UN Security Council Membership as a Litmus Test for Slovenia’s Commitment to R2P

ABSTRACT

Slovenia, a small state, was actively involved in the formation of the Responsibility to protect (R2P) and continuously supports the principle through its own normative development (such as in the 2015 Declaration on Foreign Policy of the Republic of Slovenia and its Foreign Affairs Strategies) and by regular appointment of its R2P national focal points, which provide relevant domestic capacity to actively promote R2P’s operationalization domestically, regionally, and at the global level, most prominently within the UN. Several regional European R2P Focal Points Meetings and six biennial academic interdisciplinary conferences on R2P have been organized in Slovenia, providing opportunities to enhance its capacity to lead a well-informed active advocacy for R2P. Moreover, in July 2020 Slovenia supported the first standalone HRC Resolution on the Fifteenth anniversary of the R2P. In April 2022, Slovenia was among the 83 cosponsors of the UN General Assembly Resolution on Standing mandate for a General Assembly debate when a veto is cast in the Security Council. Now, with Slovenia’s election as a non-permanent UN Security Council member for the period 2024–25, an important opportunity has arisen to use accumulated knowledge and experience and strive for efficient operationalization of R2P, including through peace operations. The aim of this paper is to discuss Slovenia’s relationship with the R2P, including during Slovenia’s candidacy for the non-permanent seat at the UN Security Council, and to suggest possible future developments.

KEYWORDS:

• Slovenia
• R2P
• UN Security Council
• UN General Assembly
• R2P focal point

1. Introduction

In regional and multilateral settings, the Republic of Slovenia officially promotes human rights, the rule of law, and democracy.¹ Slovenia became an independent state in 1991 after the dissolution of former Yugoslavia (SFRY),² and with the departure of the last former Yugoslav soldier from its territory late that year, it assumed effective and complete responsibility for maintaining its sovereignty and independence, and for its national security.³ In the context of national defence, its constitution holds that “In the provision of security, the state proceeds principally from a policy of peace, and an ethic of peace and non-aggression.”⁴ A small state of approximately 2 million people, Slovenia joined the United Nations (UN) on May 22, 1992, and as a member it has sought to promote the vital importance of the effective functioning of the multilateral system.

Small states make up the majority of UN membership, and are among the strongest advocates for rules-based multilateralism. This is hardly surprising, as multilateral platforms give them the opportunity to play a role in global affairs that is disproportionate to their size, including as key drafters, negotiators, and thought leaders on a variety of international issues.⁵ Yet many small states face challenges in advancing their interests at the UN, due to factors such as asymmetric access to information, capacity constraints, and structural barriers to full participation.⁶ Thorhallsson argues that the difference in behaviour between the smaller and larger states can be explained by the small administrations, their characteristics, and their different range of interests, since smaller states are forced to prioritize between the sectors: they do not have enough staff, expertise, or other resources to follow all negotiations, and as a result they become reactive in many sectors.⁷ He continues, however, to argue that smaller states become proactive in their most important sectors by using special characteristics of their administrations, such as informality, flexible decision-making, officials’ greater room of manoeuvre, and giving guidelines rather than instructions to negotiators.⁸

While norm advocacy may be a potent strategy for gaining influence, particularly for small states,⁹ at this juncture and from the international law perspective I believe it is difficult to characterize R2P as a norm. It should rather be seen as a (political) principle, although underpinned by a number of legal norms (e.g., prevention and punishment of mass atrocities that trigger R2P).

During the 1990s, Slovenia was one of the countries directly exposed to a mass influx of refugees fleeing armed conflicts and being fully aware of atrocities being committed in its vicinity, its authorities promptly assisted people seeking refuge in Slovenia. It is reasonable to argue that this exposure is one reason for Slovenia selecting a focus on conflict prevention and protection of populations, in particular women and children, and becoming a strong supporter of R2P from its inception. Perplexed by atrocities committed in its vicinity on the territory of former SFRY, particularly in Srebrenica and Kosovo, Slovenia’s involvement with the issues of conflict and atrocity prevention, including in the UN fora, thus predates the 2005 UN World Summit,¹⁰ which concluded with the World Summit Outcome document (A/RES/60/1), endorsing, without a vote, the Responsibility to Protect (R2P), as encapsulated in paragraphs 138 and 139. In 2005 Roman Kirn,¹¹ at the time a Permanent Representative of Slovenia to the UN in New York, was one of the two co-facilitators¹² in the process that led to the adoption of paragraphs 138 and 139 of the World Summit Outcome document.

Slovenia has consistently devoted significant attention to preventive diplomacy and mediation, striving to make these two areas more prominent within the UN, and has been actively involved in R2P’s formation and continues to support it, both declaratively and in practice. It was among the first countries to appoint a national R2P focal point.¹³ It is a member of both the Group of Friends of the Responsibility to Protect, which operates in New York and Geneva, and the Accountability, Coherence and Transparency (ACT) Group, launched in 2013 to advocate for more accountability, coherence, and transparency in the work of the UN Security Council by urging its members not to vote against resolutions that would facilitate prompt and decisive action in cases of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. Slovenia also supports the French-Mexican proposal that permanent members of the Security Council to refrain from using the veto in cases of R2P crimes. In May 2016, Slovenia endorsed the Kigali Principles on the Protection of Civilians¹⁴ and translated the UN-published Framework of Analysis for Atrocity Crimes: A Tool for Prevention, into Slovene.¹⁵

This article presents a case study of Slovenia's promotion and implementation of the R2P, which could be of interest to anyone interested seeking to advance the principle of R2P and other countries looking at how to honour their own commitments to R2P. I do not purport to engage in comparative analysis of other small states’ normative frameworks, policies, or practices to implement R2P here, but rather to present Slovenia’s normative framework and institutional arrangements providing for relevant domestic capacity to actively participate in and/or support R2P activities at the UN level, as well as actual activities undertaken by the R2P focal points and other actors since R2P’s inception. The article points to instances where, in terms of active engagement, explicit advocacy for R2P, and concrete initiatives within the UN system, some oscillations can be detected in Slovenia’s conduct, depending on the set priorities of the political parties forming its government at different points in time, as well as geopolitical developments influencing its foreign policy. As observed above, despite Slovenia’s size and limited resources, its informality, flexible decision-making, and officials’ greater room of manoeuvre have often enabled activities that go beyond those that other R2P champions materialize on the ground, as explained further below. Finally, the article critically discusses Slovenia’s candidacy for the non-permanent seat at the UN Security Council for 2024–25 that resulted in successful election on 6 June 2023 and speculates on possible R2P activities during the two-year mandate, starting in 2024.¹⁶

2. Slovenia’s normative framework for operationalization of R2P and its domestic and international activities

The R2P principle, endorsed in 2005, is determined by four explicitly listed crimes: genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and ethnic cleansing. It is conceptualized as comprising of three interconnected pillars.¹⁷ (1) Every state has the responsibility to protect its populations from the four mass atrocity crimes; (2) the wider international community has the responsibility to encourage and assist individual states in meeting that responsibility; and (3) if a state is manifestly failing to protect its populations, the international community must be prepared to take appropriate collective action, in a timely and decisive manner and in accordance with the UN Charter.¹⁸

Although international outlawing of the four crimes—or rather the three legally defined categories of crimes, as ethnic cleansing could, legally speaking, be subsumed under any of the other three categories depending on the concrete circumstances—constitutes erga omnes obligations for states and, arguably, international organizations, the principle of R2P as such is not a legal norm, but a principle containing a mixture of moral, political, and legal elements.¹⁹ As derives from the formulation used in the Outcome document, states have agreed that they are only ‘prepared to take collective action’ when domestic authorities are manifestly failing to protect populations for R2P crimes, and they would do this ‘on a case-by-case basis’ only.²⁰ The preparatory work of the 2005 World Summit shows that it was not the intention of states to create additional legal obligations and that R2P was ‘deliberately institutionalized … as a political, rather than legal principle’.²¹

On the basis of this conceptualization of R2P, it is necessary to look at Slovenia’s operationalization of R2P within pillar one and present Slovenia’s normative framework (2.1) and institutional arrangements and activities (2.2). At the crossroads of pillar-one and pillar-two activities are Slovenia’s contributions to UN General Assembly debates, Human Right Council activities, and other multilateral initiatives (2.3), while operationalization of R2P through activities for the Slovene Armed Forces and their own activities could be perceived as pillar-one or pillar-two actions. Finally, Slovenia’s prospective contributions during its 2024–25 UN Security Council membership will contribute to either pillar-two or pillar-three actions (2.4).

2.1. Slovenia’s normative R2P framework

A state’s normative R2P framework, additionally to its international legal commitments,²² includes all relevant domestic legislation tackling R2P crimes, in addition to any policy documents and other instruments adopted to operationalize R2P. In that respect, Slovenia, a party to the Rome Statute,²³ incriminated R2P crimes in its Criminal Code.²⁴ Explicit reference to R2P is also made in the 2015 Declaration on Foreign Policy of the Republic of Slovenia²⁵ and its 2015²⁶ and 2021²⁷ Foreign Affairs Strategies.

The 2015 Declaration on foreign policy adopted by Slovenia’s National Assembly includes among its foreign policy priority areas ‘active advocacy for the rights of children, women, national minorities and the most vulnerable groups, including enforcement of the principle of responsibility to protect, strengthening intercultural dialogue and respect for diversity, facing the challenges of an aging population’ (emphasis added).

Slovenia’s 2015 Foreign Policy Strategy, entitled ‘Slovenia: Safe, Successful and Respected in the World’, which followed the adoption of the abovementioned Declaration, contains a chapter on strengthening the multilateral system and management of globalization, stating: ‘In particular, Slovenia deals with the prevention of gross human rights violations and mass atrocities. It promotes the realisation of the Responsibility to Protect and the early detection and warning of mass human rights violations, with a view to preventing future humanitarian disasters and armed conflicts’ (emphasis added).

In December 2021 the government determined the text of the renewed Strategy, which also contains the following passage: ‘It pays special attention to the prevention of gross violations of human rights and mass atrocities, and also supports the appropriate addressing of historical mass atrocities. It advocates for more effective enforcement of responsibility to protect and early detection or warning and response to mass violations of human rights in order to prevent subsequent humanitarian disasters and armed conflicts’ (emphasis added). An additional explicit reference to ‘addressing of historical mass atrocities’ reflects the then government’s focus on tackling alleged atrocities committed during the Second World War, including against collaborationists with the Nazi regime. This was more a result of internal politics rather than a change in Slovenia’s approach to R2P.

The 2021 strategy also explicitly states that Slovenia is ‘committed to fully comply with all its international commitments in the field of human rights and fundamental freedoms, and through dialogue encourages other partners in the international community to do so.’ This demonstrates its commitment to pursue operationalization of R2P with other states and international organizations, which can be observed by activities described below, and will be further relevant during Slovenia’s membership in the UNSC.

The new strategy, under preparation at the time of writing, is expected to retain an explicit reference to R2P.²⁸

2.2. The institutionalization of R2P in Slovenia and activities of Slovene R2P focal points

The Government of the Republic of Slovenia adopted a decision on the appointment of the R2P focal point in 2012, with the mandate to ‘coordinate the positions of the Republic of Slovenia on R2P and ensure that R2P is taken into account when responding to crisis hotspots in the international community’ and to ‘report on its work to the Government of the Republic of Slovenia once a year’.

All three Slovene R2P focal points appointed to date have been high-level officials of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and thus, in principle, able to create the necessary leverage for other interlocutors within the government and beyond. The first R2P focal point was appointed in 2012 (Marko Rakovec), the second in 2013 (Simona Leskovar), and the current holder in 2015 (Blanka Jamnišek). In addition to domestic activities further presented below, these R2P focal points and other representatives of Slovenia, among others, actively cooperate with the Office of the Special Adviser to the UN Secretary General on Genocide and the Special Adviser to the UN Secretary General on R2P, the Global Centre for Responsibility to Protect, and the Global Action Against Mass Atrocity Crimes.

Slovenia is an active member of the Friends of R2P (in New York and Geneva), having participated in global meetings of R2P focal points in 2012 (New York), 2013 (Accra),²⁹ 2014 (Gaborone), 2015 (Madrid), 2016 (Seoul),³⁰ 2017 (Doha),³¹ 2018 (Helsinki),³² 2019 (Brussels, EU/EEAS headquarters),³³ and 2022 (Washington).³⁴ Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, no global meeting of R2P focal points was held in 2020 or 2021.

The meeting organized by the EU in Brussels in May 2019, to which the Slovene R2P focal point contributed, discussed the effective implementation of R2P with an emphasis on implementation at the national level and in foreign policy, the functioning and possibilities of cooperation of international organizations, and the consideration of current cases. The focal points participating were presented the first Manual for R2P Focal Points, prepared by the Global Centre for R2P, and the EU Atrocity Prevention Toolkit prepared by the European External Action Service. The Manual for R2P Focal Points included an example of good practice in raising awareness of the rights of refugee children according to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, prepared by the Slovenian R2P focal point.³⁵

Slovenia’s R2P focal points also regularly promote discussions on sovereignty as responsibility, the prevention of mass atrocities, and the implementation of these principles in practice, thus raising awareness of the need for R2P implementation within governmental fora and the general public. The internal diplomatic public, namely directorates and sectors in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and diplomatic-consular missions, government departments and services, and occasionally independent bodies (e.g., Ombudsman, Defender of Equal Opportunities), are therefore regularly informed about situations in other countries, such as through sharing weekly R2P Alerts for specific situations around the world where populations are at risk and the dissemination of R2P Monitors. When new UNSC members are elected, the R2P focal point regularly provides comprehensive information on the profiles of the newly elected countries from the R2P point of view.

In the framework of foreign policy activities forming Slovenia’s positions on situations in individual countries, e.g., in the process of the UN’s Universal Periodic Review, the R2P focal point contributes the recommendations of international analysts from the Global Centre for R2P as well as concrete formulations for Slovenian positions. The R2P focal point also regularly prepares Slovenian national positions in UN discussions on R2P (such as for Arria Formula meetings and other open UNSC discussions and in the HRC), in the preparation of group statements by the EU, the Group of Friends for R2P in New York and Geneva, and messages for the R2P Steering Group. Furthermore, the highest Slovenian diplomatic and political representatives regularly point out the importance of implementing R2P in their appearances, bilateral contacts, and at multilateral meetings, especially at the UNGA and the HRC, at the initiative of the R2P focal point. During informal discussions on anniversaries of the R2P principle, Slovenia has actively participated and co-shaped the positions of regional organizations (EU) and informal groups (Group of Friends of R2P in New York and Geneva, Global Network of Contact Points, etc.), as well as providing substantive contributions to the Reports of the UN Secretary General on R2P. Slovenia’s R2P focal point has also regularly provided answers to the questionnaire of the UN General Assembly Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide.

The focal point also regularly participates as a panellist in various international events on R2P³⁶ or related topics.³⁷ The focal point has reported on many international events over the years, and these have been summarized in annual reports to the government.

When it comes to preventing the negative social processes that may lead to atrocities, it is worth mentioning long-term prevention activities, which include one of Slovenia's foreign-policy priorities: human rights education. In 2005, during its first presidency of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, and the time at which the implementation of the World Program for Human Rights Education started, Slovenia and Slovenian experts designed and offered a pilot project³⁸ and material for the education of children, titled Our Rights and based on the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.

Due to the need to respect the rights of refugee children during the mass influx of refugees in Europe in 2015/16, the R2P focal point developed a teaching sheet, drawing from the Our Rights project, on raising awareness among the majority population about the rights of refugee children; it was used for a discussion lesson in Slovenian elementary schools, reaching 40,000 students. The initiative was well-received and is said to have had many positive effects; as such it was mentioned as good practice prepared by the Slovenian R2P contact point in the global Manual for R2P Focal Points (Annex III).

The Slovenian R2P focal point also cooperates with the Auschwitz Institute for Peace and Reconciliation, renamed the Auschwitz Institute for the Prevention of Genocide and Mass Atrocities in 2019.

In March 2022, the Slovenian R2P focal point prepared a proposal with ideas for reflection for the leadership of Slovenia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, in the hopes of contributing to the implementation of R2P in the case of Russia’s aggression against Ukraine.

2.3. Slovenia’s contributions to UN General Assembly debates, HRC activities, and other multilateral initiatives

2.3.1. Ensuring R2P’s prominent place in the UNGA and HRC debates and other multilateral initiatives

In accordance with references to R2P in its core foreign policy documents, Slovenia regularly participates in the UNGA and HRC debates on R2P, either individually or through collective EU statements.

For example, during the informal debates of the opening week of UNGA73 in 2018, Slovenia actively participated in the panel and cosponsored the events related to R2P: prosecution of sexual and gender-based crimes on the 20th anniversary of the ICC (25 September), on human rights and the maintenance of international peace and security: strengthening the bridge between Geneva and New York (26 September), and on the connection between peacekeeping operations and R2P (27 September). In the debate under item 86 on the rule of law at the national and international level, Slovenia actively participated with a presentation that contained positions regarding R2P. On 11 October, the Permanent Representative of Slovenia to the UN addressed the participants of a global seminar organized by the Auschwitz Institute for Peace and Reconciliation in New York, stressing the importance of preventing mass atrocities.

As a member of the HRC from 2016–18, Slovenia drew attention to R2P, with an emphasis on the need for preventive action, in general discussions of the HRC and thematic discussions by country, particularly during Slovenia’s chairing of the HRC in 2018. Moreover, in July 2020 Slovenia supported the first standalone HRC resolution on the Fifteenth anniversary of the responsibility to protect populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity.³⁹

With the adoption of the 2021 UNGA resolution on R2P 75/277, R2P came to be positioned as a regular item on the agenda of the UNGA, which gives a mandate to the UN Secretary General to regularly report on issues of R2P. Slovenia was one of the cosponsors of the resolution proposed by the former special adviser to the UN Secretary General for R2P, Ivan Šimonović, the current Croatian permanent representative to the UN.

Slovenia was also among the 83 cosponsors of the UN General Assembly Resolution on Standing mandate for a General Assembly debate when a veto is cast in the Security Council (A/76/L.52), adopted by consensus in April 2022.

On the 15th anniversary of R2P, Slovenia’s R2P focal point proposed that the government adopt a special statement in which Slovenia would confirm its support for the implementation of R2P and the prevention of processes that can lead to atrocities under certain circumstances, but the government unfortunately did not take it into account.⁴⁰

In 2023, upon Slovenia’s adhesion to the Global Action Against Mass Atrocity Crimes as a partner, Jamnišek expressed the view that ‘The international community has to work more effectively to protect populations from mass atrocity crimes. We believe that Slovenia can contribute to atrocity prevention in this platform for dialogue and discussion by actors that are States, academic institutions and other civil society organizations.’⁴¹ This sent a clear signal that Slovenia is willing to push for more effective responses to mass atrocities; it will be interesting to observe what concrete initiatives Slovenia will propose in the years to come within this global framework.

2.3.2. Regional initiatives and cooperation with academia

Several regional European R2P Focal Points Meetings⁴² and interdisciplinary international conferences titled R2P in Theory and Practice (in 2013, 2015, 2017, 2019, 2021, and 2023)⁴³ have been organized in Slovenia by the Faculty of Law of the University of Ljubljana in cooperation with the Ministry of Foreign (now also European) Affairs, providing an opportunity for enhancing capacity to lead a well-informed active R2P advocacy in the UN fora. Each conference included participants from all continents and the UN Secretary-General Special Advisers on R2P.⁴⁴ It is also worth mentioning that the 2017 European R2P Focal Points Meeting resulted in detailed recommendations included in the ‘Chair's Statement to Orient European Action on R2P and the Prevention of Mass Atrocity Crimes’, focusing on: (1) the prevention of mass atrocities, especially in building national and regional resilience of societies; (2) situations where various risks are already present and violations of international human rights law and of international humanitarian law occurring; and (3) situations of instability or conflict.

In May 2018, when the EU, through its CONUN working group, adopted ‘Recommendations on promoting and operationalizing the Responsibility to Protect by the EU and EU Member States’ to encourage the development, adoption, and implementation of R2P, it also recommended that, as part of its operational development, the EU and member states should examine the links between R2P and the internal dimensions of EU and member state policies regarding attacks on minorities, hate speech, and incitement to hatred and discrimination against minorities, as well as in the context of policies that promote gender equality and women's empowerment. On this basis, a new R2P EU atrocity prevention toolkit (The EU R2P – Atrocity Prevention Toolkit) was prepared, taking into account the recommendations from the 2017 Ljubljana regional R2P meeting.

Additionally, numerous educational and awareness-raising activities have been carried out for various audiences in Slovenia (e.g., on international commemorative days such as Holocaust Day, Human Rights Day, and Genocide Day, on special occasions such as the Festival of Tolerance, and in other educational and public settings) with the active participation of the R2P focal point.

In 2015, Slovenia cosponsored the UN resolution on the establishment of the International Day of Commemoration and Dignity of the Victims of the Crime of Genocide and the Prevention of this Crime. As of 2015, the R2P focal point cooperates with academic institutions to organize public commemorations of this day with prominent Slovenian personalities (e.g., in 2016, with the world's oldest diplomat at the time, 102-year-old Anton Vratuša, who experienced the horrors of the concentration camps during the Second World War) and various other awareness-raising events. These are well attended, especially by younger people.

2.3.3. Fighting impunity for mass atrocity crimes

The fight against impunity for international crimes, as an important element of R2P, has been a priority for Slovenia. It has assisted in several processes to enhance the international response to mass atrocities, including through cooperation with the International Criminal Tribunal for former Yugoslavia and supporting the appointment of a Slovene judge at the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, Pavel Dolenc.⁴⁵ Slovenia also actively contributed to the adoption of the Rome Statute and is a founding member of the International Criminal Court (ICC) and a promoter of accountability for ICC crimes. The December 2023 Assembly of States Parties to the ICC Statute elected a Slovenian, Beti Hohler,⁴⁶ who became the youngest elected judge in the history of the Court.

Slovenia also co-leads the Mutual Legal Assistance (MLA) initiative, along with Argentina, Belgium, Mongolia, the Netherlands, and Senegal, for the adoption of the Convention on International Cooperation in the Investigation and Prosecution of Genocide, Crimes against Humanity, War Crimes and other International Crimes. Slovenia’s contribution in the core group of states supporting a new treaty on MLA, and its hosting of the two-week MLA diplomatic conference in May 2023—resulting in the adoption of the text of the Ljubljana-The Hague Convention on International Cooperation in the Investigation and Prosecution of the Crime of Genocide, Crimes Against Humanity, War Crimes and Other International Crimes⁴⁷—can be perceived as concrete action towards further operationalization of R2P. These processes materialized during the campaign for Slovenia’s non-permanent seat at the UNSC, demonstrating that Slovenia engaged in clear political efforts and was not willing to compromise its express support for R2P even though this might have come at political cost.

2.4. The operationalization of R2P through engaging the armed forces

Deployment of a state’s armed forces can be perceived either as an assistance matter under R2P’s pillar two or as part of the coercive action under pillar three. Slovenia has not so far participated in any pillar-three coercive actions including armed forces, but it does have significant experience participating in peace operations, as a mechanism for cooperation among states where populations are or might become exposed to R2P crimes. More often than not, R2P situations evolve into or arise out of situations of armed conflict.⁴⁸ Small states can make important contributions to UN peacekeeping in addition to contributing troops, including by developing guidance materials and additional training for troop contributors,⁴⁹ which can help armed forces operationalize R2P on the ground.

The Slovene Armed Forces (SAF) have been engaged in several UN-, NATO-, and EU-led peace missions (e.g., in Kosovo, Afghanistan, Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, Northern Macedonia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Mali) aimed at preventing and/or reacting to events that might lead/have led to mass atrocities.

In 2010, Slovenia adopted its Strategy of the Participation of the Republic of Slovenia in International Operations and Missions.⁵⁰ While the strategy does not explicitly refer to R2P, it lists among the basic principles and values underlying Slovenia’s interest in participation in international operations and missions ‘respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, the protection of particularly vulnerable groups such as children and women, the rule of law, effective multilateralism, responsibility and solidarity, respect of international law’. Many of these values constitute the building blocks of R2P.

Nevertheless, besides a few general exchanges between the national R2P focal point and the SAF, no concerted efforts were made until 2021 to establish to what extent SAF members are educated and trained to implement R2P when deployed on peace missions.

In 2021, the Slovene R2P focal point and I designed and carried out a research inquiry into the level of awareness of R2P’s meaning and applicability in the SAF. Our questionnaire, which ensured participants’ anonymity and was structured so that they could only see the next questions after they had answered the first ones, without any possibility to return to or modify previous answers, was sent to the general staff of the SAF and the Ministry of Defence. Out of 6262 active SAF professional members as of June 2021, 260 answered the first two general questions about their gender and age, while approximately 190 answered the whole questionnaire (approximately 100 more opened the survey but decided not to answer the questions). When it came to questions specifically on R2P, then, about 27% of participants stopped responding. It is difficult to speculate on the reasons for this, but the SAF leadership expressed an interest in our giving additional training to SAF members—a task yet to materialize due to the pandemic period.

Among the 260 participants, 217 were men and 40 women (15%), which is close to the overall gender statistics SAF (16.7% are women). Only one participant was aged under 30, 66% were aged 31–40, 35% were aged 41–50, and 39% were over 50, which shows that it was mostly experienced members of the SAF who answered the whole questionnaire.

I will now briefly present some of the findings of that research.⁵¹ To the question of whether they had ever heard of the R2P principle, 30% of participants responded positively. Given the ages of the respondents, it could be observed that a significant number of more experienced members of SAF had never been educated about the meaning of R2P or been put in a situation where action in accordance with R2P was discussed or implemented, at least not under the R2P designation. Those who responded positively were asked to briefly explain their opinion of what the R2P principle stands for, and a fair number of them correctly described its essence. Several participants linked the R2P to individual responsibility, however, which is yet to be fully conceptualized and normatively developed.⁵² Many highlighted the ‘vulnerability’ of a population as a trigger for action.

Participants then saw the next question, which first provided an explanation of R2P, including the crimes and the three pillars, and then asked if participants had been in a position to implement the R2P principle in their careers since 2005. To this, 60% responded negatively, 13% responded positively, while others were unsure.

When asked where and when they applied the principle of R2P, the answers of the respondents were the following: Afghanistan (2013), KFOR (2012), independence war (1991), ISAF (2010), KFOR (2013), ‘international peace operations’ (multiple answers, without specifications), BiH and Kosovo (2004, 2006, 2009, 2020), KFOR (6-month rotation 2020–21), in border areas preventing illegal migration, Afghanistan and Chad, Kosovo- Serbian enclaves (2009–16); KFOR (2010, 2015, 2016, 2017, and 2018, multiple answers), Mali (2013), Afghanistan (2009–09), BiH (2012), Kosovo (2006) and Afghanistan (2017 and 2020), in planning of training of defence forces, working for NATO.

When asked which atrocity crimes R2P should prevent (selected from a list), 71% of respondents answered correctly. However, to the question about the primary responsibility under the R2P (that of the state), only 13% answered correctly; most answered ‘the state and the international community’. To a question about the international community’s means of response (diplomatic actions, humanitarian aid and other peaceful means, armed force), 60% of responses were correct. Asked about their opinion concerning the accountability of SAF members in a (potential) case of inciting violence or aiding the execution of one of the atrocity crimes, 97% of respondents answered correctly, and when asked the same question about the accountability of SAF members in a case of mass atrocity crimes in front of the ICC, 98% of respondents answered correctly.

To a question about their awareness of R2P being included in the Rules of Engagement of the Slovenian Army in the International Peace Operations, 47% of respondents answered positively, 10% negatively, 18% did not know, and some did not answer. Similarly, 44% answered yes, 6% no, and 25% did not know if R2P was part of the army’s military doctrine.

When asked if training to implement R2P had been part of the preparedness programme for international peace operations (multiple answers were possible), 31% of respondents answered they did not have such training, 62% said they had training before going to international peace operations, 35% said they had such training within military exercises and in training abroad in military schools, and 38% said they had such training in international peace operations with members of militaries from other countries. Asking about their experience of R2P in real-life situations, 40% of participants responded and mentioned that they mostly helped to implement R2P in Kosovo and Bosnia.

The last question sought ideas on how to operate in effective international peace operations to implement R2P in protecting populations and preventing the incitement of mass atrocities. A variety of answers were received, including: that it could be achieved by informing and training everyone before they go on international peace operations; through more education, more humanitarian aid, and political dialogue; through diplomatic activities and responsible and truthful reporting; and through increasing work with NGOs in areas of operation. It was also said that states and the international community avoid interference, so the military does not have a proper role; and that implementing R2P would be ‘almost impossible’.

In 2021 the results were presented at the international symposium ‘IR2P Symposium – Intervention and Responsibility to Protect: Past, Present, & Futures’,⁵³ aimed at innovatively contributing to the further operationalization of R2P through the actions of armed forces.

2.5. Slovenia at the 2023 elections for a non-permanent seat at the UN Security Council

The UNSC consists of 15 members: five permanent members with veto power (P5) and 10 non-permanent or elected members (E10) who serve for a period of two years.⁵⁴ When (only) in November 2022,⁵⁵ Slovenia presented its vision for its candidature for a non-permanent seat on the UNSC to the Permanent Representatives of the UN Member States in New York, Slovenian Foreign Minister Tanja Fajon said that ‘during its 30-year UN membership, Slovenia has proven on several occasions its commitment to multilateralism, solidarity and shared responsibility for world peace, security and development. Today, we are committed to this goal more than ever’. She added that ‘Slovenia will always be an honest broker and a reliable partner to all, in a constructive, engaged, decisive and active manner’.⁵⁶

Slovenia promised that as a non-permanent member of the UNSC it would strive toward two main goals: 1) building trust and mutual respect by consistently observing international law and the UN Charter, whereby it will strive to hold inclusive debates and make decisions on the basis of reliable and credible information; and 2) securing the future by highlighting equality and the indispensable role of women and young people in all phases of conflict.⁵⁷

To ensure geographical representation, E10 seats are allocated to five regional groups. Even if candidates are running unopposed in their group, they still need to win the support of more than two-thirds of the UN General Assembly.⁵⁸ All candidate states in other regional groups at the 2023 elections for 2024/25 membership stood unopposed: Guyana received 191 votes, Sierra Leone 188 votes, Algeria 184 votes, and South Korea 180 votes. In the EEG Slovenia won 153 votes to beat Belarus, which received 38 votes. Belarus had been an unopposed candidate since 2007 for the 2024/25 Eastern European seat, and Slovenia entered the race only in December 2021 after a brutal crackdown by the Belarus authorities on protests following the country’s 2020 presidential election.⁵⁹

The question for the discussion here is to what extent Slovenia included in the election campaign its commitment to and support for the principle of R2P, and whether R2P will feature prominently in the agenda for its two-year membership.

To start with the first part, Slovenia focused its campaign predominantly on issues uncontested by most, if not all, UN member states. The slogan of Slovenia's candidacy was ‘BUILDING TRUST – SECURING FUTURE’, intended to reflect the areas in which, over its 30-year history, Slovenia has proven a credible partner in international relations. The first part of the slogan thus referred to respect for international law, particularly in terms of accountability, conflict prevention, transparency, and the women, peace, and security agenda, while the second part focused on climate and security, water diplomacy, food security, and children in armed conflict. Although R2P was not mentioned explicitly, many of those areas are closely interlinked with the principle and atrocity prevention.

During the 2023 R2P international conference organized at Ljubljana’s Faculty of Law, a few weeks prior to the elections in New York, Slovenia’s President Nataša Pirc Musar and Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign and European Affairs Tanja Fajon delivered strong statements in support of R2P and Slovenia’s commitment to its operationalization. R2P was thus explicitly invoked without any of the concerns that may have prevailed on other occasions due to political sensitivities and controversies around the principle.

In an attempt to envision possible engagements during Slovenia’s UNSC membership, we might expect its enhanced interaction on the topics of climate change, water scarcity, and food insecurity as indicators for common and/or specific R2P risk factors.⁶⁰ Further, vulnerable groups, such as women and children in armed conflict situations, are likely to underlie many of the Slovenia’s activities under the banner of R2P or a different designation. Finally, preventing the escalation of situations in Slovenia’s neighbourhood, for example tensions in BiH and Kosovo, as well as accountability for crimes committed in Ukraine, are possible to an extent—considering the paralysis on many of these issues due to the veto power of P5—in the agendas of Slovene diplomats in Ljubljana and New York. Finally, recent events in Israel-Palestine, which involve many R2P elements, will unavoidably require significant attention from Slovenia. It is not very likely that Slovenia will make an explicit pronouncement on this issue by referring to R2P, but rather by contextualization through identified priorities which indirectly interlink with various R2P elements. Given Slovenia’s strong lobbying for support among African states, it is to be expected that in addition to its focus on Russia-Ukraine and Israel-Palestine, it will keep to its promises not to forget about African issues while on the UNSC.

3. Conclusions

Despite talk of states’ declining engagement with the principle of R2P and debates about its lost appeal, the actions of Slovenia’s political organs and academia described here suggest a different conclusion, particularly due to approaches to R2P implementation that are innovative (e.g., the direct engagement of the R2P focal point with the armed forces) and creative (e.g., inserting R2P language in materials for elementary schools facing an increased presence of refuges among schoolchildren). Slovenia’s unwavering support has also persisted despite changes of government and changes of the highest representatives of the state, even though it sometimes proves difficult to appropriately use R2P language when the argument of political sensitivities prevails. It is thus possible to argue that regardless of the claims of ‘global reordering’, Slovenia’s politics remain generally unaltered when it comes to support for R2P and prevention of and responses to mass atrocities.

It is interesting to observe that the number of books published in Slovenia exclusively devoted to R2P⁶¹ surpasses the number of books tackling any other international law or international relations theme published by Slovene publishers.⁶² What’s more, these theoretical, conceptual, and analytical contributions emanating from Slovenia significantly support authorities and researchers dealing with R2P in Slovenia and beyond, arguably providing more materials on the topic than any other comparable small-sized state. Various issues discussed have helped clarify R2P elements⁶³ and have often adopted approaches are innovative, progressive, and sometimes even ground-breaking, such as discussions on the opportunities and challenges arising out of the development and use of artificial intelligence in furthering the objectives of R2P.⁶⁴

Finally, the 2024/25 UNSC membership, in the midst of the many ongoing armed conflicts and tensions, will serve as a litmus test for Slovenia’s commitment to R2P. This period will reveal whether Slovenia will be able to find innovative ways to promote R2P beyond the rhetoric, including perhaps through introducing a specific R2P lens in UNSC-mandated peace operations, and develop concrete initiatives to add value to the primary UN echelon for the maintenance of international peace and security. In these efforts it will benefit from, inter alia, the newest resource for states, titled A Framework for Action for the Responsibility to Protect,⁶⁵ and best practices shared by other smaller states that have recently served on the UNSC recently, such as Norway, which became a penholder on some important issues that fall within the essence of R2P, without necessarily referring to R2P explicitly.⁶⁶ The outcomes during Slovenia’s UNSC membership should not be measured by the number of references to R2P, but rather in terms of improvements for the populations on the ground endangered by the four R2P atrocity crimes, which due to limited capacities of a small state, can only be achieved in meaningful cooperation with other UN members and international organisations. Although ‘one swallow doesn’t make a summer’, it is noteworthy that on 27 October 2023 Slovenia joined 119 other UN member states to vote in favour of the ‘Jordanian resolution’ during the Tenth Emergency Special Session of the UN General Assembly (A/ES-10/L.25), calling for an ‘immediate, durable and sustained humanitarian truce’ between Israeli forces and Hamas militants in Gaza, and demanding ‘continuous, sufficient and unhindered’ provision of lifesaving supplies and services for civilians trapped inside the enclave of Gaza, as Israel expanded its ground operations and intensified its bombing campaign—without a doubt a most serious R2P situation.

Slovenia’s strongest potential generally, and particularly during its UNSC membership, thus lies not in its monolithic contributions towards operationalizing R2P, but rather in its role as a global R2P convenor.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Vasilka Sancin

Vasilka Sancin (PhD) is a full professor of international law, head of the Department of International Law and director of the Institute for International Law and International Relations at the Faculty of Law, University of Ljubljana (Slovenia). She serves as a member of the UN Human Rights Council Advisory Committee (2022–25), an arbitrator and member of the Bureau of the OSCE Court of Conciliation and Arbitration (2019–25), and ad hoc judge at the European Court of Human Rights. She has also served as a member of the UN Human Rights Committee (2019–22), its vice president (2021–22), and Special Rapporteur on Follow-up to Concluding Observations. Among other professional affiliations, she is a President of the Slovene Branch and a member of the Executive Council of the International Law Association (ILA), a member of the European Society of International Law, European Law Institute, UNODC Anti-Corruption Academic (ACAD) Initiative, and the European Centre for Responsibility to Protect. She is also the conference chair of a series of international interdisciplinary scientific conferences titled Responsibility to Protect in Theory and Practice (www.R2Pconference.com).

Notes

1 These are also the values underpinning its Constitution. Official Gazette of the Republic of Slovenia, Nos 33/91-I, 42/97, 66/2000, 24/03, 69/04, 68/06, 47/13 and 75/16.

2 On controversies regarding the contested, and ultimately unsuccessful, policy of continuing SRFY membership by the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY), later renamed Serbia and Montenegro, see, e.g., Borut Bohte, 'Status ZRJ v OZN' (Status of FRY in the UN) (2000) 55: 11/12 Pravnik: revija za pravno teorijo in prakso 801.

3 See, Anton Grizold, 'The National Security Issue in Slovenia' in Bojko Bučar and Stein Kuhnle (eds), Small States Compared: politics of Norway and Sovenia (Alma Mater Forlag AS 1994) 85.

4 Article 124 (3) of the Constitution.

5 See, Andrea Ó Súilleabháin, 'Small States at the United Nations:Diverse Perspectives, Shared Opportunities' (2014) International Peace Institute <https://www.ipinst.org/wp-content/uploads/publications/ipi_e_pub_small_states_at_un.pdf> accessed 21 June 2023.

6 ibid 11-13.

7 Baldur Thorhallson, The role of Small States in the European Union (Ashgate 2000) 232.

8 ibid.

9 See, Annika Björkdahl, 'Norm advocacy: a small state strategy to influence the EU' (2008) 15:1 Journal of European Public Policy 135.

10 See <https://www.un.org/en/conferences/environment/newyork2005> accessed 21 June 2023.

11 Kirn documented his experience and the difficulties of the negotiations, which resulted in success with the consensual adoption of paras. 138 and 139 in the final document, in his autobiographical book V službi diplomacije (In the service of diplomacy) (Modrijan 2017).

12 The other co-facilitator was Iftekhar Ahmed Chowdhury from Bangladesh.

13 Since 2012, Slovenia has consecutively appointed three R2P National Focal Points. The role is currently performed by Ambassador Blanka Jamnišek, who as of 2019 is also a member of the Steering Group within the Global Network of R2P Focal Points (GCR2P), established to promote the implementation of R2P and to make proposals for the operation of the R2P Focal Points. As of May 2021, GCR2P also performs the tasks of the secretariat and coordinator of activities of the International Coalition for the Responsibility to Protect (ICRtoP), which unites approximately 50 non-governmental organizations from all over the world, operating since 2009.

14 The Kigali Principles on the Protection of Civilians are a non-binding set of eighteen (18) pledges for the effective and thorough implementation of the protection of civilians in UN peacekeeping. The principles on the Protection of Civilians emanated from the High-level International Conference on the Protection of Civilians held in Rwanda on 28-29 May 2015.

15 The translation in a non-official UN language with the state budgetary resources remains the exceptional endeavour of individual states. The Slovenian text is available at: <https://www.gov.si/assets/ministrstva/MZZ/Dokumenti/multilaterala/OZN/f23efdb4c8/Okvir_za_prepoznavanje_grozodejstev.pdf> accessed 6 June 2023.

16 At the time of writing, Slovenia has not publicly revealed any official strategic documents on priorities during its upcoming UNSC membership. Informal rumours however have it that Slovenia shall be focusing mostly on prevention of conflicts, nexus between climate change and peace and security and protection of populations from atrocity crimes. While not mentioning R2P explicitly, as in the context of the UNSC, it is supposedly an »overly charged« notion, these envisaged priorities clearly transcend some of the main elements of R2P.

17 Implementing the responsibility to protect, Report of the Secretary General, 2009, A/63/677.

18 See Manual for R2P Focal Points, The Global Network of R2P Focal Points, 2022, p. 4, <https://www.globalr2p.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/R2P-Focal-Points-Manual-12-September-FINAL.pdf> accessed 6 June 2023.

19 Welsh speaks of a ‘complex norm’ with these interconnected elements. See Jennifer M. Welsh, ‘Norm Contestation and the Responsibility to Protect’ (2013) 5 Global Responsibility to Protect 386.

20 World Summit Outcome Document, para. 139.

21 Jennifer M. Welsh, ‘Norm Robustness and the Responsibility to Protect’ (2019) 4:1 Journal of Global Security Studies 53.

22 Slovenia, on 6 July 1992, succeeded to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, which the SFRY had signed and ratified on 11 December 1948 and 29 August 1950, respectively. Slovenia is also a party to all relevant international humanitarian law treaties, mostly through succession after the SFRY.

23 Slovenia signed the Rome Statute on 7 October 1998 and deposited its instrument of ratification on 31 December 2001.

24 See Criminal Code (Official Gazette of the Republic of Slovenia, Nos 50/12, 6/16 – corr., 54/15, 38/16, 27/17, 23/20, 91/20, 95/21, 186/21, 105/22 and 16/23), articles 100-102.

25 Declaration of Foreign Policy of the Republic of Slovenia (DeZPRS-1), <https://www.gov.si/assets/ministrstva/MZZ/Dokumenti/strateski-in-programski-dokumenti/DECLARATION_ON_FOREIGN_POLICY_-_FINAL.pdf> accessed 6 June 2023.

26 See <https://www.gov.si/assets/ministrstva/MZZ/Dokumenti/strateski-in-programski-dokumenti/strategija_ZP_ang.pdf> accessed 6 June 2023.

27 See <https://www.gov.si/assets/ministrstva/MZZ/Dokumenti/strateski-in-programski-dokumenti/strategija_ZP_ang.pdf> accessed 6 June 2023.

28 The author had the opportunity to review the first draft.

29 Rakovec led the panel on the operation of R2P focal points.

30 Jamnišek presented good practice of translation and public presentations of the Framework of Analysis for Atrocity Crimes, helping raise awareness among different publics within the country, which was recognized as good practice and incentives were given to other countries to translate the publication.

31 Jamnišek presented regional meetings and coordinated recommendations.

32 Jamnišek presented the good practice of prevention through education for children's rights, including the rights of refugee children.

33 Jamnišek and the author of this article presented on the topic of multilateral cooperation.

34 Jamnišek contributed to formulating key recommendations for the meeting.

35 See Manual for R2P Focal Points (2022) The Global Network of R2P Focal Points 46, <https://www.globalr2p.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/R2P-Focal-Points-Manual-12-September-FINAL.pdf> accessed 6 June 2023.

36 E.g., ministerial meeting on R2P 2020; webinar ‘Protection Approaches’ in 2021; the event of the Slovenian Presidency of the EU 2021 entitled ‘Launch of the 4th Report on EU Guidelines on promoting Compliance with International Humanitarian Law’.

37 E.g., to the opening address at the webinar of the Danish Institute for Human Rights on February 11, 2021 on the topic ‘Tracking and Celebrating Human Rights Education’.

38 Initiated by Jamnišek. So far, hundreds of thousands of children have participated in this project, learning about their rights in 24 languages in 27 countries in Europe, the Caucasus, the Russian Federation, the Middle East, Latin America, and India, together with the Nobel laureate NGO, as well as in Japan.

39 Resolution adopted by the Human Rights Council on 17 July 2020, Fifteenth anniversary of the responsibility to protect populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity, as enshrined in the 2005 World Summit Outcome, A/HRC/RES/44/14.

40 This was the same government that was more concerned with the past atrocities and less with current human righst and international humanitarian law concerns.

41 See <https://gaamac.org/organizations/slovenia-ministry-of-foreign-and-european-affairs/> accessed 6 June 2023.

42 The discussions at three regional meetings in Ljubljana for European R2P Focal Points (in 2013, 2015 and 2017) focused on how European countries can implement R2P domestically and regionally and the role European R2P Focal Points can play in mass atrocity prevention at a multilateral level. See <http://www.globalr2p.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Updated-Annexes-R2P-Focal-Points-Manual.pdf> accessed 6 June 2023.

43 See <www.R2Pconference.com> accessed 6 June 2023.

44 The remarks were delivered by all former special advisers (Edward C. Luck, Jennifer Welsh, Ivan Šimonović, Karen Smith and George William Okoth-Obbo).

45 Judge Dolenc was elected by the UN General Assembly on 3 November 1999. See <https://press.un.org/en/1998/19981103.ga9495.html> accessed 6 June 2023.

46 See <https://asp.icc-cpi.int/elections/judges/2023/Results> accessed 6 December 2023.

47 Available at <https://www.gov.si/assets/ministrstva/MZEZ/projekti/MLA-pobuda/The-Ljubljana-The-Hague-MLA-Convention.pdf> accessed 6 June 2023.

48 See current and past R2P situations, where in majority of these populations have been exposed to R2P crimes in international or non-international armed conflicts and/or in recovery phases after those, <https://www.globalr2p.org/populations-at-risk/> accessed 21 June 2023.

49 See, e.g., Louise Riis Andersen and Richard Gowan, ‘Small states can take small but important steps to improve UN peacekeeping’ (2020) Danish Institute for International Studies <https://www.diis.dk/en/research/small-states-can-take-small-but-important-steps-to-improve-un-peacekeeping> accessed 6 June 2023.

50 Official Gazette of the Republic of Slovenia, No 19/2010 (12 March 2010).

51 Detailed results are archived with the author of this article.

52 See e.g., Edward C. Luck and Dina Luck, 'The Individual Responsibility to Protect' in Sheri P. Rosenberg, Tibi Galis and Alex Zucker (eds), Reconstructing Atrocity Prevention (Cambridge University Press 2015).

53 The online symposium was convened on 6 September 2021 by the journal Global Responsibility to Protect, the Centre for Grand Strategy at King’s College London, and the Centre for Geopolitics at the University of Cambridge.

54 Article 23, Charter of the United Nations, 24 October 1945, 1 UNTS XVI, available at: <https://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6b3930.html> accessed 6 June 2023.

55 The decision was made in the context of the Russian aggression against Ukraine and in light of the fact that before Slovenia's announcement, only Belarus was pretending for the seat of the Eastern European Group (EEG) on the UNSC.

56 See <https://www.gov.si/en/news/2022-09-27-minister-fajon-in-new-york-on-slovenias-candidature-for-a-non-permanent-seat-on-the-un-security-council/> accessed 6 June 2023.

57 ibid.

58 Taking into account currently 193 UN member states, this amounts to 128 votes.

59 ‘The Russians have always argued that a lot of states support Ukraine in public at the U.N., but sympathize with Russia in private. But this secret ballot does not support that claim at all’. International Crisis Group U.N. Director Richard Gowan said. See Five nations elected to U.N. Security Council, but Belarus denied, Reuters, June 6, 2023, <https://www.reuters.com/world/five-nations-elected-un-security-council-belarus-denied-2023-06-06/> accessed 6 June 2023.

60 See Framework of Analysis for ATROCITY CRIMES, A tool for prevention (United Nations 2014) <https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/documents/about-us/Doc.3_Framework%20of%20Analysis%20for%20Atrocity%20Crimes_EN.pdf> accessed 6 June 2023. This document has been translated into Slovenian language already in 2016 with a Foreword by the then Minister of Foreign Affairs and is available to the general public in physical form in libraries as well as online. See <https://www.gov.si/assets/ministrstva/MZZ/Dokumenti/multilaterala/OZN/f23efdb4c8/Okvir_za_prepoznavanje_grozodejstev.pdf> accessed 6 June 2023.

61 See, e.g., the first comprehenisve textbook on R2P in Slovenian language – with the Foreword by the first UN Secretary-General's Special Adviser for R2P, Edward C. Luck – Vasilka Sancin (ed and author), Maja Bavdek, Mark Jo Moggi, Nenad Mrdaković, Nastasja Suhadolnik, Katarina Škrbec and Nina Zupan, Lokalni zločinci – univerzalni zločini: Odgovornost zaščititi (Local Criminals – Universal Crimes: Responsibility to Protect) (GV Založba 2010); Vasilka Sancin (ed), Responsibility to protect in theory and practice: papers presented at the Responsibility to Protect in Theory and Practice Conference Ljubljana (GV Založba 2013); Vasilka Sancin (ed), Responsibility to Protect: where do we stand ten years after? (Pravna fakulteta Univerze v Ljubljani 2015); Vasilka Sancin (ed), Are we "manifestly failing" R2P? (Pravna fakulteta Univerze v Ljubljani 2017); Vasilka Sancin (ed), Responsibility to Protect: Lessons Learned and the Way Forward (Pravna fakulteta Univerze v Ljubljani 2019); Vasilka Sancin in Maša Kovič Dine (eds) The Limits of Responsibility to Protect (Pravna fakulteta Univerze v Ljubljani, Ljubljana, 2023).

62 Numerous bachelor, master, and PhD theses are also being written on R2P (e.g., Eva Tomič, Odgovornost zaščititi: novo mednarodnopravno pravilo in statu nascendi? (Responsibility to Protect: a new international legal rule in statu nascendi?) (Master thesis at the Faculty of Law of the University of Ljubljana 2011); as well as articles and chapters published by Slovene authors (e.g., Vasilka Sancin, ‘Izzivi OZN pri uveljavljanju odgovornosti zaščititi’ (2016) 53:1 Teorija in praksa 118; Vasilka Sancin, ‘Odgovornost zaščititi in njeno globalno, regionalno in državno uveljavljanje’ in Andraž Zidar, Sanja Štiglic and Ana Polak Petrič (eds) Slovenske misli o mednarodnih odnosih in pravu: prispevki ob 80-letnici dr. Ernesta Petriča (Založba FDV, Ministrstvo za zunanje zadeve Republike Slovenije 2016).

63 E.g., the standard of 'manifestly failing' from para. 139, the discussions on which contributed to the later published article by Adrian Gallagher, 'What constitutes a ‘Manifest Failing’? Ambiguous and inconsistent terminology and the Responsibility to Protect' (2014) 28:4 International Relations 428.

64 See Vasilka Sancin and Maša kovič Dine (eds), Conference Proceedings and Book of Abstracts 36 and 27; <http://www.r2pconference.com/uploads/1/6/7/5/16757814/conference_proceedings_29.05.2023_compressed.pdf> accessed 6 June 2023.

65 See <https://r2pasiapacific.org/files/10183/R2P_Framework2023_FinalDigital.pdf> accessed 10 October 2023.

66 Listen to account by Meena Syed in Expert Voices on Atrocity Prevention, Episode 23, <https://youtu.be/K_n4R_LlQ5Y?si=3QI065m7Ia_bUrS5> accessed 10 October 2023.