Search results
focus is laid on the legal effects of the Security Council’s resolutions. A discussion on the limits to the Security Council’s powers and the remedies against their violations concludes the chapter. The pivotal role of Art. 39 of the Charter It is appropriate to begin the analysis of the collective security system established by the
immense suffering, many in MSF came around to the view that ‘silence kills’. This led to all MSF sections agreeing, in 1992, to remove the confidentiality provisions from the charter ( Weissman, 2011 : 183). And the Chantilly Principles, agreed in 1995, made public denunciation a key pillar of témoignage . But with the dawn of the new century, a series of internal and external factors forced a reboot of the concept, which had rarely inspired consensus
government to clarify their intent. But the Italian authorities demanded signature within a week of receiving the text. Ultimately, MSF refused to sign the code of conduct, and was greeted with exactly the massive public criticism it feared in the Italian media for doing so ( Galli della Loggia, 2017 ; Picardi, 2017 ). But its partner on the MV Aquarius , and the charterer of the ship, SOS Méditerranée, did sign at a later stage, meaning that the vessel did agree to comply
This book is the collective use of force within the framework of the Charter, whose ambitious project is based on the premise that armed force can be resorted to exclusively in the common interest. It begins with a short discussion of the powers granted to the Security Council for the discharge of its primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security, and the conditions under which these powers may be exercised. The United States, supported by its NATO allies, or at least some of them, openly challenged the authority of the Security Council and attempted to downgrade its authorisation from a legal requirement to a matter of political convenience. The book deals with the use of force by States either individually or jointly. Through the lenses of the interaction between the Charter and customary international law, it considers the evolution of the right to self-defence, the only exception expressly provided for in the Charter, and the possible re-emergence of other exceptions. The book focuses in particular on the controversial question concerning the legality of the threat or use of nuclear weapons in self-defence and of the pre-emptive military action against threats posed by these weapons. Often referring to the recent Iraqi crisis, it further deals with the collective and unilateral means at the disposal of the United Nations and its members to enforce disarmament obligations and tackle the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.
, should be composed essentially of Mandingo, or Fulbe, or Songhai, then we should have problems’: cited in Thornberry, Minorities and Human Rights Law, p. 22. 7 The Charter of the OAU 1963 outlines purposes and aims of the OAU, including ‘to defend the States’ sovereignty, their territorial integrity and independence’; principles to which members adhere include ‘respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of each State and for its inalienable right to independent existence’. This reverse an earlier policy of abolition or adjustment of colonial frontiers
regulation of force have been disrupted by the new threats to international peace and security caused by terrorism and weapons of mass destruction, 1 or whether they may still be adequate, with certain adjustments where necessary, to govern the use of force in international law. 2 The study rejects a static vision of the Charter in favour of a more flexible and mainly inductive approach 3 based on the analysis of the practice
The collective security system and the unilateral or joint use of force are not sealed compartments. Their interaction is manifest in Art. 51 of the Charter, which temporally limits the right to self-defence until the Security Council discharges its responsibilities. Perhaps less evident, but nonetheless equally important, is the function of
This chapter discusses the extent to which the collective security system established in the Charter could function in the 1990s in spite of the non-implementation of Arts. 43 et seq . of the Charter. Alongside the dilatation of the notion of threat to peace, the frequent authorisation of the use of force granted to Member States is certainly
producing workers deserving of the vote, but despite this important caveat they were not clear how exactly power would be granted to the working class once they were improved –or, indeed, how ‘improvement’ was quantifiable and what an improved worker would actually look like. Being vague on this point may have helped rebuild and stabilise the movement in the 1840s and avoided repeating the tired arguments about revolution and violence from 1839, but the stated aims of the ‘Charter and something more’ were unlikely to be delivered by the counter-culture that the movement