The Fight against isil in Syria. Comments on the Recent Discussion of the Right of Self-defence against Non-state Actors

2018 ◽  
Vol 87 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-25 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marja Lehto
Keyword(s):  
Legal Theory ◽  
State Violence ◽  
Recent Discussion ◽  
Fertile Ground ◽  
State Actors ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right ◽  
Silver Bullet ◽  
Self Defence

The legal debate on self-defence against non-state actors is still inconclusive after two decades. At the same time, it has created a fertile ground for attempts to find a silver bullet: a new legal theory that could bridge the conceptual gap between the law of the un Charter and the expanded notion of self-defence. The article gives an overview of the legal rationales presented in relation to the fight against isil in Syria as well as scholarly comments, focusing on the emerging doctrine of ‘unwilling or unable’. It argues that the ‘unwilling or unable’ test has little to offer as a solution to the problem of responding to massive non-state violence. It does not amount to a coherent doctrine, and is in many respects at odds with established interpretations of law. The apparent simplicity of the ‘unwilling or unable test’ may be politically attractive but makes it open to abuse.

Self-Defence in Response to Attacks by Non-state Actors in the Light of Recent State Practice: A Step Forward?

2010 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 183-208 ◽  
Author(s):  
RAPHAËL VAN STEENBERGHE
Keyword(s):  
Use Of Force ◽  
Prima Facie ◽  
Operation Enduring Freedom ◽  
Armed Attack ◽  
The Us ◽  
State Practice ◽  
State Actors ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right ◽  
Self Defence

AbstractThis article analyses the recent state practice in which the right of self-defence has been invoked in order to justify the use of force in response to attacks by non-state actors. The main purpose of this analysis is to determine whether the law of self-defence has evolved through this practice. It is submitted that the latter confirms the tendency, evidenced by the US operation ‘Enduring Freedom’ in Afghanistan in 2001, towards allowing states to respond in self-defence to private armed attacks, that is, attacks which are committed by non-state actors only. The article also aims to shed some light on other fundamental conditions of the law of self-defence which played a significant role in the legal assessment of the recent state practice. It is argued in this respect that this practice confirms that any armed attack must reach some level of gravity – which may be assessed by accumulating minor uses of force – in order to trigger the right of self-defence, and that proportionality of the action taken in self-defence may be assessed in quantitative terms, but only as a means of making a prima facie judgement about the necessity of this action.

The Prohibition of the Use of Force in Arbitrations and Fact-Finding Reports

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vaios Koutroulis
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Arbitral Tribunal ◽  
Commissions Of Inquiry ◽  
State Actors ◽  
The Law ◽  
Fact Finding ◽  
The Right ◽  
Self Defence

This chapter examines the approach used by arbitral tribunals and commissions of inquiry or fact-finding missions with respect to rules governing the use of force after the adoption of the UN Charter in 1945, with emphasis on the right to self-defence and the conditions relating to its exercise. It assesses the legal significance of arbitral awards and fact-finding reports and considers how they have interpreted and applied jus contra bellum—the prohibition of the use of force in international relations and its exceptions. The chapter focuses on two significant arbitration precedents: the Eritrea Ethiopia Claims Commission and an arbitral tribunal constituted under Annex VII to the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). Finally, it discusses questions relating to the threshold for the application of jus contra bellum rules, namely Articles 2(4) and 51 of the UN Charter, and whether such rules are applicable to non-state actors.

scholarly journals SELF-DEFENCE AGAINST NON-STATE ACTORS: ARE POWERFUL STATES WILLING BUT UNABLE TO CHANGE INTERNATIONAL LAW?

2017 ◽  
Vol 67 (2) ◽  
pp. 263-286 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jutta Brunnée ◽  
Stephen J Toope
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
World Politics ◽  
Customary Law ◽  
Current State ◽  
State Actors ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right ◽  
Self Defence

AbstractCan a few primarily Western States expand the right to self-defence against non-State actors, incorporating the unwilling or unable standard? Even on a traditional reading of customary law formation, the answer is no because proponents have failed to attract consistent and widespread support. What is more, using our interactional international law approach, we show that efforts to date have not been successful because they have failed to address fundamental rule of law concerns. The current state of world politics has perhaps caught proponents of the unwilling or unable standard in a difficult bind. We suggest how proponents might carefully develop the law on self-defence against non-State actors.

Punishment

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark McClish
Keyword(s):  
Legal System ◽  
State Violence ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right

In Indic thought, the daṇḍa (“staff”) represented the king’s use of violence for the purpose of governance. His right and obligation as daṇḍadhara (“wielder of the staff”) to punish those deemed deserving of punishment under the law defined the king’s role in the legal system. In this sense, daṇḍa represented the legalization of domination, in which state violence was reckoned as just punishment. But the king was not the only one with a recognized right to punish. This chapter explores how daṇḍa was used to articulate and legitimize relations of domination within the legal imagination of Dharmaśāstra. It asks, in particular, who is conferred the right to punish and how much?

The invocation of the right to self-defence in response to armed attacks conducted by armed groups: Implications for attribution

2018 ◽  
Vol 32 (01) ◽  
pp. 91-110 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erika de Wet
Keyword(s):  
Due Diligence ◽  
Armed Groups ◽  
Armed Attack ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
State Actors ◽  
The Right ◽  
United Nations Charter ◽  
Territorial States ◽  
Self Defence

AbstractThe right to self-defence in Article 51 of the United Nations Charter is increasingly being invoked in response to armed attacks conducted by armed groups located in a territory of another state, with or without the (direct) assistance of such a state. This article examines the implications of the invocation of the right to self-defence under these circumstances for the principles of attribution within thejus ad bellumparadigm. First, it illuminates how the threshold requirements for indirect armed attacks (that is, the state acting through a private actor) have been lowered since the 1986Nicaraguadecision of the International Court of Justice. In so doing, the article suggests that in order to prevent a complete erosion of the benchmarks of an indirect armed attack, the notions of ‘substantial involvement’ in an armed attack, ‘harbouring’, and ‘unwillingness’ should be interpreted as manifestations of due diligence. Thereafter, the article illustrates that there is also an increasing attribution of armed attacks directly to non-state actors, notably those located in areas over which territorial states have lost control. Such states could be depicted as being ‘unable’ to counter the activities of non-state actors. The article further submits that particularly in these instances, the principle of necessity within the self-defence paradigm can play an important role in curbing the potential for abuse inherent in the vague notion of ‘inability’, if interpreted in light of Article 25 of the Articles on State Responsibility for Internationally Wrongful Acts.

Self-Defence and Israel in International Law: A Reappraisal

1976 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 516-562 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barry Feinstein
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
The State ◽  
Self Help ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right ◽  
Self Defence

Dean Acheson frankly reconfirmed the right of self-preservation, when he asserted, “…law simply does not deal with … questions of ultimate power—power that comes close to the sources of sovereignty…. No law can destroy the state creating the law. The survival of states is not a matter of law”. It is beyond the law.Given the existence of man's elementary loyalty to autonomous states, the necessity for using force springs from the need of states to depend fundamentally on self-help in order to guarantee their survival and welfare. This search for security in a system of politics without government, forces the state to be dependent upon military self-help.

Part 3 The Post 9/11-Era (2001–), 53 ‘Operation Phoenix’, the Colombian Raid Against the FARC in Ecuador—2008

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pinto Mónica ◽  
Kotlik Marcos
Keyword(s):  
Armed Forces ◽  
The Political ◽  
Organization Of American States ◽  
Territorial Integrity ◽  
American States ◽  
Political Cost ◽  
State Actors ◽  
The Right ◽  
Self Defence

This contribution examines the 2008 operation conducted by Colombia against a camp of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) located in the territory of Ecuador. It sets out the facts, the legal positions of both countries, the reactions of other governments in the continent, and how the situation was addressed within the Organization of American States and the Rio Group. It then analyses the operation in light of discussions about the possible exercise of the right to self-defence against non-state actors. The closing section suggests that, although the political cost for Colombia was relatively low, this case contributes to a restrictive interpretation of the right, to self-defence based on the inviolability of territorial integrity.

scholarly journals Self-Defence against Non-state Actors: The Interaction between Self-Defence as a Primary Rule and Self-Defence as a Secondary Rule

2016 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 801-825 ◽  
Author(s):  
NICHOLAS TSAGOURIAS
Keyword(s):  
Legal Issues ◽  
The Self ◽  
The Other ◽  
Security Threat ◽  
Alternative Framework ◽  
Primary Rule ◽  
State Actors ◽  
The Law ◽  
Secondary Rule ◽  
Self Defence

AbstractThis article examines the law of self-defence as applied to non-state attacks in light of the coalition air strikes against ISIL in Syria. It critiques the two current interpretations of the law of self-defence – one based on attribution and the other on the ‘unable or unwilling’ test – for failing to address adequately the security threat posed by non-state actors or for not addressing convincingly the legal issues arising from the fact that the self-defence action unfolds on the territory of another state. For this reason, it proposes an alternative framework which combines the primary rule of self-defence to justify the use of defensive force against non-state actors, with the secondary rule of self-defence to excuse the incidental breach of the territorial state's sovereignty.

scholarly journals BOOK REVIEW: PANCASILA MORALS, LAW AND POWER (MORAL PANCASILA, HUKUM, DAN KEKUASAAN)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ayu Aulia Rahmah ◽  
Moses Glorino Rumambo Pandin
Keyword(s):  
Human Resources ◽  
Legal Theory ◽  
The State ◽  
Correct Result ◽  
The People ◽  
Legal Situation ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right

The book called Moral Pancasila, Hukum, dan Kekuasaan was written by Romli Atmasasmita with the aim of being a form of participation in bringing legal civilization in Indonesia so that it can be better and more advanced. In this book, the author elaborates on legal theory related to Pancasila, which is the state ideology as well as the source of all legal sources. The writing of the book Moral Pancasila, Hukum, dan Kekuasaan is addressed to all readers as well as the nation's generation who are interested in law and especially experts and legal apparatus. The writer hopes that this book can provide insight and invites to manage law in the field of natural and human resources efficiently, productively, and constructively because the legal situation depends on the people who run it. If the law is implemented correctly by the right person, the law will give a fair and correct result.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document