skip to Main Content

Stockholm Agreement Document

It shows that the agreement was reached following reports of widespread human rights violations in prisons, which have reached the level of war crimes and crimes against humanity, and has resulted in a finding in the report of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and the renowned panel of experts that “the Yemeni governments , the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia” and the “de facto authorities are responsible for international human rights violations” “which boil down to the following war crimes: rape, degrading and cruel treatment, torture and outrage at personal dignity.” [29] The main positive achievement of the Stockholm Agreement was the Hodeida Front. The fighting in Hodeida has virtually ceased for almost a year, and the truce has more or less held for 13 months. This is due to the presence of the UN mission to support the hodeida agreement (UNMHA) in January 2019, whose mandate was renewed for a further six months on 13 January 2020. Although it has faced significant difficulties and is on its third leader, it is now fully occupied and has set up 4 “observation posts” in the city of Hodeida, which help to maintain the area without combat and facilitate the transit of goods between the port and roads inland. The “re-deployment of forces”, which required the redistribution of troops from both sides and the surrender of the three ports to the local security forces, agreed by both sides and approved by the United Nations, was less successful. This formulation naturally allowed each party to interpret the situation as it had intended, and that is exactly what they did. 2- An executive mechanism to activate the prisoner exchange agreement. Subsequently, the second mandate of the agreement, as defined in both the Hodeidah Agreement and the Taz Agreement, aimed at “opening humanitarian corridors to enable”[23] to “facilitate the free movement of civilians and goods. and the delivery of humanitarian aid. [24] 1- An agreement on the city of Hodeidah and the ports of Hodeidah, Salif and Ras Issa. 2- An executive mechanism to activate the prisoner exchange agreement.

3- A declaration of agreement on Tasz. Overall, one year after its agreement, the outcome of the Stockholm agreement is very limited. In particular it has not prevented the Huthis from increasing their influence in the part of Yemen they control nor has it reduced their control in Hodeida governorate. The year 2019 began with high hopes in the international community thanks to the UN-backed Stockholm Agreement, concluded on 13 December 2018 after a week of negotiations in Sweden. Since the start of the global war in early 2015, it has been the first-ever agreement between the Houthi movement, which controls most of Yemen`s population and a third of the country`s territory on the one hand, and President Hadi`s internationally recognized government, on the other, the IRG. The commitments set out in the Stockholm agreement were made in three parts: the Hodeidah agreement, the Taz agreement and a prisoner exchange agreement. Together, these companies have committed parties to (1) a ceasefire in the city of Hodeidah and in the ports of Hodeidah, Salif and Ras Issa, as well as the redistribution of troops on both sides; [14] (2) opening of humanitarian corridors for the flow of aid through these ports; [15] and (3) a prisoner exchange aimed at freeing more than 15,000 prisoners and detainees. [16] The parties also agreed to conduct discussions on the creation of a humanitarian corridor for humanitarian assistance to Taz governorate. [17] This followed reports of successive airstrikes in Hodeidah province by coalition forces and of Houthi fighters using protected positions, such as hospitals, to stage fighting, prompting a statement of concern from the UN Security Council on compliance with international humanitarian law.

[20] It also came after the report of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and the renowned panel of experts expressed “serious concerns about violations of international humanitarian law and, possibly, war crimes”, which were committed as a result of “attacks in violation of the principles of distinction, proportionality and prudence”. [21] Documentation of the Coordination Committee for Redistribution

Back To Top