Full text loading...
This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.
I accept this policy
Find out more here
Has the ‘Responsibility to Protect’ Been a Real Change in Humanitarian Intervention? An Analysis from the Crisis in Libya
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The full text of this article is not currently available.
Brill’s MyBook program is exclusively available on BrillOnline Books and Journals. Students and scholars affiliated with an institution that has purchased a Brill E-Book on the BrillOnline platform automatically have access to the MyBook option for the title(s) acquired by the Library. Brill MyBook is a print-on-demand paperback copy which is sold at a favorably uniform low price.
1871-9740
You must be logged in to use this functionality
For more content, see International Law FORUM du droit international and Non-State Actors and International Law.
Abstract One of the most relevant axiological clashes in the international arena occurs between the concepts of sovereignty and human rights. This clash involves the questions of legality and legitimacy and is highlighted in the practice of humanitarian intervention. An attempt to bridge this gap was made in 2001 with the doctrine of the ‘responsibility to protect’ – adopted in 2005 by the UN. It proposes doctrinal, practical and ethical shifts in the treatment of humanitarian interventions, bringing along a more holistic approach with the proposal of responsibilities to react, to prevent and to rebuild. 7 years after its adoption and in light of the recent development of the military action against Libya, where the ‘responsibility to protect’ was called upon for the first time, the present article analyses the doctrinal, practical and ethical aspects of the ‘responsibility to protect’ aiming to verify whether the doctrine has been a real change in humanitarian interventions.
back to top