Abstract
Introduction. The case study that forms the starting point for this analysis involves use of lethal force by one State (A) against a non-state actor who is currently in the territory of another State (B). State A claims that the said non-state actor is involved in terrorist activities directed against it or its citizens, and that State B has failed to take action to apprehend him and put an end to his terrorist activities, because it is either unwilling or incapable of doing so. The question for discussion is which regime of international law applies to the action of State A. In analysing this question it is important to distinguish between two separate, though connected, issues: legality of using force in the territory of another state; the right to life of the individual concerned. Legality of using force in territory of another state Article 2(4) UN Charter obliges members to ‘refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state’. There are, of course, exceptions to this prohibition. First and foremost among these is use of force in exercise of the inherent right of a state to self-defence, recognized in Article 51 of the Charter.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Title of host publication | Counter-Terrorism Strategies in a Fragmented International Legal Order |
Subtitle of host publication | Meeting the Challenges |
Publisher | Cambridge University Press |
Pages | 559-588 |
Number of pages | 30 |
ISBN (Electronic) | 9781139178907 |
ISBN (Print) | 9781107025387 |
DOIs | |
State | Published - 1 Jan 2011 |
Bibliographical note
Publisher Copyright:© Cambridge University Press 2013.