Show simple item record

dc.creatorJovanović, Miodrag
dc.date.accessioned2024-03-11T14:40:23Z
dc.date.available2024-03-11T14:40:23Z
dc.date.issued2015
dc.identifier.issn1540-1650
dc.identifier.urihttps://ralf.ius.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/828
dc.description.abstractAfter being initially drafted in 2001 by an expert body-the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty-the "responsibility to protect" (R2P) doctrine has eventually found its way into the 2005 UN World Summit Outcome document, thereby replacing a morally controversial doctrine of "humanitarian intervention". The paper aims, first, to point out how these two doctrines are different ethical projects. Second, recognizing that it is safer to say that the doctrine has not become a principle of law, this paper tries to situate it within the prevalent value of the international rule of law. It does so by exploring two somewhat contrasting conceptions-one more substantive in nature, which takes individuals as ultimate beneficiaries of this value, and the other, more formal in nature, which puts states in the forefront. The R2P case shows, however, that neither of them can be advanced to the full extent.en
dc.publisherOxford Univ Press, Oxford
dc.rightsrestrictedAccess
dc.sourceChinese Journal of International Law
dc.titleResponsibility to Protect and the International Rule of Lawen
dc.typearticle
dc.rights.licenseARR
dc.citation.epage776
dc.citation.issue4
dc.citation.other14(4): 757-776
dc.citation.rankM22
dc.citation.spage757
dc.citation.volume14
dc.identifier.doi10.1093/chinesejil/jmv042
dc.identifier.rcubconv_2916
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-84951274273
dc.identifier.wos000366467300005
dc.type.versionpublishedVersion


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record