Search: self-defense

such attacks”, “consistent with Article 51 of the UN Charter”. While the right of self-defense of Iraq (which invited the US forces to intervene) had already been referred to in former statements of US officials, one should wonder which implications the second half of this statement, “U.S. national self-defense” will carry. It might indicate that even if Iraq withdrew its invitation, the United States would consider itself to nevertheless be in a position to continue operations based on the violation of above-mentioned “interests”, IS being “a threat not only to...

...prohibition to three specific categories of force. Meg deGuzman What I find most perplexing about Harold's post is that rather than arguing that UHI is legal he proposes "a narrow 'affirmative defense' that would render lawful otherwise illegal behavior." Under criminal law theory, to render behavior legal the defense would have to be a justification defense rather than an excuse defense (which merely excuses unlawful conduct). Justification defenses (like self-defense and necessity) usually require imminence -- no time to take the usual (legal) route without risking serious harm to self/others....

sovereignty is contested." Or maybe "any of the wars it is likely to contemplate would be (at least arguably) consistent with Article II’s self defense obligations."). Put aside, again, the validity of the territorial claim, and whether this kind of argument is properly characterized as self-defense or simply not an unlawful use of force in the meaning of 2(4). The latter of your views sounds a lot like India's position in India/Goa, which perhaps suggests poetic justice. Still, in your view, is there not a point at which using force...

...military assistance to Ukraine do so openly and have justified their conduct by arguing that it aims to assist the victim of aggression to exercise its individual right of self-defense to repel an armed attack. There is remarkable consistency in the relevant statements by the EU, the USA, the UK and Germany. It is interesting that the assisting States do not invoke the right of collective self-defense, as this is a ground enabling the lawful use of force and would as a matter of principle make these States parties to...

...Uganda airport) cannot qualify as acts of self-defense because the operations targeted non-state actors. Principles of Self-Defense. A number of customary international law principles underlie the exercise of the right of self-defense. Readers will, of course, be most familiar with the principles of necessity (i.e., using only the degree of force, not otherwise prohibited by the law of armed conflict, required to achieve the enemy’s complete or partial submission at the earliest possible moment with minimum loss of life and resources), proportionality (i.e., the losses resulting from a military action...

...of putting into effect a collective security system. Its main body, the Security Council, is entitled under article 39 of the Charter to determine the existence of threats to peace, breaches thereof or acts of aggression, being able to decide non-forcible or forcible measures (arts. 41 and 42). Such collective security regime coexists with that of collective self-defense under the Charter. According to Hans Kelsen, collective self-defense differs from collective security in that under the former states have the faculty to intervene when invited by the victim state, whereas under...

As was widely reported in the media, Khamis al-Obeidi, a defense attorney for Saddam and his half-brother Barzan Ibrahim, was murdered two weeks ago. Al-Obeidi is the third defense attorney to be killed during the trial. Human Rights Watch has released a statement regarding the need to protect defense counsel — current and future — appearing before the Iraqi High tribunal. With their permission, I am reproducing it in full: The brutal murder of Iraqi lawyer Khamis Al-Obeidi, defense counsel for former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, underlines the urgent need...

...of arms than its predecessors. On paper, there is reason to be optimistic: the Court has adopted comprehensive regulations governing the qualifications required of defense counsel and the provision of resources to the defense. In terms of qualifications, the ICC requires all defense counsel to have at least 10 years experience in international or criminal law and procedure, including relevant experience – whether as judge, prosecutor, or defense attorney – in criminal proceedings. Moreover, the Court has created an Office of Public Counsel for the defense that is responsible for...

...a backdoor way of amending the Charter without going through the difficult process of amending the Charter. A far better and more fruitful exercise is to examine article 51 of the UN Charter more closely. Article 51 preserves the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense, or what the French-language version of the Charter refers to as the droit naturel de legitimate defense. The right to legitimate defense (which covers both self- and other-defense) is a natural law right. It isn’t created by the UN Charter or by positive law...

...a belligerent still has responsibilities under int'l law. It is certainly possible to conclude that the old regiime is no longer the legitimate govt. of Syria, esp. under Univ. Dec. H.R. art. 21(3) and major developments in the law of self-determination. It is possible for the legitimate rep. of the people of Syria to request aid that would be considered to be self-determination assistance and/or collective self-defents (since self-defense under customary int'l law is not merely a right of a state or a "govt."). Certainly, international law has never been...

...as many defense agents as possible into their platform ecosystem. By rapidly exploiting these network effects and scaling up this way, the most successful defense tech companies set out to disrupt the defense market in the years to come. Early movers such as Shield AI, Anduril, Rebellion Defense, and Palantir are rewarded by this model and raise the most funding from venture capital. They are now starting to compete with industrial defense companies, either directly by building the military hardware themselves or by partnering up and renting out software solutions...

...one assumes ‘no Security Council authorization’, is to argue not just that’s it’s legitimate, but that it is actually legal. In rough terms, this means appeal to self-defense (including the defense of others who can’t defend themselves) from aggression as an on-going customary law right, including under the Charter. The legal argument then runs to a point crucial in many justifications of humanitarian intervention under “Responsibility to Protect” (R2P). Self-defense, or defense of others, can run not just to defending a state, but to defending a state’s own people. Including...