Collective Security and Human Rights

2012 ◽  
pp. 42-70 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonios Tzanakopoulos
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Collective Security

scholarly journals Human freedom and/or safety

Temida ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 95-104
Author(s):  
Ljubo Bavcon
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Human Freedom ◽  
Collective Security ◽  
Increase Efficiency

This paper deals with the dilemma of whether it is justified to reduce human freedom and rights in order to achieve a greater level of his personal and / or collective security. The author points to the growing political and criminal repressiveness and fewer guarantees for the respect of human rights and freedoms, all in order to increase efficiency and safety in the war against crime. Also, the paper points out the consequences of such tendencies.

14. The use of force and collective security

2019 ◽  
pp. 346-374
Author(s):  
Gleider Hernández
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Security Council ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
Collective Security ◽  
International Peace ◽  
Humanitarian Interventions ◽  
Peace And Security ◽  
United Nations Charter ◽  
Self Defence

This chapter looks at the use of force and collective security. Today, the United Nations Charter embodies the indispensable principles of international law on the use of force. These include the prohibition on the unilateral use of force found in Article 2(4), and the recognition of the inherent right of all States to use force in self-defence found in Article 51. Finally, under Chapter VII, a collective security system centred upon the Security Council was established for the maintenance of international peace and security. A key debate over the scope of Article 2(4) is whether a new exception has been recognized which would allow the use of force motivated by humanitarian considerations. It is argued that these ‘humanitarian interventions’ would allow a State to use force to protect people in another State from gross and systematic human rights violations when the target State is unwilling or unable to act.

Public International Law: Is It Fit For Purpose?

2007 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 113-123 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gillian Triggs
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
Prisoners Of War ◽  
Collective Security ◽  
Public International Law ◽  
Fit For Purpose ◽  
The Relationship

AbstractThis paper by Professor Gillian Triggs seeks to explore whether the traditional principles of public international law are ‘fit for purpose’ in responding to such contemporary threats to collective security by reference to three issues: the regulation of the use of force; the need to balance the sovereign rights of states with humanitarian concerns; and the relationship between human rights and the orthodox rules applicable to prisoners of war and security detainees.

The Privatisation of ‘the Core Business of un Peacekeeping Operations’: Any Legal Limit?

2014 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 405-422 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mirko Sossai
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Collective Security ◽  
International Peace ◽  
Peacekeeping Operations ◽  
Normative Function ◽  
The Core ◽  
Un Peacekeeping ◽  
Peace And Security ◽  
Fundamental Values

The purpose of the present analysis is to investigate whether the law of collective security could play a normative function in the determination of which services may or may not be outsourced in the context of un peacekeeping operations. The key question is whether pmscs should only perform those activities instrumental to the life of the un, or should also cover those functions that are a direct expression of the competences attributed to it for the maintenance of international peace and security. The point is made that since peacekeeping is aimed at preserving fundamental values of the international community, peace and increasingly human rights, pmscs might play a part in it, but only in a secondary way.

Friedensethik nach dem Ende des Ost-West-Konflikts

1994 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 81-99
Author(s):  
Hans-Richard Reuter
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Just War ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
Collective Security ◽  
Military Alliances ◽  
Moral Criticism ◽  
Special Obligation ◽  
Peacekeeping Operations ◽  
Peace And Security

Abstract Today the radical as well as the organizing pacifism have become compatible in the engagement for an universal legal system, which is based on the acknowledgement of human rights and a general prohibition of the use of force. The classical doctrines of just war have become obsolete, but their implicit elements concerning moral criticism of violence are indispensable. The author critisizes the misuse of the human rights argument for the justification of military interventionism. A legitimate policy of peace and security has to depend on the development of a collective security system as proposed by the UN-Charter. It cannot be based on traditional military alliances of defence. To intervene in domestic conflicts, if any, peacekeeping operations are qualified, when and as far as they bind themselves to the principles of consensus of all parties concerned, of strict neutrality and of deescalation. There is a special obligation for Germany to restrain herself in military actions and toset an example in developing an international culture of nonviolence.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document