The Responsibility to Protect in International Law : philosophical investigations / Natalie Oman
By: Oman, Natalie [Author.].
Publisher: Newyork : Routledge, 2021Description: 206p.ISBN: 9781032083247.Subject(s): Responsibility to Protect (R2P) Concept -- Philosophical Underpinnings of the Responsibility to Protect | Challenges and Criticisms of the Responsibility to Protect Doctrine -- Case Studies and Practical ImplicationsDDC classification: 341.584 Summary: This book tracks the development of the emerging international legal principle of a responsibility to protect over the past two decades. It contrasts the influential version of the principle introduced by the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty in 2001 with subsequent interpretations of the responsibility to protect advocated by the United Nations through its human protection agenda, and reviews the dangers and inconsistencies inherent in both perspectives. The author demonstrates that the evolving responsibility to protect principle can be recruited to support a wide range of irreconcilable projects, from those of cosmopolitan constitutionalism to those of hegemonic international law. However, despite the dangers posed by this susceptibility to conceptual hijacking, Oman argues that the responsibility to protect, like human rights, is an essential a modern emancipatory formation. To remedy this dangerous malleability, the author advocates a third, distinctive interpretation of the responsibility to protect designed to limit its cooptation by liberal anti-pluralist and hegemonic international law agendas. Oman outlines the key features of such a minimalist conception, and explores its fit with the "RtoP" version of the responsibility to protect promoted in recent years by the UN. The author argues that two crucial features missing from the UN reading of the principle should be developed in future: an acknowledgement of the role of non-state actors as bearers of the responsibility to protect, and a recognition of the principle's legal character. Both of these aspects of the principle offer means to democratize the international law-making enterprise.| Item type | Current location | Call number | Status | Date due | Barcode |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Books
|
NASSDOC Library | 341.584 OMA-R (Browse shelf) | Available | 53596 |
Browsing NASSDOC Library Shelves Close shelf browser
|
|
|
|
|
No cover image available |
|
||
| 341.584 JAN-I International law and the use of force : | 341.584 JUS- Just and unjust military intervention : | 341.584 MAO-B Battling terrorism: legal perspectives on the use of force and the war on terror | 341.584 OMA-R The Responsibility to Protect in International Law : | 341.58401973087 GOL- Chavez code: cracking US intervention in Venezuela | 341.6 Survival. | 341.6 RES- Research Handbook on International Conflict and Security Law : |
Includes bibliographical references and index.
This book tracks the development of the emerging international legal principle of a responsibility to protect over the past two decades. It contrasts the influential version of the principle introduced by the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty in 2001 with subsequent interpretations of the responsibility to protect advocated by the United Nations through its human protection agenda, and reviews the dangers and inconsistencies inherent in both perspectives. The author demonstrates that the evolving responsibility to protect principle can be recruited to support a wide range of irreconcilable projects, from those of cosmopolitan constitutionalism to those of hegemonic international law. However, despite the dangers posed by this susceptibility to conceptual hijacking, Oman argues that the responsibility to protect, like human rights, is an essential a modern emancipatory formation. To remedy this dangerous malleability, the author advocates a third, distinctive interpretation of the responsibility to protect designed to limit its cooptation by liberal anti-pluralist and hegemonic international law agendas. Oman outlines the key features of such a minimalist conception, and explores its fit with the "RtoP" version of the responsibility to protect promoted in recent years by the UN. The author argues that two crucial features missing from the UN reading of the principle should be developed in future: an acknowledgement of the role of non-state actors as bearers of the responsibility to protect, and a recognition of the principle's legal character. Both of these aspects of the principle offer means to democratize the international law-making enterprise.
English.
There are no comments for this item.