Abstract
In UNs history, the Legality of Security Council Resolutions, in many cases, is challenged. Generally, these challenges are taken by States that affected Security Council decisions. With notice that States are the representative for implementation of SCR, they intervene their determination and interpretation in the way that implement SC Decisions. In some cases, domestic and regional courts evaluate the state action in implementation SCRs. Although these cases couldn’t provide direct review on Resolutions, but affected in the way of implementation. Evaluation by States is probable and arises some concerns about decreased effectiveness of SC in the 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 
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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
