Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Introduction

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Strategic Use of International Law by the United Nations Security Council

Part of the book series: SpringerBriefs in Law ((BRIEFSLAW))

Abstract

The study of the laws governing the functioning of the United Nations Security Council (SC) has fascinated generations of scholars from various fields, including international relations, history and law. From international legal perspective, the main point of attraction is represented by the powers bestowed on the SC by the founders of the UN Charter. Such powers are both legal, as long as they have been enshrined in the UN Charter, and highly discretional, since they are not subject to the formal scrutiny and control of any international subject other than the SC itself.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Bourandonis (2005), p. 14.

  2. 2.

    See, among many, Hassler (2013); Malone (2008), pp. 131–132; Weiss and Karen (2005), pp. 131–154; Fassbender (2004), pp. 341–356.

  3. 3.

    Barnett and Finnemore (2008), pp. 43–48; Chesterman et al. (2008), p. 583.

  4. 4.

    Hassler (2013), p. 2.

  5. 5.

    Chesterman et al. (2008), p. 19; Schweigman (2001), pp. 288–289; Hassler (2013), p. 2.

  6. 6.

    Franck (2009), p. xiv.

  7. 7.

    Hassler (2013), pp. 5, 220 and 232.

  8. 8.

    See UN Charter Art. 23(1) on equitable geographical distribution.

  9. 9.

    Hassler (2013), p. 3 (stressing that “Few… consider the question whether it is reform that should be aimed for, or whether better use should be made of the Council in its present form”).

  10. 10.

    See, in general, Delbrück (2002), p. 442.

  11. 11.

    Powell (2007), p. 157. See also Tsagourias (2011), p. 539; Rosand (2005), p. 542; Akram and Shah (2005), p. 431; Marschik (2005), p. 457. Fassbender also argues that the legislative power is jointly held by the UN General Assembly and the SC, which also exercises executive powers. See Fassbender (1998), p. 574.

  12. 12.

    In a celebrated book, de Wet assessed the role of jus cogens and human rights norms in limiting the SC’s enforcement powers, as set forth in Chap. 7 of the UN Charter. See de Wet (2004).

  13. 13.

    Henderson and Lubell (2013), p. 369.

  14. 14.

    See, among many, Malone (2008), p. 117; Chesterman et al. (2008); Tzanakopoulos (2013); de Wet (2004).

  15. 15.

    Barnett and Finnemore (2008), p. 41.

  16. 16.

    Rodley and Çalı (2010), p. 226.

  17. 17.

    Rodley and Çalı (2010).

  18. 18.

    Res 144(1960).

  19. 19.

    Draft Res 189(2014).

  20. 20.

    Epstein and Martin (2014); Kritzer (2010), p. 875; see also Kritzer (2009). On the growing demand for empirical research on law, see Epstein and King (2003), p. 311; Genn et al. (2006).

  21. 21.

    UN law, like the law of the sea and the law of diplomatic protection, is virtually unexplored from an empirical perspective. On this issue, see Ginsburg and Shaffer (2010), p. 780. Other studies have analysed selected aspects of international economic law, international investment law, international criminal law and international human rights law. See, for example, Posner and de Figueredo (2005); Puig (2014); Simmons and Braidenbach (2011); Franck (2008); Fauchald (2008); Bohlander and Findlay (2002); Elkins et al. (2013).

  22. 22.

    See, for instance, Crootof (2013).

  23. 23.

    Kritzer and Cane (2010), p. 4. Data collected may be either quantitative or qualitative. See Kritzer (2010), p. 883. For an overview of qualitative techniques in social science research, see Webley (2010), p. 926ff.

  24. 24.

    On the intellectual origins of the ELS movement and its relation to other disciplines, see Eisenberg (2011); Heise (2002); Ho and Kramer (2013).

  25. 25.

    <www.un.org/en/sc/documents/resolutions/> accessed 17 June 2015.

  26. 26.

    Simma et al. (2002), pp. 519–520. On the interpretation of SC resolutions, see Orakhelshvili (2007).

  27. 27.

    There is no generally accepted definition of Middle East. For the purposes of this study, the broadest concept is used. See Ylmaz (2012), p. 11.

Bibliography

  • Akram, Munir, and Shah, Syed H. 2005. The Legislative Powers of the United Nations Security Council. In Towards world constitutionalism. Issues in the legal ordering of the world community, eds. Ronald St John Macdonald and Douglas M Johnston, 431-455. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnett, Michael, and Martha Finnemore. 2008. Political approaches. In The Oxford handbook on the United Nations, ed. Thomas G. Weiss, and Sam Daws, 43–48. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bohlander, Michael, and Mark Findlay. 2002. The use of domestic sources as a basis for international criminal law principles. The Global Community Yearbook of International Law and Jurisprudence 2: 3–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourandonis, Dimitris. 2005. The history and politics of UN Security Council reform. New York: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Chesterman, Simon, Thomas M. Franck, and David M. Malone. 2008. Law and practice of the United Nations—documents and commentary. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crootof, Rebecca. 2013. Constitutional convergence and customary international law. Harvard International Law Journal Online 54: 195–203.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Wet, Erika. 2004. The chapter VII powers of the United Nations Security Council. Oxford: Hart Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Delbrück, Jost. 2002. Article 24—functions and powers. In The Charter of the United Nations: A commentary, ed. Bruno Simma, Vol. I, 442–452. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Droubi, Sufyan. 2014. Resisting United Nations Security Council resolutions. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenberg, Theodore. 2011. The origins, nature, and promise of empirical legal studies and a response to concerns. University of Illinois Law Review 5: 1713–1738.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elkins, Zachary, Ginsburg, Tom, and Simmons, Beth. 2013. Getting to rights: Treaty ratification, constitutional convergence, and human rights practice. Harvard International Law Journal 54: 61–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Epstein, Lee, and Andrew D. Martin. 2014. An introduction to empirical legal research. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Epstein, Lee, and Gary King. 2003. Building an infrastructure for empirical research in the law. Journal of Legal Education 53: 311–320.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fassbender, Bardo. 2004. Pressure for Security Council Reform. In The UN Security Council: From the cold war to the 21st Century, ed. David M. Malone, 341–356. Boulder, Colo.: Lynne Rienner.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fassbender, Bardo. 1998. The United Nations charter as constitution of the international community. Columbia Journal of Transnational Law 36: 529–619.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fauchald, Ole K. 2008. The legal reasoning of ICSID tribunals—an empirical analysis. European Journal of International Law 19: 301–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Franck, Susan D. 2008. Empiricism and international law: Insights for investment treaty dispute resolution. Virginia Journal of International Law 48: 767–815.

    Google Scholar 

  • Franck, Thomas M. 2009. International Institutions: Why Constitutionalize? In Ruling the world? Constitutionalism, international law and global governance, ed. Jeffrey L. Dunoff and Joel P. Trachtman, xi–xiv. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Genn, Dame Hazel, Martin Partington, and Sally Wheeler. 2006. Law in the real world: Improving our understanding of how law works. Final report and recommendations. London: The Nuffield Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ginsburg, Tom, and Shaffer, Gregory. 2010. How does international law work?. In The Oxford handbook of empirical legal research, eds. Herbert M Kritzer and Peter Cane New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hassler, Sabine. 2013. Reforming the UN Security Council membership: The illusion of representativeness. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heise, Michael. 2002. The past, present, and future of empirical legal scholarship: Judicial decision making and the new empiricism. University of Illinois Law Review 4: 819–850.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henderson, Christian, and Noam Lubell. 2013. The contemporary legal nature of UN Security Council ceasefire resolutions. Leiden Journal of International Law 26: 369–397.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ho, Daniel, and Larry Kramer. 2013. Introduction: The empirical revolution in law. Stanford Law Review 65: 1195–1202.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kritzer, Herbert M. 2009. Empirical legal studies before 1940: A bibliographic essay. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies 6: 925–968.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kritzer, Herbert M, and Cane, Peter (2010) Introduction. In The Oxford handbook of empirical legal research, eds. Herbert M. Kritzer and Peter Cane, 1–7. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kritzer, Herbert M. 2010b. The (nearly) forgotten early empirical legal research. In The Oxford handbook of empirical legal research, ed. Herbert M. Kritzer, and Peter Cane, 875–900. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malone, David M. 2008. Security Council. In The Oxford handbook on the United Nations, ed. Thomas G. Weiss, and Sam Daws, 117–135. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marschik, Axel. 2005. Legislative powers of the security council. In Towards world constitutionalism. Issues in the legal ordering of the world community, eds. Ronald St John Macdonald and Douglas M Johnston, 457–492. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Orakhelshvili, Alexander. 2007. The acts of the Security Council: Meaning and standards of review. Max Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law 11: 143–195.

    Google Scholar 

  • Posner, Eric, and Miguel F. de Figueredo. 2005. Is the International Court of Justice biased? Journal of Legal Studies 34: 599–630.

    Google Scholar 

  • Powell, Cathleen. 2007. The Legal Authority of the United Nations Security Council. In Security and human rights, eds. Benjamin J Goold and Liora Lazarus, 157–183. Oxford: Hart Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Puig, Sergio. 2014. Social capital in the arbitration market. European Journal of International Law 25: 387–424.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rodley, Nigel, and Başak Çalı. 2010. Use of force in international law. In International law for international relations, ed. Başak Çalı, 213–233. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosand, Eric. 2005. The Security Council as “Global Legislator”: Ultra vires or ultra innovative? Fordham International Law Journal 28: 542–590.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schweigman, David. 2001. The authority of the security council under chapter VII of the UN charter. The Hague: Kluwer Law International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simma, Bruno, Stefan Brunner, and Hans-Peter Kaul. 2002. Article 27—voting. In The Charter of the United Nations: A commentary, ed. Bruno Simma, 476–523. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simmons, Beth A., and Andrew B. Braidenbach. 2011. The empirical turn in international economic law. Minnesota Journal of International Law 20: 198–222.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsagourias, Nicholas. 2011. Security Council legislation, article 2(7) of the UN Charter, and the principle of subsidiarity. Leiden Journal of International Law 24: 539–559.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tzanakopoulos, Antonios. 2013. Disobeying the security council. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Webley, Lisa. 2010. Qualitative approaches to empirical legal research. In The Oxford handbook of empirical legal research, ed. Herbert M. Kritzer, and Peter Cane, 926–950. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiss, Thomas G., and Karen E. Young. 2005. Security Council reform? Security Dialogue 36: 131–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ylmaz, Huseyn. 2012. The Eastern question and the Ottoman Empire. The genesis of the Near and the Middle East in the nineteenth century. In Is there a Middle East? The evolution of a geopolitical concept, eds. Michael E. Bonine, Abbas Amanat, and Michael E. Gasper, 11–35. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Brunel Law School, Brunel University London, Uxbridge, UK

    Rossana Deplano

Authors
  1. Rossana Deplano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rossana Deplano .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Deplano, R. (2015). Introduction. In: The Strategic Use of International Law by the United Nations Security Council. SpringerBriefs in Law. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-21281-4_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation