or Peace Agreements of the Central Africa Region and an evaluation, which would
be made from books of various authors on the topic of human dignity and human rights with
special attention to peace agreements. Given that, comparatively, very few peace agreements in
the Central Africa Region have been effective, it would be appropriate to compare them with
some peace agreements which have been effective across the world. By choosing this method,
one would rely mainly on documents and not on data collected directly from field work. The
main resources would be the publications of other researchers, instrument, jurisprudence and

12
policies of the UN Security Council and AU Peace and Security Council. This would mainly be a
qualitative analysis.

F. RESEARCH TECHNIQUE
The technique of Document analysis is used in this work. Document analysis is a form of
qualitative research in which documents are interpreted by the researcher to give voice and
meaning around an assessment topic.35 It is a systematic procedure for reviewing or evaluating
documents both printed and electronic (computer-based and Internet-transmitted) material. Like
other analytic methods in qualitative research, document analysis requires that data be examined
and interpreted in order to elicit meaning, gain understanding, and develop empirical
knowledge.36
In the context of this dissertation, the analysis would consist in considering different
peace agreements in the Central Africa Region which have not been successful alongside
recommendations from authors around the world which have proven to be credible. It would also
involve bringing out a clear understanding of the concept of the dignity of the human person
(which is absent in most legal documents) and demonstrating how its understanding among
parties to peace agreements can influence the success in drawing up sustainable peace
agreements.
Considering the challenge posed by the global COVID-19 pandemic, the technique of
Secondary Data Analysis/Archival Study will also be used. Secondary analysis is a research
technique that involves analysing data collected by someone else. Secondary data is data that
was collected by other researchers who likely had different research objectives. Often,
researchers or research organisations share their data with other researchers in order to ensure
that its usefulness is maximised. 37 In this dissertation, it would be data collected by the United
Nations and the African Union. This technique avoids unnecessary duplication of research and
creates time for further primary analysis. A source which would be of great help in this
dissertation would be the United Nations Peacemaker through the website

35
See, GLENN Bowen, “Document Analysis as a Qualitative Research Method,” in Qualitative Research Journal,
Vol. 9, no. 2, 2009.
36
See, Ibidem.
37
CROSSMAN Ashley, “Understanding Secondary Data,” in ThoughtCo., in
https://www.thoughtco.com/secondary-analysis-3026573.

13
https://peacemaker.un.org. This would help to provide various peace agreements which have
been signed across the world and in the Central African Region in particular.

10. PLAN
To properly tackle this dissertation, the work would be divided into two parts. The first
part would establish clearly the legal, policy, philosophical and institutional frameworks for the
protection of Human Dignity in Peace Agreements. The second part gives a critical evaluation of
the place of human dignity in peace agreements. This would be followed by a General
Conclusion, an Appendix and a selected bibliography.

14
 PART I: THE LEGAL, POLICY, PHILOSOPHICAL AND INSTITUTIONAL
FRAMEWORKS FOR THE PROTECTION OF HUMAN DIGNITY IN PEACE
AGREEMENTS

15
 INTRODUCTION
The concepts of Human Dignity and Human Rights are very intimate and related notions.
These two concepts are so closely linked that one cannot be understood in isolation of the other.
If one is to acknowledge the importance of Human Rights and the obligation of one to respect
everyone’s rights, then one must begin by basing oneself on the concept of Human Dignity.
Therefore, Human Dignity is considered the foundation of Human Rights. Those who are
apologetics for Human Rights as well as different social movements usually have recourse to
Human Dignity in order to justify their claims and their activities. When there is mention of the
protection against global poverty, torture, impunity and inhuman treatments, to name a few, there
is the concept of Human Dignity at the back of the mind. Given that peace agreements go as well
to the protection of Human Rights, it goes without saying that a peace agreement is laconic
without a sense of the protection of the Dignity of the Human person.38 The notion of Human
Dignity must always be central and its spirit must also permeate through every article of a peace
agreement, without which there is little hope of a lasting solution to whatever conflict is of
interest.
The question may arise as to why a person’s rights needs to be respected on the basis of
the notion of Human Dignity; where is the rapport? The answer can be drawn either from
cultural, religious or philosophical points of view or from an experimental perspective. Given
that the philosophical views have a wider field of extension that is, including the religious,
cultural and experimental perspectives, attention would be given more to the philosophical
understanding of the notion of Human Dignity. By grasping an understanding of the relationship
between Human Rights and Human Dignity, one can therefore, understand the more the kind of
world a rational and reasonable being would like to live in and also why the
concepts are vital in the following up of peace processes; with special attention to peace
agreements.
This part would be divided into two chapters, therefore. The first chapter would deal with
“an understanding of the concept of “Human Dignity” in legal instruments” and the second
chapter would deal with “the relationship between Human Dignity and Human Rights”.

38
See, MOKA-MUBELO Willy, “Human Rights and Human Dignity,” in Reconciling Law and Morality in Human
Rights Discourse, Vol. 3, Springer, Switzerland 2017, pp 89-125.

16
CHAPTER 1: AN UNDERSTANDING OF THE CONCEPT OF “HUMAN DIGNITY” IN
LEGAL INSTRUMENTS

A. THE PHILOSOPHICAL UNDERSTANDING OF “HUMAN DIGNITY”

1. Polemics in Understanding the Concept of Human Dignity

To most people, the concept of dignity may not seem such a controversial subject, and
yet it has been defined in different ways by different cultures and different philosophers. For
some, it is the crowning value of Human Rights across the world. For others, it is a vague,
arbitrary and useless concept exploited as a slogan when proper arguments fail. Human Dignity
is one of the most controversial concepts of the 20th and 21st centuries, and a unified definition
might help build bridges between conflicting parties. Francis Fukuyama writes, in an article that
“the problem of contemporary politics [and law] is that people often do not seek recognition
simply for their dignity as abstract and equal human beings; they also seek recognition for the
groups of which they are members.” 39 The basic issue was one of dignity, or the lack thereof, the
feeling of worth or self-esteem that all of us seek. But dignity is not felt unless it is recognised by
other people. It is an inherently social and, indeed, political phenomenon. This implies that the
concept “Human Dignity” seems to have amphibious understanding, being understood
sometimes as a principle which is inherent in man and at another time it is understood as a
principle which is granted to a person by his society. The concept of dignity is used critically in
moral, ethical, legal and political discussions to express the idea that a being has an innate right
to be valued, respected and to receive ethical treatment. It is also an extension of the concept of
inherent inalienable rights. Essential to human dignity is the ability to exert “free will.” Dignity
is irreplaceable and gives value to life.

2. Dignity as a Moral Status

An explanation of human dignity as a moral status avoids these apparent difficulties since
status is properly understood as a threshold concept, not a scalar one.40 As such, moral status is
ascribed to a group of beings because of certain features they possess, regardless of the lesser or

39
FUKUYAMA Francis, “The Drive for Dignity,” in ForeignPolicy, https://foreignpolicy.com/2012/01/12/the-
drive-for-dignity/, 15/03/2020.
40
BUCHANAN Allen, “Moral Status and Human Enhancement,” in Philosophy and Public Affairs, vol. 37, no. 4,
2009, p. 346.

17
greater degree to which such beings have them. Reaching a threshold, i.e., being in possession of
certain traits or features, is a sufficient condition for having the appropriate status. The sources
and origins of the theoretical concept of human dignity can be found in antiquity. The word
“dignity” derives its original meaning from the Latin word “dignitas” conveying “honour” and
“respect.” In ancient Rome, those who held high social and political status could possess
dignitas.41 Likewise, in ancient Rome, only the man could have dignitas as opposed to women.42
Thus, a person’s dignity was associated with the person’s function of social status. This is
dangerous if not prudently understood, for it can lead to inequality.

3. Dignity as an Inherent Worth of the Human Being

Understood as the inherent and exclusive worth of human beings, dignity is a unique kind
of value for which there can be no comparisons or differences in degree. There cannot be little,
enough or too much human dignity in a person, nor do some people have more than others, since
it is assumed that every human being has exactly the same worth. Quoting Pope Francis,
“Human dignity is the same for all human beings: when I trample on the dignity of another, I am
trampling on my own.”43 This is in line with what Cicero and Immanuel Kant refer to as intrinsic
dignity. Intrinsic dignity, requires no effort on the part of the dignity bearer and it cannot be lost.
Cicero believed that all human beings have dignitas because of their inherent capacity to reason.
This universal attribute bestows all human beings equal respect. Their superior minds enable
them to think and shape their environment. Nevertheless, the prevailing concept of that time did
not share Cicero’s concept of inherent quality. The earliest and most famous Western
philosopher who argued that dignity is intrinsic to human beings is Immanuel Kant. He argued
that dignity is inviolable and cannot be denied even a vicious man. We are all born with dignity
and we all die with dignity, if one believes in the Kantian interpretation. Nobody can take it
away from us. It is this sense of dignity which is regarded as the foundation stone of human
rights. One can already see where disagreements can come in. Nobody loses their dignity.
The idea of human dignity is vital. Understood as something like the inherent or unearned
worth that all humans share equally, human dignity is typically treated as the moral basis of

41
MELTZER Henry Leslie, The Jurisprudence of Dignity, University of Pennsylvania Law Review, [S.l.], Vol. 160,
September 2011, pp. 169-233.
42
Ibidem, 190.
43
Pope Francis, Message of Pope Francis for the Lenten Brotherhood Campaign in Brazil, 2014.

18
human rights. For the same reason, it usually stands as a limit of reasonable disagreement that is,
as a limit to what humans think they should tolerate in disagreements with others about the good,
the right, or the just; rejecting the idea of human dignity is beyond the pale. Human dignity also
calls humanity to action with distinctive urgency. “People protest fiercely when they think
human dignity is under fundamental threat.” Mankind cringes whenever it thinks of itself
complicit in its injury, even indirectly, as would be true; for example, if one learns that soldiers
have tortured prisoners or that a political leader voted for has racist sympathies. Drawing from
John Rawls, “human dignity is one of the clearest points of ‘overlapping consensus’ in Western
culture today and perhaps across all cultures.”44 Despite the apparent differences in
understanding dignity, there is a common bases on which one can build the idea of dignity.
According to McCrudden, the minimum core of dignity contains three elements-1) the intrinsic
worth of all human beings, 2) the recognition and respect of the intrinsic worth by others, and 3)
the States’ duty to protect human rights.45 
From the above writings, one can conclude that Human Dignity is a connatural concept
which applies to every human being without discrimination. It is the worth of man qua man. It is
an ontological principle. The modern constitutional law rests heavily on the Kantian vision of
dignity making the inherent dignity for every individual a legal principle. Thus, the modern
concept of dignity discards the traditional notion which views dignity as a privilege for nobles.
Instead, it requires the State to respect equal dignity of individuals. 46 Dignity is justice that
protects an individual from psychological harm, unjust treatment both in personal and public
relations.

G. THE USE OF “HUMAN DIGNITY” IN LEGAL INSTRUMENTS

1. The UN Charter and Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Certainly the moral, political and legal significance of the idea of dignity in our time is
inseparable from its association with human rights. After the Second World War, the phrase
“human dignity” appeared on the main International Human Rights documents. For example, in
the Preamble to the Charter of the United Nations (1945), where in the name of the peoples of
44
RAWLS John, A Theory of Justice, Harvard University Press, Cambridge 2005, p329.
45
MCCRUDDEN Christopher, “Human Dignity and Judicial Interpretation of Human Rights,” The European
Journal of International Law, September 2008, Firenze, Vol. 19, n. 4, pp. 655-724.
46
RAO Neomi, “On the Use and Abuse of Dignity in Constitutional Law,” Columbia Journal of European Law,
Spring, Vol. 2, n. 2, 2008, pp. 201-256.

19
the United Nations it is proclaimed as: “faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and
worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and
small”.47 It has definitely been the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR, 1948) that
has done most to popularize the use of dignity in human rights discourse. In the UDHR the
phrase appears five times: twice in the Preamble (“Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity
and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of
freedom, justice and peace in the world”) and in three articles (article 1: “All human beings are
born free and equal in dignity and rights”; and also in articles 22 and 23 about socio-economic
rights).48 Following the UDHR, the mention of dignity has become commonplace in international
human rights law and humanitarian laws. With human rights, the appeal to human dignity has
become common in public debates, in some cases as a formulaic invocation, in others as a
powerful rhetorical device. Of course, the inflationary use ends up having deleterious effects on
the meaning of words. Thus, the notion of human dignity may sound like a platitude, or be
regarded as “mere decoration”, just a “fine-sounding phrase”.49

2. The ICCPR and ICESCR

In recent years the use of the concept “Human Dignity” has generated much controversy.
To critics, appeals to human dignity represent vague statements, or a resort to a mere slogan
without a fixed content, useless for normative theory. Controversy has taken place in bioethics
and other fields of study, but the issues raised are pertinent for the use of the term “Human
Dignity” in the theory and practice of human rights. Only later in the International Covenants on
Civil and Political Rights (1966) and on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (1966) is the kind
of relation between the two notions explicitly formulated: “Recognizing that these rights derive
from the inherent dignity of the human person”. Of course, this represents a major move whose
significance should not be overlooked. It establishes a priority in the order of justification.
Dignity is assigned a foundational role in human rights discourse as the ground for human
rights.50

47
See http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/preamble.shtml.
48
Universal Declaration on Human Rights, 1948, Preamble, articles 1, 22 and 23.
49
WALDRON Jeremy, “Dignity and Rank,” in Archives Européenes de Sociologie, Vol. XLVIII, n.2, 2007, pp.
201- 203.
50
SHULTZINER Doron, “Human Dignity: Functions and Meaning,” in Global Jurist Topics, vol. 3, no. 3, 2003, p.
4.

20
 Furthermore, there are two claims which arise with respect to the relationship between
Human Dignity and Human Rights:
 The first claim is, “from the inherent dignity of man, rights are derived and this
claim seems straightforward and foundational.” This claim gives the impression
that the final cause of human rights is to defend and enhance Human Dignity
therefore, calling on a profound understanding of the concept of Human Dignity
and putting in what is necessary to defend it.
 The second claim, puts dignity and rights as complementary. One is not the
consequence of the other. Rather, they are two independent concepts supporting
each other. This is expressed in article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights (UDHR). “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.”
There is no definition of human dignity in declarations, treaties and other international
human rights instruments. Its meaning is simply left to an intuitive understanding, assuming that
everyone knows roughly what it is.51 But is this a reliable assumption? Here lies the bone of
contention in this dissertation.

3. Constitutions and Conventions and other Treaties

In the world in general, the term “dignity” appears in the constitutions of 157 countries
which makes 81percent of the total number of sovereign States that are members of the United
Nations (Data collected by Doron Shultziner). 52 It is not common to find the words “Human
Dignity,” explicitly cited in the constitutions of most States in the Central Africa Region. This is
probably because most of their constitutions do acknowledge the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights in their preamble or articles. To begin with worldwide examples, the Constitution
of the United States of America contains the Bill of Rights and this was drafted at the end of the
eighteenth Century.53 This places little surprise to the fact that the words “Human Dignity” carry
no special provision within the Constitution. Considering the Declaration of the Rights of Man
and of the Citizen of 1789, which came up after the French revolution, there is only a mention of
51
SCHACHTER Oscar, “Human Dignity as a Normative Concept,” The American Journal of International Law,
Vol. 77, n. 4, 1983, pp. 848-854, p. 849.
52
BARILAN Yechiel Michael, Human Dignity, Human Rights, and Responsibility: The New Language of Global
Bioethics and Biolaw, the MIT Press, Cambridge 2012, p3.
53
See, BARAK Aharon, “Human Dignity in American Constitutional Law,” in Human Dignity: Constitutional
Value and the Constitutional Right, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2015, pp 185-20.

21
the “honor” (dignités) of man without emphatically expressing the richer sense of the term
“dignity” as it is expected to be understood by those who, in law, are supposed to be defending
it.
Coming to the Central Africa Region, there is a general acknowledgement of the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights and/or the Bill of Rights. This is, however, done in
different ways. In the preamble of the Constitution of Central African Republic (2004 with
ammendments through 2010), it is mentioned that «  Animé par le souci d’assurer à l’Homme sa
dignité dans le respect du principe de  ‘ZO KWE ZO’ énoncé par le Père fondateur de la
République Centrafricaine, Barthélemy BOGANDA ».  This case is at least explicit.
Unfortunately this paragraph does not appear in the 2013 constitution proposed during the
interim government period, probably as a result of the same practice of presuming that the
concept of human dignity is implicit in the UDHR. This does not give much help because it
pushes a foundational concept to the shades. Nevertheless, the preamble of this same constitution
goes forward to reaffirm its acknowledgement and integration of the Universal Declaration on
Human Rights and the two following covenants of 1966 and the African Charter on Human and
Peoples’ Rights. This shows that the constitution carries the concept of Human Dignity not just
as a foreign or borrowed concept but as one which is inborn in the very construction and culture
of the State.54 The Constitution of the Republic of Chad is explicit in its preamble as averred,
“Affirm…to build a State of law and once united nation founded on public freedoms and the
fundamental rights of Man, the dignity of the human person and political pluralism on the values
of solidarity and fraternity;” and then it further goes to affirm its acknowledgement of the UN
Charter and the UDHR and the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR). 55 The
Constitution of Angola has it explicitly clear thus: “determined to build together a just and
progressive society that respects life, equality, diversity and human dignity.” Again, in the case
of Burundi it is only presumed in the UDHR but not mentioned at all in the 2018 constitution.
This is the same case with the May 2005 constitution of the DRC, the 2015 Constitution of the
Republic of Congo and the Republic of Cameroon (2008).56
It can, therefore, be established that a lot of presumption is made that the concept of
human dignity, already present in the Bill of Rights is perfectly understood. But this should not
54
See, Preamble of the Central African Republic’s Constitution of 2004 with Amendments through 2010.
55
See, Preamble of the Republic of Chad 1996 (rev. 2005).
56
See, Preamble of the Constitutions of the Republic of Burundi (2018), DRC (2005), Republic of Congo (2015)
Republic of Cameroon (2008).

22
really be the case, granted the stage which the world has arrived today with respect to conflict.
Every document needs to resound the concept of “Human Dignity” and go further to explain
what it means in an article. It must be the spirit of every legal document and not just a
presumption.
With respect to conventions, it would be an exaggeration to say the concept of Human
Dignity is ignored. There are conventions which explicitly make use of the concept of Human
dignity for example: Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Dignity of the Human
Being with regard to the Application of Biology and Medicine, Convention on Human Rights
and Biomedicine (1997),57 Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against
Women (1979), United Nations Conventions on the Rights of the Child (1989). 58 Worthy of note
is the fact that the European Convention on Human Rights does not have the mention of the
concept “Human Dignity” in its original text but later in Protocol No. 13 in 2002, this concept is
inserted in the first paragraph. This shows how vital this concept is in the drawing up of a legal
document. The great worry arises as to why this concept cannot be reiterated in every legal
document. The respect for and protection of human dignity should be the soul of every legal
document. Peace agreements are no exceptions to this recommendation. A peace agreement
which does not serve to protect the dignity of the human person is not essentially a Peace
Agreement. Rather it should be considered an economic agreement or a military agreement or a
political agreement in actuality, and these would more often than not be ephemeral.

57
Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine, 1997.
58
See, Preamble of Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women, 1979.

23
 CHAPTER 2: THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HUMAN DIGNITY AND HUMAN
RIGHTS

A. HUMAN DIGNITY AS THE FOUNDATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS

4. Human Dignity and other Alternatives as Foundations to Human Rights

The proposition that Human Dignity is at the foundation of Human rights is recurrent in
the preambles of some of the major human rights documents especially the Bill of Rights and
constitutions and it is not uncommon to find scholars addressing this same proposition in the
subject of Human Rights. This therefore, requires examining: primordially, in the new school of
thoughts in the philosophical study of dignity;59 secondly, people continue to contradict each
other with respect to Human Rights and this calls for attention with respect to looking at research
papers which dwell on these disagreements; thirdly, because putting dignity as foundational may
provide grounds for challenging other values or principles that have claimed to be foundational
to Human Rights.60
To some scholars, the ultimate foundation of Human Rights is constituted by those
essential needs of each individual, the fulfilment of which is, under given historical conditions, a
necessary condition of social survival and development. Moreover, although Human Dignity lies
at the foundations of Human Rights, it does not by itself exhaust those foundations; instead,
human dignity characteristically operates in intimate union with a profile of universal human
interests in generating human rights. Contrary to extreme foundationalists, the foundations of
human rights are characterised by a value pluralism that embraces both moral and prudential
elements. Human Rights are grounded in the universal interests of human beings, each and every
one of whom possesses an equal moral status arising from their common humanity. Law is only
humane and just if its particular statutes express such universal needs without which the law can
be seen as a naked force. Therefore, a law that simply serves the objective of positive law may be
seen as simply a justification of the selfish interest of a ruling elite. 61 Some other more liberal
approaches stress that Human Rights have their bases grounded in the human capacity for
rationally purposive agency which is determined to be the distinguishing characteristic of human

59
ROSEN Michael, Dignity: its History and Meaning, Harvard University Press, Cambridge 2012, p20.
60
FLETCHER George, “Human Dignity as a Constitutional Value,” in University of Western Ontario Law
Review, 22 (1984), p178.
61
MARKOVIC Mihailo, “Philosophical Foundations of Human Rights,” in Praxis International, n 4, Oxford
University Press, Oxford 2015, p702.

24
beings. Thus humans have entitlements to well-being and freedom as these are required for us to
engage in purposive activities. This in turn becomes the basis for a fuller doctrine of Human
Rights.62 This however, is dangerous because persons who have lost their rationality either
through health or accident, may be considered sub-humans and hence may be deprived of
Human Rights. This explains why the foundation of Human Rights must be reconstructed to
Human Dignity instead of the rationality. All humans deserve these rights irrespective of their
health conditions.

5. Human Dignity as a Pivot

The term “Human Dignity” is a “conceptual fulcrum,” which serves, on the one hand, the
role of “mediating” between an extension of subjects that pervade all of human life and on the
other hand the role of a base for the enforcing of legal rights properly found in the constitution of
democratic States.63 This therefore, gives a certain basis on which many subjects concerning
humanity especially “Human Rights” can be based on. It is no doubt that there are some
constitutionally established rights which arise with the democratic opinions of persons in a State.
On the contrary, some Human Rights, especially the first degree human rights are more or less
the point on which most democratic liberations are based on. That is, these human rights are not
a consequence of democratic opinions, but are rather a reason for which democratic opinions are
sought.

6. Human Dignity and Human Rights as Interdependent

It can be mentioned that the concepts of Human Dignity and Human Rights are
interdependent in the sense that one cannot be without the other. To talk of Human Rights would
lead one seek to defend the dignity of the human person and to talk of Human Dignity
necessitates the establishment of a law for its protection. The danger comes in when Human
Rights are simply seen as laws which must be followed as compared to other penal laws which
can be altered anytime depending on the situational condition of a particular State. Human
Rights are permanent. Taking out the concept of Human Dignity as the spirit of Human Rights

62
GEWIRTH Alan, The Community of Rights, University of Chicago Press, Chicago 1996, p6.
63
HABERMAS Jürgen, “The Concept of Human Dignity and the Realistic Utopia of Human Rights,” in The Crisis
of the European Union: A Response, Polity Press, Cambridge 2012, pp. 81-87.

25
would simply lead to a series of laws with no anthropocentric objective. According to
international instruments on Human Rights, the dignity of the human person is the foundation of
human rights, and both Human Dignity and Human Rights are inherent to the human being,
universal and inviolable. This understanding of Human Dignity is not a fruitless truism, but the
solid foundation on which to build a world community under the rule of the new ius gentium: the
international law for Human kind. Olof Palme the former Prime Minister of Sweden said: “… for
us democracy is a question of human dignity. And human dignity is political freedom, the right
to freely express opinion and the right to be allowed to criticise and form opinions. Human
dignity is the right to health, work, education and social welfare. Human dignity is the right and
the practical possibility to shape the future with others. These rights, the rights of democracy, are
not reserved for a select group within society, they are the rights of all the people.” 64 Expatiating
on this quote, one would see that Palme is actually summarising the first degree Human Rights
and explaining that respecting them is to respect Human Dignity. The degree of respect of
Human Dignity depends on how these rights are observed. They are for all people irrespective of
their status and by virtue of their essence as human persons. In the same light, G. K. Chesterton
explains that “When people begin to ignore Human Dignity, it will not be long before they begin
to ignore Human Rights.”65 This explains why it is extremely important to reiterate several times
during a peace process, at its beginning, during and at the end that all that is being carried out is
geared towards the respect of the dignity of the human person. Persons may not come to a table
to make peace agreements which do not have the protection of the dignity of the human person
as the first objective. Such agreements would remain ephemeral as the self-interests of man are
not permanent but constantly change over time. All the peace agreements in the Central Africa
Region which have failed are all linked to the fact that they were more fully political and/or
economical in nature. Human rights only came up (if it did) as a formula for the establishment of
a document.
The demanding nature of “Human Dignity” sustains the notion of “legal personhood” and
both notions pertain to the realm of Law and Right, not Morale and Values. Thus, Human

64
See, ELSHTAIN Bethke Jean, “Democracy and Human Dignity,” in An Interdisciplinary Journal, Vol. 87, n. 1,
Penn State University Press, Pennsylvania 2004, pp 15-26.
65
CHESTERTON Gilbert Keith, Delphi Complete Works of
Chesterton,https://books.google.cm/books.about/Delphi_Complete_Works_of_G_K_Chesterton.html?
id=slUbAgAAQBAJ&redir_esc=y, 23th April 2020.

26
Dignity and Human Rights are and must be, respectively, a basic principle and a necessary part
of any Law System, including international law.66

H. HUMAN DIGNITY AS THE GOAL OF HUMAN RIGHTS

1. Human Dignity goes beyond just a Formula

It is important to clearly establish that Human Dignity (its protection and enhancement)
stands as a goal for which the fight for the protection of Human Rights is promulgated. This is to
avoid a situation where the concept of “Human Dignity” is not reduced to a formality for
preambles of legal instruments with no insight to what the concept actually signifies. 67 This
sometimes can be very disadvantageous even to peace agreements because the term “Human
Dignity” may be used simply for political compromise with a good number of inconsistencies.
This concept is consistently reiterated in the “Bill of Rights” as the aim for which the protection
of Human Rights seeks.

2. Human Dignity at the Centre of the Bill of Rights

Quoting the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, “Dignity and justice for
each and every human being are the promise of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The
concept of dignity lies at the heart of human rights. It is mentioned in the first sentence of the
preamble of the Declaration and appears again in article 1. Yet of all the rights to which
everyone is entitled, dignity is perhaps the most difficult to express and to put into a tangible
form. Put simply, it means we must treat one another with respect, tolerance and understanding.
Governments must do the same, in law as well as in practice, for the individuals who make up
communities, societies and nations. The idea of justice and the equality of everyone before the
law, appears throughout the Declaration. In fact, the declaration core values of non-
discrimination and equality are ultimately a commitment to universal justice and recognition of
inherent human dignity.”68
Continuing with a purely textual analysis, it is interesting that the ICCPR and the
ICESCR
66
ALZINA DE AGUILAR Jose Pablo, Human Dignity according to International Instruments on Human Rights,
www.reei.org, Issue 22, December 2011.
67
MORSINK Johannes, The Universal Declaration of Human Rights: Origins, Drafting and Intent, University of
Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia 1999, p10.
68
See, “Universal Declaration of Human Rights – in six cross-cutting themes,” in United Nations Human Rights
Office of the High Commissioner, www.ohchr.org/EN/UDHR/pages/crosscuttingThemes.aspx.

27
seem to present dignity as part of the content of certain rights. Article 10(1) of the ICCPR says:
“All persons deprived of their liberty shall be treated with… respect for the inherent dignity of
the human person.” (This is similar to the requirement in international humanitarian law that
detainees, in particular, be protected from (among other things) “outrages upon personal
dignity.”)69 Dignity is also implicated in certain particular claims about socio-economic rights.
Article 13(1) of the ICESCR, recognizes a right to education and lays it down that “education
shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and the sense of its dignity,”
and, in the UDHR, Article 23(3) proclaims that “everyone who works has the right to just and
favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human
dignity. Is this particularity of these claims about dignity consistent with the view that dignity is
the general foundation of all human rights? The answer is affirmative as it is also made evident
in the mission statement of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), “The
International Committee of the Red Cross is an impartial, neutral and independent organization
whose exclusively humanitarian mission is to protect the lives and dignity of victims of armed
conflict and other situations of violence and to provide them with assistance.” 70 This goes a long
way to explain the successes of the ICRC registered around the world. The protection of the
dignity of the human person is at the forefront of their mandate and mission. This would be
equally an outstanding motivation for the successful negotiation and implementation of peace
agreements in the Central Africa Region. Drawing from her mandate and mission, the ICRC is
noted to be deeply concerned with respect to the situation in the Central African Republic given
the intensifying violence. The organisation, therefore, called upon all the concerned parties to the
conflict, leaders of armed groups and individual fighters to respect human life and dignity, spare
civilians and facilitate neutral, independent and impartial humanitarian action. This, further, goes
to emphasise the central place of the concept of Human Dignity in the resolution of conflict.
Peace agreements that have economic and political or military objectives as their foundation do
not stand a good chance of bringing sustainable peace to any given society.

69
Geneva Convention, Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War of 12 August 1949, Article 3.
70
See, “The ICRC’s Mandate and Mission,” in International Committee of the Red Cross,
https://www.icrc.org/en/mandate-and-mission, 02nd April 2020.

28
 3. Human Dignity as the Goal of Peace Agreements
The place Human Dignity holds in Human Rights flows into Peace Agreements given
that one of the main aims of peace agreements is to protect and serve Human Rights. Peace
agreements deal with human beings and their welfare, and this cannot be done while ignoring the
concept of Human Dignity. This can be seen when conflict has reached a State where “several
hundred sick children and pregnant women have been unable to reach clinics or maternity
hospitals, thousands of families are destitute, their homes having been burnt down and their
livelihoods destroyed. They are living in a constant state of fear, when families cannot bury their
dead in accordance with the rites of their religion or traditions, when humanitarian access is
hindered to the wounded and the sick,” then it can be clearly established that parties responsible
for the conflict have lost their sense of the value of the dignity of the human person; humanity
itself is flouted.71 Therefore, establishing a peace agreement without making an effort to
reconstruct the value of this same concept in their minds and in their negotiations would be a
great flaw for the good of the Central Africa Region. The concept of the value of Human Dignity
must be sung like an anthem and a rhyme in the ears of all concerned with armed conflict.

71
See, MWEHU Germain, “Central African Republic: ICRC calls for respect for human life and dignity,” in
International Committee of the Red Cross, www.icrc.org/en/document/central-african-republic-bangui-calls-for-
respect-human-dignity-violence%3famp, 06th November 2015.

29
 CONCLUSION
One way of conceptualising Human Rights is through the lens of peace promotion.
Whereas Human Rights are typically, legal and political by nature, peace promotion calls upon a
person’s moral and ethical faculties. Human Dignity appears as a central concept to both Peace
and Human Rights. It is the reason for which peace promotion is necessary for humanity, and it
is also the final end for which the active promotion of Human Rights is ethically justified. A
point which would not be exhausted even if mentioned in every page of this work is (as also
thought of by some thinkers) that, the usefulness of dignity has been lost and the concept is
threatened seriously from within.72 This explains why the International Day of Peace is a
celebration of the international values of dignity, Human Rights and peace. On the 21 st of
September 2017, International Day of Peace, the theme was “Together for Peace: Respect, Safety
and Dignity for all.”73 We cannot talk of Peace agreements without the concept of Human
Dignity at the forefront. Drawing from this, it would be very important that all peace agreements
which are drawn in the Central Africa Region reiterate the value of the concept of Human
Dignity. The people of the Central Africa Region need to be made aware of the value of the
dignity of the human person in all aspects of their laws, policies, peace processes, and precisely,
in their peace agreements.
This work does not trivialise any other intentions for which peace agreements are drawn.
It goes to give a firmer ground or foundation for the success of peace agreements. Whatever the
objective of a peace agreement is, it is important to begin by stressing the common principle that
unites all humanity, which is our Human Dignity before any other partitioning into groups.

72
SCHROEDER Doris, “Human Rights and Human Dignity: An Appeal to Separate the Conjoined Twins,” in
Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, Vol. 15, n. 3, Springer, June 2012, pp 323-335.
73
See, Theme for International Day of Peace, 21st September 2017.

30
PART II: A CRITICAL EVALUATION OF THE PLACE OF HUMAN DIGNITY IN
PEACE AGREEMENTS

31
 INTRODUCTION
Peace agreements are contracts intended to end violent conflict, or to significantly
transform a conflict, so that it can be more constructively addressed. 74 Conflict, in its nature, is
not humane especially when it escalates to war or armed conflict. Underscoring that peace is
more than just the absence of war, United Nations officials stressed the need for concerted efforts
to achieve the common vision of a life of dignity and well-being. This is expressed in the
statement that “we know that peace cannot be decreed solely through treaties – it must be
nurtured through the dignity, rights and capacities of every man and woman.” 75 Therefore, it is
utopia to talk of sustainable peace or the establishment of a peace agreement without an explicit
concern on, and an understanding of, the concept of human dignity. The two are not mutually
exclusive and must go together for the attainment of sustainable peace. The primary impetus on
which the United Nations was founded was to create a new culture of peace. As already
mentioned above, several times, the word “dignity” is prominently cited in the first sentence of
the Charter of the UN, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the Convention on the
Rights of the Child and included in many other UN documents and resolutions. One may ask:
why is the role of dignity important in the Culture of Peace? The Culture of Peace, defined as “a
set of values, attitudes, traditions and modes of behaviour and ways of life,” 76 is based on loving
understanding, goodwill and right relations with all life. Dignity is, perhaps, the foundation, the
key ingredient in this formula, including therefore, compassion, empathy, justice, solidarity,
respect for diversity, dialogue and understanding, among other ingredients. 77 The peace of the
world rests directly with each one of us and not just with some elected or selected few. This
should give us a clue as to the considerable significance of dignity. This part would be divided
into two chapters: The Nature of Peace Agreements (Chapter 3) and the Protection of Human
Dignity in Peace Agreements (Chapter 4).

74
YAWANARAJAH Nita – OUELLET Julian, “What are Peace Agreements?” in Beyond Intractability,
https://www.beyondintractability.org, 10th March 2020.
75
Secretary General Ban Ki-moon said in his remarks to the High-level Forum on the Culture of Peace, convened by
the General Assembly. See, “Peace means dignity, well-being for all, not just absence of war – UN officials,” in UN
News, https://news.un.org/en/story/2014/09/476992-peace-means-dignity-well-being-all-not-just-absence-war-un-
officials, 9th September 2014, 10th March 2020.
76
UN Declaration and Programme of Action on Culture of Peace, 1999.
77
See, SPELLING Iris, “Culture of Peace: The role of human dignity in the culture of peace,” in Ashland Tidings,
https://ashlandtidings.com/archive/culture-of -peace-the-role-of-human-dignity-in-the-culture-of-peace, 9 th April
2018.

32
 CHAPTER 3: THE NATURE OF PEACE AGREEMENTS

Peace Agreements offer rule-based approaches, which distinguish from some variable
peace processes and are manifested as establishing a legal peace. Peace, in the legal context takes
the following forms: 1) Peace agreements evaluate internal and external interactions for the
legitimacy of government through distorting government and supporting human rights; a
different composition of public and private (non-government) signatories; 2) Peace agreements
are common treaties riding over national (interior) and international legal issues; 3) Different
forms of legal commitments; peace agreements embrace both valid organizational regulations
and contracts or pseudo-commitment contracts; 4) Various third party agencies; peace
agreements rely upon common law coalition government and contain multiple oppositions,
common law and political mechanisms and their implementation.78
These various ways simultaneously reflect settlement ways of peace agreements. If legal
issues are ignored and peace agreements are properly considered, they may be argued as a
temporary international constitution. Peace agreements provide a powerful plan for governing.
However, they are often minor and temporary requiring development. For a peace process to be
actualised, there is a variety of types of agreements that can be arrived at. 79 These agreements
have distinct objectives and participate in a particular way with regard to building positive
momentum for a final settlement of conflict. Situations must not apply all the types of
agreements before the attainment of peace. Some situations may go step by step while others
may be sufficient with only one agreement. The United Nations has, however, made the effort to
differentiate the various types of peace agreements. 80 Some other authors present five types of
peace agreements while others present three. However, the Cessation of Hostilities or Ceasefire
Agreements, interim or Preliminary Agreements can both be put under the heading of Pre-
negotiation Agreements.

78
BOHLOULZADEH Ghassem, “The Nature of Peace Agreement in International Law,” in Journal of Politics and
Law; Vol. 10, n. 2; Published by Canadian Centre of Science and Education 2017.
79
See, BELL Christine, “Peace Agreements: Their Nature and Legal Status,”in The American Journal of
International Law, Vol. 100, n. 2, 2006, Cambridge University Press, p375.
80
See, “Peace Agreements” in UN Peacemaker Databank, Policy Planning Unit, Department of Political Affairs,
United Nations, April 2006.

33
 A. TYPES OF PEACE AGREEMENTS

4. Pre-negotiation Agreements
Pre-negotiation Agreements do carry the purpose of establishing the path by which a
peace process can be conducted. They are actually the first formal documents that establish and
begin a peace process. However, before the negotiations begin, there is need for the declaration
and respect of an agreement to a cease fire or cessation of hostilities.

a) Cessation of Hostilities or Ceasefire Agreements

A Ceasefire agreement refers to a temporary stoppage of war or any armed conflict for an
agreed- upon timeframe or within a limited area. The concerned parties which could be two or
more, to the agreement, come to a compromise to suspend violent actions, without necessarily
yielding in anyway. Thomas Nast writes that, a ceasefire is “a truce – not a compromise, but a
chance for high-toned gentlemen to retire gracefully from their very civil declarations of war.” 81
This implies that a ceasefire is a call for dialogue and negotiation between warring parties. This
particular type of peace agreement is of a military essence; that is, it is military in nature and
gears towards stopping combating actors from going on with armed combat. This can, therefore,
give room for political and legal negotiations aimed at attaining a more durable solution.
However, given its ephemeral nature, ceasefire agreements cannot last long and are
fragile. Therefore, it is required that all other negotiations which need to go on during the
ceasefire agreement be done with all seriousness and smartness. Ceasefire agreements must be
quickly followed up with further agreements, if the ceasefire needs to be of value.
An example can be taken of the Central African Republic (CAR); that is, the Ceasefire
and Peace Agreement between the Government of the Central African Republic and the Political
and Military Central African Movement: the Popular Army for the Restoration of Democracy
(APRD) signed on 05th September 2008. This agreement provided for an immediate ceasefire
between the CAR Government and the APRD. Issues covered include Disarmament,
Demobilisation and Reintegration (DDR), provisions for security and peace during the dialogue,
provisions for amnesty and liberation of prisoners, and the creation of an implementation
commission. In the same country, there is the Accord de Cessez-le-Feu Entre d’une part
L’Union des Forces Democratiques pour le Rassemblement (UFDR) et d’autre part la

81
See, Thomas NAST, Harper’s Weekly, February 17th, 1877, Courtesy of Library of Congress, p 132.

34
convention des Patriotes pour la Justice et la Paix (CPJP) (08/10/2011), Accord de cessez-le-feu
entre le Gouvernement de la Republique Centrafricaine et la Coalition Seleka (11/01/2013),
Brazzaville Agreement on Cessation of Hostilities (23/07/2014).

b) Pre-negotiation Agreements
Pre-negotiation agreements are peace agreements which have the purpose of defining
how a state of peace can or will be negotiated. 82 It goes to establish issues of procedure which
may include schedules, agendas, participants and location, as well as the peacemaker’s role and
the process by which later framework or comprehensive agreements can be drafted. The way a
peace process is managed has much to do with whether it would be actualised or not. The pre-
negotiation agreement goes to structure negotiations and keep them on tract. When a pre-
negotiation agreement is arrived at, then it is a positive sign that the achievement of a successful
peace process is feasible. Often, agreements emerging at this stage are incremental with the aim
of building to a formal cease-fire that would enable multi party talks. Typically, they do not
include all the parties to the conflict but take the form of bilateral agreements between some of
the parties and remain secret until a later date. 83 The parties concerned in the agreement can
begin to have confidence and promote trust between themselves. At this stage of a peace process,
“what is important is the fact of having established a joint commitment to future negotiations.” 84
The pre-negotiation stage tends to focus on who is going to negotiate with and with what status,
raising issues such as the return of negotiators from exile or their release from prison: safeguards
as to future physical integrity and freedom from imprisonment; and limits on how the war may
be waged while negotiations take place.85
Meanwhile the pre-negotiation Agreement is undergoing implementation and heading
towards the Framework Agreements, there is a chance for an Interim Agreement or Preliminary
Agreement which are drawn up in some cases.

82
YAWANARAJAH Nita and OUELLET Julian, “Peace Agreements,” in Beyond Intractability. Eds. Guy Burgess
and Heidi Burgess, Conflict Information Consortium, University of Colorado, Boulder. Posted: September 2003
http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/structuring-peace-agree, 11/03/2020.
83
See, BELL Christine, “Peace Agreements: Their Nature and Legal Status,” in The American Journal of
International Law, Vol. 100, No. 2, 2006, Cambridge University Press, p376.
84
See, Ibidem, p377.
85
Ibidem, p376.

35
 c) Interim or Preliminary Agreements
Interim or Preliminary agreements are agreements which serve the purpose of a primary
step on the way to organising future negotiations. They can be also referred to as “agreements to
agree” or commitments to reach a negotiated settlement and build confidence between the
parties.
Interim agreements are not ordinarily concerned with the procedure or structure by which a
peace process would be carried out but have similar features of a pre-pre-negotiation agreement,
outlining when and how negotiations might be held. An interim agreement is a good sign that a
ceasefire will be respected. It can also be used to restart an inert peace process. These form of
agreements are not stable, and need to be followed with negotiations on procedural and
substantive issues quickly to keep the new positive momentum of a peace process. An example
of an Interim Agreement includes the Declaration of Fundamental Principles of the Inter-
Congolese Political Negotiations, 2001.

5. Comprehensive or Framework Agreements

The terms “Comprehensive Agreements” and “Framework Agreements” are often used
interchangeably. However, there is a slight difference between the two types of agreements:
Framework Agreements are agreements that broadly agree upon the principles and agenda upon
which the substantive issues will be negotiated. Framework agreements are usually accompanied
by protracted negotiations that result in Annexes that contain the negotiated details on
substantive issues, or are a series of subsequent agreements that are sometimes collectively
known as the Comprehensive Agreement (whose objective is to carefully find the common
ground between the interests and needs of the parties to the conflict, and resolve the substantive
issues in dispute).
The purpose of basic or framework agreements is to keep on a ceasefire. They provide a
framework for governance designed to address the root cause of the conflict and thus to halt the
violence more permanently. They tend to be more inclusive of the main groups involved in
waging the war by military means. Usually, they are public and are formally recorded in a
written, signed form and include international participants.86 These agreements are designed for
the States targeting conflict fundamentals and more permanently stopping hostility. 87 The
86
BELL Christine, “Peace Agreements: Their Nature and Legal Status,” in The American Journal of International
Law, vol. 100, no. 2, 2006, p373–412.
87
KHARAZI Kamal, Developments of post-ware collective security system. Journal of Legal Studies, 1995, p15.

36
agreements of this step are more obviously entitled “peace treaty”. Such agreements try to
include the groups involving military wars. Individuals out of the trend are considered for this. 88
The Burundi Peace Agreement and Sierra Leon Peace Treaty, as well as South Africa’s
incidental and provisional constitution are all instances of this type of agreement. A framework
agreement is associated to formal negotiations, and it is necessary to enforce. The members
fundamentally compromise regarding dominant influence and use of strength.

6. Implementation Agreements
Implementation Agreements elaborate on the details of a Comprehensive or Framework
Agreement. They begin to advance and develop aspects of the framework, fleshing out their
details. An implementation agreement almost always requires a new round of negotiations with
the relevant parties. In these negotiations, framework or comprehensive agreements are fine-
tuned and given specificity. The goal of implementation agreements is to work out the details
and mechanics to facilitate implementation of the comprehensive agreement. Implementation
agreements are not always formally written documents.89 Sometimes they are verbal
commitments, exchanges of letters, and joint public statements that help move implementation
forward. Due to this fact, it is usually very difficult to keep track of implementation agreements.
Often, the informal nature of these agreements makes it more difficult to hold the parties to their
commitments. While formally written implementation agreements often take a longer time to
achieve, there is usually a perception that the parties are committed, serious and obligated to
implement these agreements.

I. COMPONENTS OF PEACE AGREEMENTS

1. Procedural Components of Peace Agreements

Procedural Components set out the processes that establish and maintain peace. They
delineate the HOW of a peace process by establishing the processes and measures that help build

88
BOHLOULZADEH Ghassem, “The Nature of Peace Agreement in International Law,” in Journal of Politics and
Law; Vol. 10, n. 2; Canadian Center of Science and Education, 2017, p209.
89
BELL Christine, “Peace Agreements: Their Nature and Legal Status,” in The American Journal of International
Law, Vol. 100, n. 2, 2006, p373–412.

37
peace.90 This would involve the instituting of schedules and institutions that enable the
implementation of substantive issues such as elections, justice, human rights and disarmament.

2. Substantive Components of Peace Agreements

Substantive Components of an agreement seeks to establish a solution to the challenge of
WHAT is going to change after the peace agreement is reached. Substantive components include
political, economic, and social structural changes that are needed to remedy past grievances and
provide for a more fair and equitable future.91 Substantive components, would deal with all that
is required to with regard to distribution of power, management of natural resources and the type
of mechanisms to address past injustices.

3. Institutional Components of Peace Agreements

Institutional or Organizational components are arrangements or mechanisms intended to
promote the peace consolidation efforts after the agreement. This component of agreements is
concerned with the WHO element of the agreement. 92 It is directly concerned with or provide
oversight and guidance to other actors to carry out the activities intended to consolidate the
fragile peace and lay the foundation for sustainable peace and development. There are two types
of organizational components. The first, often referred to by the United Nations as
“implementation mechanisms,” immediately follows a peace agreement and is intended to
promote agreement implementation. The second type of organizational/institutional component
is designed to resolve subsequent or future conflicts over substantive issues, such as the abuse of
State power in relation to human rights and the promotion of transparency and accountability in
governance. These mechanisms, often referred to in the United Nations as “peacebuilding
mechanisms” help promote the culture of peaceful conflict resolution in a society and public
confidence in the State’s capacity to resolve future grievances systematically and impartially.

90
See, YAWANARAJAH Nita, “Components of Peace Agreements,” in ADR Times,
https://www.adrtimes.com/library/components-of-peace-agreements, 14th March 2020.
91
See, YAWANARAJAH Nita, “Components of Peace Agreements,” in ADR Times,
https://www.adrtimes.com/library/components-of-peace-agreements, 14th March 2020.
92
Ibidem.

38
 a) Implementation Mechanism
Implementation mechanisms can take a variety of forms, and exist to help increase the
likelihood that a peace agreement is implemented.93 Implementation mechanisms have been most
concrete with respect to the primary focus on ensuring that ceasefire agreements should be
adhered to. Tasks included monitoring, verifying, and reporting on the decommissioning of
weapons, the demobilisation of armed forces, and ceasefire violations. 94 Implementation
mechanisms abound in other forms of peace agreements which address broader issues aimed not
only at ending conflict, but on building political processes and institutions that will sustain peace.
Today, implementation mechanisms assist in implementing commitments in areas as diverse as
elections to land reform, power sharing to reforming the security sector, and the sharing of
economic resources to the ratification and incorporation in domestic law of international human
rights treaties. In attempting to create mechanisms that can respond to the increasing detail and
complexity of peace agreements, and also to play a role in building the legitimacy of the
agreement among the wider public, peace agreements have developed a diverse array of
implementation mechanisms designed to deliver different tasks across different contexts.
The implementation mechanisms go beyond just standing as agreements; they have a
good number of functions. The functions are inexhaustible but are mainly to provide
implementation modalities; monitoring implementation; verifying compliance with the terms of
an agreement and addressing disputes that arise during the course of implementation.95
It is also important to consider the composition of Implementation Mechanisms. An
important component in the design of implementation mechanisms is concerned with which
actors should be involved in the mechanism. The decision about whom to include or exclude in
implementation mechanisms can increase or hamper the legitimacy of the mechanism in
question, build trust, or garner disapproval. Broadly stated, four different permutations of actor

93
This research draws on the PA-X Peace Agreement Database (www.peaceagreements.org), a database of all peace
agreements at any stage of the peace process from 1990 to 2018. The database is fully searchable and supports both
qualitative and quantitative examination of peace agreements. Sean MOLLOY and Christine BELL, How Peace
Agreements Provide for Implementation, Political Settlements Research Programme (PSRP), Global Justice
Academy School of Law Old College, The University of Edinburgh, 1990-2018.
94
ABDENUR Adriana Ethal, “Monitoring of Peace Agreement Implementation: Lessons from Colombia,” in
reliefweb, https://reliefweb.int/report/colombia/monitoring-peace-agreement-implementation-lessons-colombia, 14th
March 2020.
95
See, MOLLOY Sean and BELL Christine, How Peace Agreements Provide for Implementation, Political
Settlements Research Programme (PSRP), Global Justice Academy School of Law Old College, The University of
Edinburgh, 1990-2018.

39
can be involved in implementation mechanisms: conflict protagonists only; civil society actors
only; international actors only; or hybrid formations.96

b) Peace building Mechanism

The United Nations often refers to the second type of organizational/institutional
component as “peacebuilding mechanisms.” These mechanisms help promote the culture of
peaceful conflict resolution in a society and public confidence in the state’s capacity to resolve
future grievances systematically and impartially. It is designed to resolve subsequent/future
conflicts over substantive issues, such as the abuse of state power in relation to human rights and
the promotion of transparency and accountability in governance. Peacebuilding mechanisms are
designed to provide:
 A neutral monitoring capacity to ensure that peace agreement commitments are
honoured,
 A steering capacity which sets priorities and keeps the peace implementation on track,
 A political forum which allows parties to resolve implementation disagreements through
political negotiations.
 A neutral structure and capacity within the State to resolve future conflicts and
complaints.
 A means for the peaceful resolution of public grievances before they become a source of
conflict in a society.
 A means for preventing future conflicts.97
Peacebuilding mechanisms could include the setting up of a new office of ombudspersons, a
commission on Human Rights and the strengthening of the judiciary with international advisory
and/or monitoring capacity.

96
LYONS Terry, ‘Successful peace implementation: plans and processes,’ in Peacebuilding, Vol 4, n. 1, 2016, pp.
71-82.
97
YAWANARAJAH Nita, “Components of Peace Agreements,” in ADR Times,
https://www.adrtimes.com/library/components-of-peace-agreements, 14th March 2020.

40
 CHAPTER 4: PROTECTION OF HUMAN DIGNITY IN PEACE AGREEMENTS
Drawing from the information in the UN Peace Agreements Database, it is noted that
about 42percent of all peace agreements have to do with Africa. Unfortunately a good number of
them have failed to lay a firm base for a peace that is sustainable. 98 The question normally arises
as to why this is the case in the continent of Africa at large and the region of Central Africa in
particular? Worthy of note is the fact that peace negotiations can falter if those who participate in
drawing the negotiations feel that they are under pressure or if those who are involved do not
implement the negotiations in good faith. This culture of non-compliance fuels political
instability and societal tension, as can also be seen in ongoing conflicts in the Central African
Republic and Burundi.99 Therefore, in order to be assured of sustainable peace, the foundations
must be properly laid down, transforming the mentality of those who participate at the
negotiating table, as well as the contents of the peace talks. They must have a proper
understanding of what Human Dignity is all about, and must put it as the main objective of their
agreements, otherwise they would continue to dwell on opinions which would hardly satisfy all
the parties involved.

A. NEGOTIATING JUSTICE: HUMAN DIGNITY AND PEACE AGREEMENTS

4. Complementarity and Tensions

Human Rights and Peace Agreements have a complementary role to play with each other.
Given that Human Dignity is the foundation principle of Human Rights, and the protection of
Human Rights is a fundamental objective of Peace Agreements, it follows logically in syllogism
that Human Dignity has a complementary role to play with Peace Agreements. Many cases of
internal conflicts can be traced back to the fact that a particular group of persons felt that they
were not treated in a manner befitting of their persons as human beings; their dignity had been
trampled on. Usually, it begins as passive non-violent resistance which gradually escalates into
violent and armed conflict. In most cases, secessionist conflicts or armed conflicts which affect
98
ADETULA Victor - MURITHI Tim - BUCHANAN Clarke, Peace Negotiations and Agreements in Africa: Why
they fail and How to Improve them, Nordiska Afrikainstitutet/The Nordic Africa Institute, November 2018.
99
See, Ibidem.

41
most States in the Central Africa Region began as a demand for a restitution and respect of the
dignity of the citizens of a particular area of a State. In this light, a violation of the dignity of the
human person becomes a cause of conflict. It may not appear as such at first glance, but, when
looked at with limpid acuteness, one would find that violation of Human Dignity is at the base.
For example, a State repression, lack of equal access to resources, and the failure of the rule of
law, leads to corruption, dictatorship, monopolies, which in turn affect the economic situation of
a State and may lead to poor amenities and facilities such as poor health care, low nutrition and
poor education. This was the case especially in Burundi which led up to the Arusha Agreement.
It was not ethnic diversity per se that caused the conflict, but rather the inequality in the
distribution of access to national resources and political power across ethnic groups. 100 The
Arusha Agreement sought to establish an equal distribution of power and resources without first
of all emphasising the fact that every citizen of Burundi was a human being with equal dignity. 101
So much emphasis was put on the fact that they all had the status of independent ethnic groups
coming together to form one State. Cultural Diversity is a rich resource, but it is important to
note, always, that beneath the social construct of culture is the human being. As a result of this,
the tension between the various ethnic groups which exist in Burundi has never completely
subsided.
The concept of Human Dignity addresses the value of every single human being, and as
such, awakens an awareness of the basic human needs, whose denial, in most cases, sums up to
the direct or indirect cause of most conflicts. Acknowledging categorically and unequivocally the
concept of Human Dignity gives a vital disposition for convincing the parties involved in a peace
agreements that their fears of being judged with prejudice, or being conquered is already suitably
addressed. This applies both with regard to the allocation of resources or in the execution of
State power in a general sense. This leads to the point which is treated below dealing with the
Spirit of the Law versus the Letter of the Law. Should conventions and treaties or constitutions
just be followed in all circumstances because they have been written down or do these
documents have a certain spirit that can be served, therefore enhancing the effective
implementation of peace agreements?

100
NDIKUMANA Léonce, ‘Distributional Conflict, the State, and Peacebuilding in Burundi,’ in United Nations
University World Institute for Development Economics Research (UNU-WIDER), Research Paper n. 2005/45, p. 5.
101
See, Ibidem.

42
 5. Spirit of the Law versus the Letter of the Law
Peace agreements also carry a legal status. This is best expressed when, sometimes, their
articles or contents appear either in treaties, constitutions or conventions. An example is the
Green Tree Agreement between Cameroon and Nigeria which has the form of a treaty between
the two States.102 Most often, the parties involved in peace agreements carry certain fears at the
back of their minds, especially after heavy armed combat. Those in the Central Africa Region
that have been parties to the Roman Statute of the International Criminal Court already foresee
the establishment of peace or their disarmament as an easy way to hand themselves over for
prosecution under the charges of war crimes. Others already see ad hoc tribunals being created to
judge them or national tribunals hanging them or sentencing them to excruciating penalties.
These fears make the implementation of peace treaties ineffective. In this light, it is important to
consider the concepts of the “Letter of the Law and the Spirit of the Law.”
The letter of the law versus the spirit of the law is an idiomatic antithesis. To act in a way
that obeys the letters of the law and yet ignores the spirit of the law is to act divorced from the
intention of the legislators of the law. On the one hand, when one obeys the letter of the law but
not the spirit, one is obeying the literal interpretation of the words (the letter) of the law, but not
necessarily the intent of those who wrote the law. On the other hand, to act according to the spirit
of the law even if it goes against the letter of the law, one can be considered to have executed the
intention of the legislator of the law. Peace agreements go beyond the subject of just Human
Rights Law; they extend to all the other branches of International Law/Relations. However, it
should be noted that at the foundation of international law, is the objective of serving the rights
of man. The protection of the dignity of the human person is the spirit of Human Rights law and
should also be the spirit of peace agreements. It is true that judges and/jurists are not moral
philosophers to begin philosophising over laws but in the case of peace agreements where these
are laws being drawn up, quoting Hardley Arkes, one must come to understand that “Jurists
cannot understand the law apart from those moral premises that add up to make up the law.” 103
Those moral premises sum up to make the spirit of the law. This, therefore, implies that, if those
who are interpreting or executing the law forget those premises under which the law was
constructed, then the application of the law would be faulty. When drawing peace agreements
102
Nigeria is not one of the States of the Central African Region, but the Green Tree Agreement has just been quoted
here for the sake of an example. The preference of this agreement comes because it is one of the most stable
agreements around the armpit of Africa.
103
ARKES Hadley, Beyond the Constitution, Princeton University Press, New Jersey 1986, p278.

43
therefore, it is important to put the good of the human being as a person before the good of the
State.104 It is important to remember that those involved in the signing of the agreements are
individual persons, and those who would be implicated by the agreements are persons. In this
way, the agreements would take a form that gives the concerned parties real assent to the statutes
of the agreement.
A practical example is the concept of impunity. The amended Set of Principles for the
Protection and Promotion of Human Rights Through Action to Combat Impunity, which was
handed to the United Nations Commission on Human Rights on 8th February 2005 avers the
definition of impunity as “the impossibility, de jure or de facto, of bringing the perpetrator of
violations to account – whether in criminal, civil, administrative or disciplinary proceedings –
since they are not subject to any inquiry that might lead to their being accused, arrested, tried
and, if found guilty, sentenced to appropriate penalties, and to making reparations to their
victims.”105
The First Principle to this above immediately mentioned document postulates that “impunity
arises from a failure by States to meet their obligations to investigate violations; …to ensure the
inalienable right to know the truth about violations; and to take other necessary steps to prevent a
recurrence of violations.”106 What is striking here is the last part of the quote; that is “…to take
other necessary steps to prevent a recurrence of violations.” This implies that, if the pursuing of
leaders of armed groups who are guilty of war crimes or crimes against humanity would lead to
further Human Rights violations, it would be a wiser option on a wager argument, to let such
persons have the feeling that their security would be guaranteed even after peace is established.
This would be sacrificing the application of the law on a few for the good of the many. If the
application of the letter of the law would lead to further abuse on Human Dignity, it is important
to remember that the law is meant to serve the good of man, (i.e. his dignity) and not the other
way round. Stedman explains that “our attempts to assess the intent and motivation of parties
during peace implementation must rest on intelligence, not indicators,” and that motives for
noncompliance should be assessed “through intelligence, informants, surveillance, and reading

104
See, ROEDER Philip – ROTHCHILD Donald (eds.), Sustainable Peace. Power and Democracy
after Civil war, Cornell University Press, New York 2005, p12.
105
See, Principles for the Protection and Promotion of Human Rights Through Action to Combat Impunity,
December 2009, Definitions.
106
See, Principles for the Protection and Promotion of Human Rights Through Action to Combat Impunity,
December 2009, Principle 1: General Obligations of States to Take Effective Action to Combat Impunity.

44
of documents.”107 It is important to note the insistence on the use of intelligence. Those at the
negotiating table have “a strong temptation to turn the page and to seek amnesty for themselves.”
Whether war criminals are brought to justice or not, may be less important than addressing the
issue at stake and facing the truth of what really happened in the country during the war.
Therefore, applying laws without getting into the spirit of the law would not help any society nor
would it help any peace agreement at attaining success. There is need to study the immediate
situation sedulously and apply what is known in Greek as επιεικεια (pronounced ‘Epikeia’)108.
This is a serious point worth considering especially among people who facilitate and/or
participate in the drafting and signing of peace agreements. They must keep the spirit of the law
which is to protect the dignity of the human person. This implies that any wise steps that can
immediately and permanently halt the violations of human rights are extremely urgent and need
to be taken. This can explain the consequence of the most recent failed peace agreements where
the parties involved feel insecure especially before the laws which were already put in place
assuring condemnation on their leaders and some members with respect war crimes or crimes
against humanity. This is a situation which needs the maximum degree of the wits of the pundits
involved in the drawing and implementation of peace agreements.

6. The Good of Human Dignity of Ex-Combatants and Civilians

Without prejudice to the good intentions and good reasons behind the actions of
international implementers of peace agreements, one can note also that they focus on assuring
the security of ex-combatants. Assuring the security of the population in general is usually
neglected with regards to the implementation of peace agreements.109 War and especially civil
war settlements give room for opportunities towards redesigning and reforming institutions for

107
STEDMAN Stephen John, “Introduction,” in: Stephen John Stedman / Donald Rothchild / Elizabeth Cousens
(eds.): Ending Civil Wars. The Implementation of Peace Agreements, Boulder, Col.: Lynne Rienner, 2002, p13.
108
Epikeia is a term derived from Greek, meaning “reasonableness.” It is a restrictive interpretation of positive law
based on the benign will of the legislator who would not want to bind his subjects in certain circumstances. In a
concrete situation the individual invoking a higher law acts against the letter of an imperfect positive law. This is a
virtue, which pertains to the virtue of legal justice (Summa Theologiae 2a2ae, 120.1 ad 2). Human law is imperfect
and admits of exceptions because, by its very nature, human law is based on the ordinary course of changing
circumstances (ut in pluribus). Epikeia may be used in three cases: (1) when the observance of the law would be
inhuman by reason of a higher law, epikeia is obligatory; (2) when compliance with the law demands heroism and
effort out of proportion to the purpose of the law, epikeia may be used; (3) when particular circumstances
unforeseen by the legislator would indicate that it was not his mind or intention to bind the subject, epikeia may be
used.
109
CALL Charles and STANLEY William, “A Sacrifice for Peace? Security for the General Public during
Implementation of Peace Agreements,” in Stephen John Stedman, Donald Rothchild and Elizabeth Cousens, eds.,
Ending Civil Wars: The Implementation of Peace Agreements, Lynne Rienner Publishers, Boulder 2002, p221.

45
the security of civilians. Therefore, involving the reformation of civilian security reform into
peace agreements helps those who implement them with limpid directives for assistance
programmes that have to do with the protection of the interest of the civilians.

J. PEACE THROUGH A HEALING TRANSFORMATION OF HUMAN DIGNITY

Generally, successful peace agreements are anchored on leaders honouring commitments.
In Burundi and the Democratic Republic of Congo, political leaders methodically dismantled key
elements of agreements that they saw as impediments to their pursuit of power. Even as this
happened, the regional and international partners, on their part, fell short of enforcing the
provision of the peace processes’ when they were being challenged. As a result of this, most
countries in Central Africa like Burundi, Central African Republic (CAR), and the Democratic
Republic of Congo (DRC) have fallen back to conflict even after signing a number of peace
agreements. Peace agreements, need to be explicitly bolstered and protected from anticipated
executive branch interference. This can only be done if the leaders, especially those who hold
offices in the executive branch of States understand the concept of Human Dignity and see the
fundamental importance of protecting this indelible worth of the human being. This, however,
would not be short term. Therefore, there is not much need hurrying over peace agreements.
Successful consolidation of peace agreements takes time. Early advancement does not assure a
long term success of a peace agreement.

1. Focusing on the Dignity of the Human Person in Peace Agreements

For peace agreements and negotiations to be effective, there needs to be a paradigm shift
in the understanding of peace and conflict. It is, therefore, important to take enough time to
sensitise and remind the parties involved that the agreements made, and the peace sought for, is
for the good of every man as an equal entity and not just for social groups or races. This is what
Human Dignity signifies; not dignity as a collective principle but dignity as a property
connaturally existing with every human person. What is usually and conspicuously absent from
peace negotiations is broad-based participation by those who should benefit in the first place:
citizens. More specifically, the local level of security provision and insecurity production is

46
rarely taken into account.110 This should not be the case. Much effort should be made to involve
and protect their interest when drawing peace agreements. In this way the process would be
geared towards serving the people as a whole and not just the interest of the authorities steering
the fight. This also calls to mind the concept of “Minority veto”. 111 This concept explains that
minorities in existential danger can veto important decisions leading to new negotiations on the
consensus mode. There is no wisdom in side-lining a group of people as the minority or the
insignificant because as long as they do not feel treated as human beings they would continue to
offer passive or active resistance either way of which is an obstruction to the attainment of
sustainable peace.
The paradox of inclusion is a very serious point that needs to be considered. It also flows
from the consequence of the “minority veto” concept. In many occasions in the continent of
Africa at large and the Central African Region in particular, there is the tendency of excluding
one or more rebel groups in the drawing or establishment of peace agreements especially when
there is the topic of power sharing on the table. Their participation could give them a sense of
belonging and also give them value as humans who have a dignity and a rational capacity to
contribute to the building of sustainable peace. This has been evident in Burundi and the
Democratic Republic of Congo where moderate civilian parties are more easily excluded from
negotiations and seldom are given international recognition.112
Taking from Chester A. Crocker, Chairman, Board of Directors of the US Institute of
Peace, it is noted that people fallibly have the impression that after a victory in combat, or a
negotiated settlement, life gets back to normal. On the contrary it has been discovered by
Crocker, that effective implementation of an agreement is a fundamental aspect of every peace
settlement process.113 This is worthy of note as “negotiating a second peace agreement after one
has failed is often more costly in time, money and lives.” The cases of the peace accords of
Angola and Rwanda are good examples, where-by to a huge degree, more people died after the

110
PARIS Roland, At War’s End. Building Peace after Civil Conflict, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2004,
p12.
111
LIJPHART Arend, Democracy in Plural Societies. A Comparative Exploration, Yale University Press, New
Haven CT 1977, p22.
112
TULL Denis - MEHLER Andreas, “The hidden costs of power-sharing: Reproducing insurgent violence in
Africa,” in African Affairs, 2005, pp375-398.
113
See, “Commentary: Why Peace Agreements Succeed or Fail: Four Views,” in Peace Research, Vol. 29, n. 3,
1997, pp. 40-42, www.jstor.org/stable/23607571, 26th March 2020.

47
peace accords where arrived at than they had died before. This calls for more urgency with
respect to implementing peace agreements, rather than to mediation itself.
Because the concept of the dignity of the human person is not properly understood and
considered by most parties at negotiation tables, the “brutally depressing fact is that, for most of
the parties in most of these conflicts, war is a safer bet than peace.” 114 These people see the
option of peace as a leap into the unknown. This has to do with bargaining concessions, mutual
promise-making which is not guaranteed, which would surely lead to a loss in power and control.
Very few persons would like to undergo such a switch from maximum security to maximum
vulnerability. This explains why peace agreements must not be vague, because, if they are vague
then their implementation would not be effective. Going beyond the temporal scope of this work,
for the sake of necessity, an example of such agreements that are vague in the Central Africa
Region is that of the 1991 Angolan agreement which was brokered by the United States, Russia
and Portugal without the involvement of the United Nations. After the agreement was arrived at,
the United Nations was expected to enforce it. The negotiation made choice of the “winner-take-
all” system of election and when UNITA realised that it had lost the elections with 40 percent, it
went back to war. This is because the brokers of the agreement did not understand that the
mentalities of the parties involved was not centred around the good of the human person nor the
good of the people in their State, but was centred on the control of the government; this is the
case in most Central Africa Countries. This left Angola with an estimated 300,000 deaths in the
year following the election. There is a call here for consistency by those international actors who
come in to assist in conflict resolution. They should not expect that after bringing warring parties
to the table, they would become boy scouts. This people have foot soldiers who, after civil wars,
become a problem if agreements are not quickly implemented and if their resettlement is not
properly envisaged. This is because these are men and women who have been “living off the
land and killing to survive.” They need proper care to re-orientate their mentality and to make
sure that they have a good standard of living to turn to. It must always be known and understood
that solutions to internal conflicts greatly depend on the conflicting parties themselves. This
explains why those who would be involved in implementing the peace agreements need to be
made participants throughout the process of negotiations. So that they too can get involved in the

114
Quoting James Schear, deputy assistant secretary of defense for peace keeping and humanitarian affairs at the
Stanford University.

48
spirit of reconciliation and not just be cogs carrying out instructions laid down by some other
committee.
In this light, great supplication needs to be made to International Financial Organisations
such as the International Monetary Fund and World Bank which would assist greatly in the
implementation of peace agreements. These financial organisations would go a long way to
assure the sponsoring of programs and projects which can re-integrate ex-combatants and also
involve the civil population in the development of the country.

2. Peace Agreements and Business

Business115 provisions or economic interests usually infiltrates peace agreements either
directly or indirectly. These have both positive and negative consequences especially as post-
conflict reconstruction is concerned. It rather becomes a challenge when these business or
economic concerns come as priority over the good of the persons that live in the society. Peace
agreements can refer to the roles that businesses can play in peacebuilding or post-conflict
reconstruction efforts. The roles which these businesses play can range from providing
opportunities of employment and boosting the growth of an economy. This can also go as far as
reintegrating ex-combatants into the society. This goes both ways. Peace agreements can also
take into consideration the commitment to a reformation of the whole environment of business.
This would further assist in re-establishing a setup for better business development, investment
and entrepreneurship. Furthermore, Business Environment Reform (BER),116 do help in many
situations to address vital points, which may have been ignored in the past and which did
contribute to or played a great influence in the igniting of conflict. 117 This is very evident in the
DRC where mineral exploitation is one of the main economic activity. Reforms on how this
activity can be carried out for the good of the nation, would be a very vital aspect of a peace

115
Business refers to a diffuse collection of actors: business associations, multinational enterprises, small and
medium-sized firms and individual entrepreneurs. These actors may operate in the formal or informal sector, range
across agriculture, industry and services, and trade mostly domestically or operate across national borders. While all
businesses are interested in profits, the profit orientation may be primary or, particularly in the case of social
businesses, secondary.
116
The Donor Committee for Enterprise Development (DCED, 2008: 2), a membership group of donors and
intergovernmental agencies focused on private sector development, defines the Business Environment as a ‘complex
of policy, legal, institutional, and regulatory conditions that govern business activities’.
117
See, MOLLOY Sean, Business and Peace Agreements, Political Settlements Research Programme (PSRP)
Global Justice Academy School of Law Old College, The University of Edinburgh, South Bridge Edinburgh EH8
9YL, www.peaceagreements.org, 28th March 2020.

49
agreement which would go a long way to resolve conflict in the DRC. Peace agreements will
also often provide for forms of political and territorial power-sharing which work to assign
capacity over the business environment to different national and sub-national actors. Business
provisions form both an intrinsic part of negotiated settlements positively as well as they also
form great risks in the drawing of peace settlements. In Burundi, the key peace agreement
stresses the salience of businesses in creating new jobs and reducing the burden and pressures on
the public sector (Arusha Peace and Reconciliation Agreement for Burundi, 28 August 2000,
21).
Considering the former influence of business provisions, which is positive, the following
can be noted:
 By seeking to include businesses in post-conflict peacebuilding efforts, the
contributions that businesses can make to peace can be harnessed, while at the
same time limiting the potential for businesses to act as spoilers.
 Provisions addressing the business environment can provide the foundations for
future business activity while seeking simultaneously to address past injustices
and exclusion from participating in economic activity.
 Peace agreement provisions can reference the positive roles that businesses might
play during peace processes and in the aftermath of conflict. These include
contributions that arise as consequences of normal business activity, such as
providing jobs, generating economic growth and facilitating development, as well
as more direct peacebuilding roles. The latter group of contributions can include
the role of businesses in supporting efforts to reintegrate former combatants and
assisting in the implementation of peace accords.
On the other hand, there are also risks involved, with putting business provisions at the
forefront of peace agreements:
 Businesses can undermine peacebuilding processes by pursuing self-serving
objectives or forming collusive relationships with political elites who lack
commitment to the public good.
 Addressing business environment reform carries risks, particularly when reforms
seek to formalise the business environment too early or undermine otherwise

50
 productive informal economies. These risks include perpetuating exclusions and
inequalities related to the conflict.
 Designating responsibilities and ownership for business environment reform can
influence important aspects of any negotiated settlement, which involves
transferring power from one group to another.

In line with this relationship between business provisions and peace agreements, certain
recommendations can be arrived at. These would go a long way to bring a balance between
business interests in the establishment of peace agreements and the common good of the citizens
found in the States in the Central Africa Region.
 Peace agreements as they stand are an opening for ensuring that those who are actors in
business affairs are also part in the peace process as capable peacebuilders. Great care
and attention must be taken because business has a very high capacity with respect to
trivialising peacebuilding efforts through ties with political elites, thus putting business
agendas as priority over the greater interest of the dignity of the persons who inhabit a
particular State in question. This is a very vital aspect in peace negotiation. As long as the
dignity of the persons who live in a society is not respected, there can never be
sustainable peace.
 Secondly, BER usually plays a wider part in reform agendas. Taking conflict analysis
into consideration, one can be helped by being informed on how to address what business
environment-related issues can be addressed. If this is not properly handled, the business
environment reform agenda can rather be conflict-promoting. This is so, given that
bringing reform to an environment of business is a part of a delicate process of post-
conflict economic reconstruction. This has to do with complex relations among business
organs, elites and the society. Therefore, “the relationship of business to conflict and
peacebuilding should be part of conflict analysis in any attempts to support peace
agreement negotiation and implementation.”
 Thirdly, it can be considered imperative that actors in the business milieu be included in
the negotiation stage of peace processes. This is a practice which should be greatly
encouraged. In this way, the agreement would not just be an agreement which is piloted
by elites for elites. The agreement needs to be holistic in its content and objective.

51
  Fourthly, given the importance of the task of negotiating and implementing peace
agreements, it is important that proper reference be sought before implicating business
actors in the peace process. It is highly also dependent on the relationship which is
established either in the past, present or in potency between “the political, economic and
territorial power-sharing, and on issues of capacity, ownership and responsibility for
business environment processes at different national and sub-national levels.”

Reforming the business environment is also a concern and commitment of relevant peace
agreement especially in the Central Africa Region where the mining of minerals is considered of
much value. This can therefore, aim at changing the circumstances in which business actors
operate, seek to invest in or establish a business. 118 Privatisation, liberalisation of trade and
reforms of macroeconomic concerns, which go to improve the rule of law and protect the right to
property are not trivial nor can be over looked among the part which can be played by business
in the framework of peace agreements. This is because it goes a long way to protect Human
Rights and therefore, the dignity of the human person, which is also the source and summit of all
efforts of human rights law.
The Democratic Republic of Congo and Angola can be considered as case studies in this
regard to show how the relationship between business and peace agreements can be very vital to
the protection of the dignity of the human person.
a) Democratic Republic of Congo
Natural resources played a very big role in the armed conflict in the DRC; but,
unfortunately the peace agreements which have been drawn in DRC have made little reference to
the management of these natural resources. The focus of the Lusaka Agreement of 10 July 1999,
the Agreements between the Government of the DRC and Rwanda of 30 July 2002 and Uganda
of
6 September 2002, and the Global and Inclusive Agreement on the Transition in
the Democratic Republic of Congo of 17 December 2002, is rather on issues of a military and
political nature. Economic issues only appear timidly or in other words vaguely. This was not
because the economic issues were irrelevant; rather, it was because the belligerents and their
patrons abroad had their hidden economic agendas. They were avoiding exposure and so decided
118
See, WHITE Simon, and FORTUNE Peter, Business Environment Reform and Investment Promotion and
Facilitation: Rapid Evidence Assessment, Coffey International Development, London 2015, p4.

52
not to openly acknowledge the economic dimension of the violent conflict in the DRC. The
findings of the United Nations Expert Panel Report which dealt on the Illegal Exploitation of
Natural Resources (April 2001) and its Addendum (November 2001) helped in bringing out the
economic phase of the conflict in the DRC. “The Inter-Congolese Dialogue (ICD), for example,
made reference to reviewing the contracts signed during the armed conflict, an inventory of
destructive acts committed during the wars, an evaluation of the cost of the wars, economic
reconstruction and the return of stolen property.119
The parties concerned had the impression that power-sharing was going to solve all the
problems including the rational regulation of the control of resources. This presumption was of
no good consequence to the DRC. Spoilers were not included in the ICD and these spoilers
trivialised the implementation of economic provisions. Unfortunately, the peace agreements did
not in any significant way change the array of resource exploitation. Tackling economic interests
directly would have made some parties back out given that their intentions would have been
exposed.120 Despite the fact that economic interests of concerned parties at the negotiation was
avoided, it has been integrated into the peace process and it is a virtual hidden script. 121 The
parties involved saw that political settlements had an economic value and as such they could
receive additional opportunities through access to State offices and State resources and at the
same time keeping control over natural resource areas and their benefits.122

b) Angola
In Angola, there is a similar situation, the UNITA has had as its major source of
financing, the mining and sales of diamonds. This was greatly snubbed by the Lusaka Protocol
which was arrived at on 20th November 1994. Rather a power-sharing dimension was taken given
UNITA administrative control over the Ministry of Mines and Geology implying that it had
control over Angola’s diamond mines. This was as a result that it was not seen as realistic that
UNITA would withdraw from diamond mines and touching such a topic would have threatened
the peace negotiation. In this light, while UNITA was left to control the diamond mines, the
119
GRIGNON François, “Economic Agendas in the Congolese Peace Process” in Michael Nest (ed.), The
Democratic Republic of Congo: Economic Dimensions of War and Peace, Lynne Rienner Publishers, Boulder 2006,
p. 69, 72-75.
120
See, Ibidem, 74-75, 77, 92.
121
Ibidem, pp. 65.
122
See, NEST Michael, “The Political Economy of the Congo War,” in NEST, The Democratic Republic of Congo,
p. 55.

53
other party was left to control the oil depots. 123 These resources were respectively expected to
help the various parties to finance their participation in the political life of the State especially as
the democratisation of the State was envisaged.
Looking at the Lusaka Protocol, it was the responsibility of the MPLA and the UNITA
(at the same time parties to the agreement) to implement the protocol. These two parties have
had a history of antipathy which already affected their dispositions towards trusting each other.
They each saw the protocol as a military strategy to out-power the other. 124 UNITA saw that the
government was trying to seize control over the whole state and outcast her. As such it was
clearly expressed in the words of Jonas Savimbi, “You cannot ask for everything; Let us have
your army! Here, have it. Let us have your weapons! Here, have them. Let us have your money!
Oh come on, get real! Nobody will accept that.”125
Savimbi seemed to be prophetic as the Lusaka peace process ended with MPLA attacking
UNITA’s diamond mines in Lunada Norte province in 1998. The ensuring renewal of armed
conflict showed that both parties had used their respective control over oil and diamonds to
invest in military power instead of building democratic credentials.
Clearly, it can be seen that the interest in the people of Angola (and also in the DRC) as
seen above as persons with an inherent dignity and with a right to peace was not the concern of
the peace process. The concept of Human Dignity was not the concern of the parties. They had
their various selfish interests as the chief concern. This explains why they could not easily have a
common denominator. Peace agreements which do not have the aim of serving humanity, which
do not have the interest of the dignity of the people who would be affected by its implementation
can hardly be sustainable. Nelson Mandela says that “No power on this earth can destroy the
thirst for human dignity.”126

123
VINES Alex, “Angola: Forty Years of War,” in BATCHELOR Peter and KLINGMA Kees (eds.),
Demilitarisation and Peacebuilding in Southern Africa – Volume II, Ashgate Publishing Ltd., Aldershot 2004, p. 89-
90.
124
CILLIERS Jackie, “Beyond the Stalemate?” in CILLIERS Jackie and DIETRICH Christian (eds.), Angola’s War
Economy: The Role of Oil and Diamonds, Institute for Security Studies, Pretoria 2000, pp. 350-351.
125
See, GREENHILL Kelly, and MAJOR Solomon, “The Perils of Profiling: Civil War Spoilers and the Collapse of
Intrastate Peace Accords,” in International Security, Vol. 31, n 3, MIT Press, Cambridge 2007, p 21.
126
See, Statement by Nelson Mandela on the Bisho Massacre, 8 th September 1992,
www.mandela.gov.za/mandela_speeches/1992/920908_bisho.htm.

54
 3. Peace Agreements and Power Sharing
It is uncommon to find peace agreements void of top politicians and/or military officials,
who play a great part in negotiating, signing or benefiting from a peace process. Typically, it is
common to find the absence of those who in the first place experience the most basic
consequences of the agreements made. These are not just the citizens but the common people.
The term common people is of preference to citizens, because, even those who are of the higher
echelon of the State are also citizens. These people are extremely vulnerable to the consequences
of a poor level of security provisions and insecurity. Outside negotiators usually have the
impression that power sharing is of a positive value to peace agreements, but in a more extensive
note it is not always exactly the case as it presents itself. 127 Taking a closer look at the approach
of power sharing, it becomes more evident that it cannot give durable solutions to relevant
aspects of complex cases of conflict; especially conflict that goes beyond a confined elite focus.
The envisaged positive effects can only be arrived at after intense debates and arrangements for
transitional power-sharing which involves scrupulously taking into account the good of the
common person.
Some scholars believe that the more power-sharing is built into a peace agreement, the
less international commitment is needed to guarantee it. This implies that the peace would be
sustainable and can last without external influence. 128 Despite the promising impression this
gives, it is important to ask the question as to “what power-sharing means?” and “who are the
parties involved in the power-sharing?” Responding to this questions in an objective way would
help to provoke an awareness against the limiting of power-sharing to only a few areas of
governance. Power sharing may not always be reduced to the government and a pocket of rebel
groups, or radical movements while ignoring other civilian opposition parties. It is also important
to know that power sharing takes several dimensions that is: the political dimension (for
example, in the transition phase on the 19th April 2002 at Sun City, Kabila remained President of
the Republic; Bemba (MLC) became Prime Minister; president of National Assembly goes to
RDC; and president of the Senate to the unarmed opposition), territorial dimension;
federalism/decentralisation (for example with respect to Burundi, on 8th October 2003 at Pretoria,
at the Provincial level: CNDD-FDD got three governors’ positions plus five advisers, and at the
127
JARSTAD Anna, ‘Power sharing for peace and democracy?’ in Paper presented at the 47th annual meeting of the
International Studies Association, San Diego, 22–25 March 2006, p. 9.
128
WALTER Barbara, ‘The Critical Barrier to Civil War’, in International Organization, Vol. 51, Issue 3,
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1997, pp. 335–64.

55
Local level: CNDD-FDD got 30 administrators), military dimension (for example in Angola on
4th April 2002 at Luanda, there was the Integration of UNITA officers and soldiers into the
national army; the rest to be demobilized) , and the economic dimension of power sharing (for
example, in Burundi, CNDD-FDD headed 20% of public enterprises).
It is noted by some scholars in the field of conflict resolution that power sharing
especially in the military dimension and economic dimension, gives a sense of security to ex-
combatants who are looking forward to working alongside their adversaries after severe
combat.129 Unfortunately this is a hypothesis which cannot be taken for absolute validity unless
the parties concerned at the conflict are all encountered and consulted about the subject of power
sharing. This is because the parties could either be limited, greedy or total spoilers to peace
130
agreements and this would influence their approach to power sharing. Not all parties are
always interested in power sharing. In this case, it is always important to do inquiries before as to
the interests of the parties. Most often, it is difficult to make the parties see a common factor or
interest that can unite them. This explains why, in every peace agreement, it is essential to put
the idea of serving the dignity of the human person at the forefront. Once it begins from material
interest, there is a higher chance of disagreement or selfish gain. The parties must be brought to
understand that the massacre and other forms of human rights abuse is monstrous and needs to be
halted immediately. Otherwise, even all the positive consequences of power sharing if there are
any serious ones would be ephemeral.
Agreeing with Tull and Mehler, there is the argument that just engaging in implementing
the practice of power sharing for the sake of peace without a proper critique, thus, giving rebel
groups a share of power in a state, would lead to a negative example especially across the Central
Africa Region. This would serve as motivation to ambitious leaders that they can take upon the
insurrectionary paths towards achieving and yielding power in their various States. This would
most evidently, and despite how much power sharing agreements are effective, bring States back
into violent conflict.131 The point here is not to encourage the side-lining of rebel groups in peace
agreements, but to show that, in most cases, civilian opposition groups that complained during
129
HODDIE Matthew and HARTZELL Caroline, “Power sharing in peace settlements: initiating the transition from
Civil War” in Philip G. Roeder and Donald Rothchild (eds), Sustainable Peace: Power and Democracy after Civil
War, Cornell University Press, New York 2005, p. 103.
130
See, GREENHILL Kelly and MAJOR Solomon, “The Perils of Profiling Civil War Spoilers and the Collapse of
Intrastate Peace Accords,” in International Security, Vol. 31, n. 3, The MIT Press, Winter 2006/2007, pp. 7-40.
131
TULL Denis and MEHLER Andreas, “The Hidden Costs of Power Sharing: Reproducing Insurgent Violence in
Africa,” in African Affairs, Vol. 104, Issue 416, Oxford University Press, Oxford 2005, p. 375.

56
peacetime are ignored, giving preference only to rebel groups which may be more of spoilers
resulting in the privation of a more constructive force in peace negotiations.
In the negotiating of peace processes it is important to know or to assume that most
leaders who are self-declared (as compared to constitutional leaders) and those who represent
neglected groups usually lack genuine concern in the interest of anything that is not directed to
their selfish aims. They are not actually in the interest of the people they are supposed to
represent. “Implicitly, they are also perceived as representatives of ethnic groups, while those
rarely form an undisputed entity. The outer limits of these groups are in fact frequently disputed
and the internal homogeneity is a fiction.”132 They are simply politico-military entrepreneurs.
Most peace agreements in the Central Africa Region are signed between the government
and some individual rebel groups. Civilian parties are usually snubbed. Following from this,
most civilian representatives are not part of the power sharing formula as they are non-
signatories. Here we find a government stuffed with an overrepresentation of warring parties.
Even if coordinating offices are given to civilian parties there is a great challenge for the office
to pursue any independent policies. In DRC, CAR and Chad, civilian political parties have
suffered a setback not only because of war, but also because of the way peace was negotiated
from outside and above.
It must be noted that, power sharing agreements offer no miraculous solutions to
complex crisis situations. The situations must be tackled from the base. Power sharing is most
often focused around the belligerent parties and ignores the people who are at the base of the
State echelon. These same people are the ones who contribute greatly to the stability of the State.
Therefore, the entire discussion about power sharing and sustainable peace looks inherently
flawed when it does not focus on what peace is all about; security for the people.

CONCLUSION
Human Dignity and Peace Agreements are like two wings which need to be spread at the
same time to keep a bird flying; one cannot go without the other. Following from the
development of the second part of this work, this is made more evident. The peace process is not
just a momentary activity. It is rather a sequence of events that take time to actualise. This has
been shown above from the cease fire agreements which begin the pre-negotiation agreements
132
MEHLER Andreas, “Peace and Power Sharing in Africa: A Not So Obvious Relationship,” in African Affairs,
Volume 108, Issue 432, Oxford University Press, Oxford 2009, p456.

57
across comprehensive or framework agreements and up to implementation agreements. Every
step in this process involves human beings of different political and economic interest of
different levels. It would be consistently difficult to get all these people to work together for a
common objective if they do not have a common foundation, if they do not see the interest of all
(themselves actively included) in the dictates and unfolding of the peace agreement.
This explains why every peace agreement must be based, first of all on the concept of
Human Dignity. The protection of the dignity of the human person must be at the centre and
must be the spirit governing every step. When this is the case, even when challenges arise,
foreign actors can easily see themselves identifying with the difficulties of the State in question.
When the interest is economic or political (two principles that interconnect), then foreign actors
that come into play come to take their own share of the booty. There is no great point trying to
outsmart each other in drawing peace agreements, it is not a time for simple business deals.
Therefore, there is a need for a healing transformation of the mind-set of the parties involved in
conflicts in the Central Africa Region. They have to come together to realise that they are one
people with one objective. In a letter to his wife from the Thysville Prison, Congo, titled My
Country, Patrice Lumumba writes, “without dignity there is no liberty, without justice there is no
dignity, and without independence there are no free men” for African unity and solidarity are no
longer dreams; they must be expressed in decisions.” 133 It would be a perpetual danger to the
people of the Central Africa Region to keep putting minerals or power at the forefront of their
ambitions instead of their common interest. This would give way to post-colonial interest which
would hardly render any peace agreement successful. Power and Business would not serve as the
right foundations for peace agreements. Rather the protection of the dignity of the people must
be the starting point which would also lead to safeguarding their Human Rights, and, hence there
would be peace within and without.

133
LUMUMBA Patrice, Speech at the Opening of the All-African Conference in Leopoldville, 25th August 1960.

58
GENERAL CONCLUSION

59
 GENERAL CONCLUSION
Of all the peace agreements that have been registered in the world by the United Nations
Peace Agreement Data base, over 42 per-cent is related to Africa. Unfortunately, most of them
have failed to stand as a base for sustainable peace. The Central Africa Region is no exception.
Peace agreements, upon peace agreements of all stages have been drawn up. Unfortunately, their
effectiveness have been rather minimal. This, therefore, calls for research as to why the failures
have been recorded and why Central Africa countries fall into the conflict trap, where societies
that have suffered civil war later relapse into violence. At the foundation of this challenge is the
fact that, peace negotiations can falter if parties feel coerced into accepting an outcome. Also,
agreements may collapse if the parties involved do not implement them in good faith. 134 The key
word is “good faith.” Good faith has a lot to do with how successful a peace agreement would
be. If parties do not come in good faith but with selfish ambitions, then there is already a
weakness in any peace process they are embarking on. If the peace agreement does not deal with
the betterment of the modus vivendi of the society, that is also taking into account “positive
peace,” then it would be difficult to draw up and implement peace agreements that will not
continue to fail to end suffering and prevent future conflict.135
Therefore, there has to be what is called a “paradigm shift” in the way peace agreements
are approached in the Central Africa Region in particular and Africa in general. Quoting PLO
Lumumba, in his address to students at the Maseno University in 2002, “we are the third world
not because the sun rises on the West and sets in the East but because we have engaged the
reverse gear and we are moving with jet-like speed in the wrong direction – we must change this
by rolling up our sleeves and working for the growth of our country.” 136 Peace agreements should
not seek simply to prevent visible combat but to bring tranquillity to the hearts of the parties
concerned. For as long as there is anxiety in the hearts of the people, there would always be the
tendency to fight. Rather than the absence of conflict, peace needs to be understood as a
combination of factors,
such as economic opportunity, access to justice and the degree of gender equality. Similarly,
134
ADETULA Victor - MURITHI Tim - BUCHANAN Clarke, Peace Negotiations and Agreements in Africa: Why
they fail and How to Improve them, Nordiska Afrikainstitutet/The Nordic Africa Institute, November 2018.
135
See, Ibidem.
136
LUMUMBA PLO, Address to Students, Maseno University, 2002.

60
conflict should be seen not just as open violence, but as a result of the systemic oppression
inherent in a society’s cultural, economic and political structures. This paradigm shift would
require
peace agreements to tackle the socio-economic drivers of conflict – for example, corruption,
gender inequality and the unequal distribution of resources. In summary, the target should be in
reinstating the fallen state of the Dignity of Man.
This is not a task that can be done by one State as an Island or simply by the government
of a State. It needs actors from different parts of the society national and international, the role of
the United Nations, the regional bodies, an increased role of the Civil Society, gender
considerations, the role of indigenous justice systems. It would be advantageous that the form of
justice that is demanded by peace negotiations are not dictated by external actors but are
culturally embedded so that the indigenous people can identify with it. Peace is an integral
combination of factors which make the human person whole: gender equality, economic
opportunity and access to justice. It is also important to develop and support regional conflict
resolutions early on and ensure that they have a clear mandate and the capacity to mediate
regional conflict meanwhile evaluating whether a regional organisation is, in fact, best suited to
guide peace agreements, by examining the diplomatic and political relationships among its
member States.
It is also recommended that the Region as a whole, train mediators to recognise and
navigate the interests and influence of external actors in peace negotiations and to ensure
impartiality and to avoid politicising the role of chief mediator and draw on fresh faces to lead
peace negotiations. Women have a peculiar approach to solving problems and they are no less
than men in intelligence. Therefore increasing the representation of women in peace negotiations
would help give a heart-to-heart approach to peace processes. In Africa, a woman has a
significant role; it is known that the woman has always been considered as the mother of
humanity.137 Therefore, her presence in such vital processes in Africa would help greatly to affect
the approaches taken in the drawing of peace agreements.
Conclusively, there is a serious need for the sensitisation and education of the societies of
the Central Africa Region on the concept of Human Dignity, drawing from the fundamental
indigenous traditions right up to the well-established institutions. Peace agreements cannot be
137
See, “The Historical Role of women in Africa,” in Association for Free Research and International Cooperation,
https://afric.online/7069-the-historical-role-of-women-in-africa/, 26th January 2019.

61
successful unless they are typically African in their nature and have the good of the African
people as priority. The people are men and women with equal dignity and must be protected as
such.

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

MANUALS
 AHLSTRÖM Christer and NORDQUIST Kjell-Åke, “Casualties of Conflict: Report for
the World Campaign for the Protection of Victims of War,” Department of Peace and
Conflict Research, Uppsala University, 1991.
 CLAASSEN Rutger, The Cambridge Handbook of Human Dignity. Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge 2014.
 http://www.un.org/en/sections/issues-depth/human-rights: 16 February 2019.
 JAMES NICHEL, Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy, Stanford University Press,
Stanford 2017.
 NARAGHI-ANDERLINI, Inclusive Security Sustainable Peace: A Toolkit for Advocacy
and Action: Women Waging Peace, Initiative for Inclusion, 2002.
 NDIKUMANA Léonce, United Nations University World Institute for Development
Economics Research (UNU-WIDER), Research Paper n.2005/45.
 STEDMAN Stephen John, “Introduction,” in: Stephen John Stedman / Donald Rothchild /
Elizabeth Cousens (eds.): Ending Civil Wars. The Implementation of Peace Agreements,
Boulder, Col.: Lynne Rienner, 2002.

BOOKS
 ALEXY Robert, A Theory of Constitutional Rights, Oxford University Press, Oxford 2009,
462 pages.
 ARENDT Hannah, Origins of Totalitarianism, Meridian Books, New York 1958, 384 pages.
 ARKES Hadley, Beyond the Constitution, Princeton University Press, New Jersey 1986, 288
pages.

62
 BARAK Aharon, “Human Dignity in American Constitutional Law,” in Human Dignity:
Constitutional Value and the Constitutional Right, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
2015, 400 pages.
 BARILAN Yechiel Michael, Human Dignity, Human Rights, and Responsibility: The New
Language of Global Bioethics and Biolaw, the MIT Press, Cambridge 2012, 335 pages.
 BERTRAND BADIE, La Diplomatie des Droits de L’homme, Paris: Fayard 2002, 328pages.
 BEYLEVELD Deryck and BROWNSWORD Roger, Human Dignity in Bioethics and
Biolaw, Oxford University Press, Oxford 2001, 288pages.
 BINNINGSBØ, H.M. et al., (2018). Perceptions of and Experience with the Peace Process in
Colombia, Peace Research Institute Oslo (PRIO) Paper. Oslo: PRIO.
 CALL Charles and STANLEY William, “A Sacrifice for Peace? Security for the General
Public during Implementation of Peace Agreements,” in Stephen John Stedman, Donald
Rothchild and Elizabeth Cousens, (eds.), Ending Civil Wars: The Implementation of Peace
Agreements, Lynne Rienner Publishers, Boulder 2002, 729 pages.
 CHESTERTON Gilbert Keith, Delphi Complete Works of
Chesterton,https://books.google.cm/books.about/Delphi_Complete_Works_of_G_K_Chester
ton.html?id=slUbAgAAQBAJ&redir_esc=y, 23rd April 2020, 13858 pages.
 CHRISTINE BELL, Peace Agreements and Human Rights, Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 2000, 438pages.
 CILLIERS Jackie, “Beyond the Stalemate?” in CILLIERS Jackie and DIETRICH Christian
(eds.), Angola’s War Economy: The Role of Oil and Diamonds, Institute for Security Studies,
Pretoria 2000, 370 pages.
 De WAAL A., The Real Politics of the Horn of Africa: Money, War and the Business of
Power, Polity Press, Cambridge 2015, 220 pages.
 FAGOTHEY Austin, Right and Reason, The C.V. Mosby Company, Saint Louis 1976, 627
pages.
 GEWIRTH Alan, The Community of Rights, University of Chicago Press, Chicago 1996, 380
pages.
 GRIGNON François, “Economic Agendas in the Congolese Peace Process” in Michael Nest
(ed.), The Democratic Republic of Congo: Economic Dimensions of War and Peace, Lynne
Rienner Publishers, Boulder 2006, 165 pages.
63
 HABERMAS Jürgen, “The Concept of Human Dignity and the Realistic Utopia of Human
Rights,” in The Crisis of the European Union: A Response, Polity Press, Cambridge 2012,
120 pages.
 HILARY CHARLESWORTH, The Boundaries of International Law: A Feminist Analysis,
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000, 414 pages.
 HODDIE Matthew and HARTZELL Caroline, “Power Sharing in Peace Settlements:
Initiating the Transition from Civil War” in Philip G. Roeder and Donald Rothchild (eds),
Sustainable Peace: Power and Democracy after Civil War, Cornell University Press, New
York 2005, 383 pages.
 LIJPHART Arend, Democracy in Plural Societies. A Comparative Exploration, Yale
University Press, New Haven CT 1977, 248 pages.
 MACMILLAN Margaret, Les Artisans de la Paix, Paris : John Murray, 2006, 600 pages.
 MONIQUE CHEMILLIER-GENDREAU, Humanité et souverainetés. Essai sur la
fonction du droit international, Paris: Editions de la découverte, 1995, 438 pages.
 MORSINK Johannes, The Universal Declaration of Human Rights: Origins, Drafting and
Intent, University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia 1999, 378 pages.
 NEST Michael, “The Political Economy of the Congo War,” in The Democratic Republic of
Congo: Economic Dimension of Peace, Lynne Reinner Publishers, 2006, 164 pages.
 PARIS Roland, At War’s End. Building Peace after Civil Conflict, Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge 2004, 289 pages.
 RAWLS John, A Theory of Justice, Harvard University Press, Cambridge 2009, 538 pages.
 ROEDER Philip – ROTHCHILD Donald (eds.), Sustainable Peace. Power and Democracy
after Civil war, Cornell University Press, New York 2005, 383 pages.
 ROSEN Michael, Dignity: its History and Meaning, Harvard University Press, Cambridge
2012, 175 pages.
 TASIOULAS John, ‘Human Dignity and the Foundations of Human Rights’ in C
McCrudden (ed), Understanding Human Dignity, Oxford University Press, Britain 2013, 743
pages.

64
 VINES Alex, “Angola: Forty Years of War,” in BATCHELOR Peter and KLINGMA Kees
(eds.), Demilitarisation and Peacebuilding in Southern Africa – Volume II, Ashgate
Publishing Ltd., Aldershot 2004, 150 pages.
 WALDRONE Jeremy, Philosophical Foundations of Human Rights, Oxford University
Press, Oxford 2015, 691 pages.
 WALZER Michael, Just and Unjust Wars: A Moral Argument with Historical Illustrations,
4th edition, Basic Books, New York 2006, 416 pages.
 ZARTMAN William, Escalation and Negotiation, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
2005, 330 pages.
ARTICLES
 “Commentary: Why Peace Agreements Succeed or Fail: Four Views,” in Peace Research,
Vol. 29, no. 3, 1997, www.jstor.org/stable/23607571, 26th March 2020.
 “Peace Agreements” in UN Peacemaker Databank, Policy Planning Unit, Department of
Political Affairs, United Nations, April 2006.
 “The Historical Role of women in Africa,” in Association for Free Research and
International Cooperation, https://afric.online/7069-the-historical-role-of-women-in-africa/,
26th January 2019.
 “The ICRC’s Mandate and Mission,” in International Committee of the Red Cross, Nordic
Africa Institute, November 2018.
 ALZINA DE AGUILAR Jose Pablo, Human Dignity according to International Instruments
on Human Rights, www.reei.org, Issue 22, December 2011.
 ANDERLINI Naraghi Sanam, “Peace Negotiations and Agreements,” in Inclusive Security
Sustainable Peace: A Toolkit for Advocacy and Action: Women Waging Peace, 2007.
 ARNAULT Jean, “Good agreement? Bad agreement? An implementation perspective,”
Centre of International Studies Princeton University, 11th March 2020.
 BELL Christine, “Peace Agreements: Their Nature and Legal Status,” in The American
Journal of International Law, Vol. 100, No. 2, 2006, Cambridge University Press.
 BEUZE Jean, “The Role of Human Rights in Peace Agreements” in International Council on
Human Rights, 2005.

65
 BOHLOULZADEH Ghassem, “The Nature of Peace Agreement in International Law,” in
Journal of Politics and Law; Vol. 10, No. 2; Canadian Centre of Science and Education,
2017.
 BUCHANAN Allen, “Moral Status and Human Enhancement,” in Philosophy and Public
Affairs, vol. 37, no. 4, 2009.
 BUTCHER Charity AND MAIA CARTER Hallward, “Bridging the Gap between Human
Rights and Peace: An Analysis of NGOs and the United Nations Human Rights Council,” in
International Studies Perspectives (2017) 18.
 CROSSMAN Ashley, “Understanding Secondary Data,” in ThoughtCo., in
https://www.thoughtco.com/secondary-analysis-3026573.
 DOYLE, M. W., and FORTNA Virginia Page, “Does Peacekeeping Keep Peace?
International Intervention and the Duration of Peace after Civil War,” in International
Studies Quarterly, Vol. 48, no. 2, June 2004.
 DÜWELL Marcus, ‘Human Dignity: Concepts, Discussions, Philosophical Perspectives’ in
M Düwell et al. (eds), in The Cambridge Handbook of Human Dignity: Interdisciplinary
Perspectives (CUP 2014) .
 ELSHTAIN Bethke Jean, “Democracy and Human Dignity,” in An Interdisciplinary
Journal, Vol. 87, No 1, Penn State University Press, Pennsylvania 2004.
 EVADNE Grant, “Dignity and Equality,” in Human Rights Law Review, Volume 7, Issue 2,
2007.
 FLETCHER George, “Human Dignity as a Constitutional Value,” in University of Western
Ontario Law Review, 22 (1984).
 FUKUYAMA Francis, “The Drive for Dignity,” in ForeignPolicy,
https://foreignpolicy.com/2012/01/12/the-drive-for-dignity/, 15/03/2020.
 FEARON, J.D., (1995). ‘Rationalist Explanations for War’ in International Organization,
vol. 49, no. 3.
 FINDLEY, M. G., (2013). ‘Bargaining and the Interdependent Stages of Civil War
Resolution’ in Journal of Conflict Resolution. vol. 57, no. 5.
 GLENN Bowen, “Document Analysis as a Qualitative Research Method,” in Qualitative
Research Journal, Vol. 9, no. 2, 2009.

66
 GREENHILL Kelly, and MAJOR Solomon, “The Perils of Profiling: Civil War Spoilers and
the Collapse of Intrastate Peace Accords,” in International Security, Vol. 31, No 3, MIT
Press, Cambridge 2007.
 JARSTAD Anna, ‘Power sharing for peace and democracy?’ in Paper presented at the 47th
annual meeting of the International Studies Association, San Diego, 22–25 March 2006.
 KHARAZI Kamal, “Developments of post-ware collective security system,” in Journal of
Legal Studies, 1995.
 LUMUMBA Patrice, Speech at the Opening of the All-African Conference in Leopoldville,
25th August 1960.
 LUMUMBA PLO, Address to Students, Maseno University, 2002.
 LYONS Terry, ‘Successful peace implementation: plans and processes,’ in Peacebuilding,
vol 4, no. 1, 2016.
 MARKOVIC Mihailo, “Philosophical Foundations of Human Rights,” in Praxis
International, No 4, Oxford University Press, Oxford 2015
 MAIRE DUGAN, “Towards a Definition of Peace Studies,” in Key Issues of Peace
Research, IPRA Ninth Conference, Ontario 1981.
 MCCRUDDEN Christopher, “Human Dignity and Judicial Interpretation of Human Rights,”
in The European Journal of International Law, September 2008, Firenze, v. 19, n. 4.
 MEHLER Andreas, “Peace and Power Sharing in Africa: A Not So Obvious Relationship,”
in African Affairs, Volume 108, Issue 432, Oxford University Press, Oxford 2009.
 MELTZER Henry Leslie, The Jurisprudence of Dignity, University of Pennsylvania Law
Review, [S.l.], v. 160, September 2011.
 MOKA-MUBELO Willy, “Human Rights and Human Dignity,” in Reconciling Law and
Morality in Human Rights Discourse, Vol. 3, Springer, Switzerland 2017.
 MOLLOY Sean and BELL Christine, How Peace Agreements Provide for Implementation,
in Political Settlements Research Programme (PSRP), Global Justice Academy School of
Law Old College, The University of Edinburgh, 1990-2018.
 MOLLOY Sean, Business and Peace Agreements, Political Settlements Research Programme
(PSRP) Global Justice Academy School of Law Old College, The University of Edinburgh,
South Bridge Edinburgh EH8 9YL, www.peaceagreements.org, 28th March 2020.

67
 MWEHU Germain, “Central African Republic: ICRC calls for respect for human life and
dignity,” in International Committee of the Red Cross, www.icrc.org/en/document/central-
african-republic-bangui-calls-for-respect-human-dignity-violence%3famp, 06th November
2015.
 OSLER Hampson, Nurturing Peace: Why Peace Settlements Succeed or Fail, Institute of
Peace Press, Washington DC 1996.
 Pope Francis, Message of Pope Francis for the Lenten Brotherhood Campaign in Brazil,
2014.
 RAO Neomi, “On the use and abuse of dignity in constitutional law,” in Columbia Journal
of European Law, Spring, v. 2, n. 2, 2008.
 SAMBANIS, N., (2000). ‘International Peacebuilding: A Theoretical and Quantitative
Analysis.’ American Political Science Review. vol. 94, no. 4.
 SCHACHTER Oscar, “Human Dignity as a Normative Concept,” in The American Journal
of International Law, vol. 77, no. 4, 1983.
 SCHROEDER Doris, “Human Rights and Human Dignity: An Appeal to Separate the
Conjoined Twins,” in Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, Vol. 15, No. 3, Springer, June
2012.
 SHULTZINER Doron, “Human Dignity: Functions and Meaning,” in Global Jurist Topics,
vol. 3, no. 3, 2003.
 SPELLING Iris, “Culture of Peace: The role of human dignity in the culture of peace,” in
Ashland Tidings, https://ashlandtidings.com/archive/culture-of -peace-the-role-of-human-
dignity-in-the-culture-of-peace, 9th April 2018.
 Thomas NAST, Harper’s Weekly, February 17th, 1877, Courtesy of Library of Congress.
 TULL Denis and MEHLER Andreas, “The hidden costs of power sharing: reproducing
insurgent violence in Africa,” in African Affairs, Volume 104, Issue 416, Oxford University
Press, Oxford 2005.
 UN News, https://news.un.org/en/story/2014/09/476992-peace-means-dignity-well-being-all-
not-just-absence-war-un-officials, 9th September 2014.
 VALENTINI Laura, “Dignity and Human Rights: a Reconceptualisation,” in Oxford Journal
of Legal Studies, Vol. 37, No. 4 (2017).

68
 WALDRON Jeremy, “Dignity and Rank,” in Archives Européenes de Sociologie, vol.
XLVIII, no.2, 2007.
 WALLENSTEEN Peter - SOLLENBERG Margareta, “Armed Conflicts, Conflict
Termination and Peace Agreements,” in Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute
Oslo, vol. 34(3).
 WALTER Barbara, ‘The critical barrier to civil war’, in International Organization, Volume
51, Issue 3, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1997.
 WHITE Simon, and FORTUNE Peter, Business Environment Reform and Investment
Promotion and Facilitation: Rapid Evidence Assessment, Coffey International Development,
London 2015.
 YAWANARAJAH Nita – OUELLET Julian, “What are Peace Agreements?” in Beyond
Intractability, https://www.beyondintractability.org, 10th March 2020.
 YAWANARAJAH Nita and OUELLET Julian, “Peace Agreements,” in Beyond
Intractability. Eds. Guy Burgess and Heidi Burgess, Conflict Information Consortium,
University of Colorado, Boulder. Posted: September 2003
http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/structuring-peace-agree, 11/03/2020.
 YAWANARAJAH Nita, “Components of Peace Agreements,” in ADR Times,
https://www.adrtimes.com/library/components-of-peace-agreements, 14th March 2020.

LEGAL DOCUMENTS
 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948.
 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1988.
 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 1988.
 African Charter on Human and People’s Rights, 1981.
 Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine, 1997.
 Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women, 1979.
 Convention on the Rights of the Child.
 Charter of the United Nations, 1945.

69
 Geneva Conventions, 1949.
 The Constitution of Central African Republic’s, 2004 with Amendments through 2010.
 The Constitution of the Republic of Chad 1996 (rev. 2005).
 The Constitution of the Republic of Burundi, 2018.
 The Constitution of the DRC, 2005.
 The Constitution of the Republic of Congo (2015).
 The Constitution of the Republic of Cameroon (2008).
 UN Declaration and Programme of Action on Culture of Peace, 1999.
 Principles for the Protection and Promotion of Human Rights through Action to Combat
Impunity, December 2009.

70
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
NOTICE............................................................................................................................................i

DEDICATION................................................................................................................................ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS...........................................................................................................iii

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS.......................................................................................iv

ABSTRACT....................................................................................................................................v

RESUME........................................................................................................................................vi

SUMMARY..................................................................................................................................vii

General Introduction........................................................................................................................1

1. Background to the Study.........................................................................................................2

2. Context of the Study................................................................................................................3

3. Scope of Study.........................................................................................................................4

A. Geographical Scope..........................................................................................................4

B. Temporal Scope................................................................................................................5

C. Substantive Scope.............................................................................................................5

4. Definition of Concepts.............................................................................................................5

A. Human Dignity..................................................................................................................5

B. Peace Agreements.............................................................................................................6

5. Significance of The Study.......................................................................................................7

A. Scientific Interest..............................................................................................................7

B. Social Interest....................................................................................................................8

6. Literature Review....................................................................................................................8

7. Statement of the Problem.......................................................................................................11

8. Hypothesis.............................................................................................................................11

9. Methodological Framework...................................................................................................12
 A. Method of Analysis: The Legal Method.........................................................................12

B. Research Technique........................................................................................................13

10. Plan.....................................................................................................................................14

PART I: THE LEGAL, POLICY, PHILOSOPHICAL AND INSTITUTIONAL

FRAMEWORKS FOR THE PROTECTION OF HUMAN DIGNITY IN PEACE
AGREEMENTS............................................................................................................................15

Introduction................................................................................................................................16

Chapter 1: An Understanding of the Concept of “Human Dignity” in Legal Instruments............17

A. The Philosophical Understanding of “Human Dignity”.................................................17

1. Polemics in Understanding the Concept of Human Dignity.......................................17

2. Dignity as a Moral Status............................................................................................17

3. Dignity as an Inherent Worth of the Human Being.....................................................18

B. The Use of “Human Dignity” in Legal Instruments.......................................................19

1. The UN Charter and Universal Declaration of Human Rights...................................19

2. The ICCPR and ICESCR............................................................................................20

3. Constitutions and Conventions and other Treaties......................................................21

Chapter 2: The Relationship between Human Dignity and Human Rights...................................24

A. Human Dignity as the Foundation of Human Rights......................................................24

1. Human Dignity and other Alternatives as Foundations to Human Rights..................24

2. Human Dignity as a Pivot...........................................................................................25

3. Human Dignity and Human Rights as Interdependent................................................25

B. Human Dignity as the Goal of Human Rights................................................................27

1. Human Dignity goes beyond just a Formula...............................................................27

2. Human Dignity at the Centre of the Bill of Rights......................................................27

3. Human Dignity as the Goal of Peace Agreements......................................................29

Conclusion.................................................................................................................................30
ii
PART II: A CRITICAL EVALUATION OF THE PLACE OF HUMAN DIGNITY IN PEACE
AGREEMENTS............................................................................................................................31

Introduction................................................................................................................................32

Chapter 3: The Nature of Peace Agreements................................................................................33

A. Types of Peace Agreements............................................................................................34

1. Pre-negotiation Agreements........................................................................................34

2. Comprehensive or Framework Agreements................................................................36

3. Implementation Agreements.......................................................................................37

B. Components of Peace Agreements.................................................................................37

1. Procedural Components of Peace Agreements...........................................................37

2. Substantive Components of Peace Agreements..........................................................38

3. Institutional Components of Peace Agreements.........................................................38

Chapter 4: Protection of Human Dignity in Peace Agreements....................................................41

A. Negotiating Justice: Human Dignity and Peace Agreements.........................................41

1. Complementarity and Tensions...................................................................................41

2. Spirit of the Law versus the Letter of the Law............................................................42

3. The Good of Human Dignity of Ex-Combatants and Civilians..................................45

B. Peace through a healing transformation of Human Dignity...........................................46

1. Focusing on the Dignity of the Human Person in Peace Agreements.........................46

2. Peace Agreements and Business.................................................................................49

3. Peace Agreements and Power Sharing........................................................................54

Conclusion.................................................................................................................................57

GENERAL CONCLUSION..........................................................................................................59

Selected Bibliography....................................................................................................................62

TABLE OF CONTENTS.................................................................................................................i

iii
iv