The responsibility to protect and the use of force in international law
| Autor | Luís Paulo Bogliolo Piancastelli |
| Cargo | Aluno do 9º semestre do curso de Direito, na UnB, e intercambista na Universidade Science Po ? Paris |
| Páginas | 1-13 |
Regras para Citação:
PIANCASTELLI, L. P. B. The Responsibility to Protect and the Use of Force in
International Law. Revista dos E studantes de Direito da Universidade de Brasília, n. 8,
p. 59-84, 2009.
THE RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT AND THE USE OF FORCE IN INTERNATIONAL LAW
Luís Paulo Bogliolo Piancastelli
1
ABSTRACT: The following article deals with the dev elopments in recent years on the debate concerning
humanitarian intervention and the framework of public international law regarding the use of force. It
specifically focuses on how the doctrine of the Responsibility to P rotect (R2P) has developed over the
years and why it can not be seen as a contribution to the affirmation of a so-called “right” of
humanitarian intervention.
Keywords: international law; force; intervention; responsibility to protect.
1. Introduction
In 2001 the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS)
presented a report named “The Responsibility to Protect”
2
. The aim of this re port was to bring
new light into the long-standing controversy around the so-called right of humanitarian
intervention. The question to be answered was given by Kofi Annan, the former Secretary-
General of the United Nations, at the United Nations General Assembly in 1999 and again in
2000: “if humanitarian intervention is, indeed, an unacceptable assault on sovereignty, how
should we respond to a Rwanda, to a Srebrenica – to gross and systematic violations of human
rights that affect every precept of our common humanity?”.
Since the publication of the Commission’s Report, t he idea of a responsibility to
protect has generated great enthusiasm and great controversy in the international arena. It
has been said that apart from the prevention of genocide after the Second World War, no
other idea has moved faster in international fora than the Responsibility to Protect (R2P)
3
. This
paper will examine and discuss the contributions and effects the doctrine of the responsibility
to protect has brought to the underlying problem of military intervention for humanitarian
purposes.
The main problematic here is to determine whether the responsibility to protect
provides or not a firm basis for the affirmation of a right of humanitarian intervention. In order
to reach an answer t o this issue, it is essential to make preliminary distinctions concerning the
term “humanitarian intervention”. As we understand it, humanitarian intervention consists of
“coercive action by one or more states involving the use of armed force in another state
without the consent of its authorities, and with the purpose of preventing widespread
suffering or death among inhabitants”
4
. One must draw a line between humanitarian
intervention and other legal arguments for the use of force that may include a humanitarian
component. Apart from actions in self-defence or with Security Council authorization, these
1
Aluno do 9º semestre do curso de Direito, na UnB, e intercambista na Universidade Science Po – Paris.
2
ICISS (2001)
3
WEISS (2006, p.741)
4
ROBERTS (1999, p.4)
Para continuar a ler
PEÇA SUA AVALIAÇÃO