Posted: April 17th, 2015

public international law

the principle of humanitarian intervention has been used to justify the use of force without UN security council authorization in past cases.what are the arguments for and against the development of this principle?provide a critical assessment of which arguments,in your view,carry most weight and/or appear to be more persuasive.critically analyse the above with reference to relevant laws,cases and case studies.

in answering this essay question you should include the followings:
the general prohibition on the use of force under article 2(4) of the UN Charter (discuss with reference to law and case law.
however,what are the uncontroversial exceptions to this prohibition on the use of force?
should humanitarian intervention be seen as an emerging exception to this prohibition(define ‘humanitarian intervention’,has it been used in the past?)
what are the arguments for humanitarian intervention?
what are the arguments against humanitarian intervention?
critically assesss which arguments in your view carry most weight/appear to be more persuasive