International law regarding use of force – OUP Blog

Posted November 19th, 2018 in international law, news, precedent, United Nations, use of force by states by sally

‘Through the power of precedent, international incidents involving the use of force help to clarify the meaning and interpretation of jus ad bellum, the corpus of rules arising from international custom and the United Nations Charter that govern the use of force. UN Charter Article 2(4) forbids states from using force in their international relations. Exceptions to this prohibition are acts taken in self-defence under UN Charter Article 51 or under the auspices of a UN Security Council authorization to use force under Article 42. States can also consent that another state use force in its territory, for example to combat rebel or terrorist actors. In certain cases, state practice gives rise to new interpretations of existing rules or novel exceptions emerge. Through the study of precedents scholars often consider whether or not there has been a shift in the legal landscape. To give but a few illustrations, commentators have questioned if States take measures of self-defence under Article 51 to protect nationals abroad (a justification that has been invoked at various moments, for instance by Russia in the context of the crisis in Georgia in 2008), if a right to humanitarian intervention has emerged (a discussion triggered by the Kosovo crisis in 1999), or if self-defence under Article 51 can be invoked against non-state actors (a topical debate in the post 9/11 era). Consequently, depending on the precedent’s facts and the arguments invoked by the main protagonists different legal issues can be triggered.’

Full Story

OUP Blog, 19th November 2018

Source: blog.oup.com

Veronika Fikfak and Hayley J. Hooper: Whither the War Powers Convention? What Next for Parliamentary Control of Armed Conflict after Syria? – UK Constitutional Law Association

‘On Friday 13 April 2018 the Royal Air Force participated in air strikes (together with the United States and France) to degrade the Syrian regime’s chemical weapons capability and to deter further chemical attacks. This intervention in Syria was not authorised by the UN Security Council, nor was the involvement of British troops approved by the House of Commons. Instead, the decision to send British forces to Syria was made by The Prime Minister Theresa in conjunction with the Cabinet. Readers can view her public statement from 14 April 2018 here. Events unfolded this way despite governmental acknowledgement of a War Powers Convention in the 2011 Cabinet Manual.’

Full Story

UK Constitutional Law Association, 20th April 2018

Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org

The legal basis for air strikes against Syrian government targets – House of Commons Library

‘This paper looks at the general prohibition in international law on the use of force or threat of force directed at other states, and the legal advice on which the Government decided to participate with the US and France in air strikes on Syrian government targets on 14 April.’

Full text

House of Commons Library, 16th April 2018

Source: www.parliament.uk