International Law and Proliferation of International Organisations - Literature review Example

International Law and Organisation: Extent that International Law and Proliferation of International Organisations Constrains State Sovereignty Name Professor Institution Course Date 1.0 Introduction Hurd (2011); Cryer (2005, p.986) observes that international laws/ treaties and organisations are significant in the world politics. They can curtail state sovereignty or enhance the same. Hurd (2011, p.4) notes that they help define what states are and how they work. The interesting note is that even when a state violates the provided guidelines, they can’t ignore these bodies totally since they are aware of repercussions. Thus, to justify their actions, states usually employ underhand tactics. Nevertheless, this is a pointer of how governments take their international obligations. The aim of this exposition is to outline how and to show to what extent has state sovereignty been constrained by the development of international law and the proliferation of international organisations since the end of the Second World War. In this regard, the paper covers two critical segments. The first is sovereignty. Under this the paper defines what is meant by the same and assesses how state sovereignty can be constrained. Secondly, the discourse examines international law and proliferation of international organisations. In this context, the paper defines the two terms, reviews what necessitated their growth/ emergence and finally, shows the extent of how these two have constrained state sovereignty. Principal to this discourse is the humanitarian intervention so as to protect fundamental human rights and impact of the International Court of Justice in regulating states. 2.0 State Sovereignty To show how sovereignty of a nation can be constrained, it is integral to examine how the term has be conceptualised by various literatures. Held (2003) notes that sovereignty is normal conceptualised within the internal and external context. In regards to internal context, it is an agreed rule that a person or and a political body can exercise ‘supreme commend’ over a particular group of people or a given society. In this regard, it is enshrined that a government be it monarchical, democratic or aristocratic must have the final say and authority within a given territory. On the other hand, the later implies that “there should be no final and absolute authority above and beyond sovereign state”. The hallmark of external sovereignty is embedded on the fact that a country should be allowed to shape its own destiny without underhand influence from other countries (p.62). Thus, the concept of sovereignty is anchored on allowing the present authority in a given territory to exercise rule over their subjects. According to Giannini (2010, p.3 and 4), a sovereign state comprises of “a territory, a population, a legal framework, cohesive force and institutions”. For him, this implies that a sovereign state is one that has capacity to govern itself and decide on its own rules. Secondly, such has a right to do what it wishes without interference from external sources. The growth of sovereignty concept was underlined in Westphalia Treaty of 1648 where the focus was on supremacy of the state over its internal institutions and domestic matters (Stein, 1999, p.262). Presently, the same is affirmed in article 2 of the UN charter where respect for sovereignty and non-intervention is affirmed. This means that a country should have a bearing over its internal affairs without international interferences (Giannini, 2010, p.4). Stein (1999, p.263) sums all the above by noting that sovereignty is embedded on the concept of self-determination which implies that a country has “ability to govern internally according to the preferences of domestic actors”. 2.1 How State Sovereignty can be constrained Article 2 of the UN charter recognises the fact that rogue states/ leaders in the guise of sovereignty can commit atrocities against their own population. Thus, the charter gives a caveat that the responsible authorities should promote democracy, protect human rights and fundamental freedoms. In the absence of such parameters, the charter offers a leeway for international interference on domestic matters of a given country (Giannini, 2010, p. 4). A genuine external interference is only possible when a country can’t achieve its internal obligations to its citizens (failing/ failed states) and when it fails to deliver its obligation to the international community. Such has given rise to concepts such international criminal law. Apart from this, interference on internal affairs of a given country can be through military actions, trade embargoes, travel bans and so on. 3.0 International Law and of International Organisations Dixon (2007, p.3) observes that international law consists of a set of rules and principles that defines the interaction between sovereign nations and other institutional elements of international law such as UN and AU. These laws are formulated mainly by the signatory states for their own application or as a process of enhancing the functioning of bodies of which they are signatories. Nevertheless, he points out that this should not offer a room for one to think that international law isn’t with individual rights or obligations. On the other hand, most international organisations emerge as result of ratification of treaties by a given group of countries. For instance, these include UN charter, IMF articles of agreement and Rome statute of the ICC. It is these organisations that implements the obligations ratified by the members. International organisations include UN, IMF, ILO, WTO, ICC and World Bank. Other includes regional bodies like EU and AU (Hurd, 2011, p.4). 3.1 Extent that International Law and Proliferation of International Organisations Constrains State Sovereignty When a country is involved in gross violation of human rights or when the government is not able to guarantee basic human rights internal law allows for humanitarian intervention. Chapter VII of the UN charter allows international community to intervene through an armed arrangement without the host country consent if the Security Council feels that their actions amount to violation of human rights, threat to peace and international stability (Adjei, 2005, p.9). A sovereignty of a nation can be constrained is they are a threat to regional or global stability. For instance, the attack orchestrated by Pakistani in East Bengali, drove people out of their homes creating crisis (Benjamin, 1992, p.132 and 133). Furthermore, certain people in power who harbour expansionist ideology have wrecked havoc on regional peace. Such cases have been seen in Iraq military incursion in Gulf region. The other is the Idi Amin breach of Tanzanian border integrity (Acheson-Brown, 2001, p.5). The same can be said of Horn of Africa where instability in Somalia is affecting neighbouring countries like Kenya and Ethiopia. Ethiopia under numerous occasions invaded Somalia with the justification that some of her warlords and elements of Alshabab are supporting some groups with separatist ideas (Civin, 2010, 123). For instance, after disintegration of Yugoslavia in 1989, the country experienced turmoil when Croatia and Slovenia declared independence. Slobodan Milosevic in association with Serbian minority fought the Croat ethnic majority consequently causing ethnic cleansing. In 1994, US operating under the framework of NATO gave Serbs in Sarajevo ultimatum to surrender thereby culminating into Dayton peace agreement of 1995 (Valentino, 2011, p.64). Had this not be enforced, the region would have experienced extended turmoil and confusion. The other example is in 1978, when Idi Amin who had overthrown legitimately elected government of Obote engaged in mass violation of human rights by killing, deporting, displacing people and violating territorial integrity of Tanzania .the Tanzanian government authorised her military to push Ugandan soldiers out of her territory culminating to him being overthrown (Acheson-Brown, 2001, p.1, 5, 6, 7, 8 & 9). The other scenario when sovereignty of a nation is limited is when the country/ government, those in power, their allies or powerful individual are involved in mass violations of human rights yet their government can’t apprehend and charge them owing to their influence, political and economic connection. In this regard, International Criminal Court of Justice has been known to intervene on behalf of the victims. In a normative perspective a criminal would be charged within the national boundary of his or her country as per the criminal justice system of that country. However, as result of the country not being able to effectively manage its internal affairs in this regard criminal justice system so as to protect the vulnerable in the society that person is charged at the ICC on behalf of the victims (Cyer, 2005, p.984). Such occurrence already constrains the sovereignty of a country since there is an external interference in their internal affairs. 4.0 Conclusion The ultimate aim of this paper was to outline the extent to which development of international law and the proliferation of international organisations has constrained state sovereignty since the end of the Second World War. To actualise this concern, the paper in brief first examined what is means by state sovereignty and how the same can be curtailed as result of international interference by outside powers. The paper established that interference emerges when the internal decisions which were expected to be conducted by the authority in power are now being implemented by external authority. Secondly, the paper examined what constitutes the term international law and international organisations. Under the same the paper asses how these two curtails sovereignty of a nations. Using case example of humanitarian intervention, the paper established that nations can be subjected to external interference if they are a threat to their population and region’s peace & stability. Equally by using ICC case example the paper established that if a country through its criminal justice system can’t apprehend mass perpetrators of human rights, the courts handles the same on behalf of the victims. References Acheson-Brown, D 2001, The Tanzanian Invasion of Uganda: A Just War? International Third World Studies Journal and Review, Vol. 12, No. 1, p. 1-11. Adjei, E 2005, The Legality of Humanitarian Intervention. LLM Theses and Essays. Paper 2. Benjamin, B 1992, Uilateral Humanitarian Intervention: Legalising the Use of Force to Prevent Human Rights Atrocities, Fordham International Law Journal, Vol. 16, No. 1, p. 120-158. Civin, B 2010, Ethiopia’s Intervention in Somalia, 2006-2009, Retrieved on 10 September, 2013 from: gsis.yonsei.ac.kr/pear/downloadfile.asp?uid=1259&fid=1. Cryer, R 2005, International Criminal Law vs State Sovereignty: Another Round?. European Journal of International Law, Vol. 16, No. 5, p. 979-1000. Dixon, M 2007, Text book on international law, Oxford, Oxford University Press. Held, D 2003, The changing structure of international law: Sovereignty transformed?. Hurd, I 2011, International organisations: politics, law and practice, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. Stein, A 1999, Constrained sovereignty: The growth of international intrusiveness, In Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Atlanta. Valentino, B 2011, The True Costs of Humanitarian Interventions: The Hard Truth about a Noble Notion, Foreign Affairs, November/ December 2011, Vol. 90, No. 6, p. 60-75. Read More