A good example is when President Alberto Fujimori who ruled the country from 1990 to 2000 was found guilty for grave violation of human rights by the Peruvian Supreme Court.
The conviction and prosecution of the president in the country indicated that the country was able to deal with crimes of such levels. The verdict aimed at achieving accountability after the crimes committed in the country and the globe (Giddens & Thomas, 30). Cases of grave human rights violation have often been presented at the international criminal court basing on the absence of effective judiciary systems in the member states. The trial of the former Peru president was successful despite the many challenges. The trials of Head of States such as Slobodan Milosevic and Charles Taylor have taken place in the international court. However, Peru’s approach indicates that national governments can be able to prosecute former leaders by putting unique and highly competent judiciary system in place (Lee, Ambrose, 70).
Basing on the second principle of the Rio Declaration targeting sharing and management of transboundary resources, States have, in accordance with the principles of international laws and charter of the united nations, the sovereign rights to extract and exploit their resources pursuant to their own developmental and environmental policies, and the responsibilities of ensuring that activities within their control and jurisdiction do not cause harm to the environment of neighboring states and beyond. Political borders are drawn on natural resources and environment that overlap into one another. Such resources are often extracted for developmental gain although sometimes it may result in consequences such as pollution (Kauffer, 40).
The consequences of extraction may cross the political boundary set and affect the neighboring states. Peruvian people and boundary have to be protected from the effects of resource extraction in the neighboring countries such as