چکیده:
The paper is a follow up to report by Professor Christopher Greenwood of London School of Economics and Political Science, on right of self-defence.The author says that a century after the first Hague Peace Con/erence, the human race remains a victim of genocide and aggression and exposed to threat of use of chemical and bacteriologycal weapons.. She stresses that self-defence must be defined properly adding that this responsibility falls on the International Community of States.
خلاصه ماشینی:
1 So in spite of the prohibition2 of Article 2 (4) of the Charter of the United Nations; quot;all Members, shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against.
All the same, if international law clarifies the provisions for the exercise of this right and adopts sanctions for those states which do not abide by the rules and if the International Court of Justice, or future International Criminal Court are given some kind of compulsory jurisdiction to deal with those who misuse the right of self-defence, then hopefully 21st century would be a more peaceful era than the century which is ending with its shameful record for the mankind.
At least after the case of the Operation Desert Storm (that was to many scholars of international law, an example of self-defence) it seems that to be an instant action is no longer a condition for the exercise of the right.
The Persian Gulf Crisis, the involvement of the United Nations Security Council, the adoption of many resolutions in that connection, and consequently the Operation Desert Storm, once again revealed, not only the politicians but the scholars6 of international law do not hold the same idea about the interpretation7 of the Chapter VIl and especially article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, and the requirements for exercise of the right of self-defence.