How the Responsibility to Protect Influences the Security Council’s Powers, Limits and Dynamic

in Journal of International Humanitarian Legal Studies
No Access
Get Access to Full Text
Rent on DeepDyve

Have an Access Token?



Enter your access token to activate and access content online.

Please login and go to your personal user account to enter your access token.



Help

Have Institutional Access?



Access content through your institution. Any other coaching guidance?



Connect

In 2005, the Responsibility to Protect was adopted in the World Summit Outcome with the aim to enable an efficient response to humanitarian crises by making the Security Council “work better”. The swift reaction to the events in Libya sparked the hope that the new concept enabled the Security Council to function this smoothly in the future. The debates within the Council in relation to the NATO intervention demonstrate that the Responsibility to Protect was able to contribute to this success in certain, limited ways. At the same time, these debates were herald to the problems experienced in relation to the events in Syria. Through an analyses of the debates concerning Libya within the Council, debates in other UN bodies related to the new concept, State practice, and relevant documents, this article will outline the potential of the Responsibility to Protect to make the Council “work better”, as well as its limitations.

How the Responsibility to Protect Influences the Security Council’s Powers, Limits and Dynamic

in Journal of International Humanitarian Legal Studies

Sections

References

  • 15

    Interlocutory Appealsupra note 13 para. 18.

  • 20

    Ian Brownlie as cited in Lambsupra note 18 at 375.

  • 21

    Interlocutory Appealsupra note 13.

  • 26

    Interlocutory Appealsupra note 13 para. 30.

  • 33

    Interlocutory Appealsupra note 13 par. 29; and Lamb supra note 18 at 365.

  • 46

    Zifcaksupra note 41 at 516.

  • 52

    C. Stahnsupra note 36 at 101.

  • 60

    Jenningssupra note 57 at 36.

  • 61

    Lucksupra note 55 at 18.

  • 62

    Stahnsupra note 36 at 100.

  • 64

    Stahnsupra note 36 at 108.

  • 69

    Weisssupra note 10 at 149.

  • 70

    Blokkersupra note 6 at 561-63.

  • 86

    Ki-moonsupra note 48 para. 10 (b).

  • 89

    Ki-moonsupra note 48 para. 61.

  • 90

    Lucksupra note 55 at 21.

  • 100

    Stahnsupra note 36 at 114.

  • 103

    Motion on Jurisdictionsupra note 24 para. 15.

  • 129

    A/RES/60/1supra note 46 para. 139.

  • 147

     See Orfordsupra note 38 at 168; Lamb supra note 18 at 376; and M. Benchikh ‘Rapport Introductif´ in M. Benchikh Les Organisations Internationales et les Conflits Armés 19 (2001) at 46–48.

  • 149

    Annansupra note 5 para. 125.

  • 153

    Ki-moonsupra note 3.

  • 158

    Ki-moon supra note 3 para. 12.

  • 173

    Lucksupra note 55 at 17.

Information

Content Metrics

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 33 33 9
Full Text Views 129 129 28
PDF Downloads 11 11 3
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0