Legislation and Adjudication in the UN Security Council: Bringing Down the Deliberative Deficit

2008 ◽  
Vol 102 (2) ◽  
pp. 275-308 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ian Johnstone
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Security Council ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
United Nations Security Council ◽  
Weapons Of Mass Destruction ◽  
Democratic Deficit ◽  
Mass Destruction ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
Financing Of Terrorism ◽  
Set Up

Critiques of decision making in international organizations are often framed in terms of the democratic deficit. Leveled against the United Nations Security Council, the charge has become more pointed in light of recent quasi-legislative and quasi-judicial acts—most notably the adoption of Resolutions 1373 and 1540 on the financing of terrorism and the spread of weapons of mass destruction, respectively, and the Resolution 1267 sanctions regime, which targets individuals suspected of involvement in terrorism. With the first two resolutions, the Security Council imposed general obligations on all states for an indefinite period; with the third, it set up a sanctions committee that has courtlike powers to identify and freeze the assets of individuals, groups, and corporations. Despite broad sympathy among the UN membership for collective counterterrorist action in the aftermath of the attacks of September 11, 2001, a degree of skepticism accompanied these initiatives from the start and grew with the diplomatic debacle surrounding the war in Iraq. Some critics asked whether an “imperial” Security Council had become an instrument for the imposition of “hegemonic international law.” The Council has moved to address these concerns, but they remain serious enough that the regimes established under Resolutions 1267, 1373, and 1540 are at risk of collapsing.

un Security Council vs. Weapons of Mass Destruction

2016 ◽  
Vol 85 (2) ◽  
pp. 147-161
Author(s):  
Hans Blix
Keyword(s):  
Cold War ◽  
Security Council ◽  
International Institutions ◽  
Great Powers ◽  
Weapons Of Mass Destruction ◽  
Mass Destruction ◽  
Nuclear Program ◽  
Major Powers ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
The Cold War

International institutions given the task to maintain collective security and to seek disarmament need to build on cooperation between major powers. The authors of the un Charter vested great powers in the Security Council but a consensus between the five permanent great powers was required for use of the powers. This inevitably paralyzed the Council during the Cold War. After the end of the Cold War, the permanent members have remained unable jointly to pursue disarmament, but they have succeeded in several remarkable cases to reach consensus, notably on measures to prevent the further spread of weapons of mass destruction. The quick action to eliminate chemical weapons in Syria was a win-win case led by us-Russian diplomacy, while the comprehensive deal settling the controversy over Iran’s nuclear program was a victory for patient diplomacy involving all permanent members and the eu. These actions show the potentials of the Council.

What Future for the UN Charter System of War Prevention?

2003 ◽  
Vol 97 (3) ◽  
pp. 590-598 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard A. Falk
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Security Council ◽  
United Nations Security Council ◽  
Sovereign State ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
Inspection Process ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Relationship

President George W. Bush historically challenged the United Nations Security Council when he uttered some memorable words in the course of his September 12, 2002, speech to the General Assembly: “Will the UN serve the purpose of its founding, or will it be irrelevant?” In the aftermath of the Iraq war there are at least two answers to this question. The answer of the U.S. government would be to suggest that the United Nations turned out to be irrelevant due to its failure to endorse recourse to war against the Iraq of Saddam Hussein. The answer of those who opposed the war is that the UN Security Council served the purpose of its founding by its refusal to endorse recourse to a war that could not be persuasively reconciled with the UN Charter and international law. This difference of assessment is not just factual, whether Iraq was a threat and whether the inspection process was succeeding at a reasonable pace; it was also conceptual, even jurisprudential. The resolution of this latter debate is likely to shape the future role of the United Nations, as well as influence the attitude of the most powerful sovereign state as to the relationship between international law generally and the use of force as an instrument of foreign policy.

Military Enforcement of Arms Control in Iraq

1998 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 497-511
Author(s):  
Guido den Dekker ◽  
Ramses A. Wessel
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Security Council ◽  
Arms Control ◽  
Weapons Of Mass Destruction ◽  
Fundamental Issue ◽  
Mass Destruction ◽  
Enforcement Action ◽  
Legal Questions ◽  
Council Decision ◽  
The Many

The effects of the 1990 Iraqi invasion of Kuwait are felt strongly up to the present day. On numerous occasions, the inspection teams of the UN Special Commission (UNSCOM) have encountered serious problems and opposition by the Iraqi government when verifying the non-production of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Among the many legal questions raised by the Iraqi-Kuwait war's aftermath, a fundamental issue is whether – in the absence of an explicit Security Council decision – compliance by Iraq with its obligations may be enforced by military means. In this article, this question is addressed by examining whether military enforcement action can be based on Security Council resolutions adopted earlier in the course of the conflict, especially Resolutions 678 (1990), in which the Council authorised the use of ‘all necessary means’, and 1154 (1998), in which the ‘Memorandum of Understanding’ between the UN and Iraq was endorsed. It is argued that without a further mandate from the Security Council, military enforcement of arms control in Iraq under the present circumstances is prohibited by international law.

Has the United Nations Security Council Implicitly Removed Al Bashir's Immunity?

2010 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 275-288 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sophie Papillon
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Security Council ◽  
United Nations Security Council ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Arrest Warrant ◽  
Head Of State ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
Heads Of State

AbstractOn 4 March 2009, the ICC issued an arrest warrant for Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, the incumbent Head of State of Sudan. This article's purpose is to suggest a legal basis for reconciling the well established rule on personal immunities under customary international law with the prosecution of Heads of State from non-parties to the ICC Statute. While arguing for the legality of Al Bashir's warrant as well as the legality of the warrant's enforcement, this article explores the basis upon which the UN Security Council can remove immunities. By giving special attention to the concept of waivers, the article suggests that the UN organ implicitly removed Al Bashir's immunity when it referred the situation of Sudan to the ICC in 2005.

scholarly journals Reformation of the united nations security council as a key issue in world politics

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 42-58
Author(s):  
Yuri A. Tsvetkov
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Security Council ◽  
World Order ◽  
World Politics ◽  
United Nations Security Council ◽  
African Countries ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
The World ◽  
Permanent Member ◽  
The Status

The author of the article substantiates the position that the issue of reform of the Security Council, the main political body of the UN, is a key issue in world politics and international law, and intersects with the strategic interests of states, the most active players on the world stage, as well as the interests of all regions of the world. The article analyzes the advantages afforded to permanent members of this body and describes the main approaches to Security Council reform. It critically assesses attempts to deconstruct the world order through such reform and suggests ways to counter them. It also formulates criteria for evaluating compliance with the status of a permanent member of the Security Council. and demonstrates the potential of these criteria by evaluating the validity of claims and real chances for this status by the group of four G-4 states (Brazil, India, Germany, and Japan), as well as by European and African countries. The author offers a model of UN Security Council reform that takes into account the interests of Russia and world realities.

scholarly journals Genocide in Light of the Principles and Rules of International Law

2015 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 247
Author(s):  
Mohamad Badrnajad Horand ◽  
Babak Pourghahramani
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Security Council ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
Terrorist Groups ◽  
The Right

<p>In Article 2 (4) of the UN Charter has agreed that members of the United Nations must not intervene in internal affairs of another country, and sovereignty and territorial integrity of countries must be respected. Now in Syria, ISIL terrorist group is committed crimes against Shiites with the involvement of Western and Arabic countries, most of which are permanent members of the Security Council. Crimes that deprive peace, security and the right to life, causing disruption to international and regional peace and security must be prosecuted not to witness the occurrence of such crimes. Killings committed by terrorist groups against Shiites in Syria are genocide under Article 6 of the Statute of the International Criminal Court and lack of attention to crimes committed by terrorist groups in international institutions such as the International Criminal Court continues to bring chaos for the international community and are the unpleasant results resulting from weakness of courts and international organizations including the UN Security Council.</p>

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document