1. PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW Dr. Indre Isokaite Law Faculty of Vilnius University Institute of International and EU Law Public Law Department 2016

2. 2 Principles of PIL UN Charter, 1970 UN GA declaration Peace and security Non use of force Peaceful settlement of disputes Territorial integrity of States Inviolability of State boundaries International relations Cooperation Sovereign equality Fulfillment of international obligations Non-intervention / non-interference Human rights: Self determination of nations Respect for human rights and freedoms

3. PIL principles 2625 (XXV). Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations 24 October 1970 http://www.un-documents.net/a25r2625.htm

4. 4 Prohibition to use force 1928 the General Treaty for the Renunciation of War (the Kellogg-Briand Pact): prohibition of the resort to war is now a valid principle of international law. The prohibition to use force does not mean that the use of force is in all circumstances illegal. Exceptions to the principle: Right to self-defence UN Security Council mandate (GA?) Humanitarian intervention (?) [Diplomatic protection (?) – NO]

5. 5 The UN Charter Article 2 (para 4): all Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations. Article 2 (para 4) as a provision of the UN Charter is addressed to all Members of the UN; however, the prohibition on the use of force is now regarded as a principle of customary international law, which has attained the character of jus cogens, and, as such, is addressed to all members of the international community.

6. 6 1970 General Assembly Declaration on Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation Among States in Accordance with the Charter of the UN Article 2(4) has been supplemented by 1970 General Assembly Declaration that adds: 1) A war of aggression constitutes a crime against the peace for which there is responsibility under international law. 2) States must not threaten or use force to violate existing international frontiers or to solve international disputes; 3) States are under a duty to refrain from acts of reprisal involving the use of force; 4) States must not use force to deprive peoples of their right to self- determination and independence; 5) States must refrain from organising, instigating, assisting or participating in acts of civil strife or terrorist acts in another state and must not encourage the formation of armed bands for incursion into another state‘s territory.

7. Definition of Aggression, UN General Assembly Resolution 3314 (XXIX) Any of the following acts, regardless of a declaration of war, shall qualify as an act of aggression: (a) The invasion or attack by the armed forces of a State of the territory of another State, or any military occupation, however temporary, resulting from such invasion or attack, or any annexation by the use of force of the territory of another State or part thereof, (b) Bombardment by the armed forces of a State against the territory of another State or the use of any weapons by a State against the territory of another State; (c) The blockade of the ports or coasts of a State by the armed forces of another State; (d) An attack by the armed forces of a State on the land, sea or air forces, or marine and air fleets of another State;

8. Definition of Aggression (e) The use of armed forces of one State which are within the territory of another State with the agreement of the receiving State, in contravention of the conditions provided for in the agreement or any extension of their presence in such territory beyond the termination of the agreement. (f) The action of a State in allowing its territory, which it has placed at the disposal of another State, to be used by that other State for perpetrating an act of aggression against a third State; (g) The sending by or on behalf of a State of armed bands, groups, irregulars or mercenaries, which carry out acts of armed force against another State of such gravity as to amount to the acts listed above, or its substantial involvement therein.

9. Prohibition to use force: UNSC authorisation Every dispute shall be settled peacefully: Chapter VI of UN Charter (SC can make recommendations, etc.). If not efficient... Chapter VII applies: Article 39: the SC shall determine existence of threat to peace… Article 41: measures not involving use of force, e.g. interruption of economic or diplomatic relations, etc. If not sufficient or may be not sufficient... Article 42: measures involving use of (military) force in order to restore peace and security – UN interventions.

10. Peaceful measures Chapter VI Article 33 1. The parties to any dispute, the continuance of which is likely to endanger the maintenance of international peace and security, shall, first of all, seek a solution by negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements, or other peaceful means of their own choice. 2. The Security Council shall, when it deems necessary, call upon the parties to settle their dispute by such means.

11. Maintaining peace and security When a complaint concerning a threat to peace is brought before it, the Security Council’s first action is usually to recommend that the parties try to reach agreement by peaceful means. The Council may: set forth principles for such an agreement; undertake investigation and mediation, in some cases; dispatch a mission; appoint special envoys; or request the Secretary-General to use his good offices to achieve a pacific settlement of the dispute. http://www.un.org/en/sc/about/

12. Maintaining peace and security When a dispute leads to hostilities, the Council’s primary concern is to bring them to an end as soon as possible. In that case, the Council may: issue ceasefire directives that can help prevent an escalation of the conflict; dispatch military observers or a peacekeeping force to help reduce tensions, separate opposing forces and establish a calm in which peaceful settlements may be sought. Beyond this, the Council may opt for enforcement measures, including: economic sanctions, arms embargoes, financial penalties and restrictions, and travel bans; severance of diplomatic relations; blockade; or even collective military action.

13. “Chapter Six and a Half“ “The term ‘peacekeeping‘ is not found in the United Nations Charter and defies simple definition. Dag Hammarskjöld, the second UN Secretary-General, referred to it as belonging to "Chapter Six and a Half" of the Charter, placing it between traditional methods of resolving disputes peacefully, such as negotiation and mediation under Chapter VI, and more forceful action as authorized under Chapter VII.” http://www.unis.unvienna.org/unis/en/60yearsPK/

14. Iraq-Kuwait, 1990 www.contrainjerencia.com

15. Iraq-Kuwait, 1990 On 2 August 1990, Iraq invaded and occupied Kuwait. The Security Council adopted its resolution 660 (1990), condemning the invasion and demanding Iraq’s immediate and unconditional withdrawal its forces to the positions they had occupied the previous day. A few days later, the Council instituted mandatory arms and economic sanctions against Iraq. In all, over the period between 2 August and 29 November 1990, the Council adopted 12 resolutions on various aspects of the situation between Iraq and Kuwait, culminating in resolution 678 (1990). That resolution specified that if Iraq had not fully implemented by 15 January 1991 all of the Council's resolutions relating to the occupation of Kuwait, Member States cooperating with Kuwait's legitimate Government were authorized to use "all necessary means" to compel Iraq to do so and restore international peace and security in the area. http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/missions/past/unikom/backg round.html

16. UN SC Sanction? Iraq, 2003 Resolution 1441 (2002) Adopted by the Security Council at its 4644th meeting, on 8 November 2002 The Security Council... “12. Decides to convene immediately upon receipt of a report in accordance with paragraphs 4 or 11 above, in order to consider the situation and the need for full compliance with all of the relevant Council resolutions in order to secure international peace and security; 13. Recalls, in that context, that the Council has repeatedly warned Iraq that it will face serious consequences as a result of its continued violations of its obligations; 14. Decides to remain seized of the matter.“

17. Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, ICJ 1996 “... the threat or use of nuclear weapons would generally be contrary to the rules of international law applicable in armed conflict, and in particular the principles and rules of humanitarian law; However, in view of the current state of international law, and of the elements of fact at its disposal, the Court cannot conclude definitively whether the threat or use of nuclear weapons would be lawful or unlawful in an extreme circumstance of self-defence, in which the very survival of a State would be at stake; “

18. http://www.un.org/disarmament/WMD/Nuclear/NWFZ.shtml

19. 19 Self-defence The Caroline incident (1837): The exercise of force in self-defence was justified under customary international law provided that the need for it was instant, overwhelming, immediate, leaving no choice of means and no moment for deliberation and there was no viable alternative sanction which could be taken. The action taken must not be unreasonable or excessive (i.e. must be proportional). http://www.uni- miskolc.hu/~wwwdrint/20042rouillard1.htm

20. 20 Article 51 of the UN Charter Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defence shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security.

21. 21 Nicaragua case, ICJ 1986 The ICJ in the Nicaragua case clearly established that the right of self- defence existed as an inherent right under customary international law as well as under the UN Charter. Customary law continued to exist alongside treaty law. The Court also noted that an „armed attack“ included not only action by regular armed forces across an international border, but additionally the sending by or behalf of a state of armed bands or groups which carry out acts of armed force of such a gravity as to amount to an actual armed attack conducted by regular armed forces. In addition, the criteria of a collective self-defence have been set.

22. Nicaragua - USA case, ICJ 1986 www.cja.org http://www.peacepalacelibrary.nl/2011/06/confer ence-about-icjs-judgment-in-the-case-between- nicaragua-and-the-usa/

23. Self-defence: 11 September 2001 “Today our fellow citizens, our way of life, our very freedom came under attack in a series of deliberate and deadly terrorist acts. The victims were in airplanes or in their offices: secretaries, business men and women, military and Federal workers, moms and dads, friends and neighbours. Thousands of lives were suddenly ended by evil, despicable acts of terror.“ // George W. Bush http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=58057 www.telegraph.co.uk; www.britannica.com

24. Lrytas.lt

25. Operation Entebbe, 1976 https://nhlife.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/en tebbe12.jpg

26. Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Uganda) Africa's Great War / Second Congo War (1998-2003) (ICJ judgement, 2005) http://sfbayview.com/2009/03/the-african- holocaust-in-dr-congo-war-for-the-sake-of-war-itself/

27. International Court of Justice... Finds that the Republic of Uganda, by engaging in military activities against the Democratic Republic of the Congo on the latter’s territory, by occupying Ituri and by actively extending military, logistic, economic and financial support to irregular forces having operated on the territory of the DRC, violated the principle of non-use of force in international relations and the principle of non-intervention.

28. International Court of Justice... Finds that the Republic of Uganda, by the conduct of its armed forces, which committed acts of killing, torture and other forms of inhumane treatment of the Congolese civilian population, destroyed villages and civilian buildings, failed to distinguish between civilian and military targets and to protect the civilian population in fighting with other combatants, trained child soldiers, incited ethnic conflict and failed to take measures to put an end to such conflict; as well as by its failure, as an occupying Power, to take measures to respect and ensure respect for human rights and international humanitarian law in Ituri district, violated its obligations under international human rights law and international humanitarian law.

29. International Court of Justice... Finds that the Republic of Uganda, by acts of looting, plundering and exploitation of Congolese natural resources committed by members of the Ugandan armed forces in the territory of the Democratic Republic of the Congo and by its failure to comply with its obligations as an occupying Power in Ituri district to prevent acts of looting, plundering and exploitation of Congolese natural resources, violated obligations owed to the Democratic Republic of the Congo under international law.

30. Responsibility to Protect (R2P): humanitarian intervention “…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?“ http://responsibilitytoprotect.org/ICISS%20Report.pdf http://www.un.org/en/preventgenocide/adviser/responsi bility.shtml Arguments for and against humanitarian intervention?

31. Rwanda genocide, 1994 “In the weeks after April 6, 1994, 800,000 men, women, and children perished in the Rwandan genocide, perhaps as many as three quarters of the Tutsi population. At the same time, thousands of Hutu were murdered because they opposed the killing campaign and the forces directing it.“ “Aware from the start that Tutsi were being targeted for elimination, the leading foreign actors refused to acknowledge the genocide. Not only did international leaders reject what was going on, but they also declined for weeks to use their political and moral authority to challenge the legitimacy of the genocidal government.“ http://www.unitedhumanrights.org/genocide/genocide_in_rwanda.htm Photo: bbc.com

32. 32 Responsibility to Protect (R2P): humanitarian intervention Humanitarian intervention is a military intervention with exclusive aim of protection of fundamental human rights of the population suffering from crimes against humanity or genocide and the Government does not want or is not able to stop such human rights violations. Certain requirements shall be strictly followed: UNSC authorisation, proportionality, the last resort, precaution, responsibility to rebuild after intervention, etc. Although has been controversial, is now more recognised than denied, as was supported by UNSC and elaborated in the report “Responsibility to protect” by the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty, 2001: http://responsibilitytoprotect.org/ICISS%20Report.pdf Also in UN SG, SC documents http://www.un.org/en/preventgenocide/adviser/responsibility.shtml

33. Lybia, 2011 www.theguardian.com www.theatlantic.com

34. Libya, humanitarian intervention, 2011 Following widespread and systematic attacks against the civilian population by the regime in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya (Libya), the UN Security Council, on 26 February 2011, unanimously adopted resolution 1970, making explicit reference to the responsibility to protect. Deploring what it called "the gross and systematic violation of human rights" in strife-torn Libya, the Security Council demanded an end to the violence, "recalling the Libyan authorities’ responsibility to protect its population," and imposed a series of international sanctions. The Council also decided to refer the situation to the International Criminal Court.resolution 1970 In resolution 1973, adopted on 17 March 2011, the Security Council demanded an immediate ceasefire in Libya, including an end to ongoing attacks against civilians, which it said might constitute "crimes against humanity." The Council authorized Member States to take "all necessary measures" to protect civilians under threat of attack in the country, while excluding a foreign occupation force of any form on any part of Libyan territory. A few days later, acting on the resolution, NATO planes started striking at Qadhafi’s forces.resolution 1973 http://www.un.org/en/preventgenocide/rwanda/about/bgresponsibility.sht ml

35. Diplomatic protection? Diplomatic protection – peaceful measures, not related with coersive measures Draft Articles on Diplomatic Protection http://legal.un.org/avl/ha/adp/adp.html