Responsibility to Protect in the Age of Global Terror: A Methodological Reassessment

Abstract

Ten years after its formal adoption, the R2P doctrine remains an incomplete project in a world of continuing conflicts now aggravated by the existential threat of global terrorism. The debate on the permissibility of military action to stop mass atrocities when authorisation to use force is not forthcoming from the Security Council has produced only a plurality of conflicting theories but hardly any progress at the normative level. A two-pronged approach could be used to consolidate R2P as a doctrine fully integrated into the corpus of international law. The first prong requires the revamping of the largely neglected Article 48 of the ILC Draft on State Responsibility; the second involves using R2P as a platform to initiate a reform of customary international law to make it more consistent with elementary principles of justice and universal human rights.

Keywords:

• R2P
• terrorism
• use of force
• humanitarian intervention
• human rights

Notes

¹ Annan, The Question of Intervention.

² UN, Resolution 60/1 (2005) on 2005 World Summit Outcome, para 138.

³ UN, Resolution 1738 (2006) on Protection of Civilians, para. 4.

⁴ UN, Implementing the Responsibility to Protect.

⁵ UNGA, Resolution 63/308 (2009) on the Responsibility to Protect.

⁶ ICJ, Corfu Channel Case 1949; Nicaragua 1986; Oil Platforms 2003.

⁷ Alexidze, “Legal Nature of Jus Cogens”; Ronzitti, “Use of Force”; Hannikainen, Peremptory Norms (Jus Cogens).

⁸ ICJ, Avena and Other Mexican Nationals 2004, Crime of Genocide 2007, and Ahmadou Sadio Diallo 2012 cases; American Law Institute, Restatement of Foreign Relations Law.

⁹ ILC, “Draft Articles on State Responsibility”.

¹⁰ Schachter, “Legality of Pro-Democratic Invasion”, 649; Villani, “La Guerra del Kosovo”, 26; Bernardini, “Una guerra contro i popoli”, 33; Byers and Chesterman, “Changing the Rules”, 177.

¹¹ Teson, Humanitarian Intervention.

¹² Picone, Interventi delle Nazioni Unite, 512-78; Franck, “Interpretation and Change”, 204 and 230; Cassese, “Ex iniuria ius oritur”.

¹³ Pattison, Humanitarian Intervention.

¹⁴ Rawls, The Law of Peoples.

¹⁵ Conforti, “The Doctrine of ‘Just War’”, 9.

¹⁶ ICJ, Nicaragua Case.

¹⁷ Hart, The Concept of Law.

¹⁸ Dupuy, “L’unité de l’ordre juridique international”.

¹⁹ ICJ, Barcelona Traction Case.

²⁰ Crawford, The International Law Commission’s Articles: Arts. 40-41.

²¹ UN, Implementing the Responsibility to Protect.

²² Coupland, British Anti-Slavery Movement.