Thesis (M.A.)--Naval Postgraduate School, 2002. / Thesis advisor(s): Letitia Lawson, Anna Simons. Includes bibliographical references. Also available online.

Thesis--School of Advanced Airpower Studies, Maxwell Air Force Base, Ala., 1995-96. / Title from title screen (viewed Oct. 28, 2003). "February 2001." Includes bibliographical references.

This thesis examines the legal and political dilemmas in the implementation of the African Union’s (AU) ‘right’ of forceful intervention through a systemic method of analysis. It first addresses the question of whether the AU’s intervention system represents a paradigm shift in international law on intervention and the authorization role of the United Nations. It examines whether there is a justifiable basis for the implementation of the AU’s intervention mandate outside the UN system, while taking into account the necessity of the international rule of law. It then analyzes the manner in which the failure to institutionalize the concept of sovereignty as responsibility within the AU system has contributed to the Union’s failure to implement its intervention mandate even within the UN system. The AU’s legal framework expressly grants the Union the mandate to forcefully intervene in a member state in situations of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. However, the failure of the AU’s legal framework to explicitly require authorization by the Security Council for intervention (as required by the UN Charter) has led to uncertainty on the envisaged implementation mechanism, including allegations of its inconsistency with the UN Charter and international law. The Security Council may, however, be ineffective in granting authorization due to the use of the veto. There is, therefore, the question of whether the AU’s legal framework exemplifies the crystallization of a customary law permitting humanitarian intervention, or is consensual (since African states have agreed by treaty to such intervention) and consequently, Security Council authorization is not mandatory. The core argument of this thesis is that although the necessity for the international rule of law restricts African Union’s forceful interventions to United Nations authorized enforcement action, robust intervention by the Union within that framework is compromised by a systemic failure of institutionalization of the concept of sovereignty as responsibility. This thesis recommends that for robust implementation of the African Union’s intervention mandate within the UN system, alternative authorization from the General Assembly be sought where the Security Council is ineffective. However, implementation of the AU’s intervention mandate within the UN framework is compromised by continued concerns of protecting traditional concepts of unfettered sovereignty. This is evident in non-intervention oriented clauses within the AU’s legal framework (which negate the intervention mandate) and the Union’s practice of opposing forceful interventions like in the case of Libya. Possible solutions to that predicament are examined. A systemic method of analysis is utilized in this thesis since there is an interaction of various legal norms within the AU system, in addition to the system’s interaction with environmental factors such as politics and increasing global interdependence, while it is also subject to the UN and international law systems. The significance of the research is in identifying legal, policy and contextual factors that can transform the AU into an effective regional mechanism for institutionalization of the rule of law within the African region (by deterring gross human rights violations) while safeguarding the values of the international rule of law. / published_or_final_version / Law / Doctoral / Doctor of Philosophy

published_or_final_version / Law / Master / Master of Laws

The concept of compliance in international law remains amongst the most significant and, at the same time, the most perplexing of questions. The significance of compliance is highlighted in certain spheres of international law that deal with specific extraordinary circumstances. This is particularly true with respect to international humanitarian law, which is applicable during periods of armed conflict. The importance of ensuring and improving compliance with international humanitarian law is clearly expressed in the opening Article of the four Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their Additional Protocol I of 1977, in which the High Contracting Parties undertake to both "respect" and "ensure respect" for these instruments. This thesis is derived from a conviction that compliance with international humanitarian norms is more efficiently ensured through implementation, rather than enforcement mechanisms. However, it only ventures a critique of the appropriateness of military intervention as one of the mechanisms most frequently used to enforce humanitarian rules in the past decade of armed conflicts. The hypothesis this thesis postulates is that the recourse to armed force to ensure respect for international humanitarian law is at cross-purposes with the body of these rules. This statement is assessed against the Security Council's military humanitarian intervention in civil conflicts. It is suggested that the validity of the Council's decisions on humanitarian intervention hinges upon two equally determinative criteria: legality and legitimacy. The hypothesis of the thesis questions both the legality and legitimacy of the Security Council's authorized military humanitarian intervention in armed conflicts. The underlying purpose of the thesis is thus to expand the parameters of theoretical discussions about compliance in the context of international humanitarian law from a jurisprudential perspective.

Thesis (Ph.D) -- Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, 1989. / Typescript (photocopy). Vita. Bibliography: leaves 545-564. Access restricted to members of the Tufts University community. Also available via the World Wide Web;

Thesis (M.A.) - Carleton University, 2006. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 93-112). Also available in electronic format on the Internet.

Thesis (M.A.)--University of Toledo, 2008. / Typescript. "Submitted as partial fulfillments of the requirements for The Master of Arts in Sociology." "A thesis entitled"--at head of title. Bibliography: leaves 208-216.

Thesis (L.L.M.)--University of Hong Kong, 1996. / Includes bibliographical references (leaf 64-67).

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Chicago, Department of Political Science, December 1999. / Includes bibliographical references. Also available on the Internet.