Theoretical Grounds for Responsibility to Protect : A Two-Tradition Perspective on the Sovereignty-Human Rights Nexus in the History of Political Ideas

Abstract

This article explores theoretical grounds for Responsibility to Protect (RtoP) within the UN System focusing on the preparation period of the Responsibility to Protect Report of International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS). It points out that the numerous roundtable consultations and academic papers in the preparation processes characteristically lack their focus on the history of political ideas devoted to sovereignty and natural rights. While pros and cons still co-exist on the ideal of humanitarian intervention, this article makes the case for humanitarian intervention on the basis of what it calls citizen-centric sovereignty-human rights nexus on the basis of major thinkers’ views of sovereignty and natural right. The article argues that it is necessary to pay attention to the dimension of popular sovereignty as a theoretical lacuna in dealing with contemporary sovereignty-human rights nexus within the UN Charter. Thus, it is essential to reclaim the Lockean-Vattelian ruled- or citizen-centric sovereignty-human rights nexus in order to address humanitarian emergencies in the contemporary world.