What is it about?

The objects of this article are : (i) to assess critically the attempt to drive a horse and a coach through the provisions of Articles 2(4) and 51 of the UN Charter;(ii) to show that a legal regime laid down by the UN Charter which is founded on a genuine ius contra bellum ( law against war) remains unaffected; (iii) to show that the transmogrification of 'political sovereignty' to 'popular sovereignty' and the use of human rights as justifications for humanitarian intervention can be construed as a subterfuge; and (iv)to analyse the economic ,political and strategic reasons for humanitarian intervention and to show stretching international law to justify a 'right' is simply replaced by 'might'.

Featured Image

Read the Original

This page is a summary of: Forcible Protection of Nationals Abroad and Humanitarian Intervention: Might or Right?, International Law Research, August 2016, Canadian Center of Science and Education,
DOI: 10.5539/ilr.v5n1p152.
You can read the full text:

Read

Contributors

The following have contributed to this page