Abstract
In United Nations history, the legality of Security Council Resolutions, in many cases, is challenged. Generally these challenges take by states that affected Security Councils decisions. With notice that states are the representative for implementation of Security Council Resolutions, they intervene their determination and interpretation in the way that implement Security Council Decisions. In some cases, domestic and regional courts determine the state action in implementation Security Council Resolutions. Although this cases couldn’t provide direct review on Resolutions but affected by way of implementation. Determination by states is probable and arises some concerns about decrease effectiveness of Security Council in maintenance of international peace and security.
Highlights
In international legal system based on United Nations charter, the Security Council is the primary custodian of the maintenance of international peace and security
The court relied on the fact that the (ICTY) had already confirmed the legality of its establishment under international law, and found that the court did not have jurisdiction to order the release.(Milosevic v Netherland(Interlocutory Injunction)KG 01/975(2001) 48 NILR 357, 358-360) A similar approach was taken by the US court of Appeals in "Ntakirutimana v Reno", where the argument that the Security Council was not empowered under the Charter to establish the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) and the United States should not surrender him to the Tribunal was found to be outside the scope of judicial review
This is the result of the existence of a gap in this field of the international law. This leads to assessment of Security Council resolutions on the implementation of Security Council resolutions which could affect the state. the Security Council has not strong executive arm and must implemented its decisions through collaboration with states, At this stage the states act effectively and are examined the Security Council resolutions
Summary
In international legal system based on United Nations charter, the Security Council is the primary custodian of the maintenance of international peace and security. European Union Courts such as the European Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights have employed a lot on this subject following claims by individual and entity based on Human Rights violations by Security Council resolutions The attitude of these courts in relation to international law and European Union legal system create different approach in this regard. These courts have denied the judicial review on Security Council resolutions for themselves and only revoked the measures of member states on enforcement of resolution. At first we deal with lack of adequate review mechanism in United Nations, introduces States evaluation as a last resort and assess the states challenges in their determination
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
