HUMANITARIAN INTERVENTION WITHOUT SECURITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZATION: LEGAL JUSTIFICATION THROUGH THE DOCTRINE OF ABSOLUTE NECESSITY

Abstract

The number of humanitarian crises and mass atrocities in the world has brought the debate on the legality of humanitarian intervention in situations where the United Nations Security Council is unable to intervene due to the veto power of its permanent members. This paralysis of the institutions is of great concern in terms of protection of vulnerable groups against genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. The main issue in this secerio is the legal and ethical problem that arises if the international community is not able to act efficiently in the event of a humanitarian crisis because it is not possible to formalize the authorisation process in the UN Security Council, thus undermining the purpose of the creation of the UNSC and R2P. The paper has explored the legal basis of humanitarian intervention without the authorisation of the Security Council using the doctrine of absolute necessity. The research was based on Constructivist Theory which explains how the international norms have influenced the state behaviour and interpretation of international law. A qualitative study was used. The secondary sources consulted for data collection were textbooks, peerreviewed journal articles, policy reports, newspapers and international news publications. Content analysis was used to analyse these materials and determine key debates and new legal interpretations. The results showed that despite the conventional model of international law, which focuses on the sovereignty of states and the authorisation of the Security Council, the increasing humanitarian crises and the institutional constraints of the Security Council have prompted the academic debate of limited legal flexibility via the doctrines of necessity to respond to the immediate humanitarian threats. The paper also confirmed that the humanitarian norms are still a challenge to the strict application of nonintervention in the internal affairs of the countries in international law in the context of their change.. The paper suggests that there should be more explicit legal provisions and international agreement on emergency humanitarian intervention in cases where collective security measures are not able to react in time through reforming the UN and it's Security Council in addition to revisiting international protocols to make international law be in synergy with contemporary challenges