Adoption of 1325 Resolution

Author(s):  
Christine Chinkin

UN Security Council Resolution 1325 was not adopted in a vacuum, but rather can be read with a number of other programs within the Security Council (SC) and UN architecture. These include other thematic resolutions, as well as broader policy initiatives. Taken together, these diverse strands sought to shift the understanding of the SC’s role in the maintenance of international peace and security, away from a classic state-oriented approach to one that places people at its center. The adoption of Resolution 1325, along with these other developments, had implications for the making of international law (the place of civil society and experts within the international legal and institutional framework), for rethinking participation, and the meaning of security/protection. This chapter suggests that 2000 was a pivotal moment when a more human-oriented international law seemed a real possibility and before the turn back toward militarism and national security in the wake of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.

Author(s):  
Nigel D. White

This chapter examines the division of competence between the UN Security Council and the UN General Assembly concerning matters of international peace and security but placed within the context of the prohibition on the use of force. Although the Security Council can authorize the use of force by states, what is not clear is whether the General Assembly can recommend that states take military action. The chapter considers the conundrum faced by the United Nations with respect to an imminent and catastrophic use of force or act of egregious violence, when the UN Security Council is deadlocked because of the lack of agreement between the permanent members. It discusses the debate over the legality of the (in)famous Uniting for Peace Resolution of 1950 within the context of the emerging principle of a Responsibility to Protect (R2P) as well as within existing principles of international law.


AJIL Unbound ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 108 ◽  
pp. 118-122
Author(s):  
Ieva Miluna

The Uniting for Peace resolution together with the UN Charter prescribes a certain role for the General Assembly with regard to international peace and security. Larry Johnson addresses that role, but he does not consider a second question: how does the Uniting for Peace resolution affect the UN Security Council? The normative role of the Council is influenced not only by the Charter, but also by general international law. In this comment, I explore the normative role of the Council in fulfilling the Charter’s purpose to maintain international peace and security. I argue that the text of the Charter and the prior practice of both the Assembly and the Council help to determine the proper division of these organs’ respective tasks within the Charter system. I conclude that the Council alone exercises the constant control needed to enforce measures of collective security effectively, and that the Assembly is limited to recommending the consequences for states when threats or breaches of the peace occur.


AJIL Unbound ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 108 ◽  
pp. 129-134
Author(s):  
Boris N. Mamlyuk

Larry Johnson’s timely and important essay challenges both utopian and realist accounts of UN law and practice by reviving the debate over the nature and functions of the UN General Assembly, particularly the General Assembly’s power to deploy certain legal tactics not only to influence collective security deliberations in the UN Security Council, but also, more significantly, to provide some legal justification for multilateral military “collective measures” in the event of Security Council gridlock. One vehicle by which the General Assembly may assert its own right to intervene in defense of “international peace and security” is a “Uniting for Peace” (UFP) resolution, authorized by resolution 377(V) (1950). At its core, a “uniting for peace” resolution is an attempt to circumvent a Security Council deadlock by authorizing Member States to take collective action, including the use of force, in order to maintain or restore international peace and security. General Assembly resolution 377(V) does not require resolutions to take specific legal form—language that echoes the preambular “lack of unanimity of the permanent members [that results in the Security Council failing to] exercise its primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security” is sufficient to render a given resolution a UFP, provided the General Assembly resolution calls for concrete “collective [forceful] measures.” For this reason, experts disagree on precisely how many times a UFP has indeed been invoked or implemented, although informed analysts suggest UFP has been invoked in slightly more than ten instances since 1950.


Author(s):  
Wood Sir Michael

The UN Security Council impacts on the law of treaties in many different ways — ways that are both foreseen and unforeseen in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. This has led to harsh criticism by writers, less so by states. There is an important distinction to be made between obligations that are binding on the parties to a treaty by virtue of their participation therein, and obligations that are binding on states for some reason outside the treaty, for example because they are made so by mandatory Council action. Article 103 of the UN Charter has assumed increasing importance and should not be interpreted narrowly. The Council has shown self-restraint in its approach to treaties, interfering only to the extent necessary for the maintenance of international peace and security.


Author(s):  
Chantal de Jonge Oudraat

UN Security Council Resolution 1325 recognized the critical roles women can and must play in advancing international peace and security. The WPS agenda, however, has focused largely on the protection of women in conflict, in particular from sexual and gender-based violence. In doing so, the substantive participation of women in peace and security remains significantly underexplored. This chapter suggests that the lack of progress on the WPS agenda is due to the perception that it is a women’s agenda, as opposed to one that seeks to advance gender equality and security. Moreover, this chapter reveals the challenges associated with the disparate nature of the WPS and security communities. In response, this chapter suggests that for the WPS agenda to advance, the community needs to emphasize that this is not only a women’s agenda. Specifically, the dialogue needs to be reframed to acknowledge that a focus on women is necessary, but not sufficient.


2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 467-479
Author(s):  
Bahia Tahzib-Lie ◽  
Jan Reinder Rosing

Summary On 31 December 2018, the Kingdom of the Netherlands — the Netherlands, Aruba, Curaçao and St Maarten — concluded its one-year membership of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), prompting many to reflect on its meaningful contribution to international peace and security during this time. The UNSC has exclusive and far-reaching powers with regard to maintaining international peace and security. For this reason, non-permanent seats on the UNSC are highly coveted. They confer prestige, influence and respectability on the seat-holders. Given the popularity of these seats, the Kingdom’s ability to influence decision-making within the UNSC became possible only after an intensive election campaign. In this practitioners’ perspective, we provide our insights and observations on the Kingdom of the Netherlands’ campaign strategy for the UNSC elections in 2016.


2016 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-64
Author(s):  
Alexander Orakhelashvili

Over the past decade, the effective performance by the UN Security Council of its primary responsibility in the area of peace and security has increasingly become contingent on the implementation of its decisions within the national legal systems of the UN Member States. An examination of this issue in the context of the British legal system could offer a useful case-study of the ways to enhance the effectiveness of the UN collective security mechanism, to enforce the limits on the legitimacy of that mechanism, and also to highlight the practical difficulties that may accompany the attempts to apply Security Council resolutions domestically. This contribution exposes all these issues, focusing on the practice of the uk courts over the past decade. It examines the mediation of the effect of Security Council resolutions into English law through the 1946 United Nations Act, the royal prerogative and other common law techniques. After that, the contribution moves on to examine the English courts’ handling of the normative conflict between a Security Council resolution and other sources of international law.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document