Humanitarian intervention : bypassing state sovereignty

Abstract

This thesis examines the practice of humanitarian intervention and the ways in which it may be justified in leaping over the barrier of state sovereignty for the purpose of countering "abuses of individual and group human rights on an immense and brutal scale". The aftermath of the demise of the Cold War has witnessed a gradual shift in international law, which has given rise to the recognition that the increased respect for human rights, manifested through a myriad of United Nations Declarations, may have accelerated the erosion of the doctrine of state sovereignty. The principle of non-intervention into the domestic affairs of sovereign states has become less absolute, and as a result there now exists a rule, generally accepted in international law, that no sovereign state has the right to terrorise its own citizens. The behaviour of states towards their own subjects has come to deserve legitimate international concern, yet the confrontation between humanitarian intervention and the doctrine of state sovereignty remains a highly controversial issue. The true question revolving around this debate is whether, and if so, under what circumstances, international law today permits the use of military force in a sovereign state, without the consent of its government, for the purpose of preventing or relieving widespread death and suffering among the inhabitants of that state.