LL.M. (International Law) / After witnessing the catastrophic effects of the First World War, the pursuit of a global regulatory body charged with the responsibility of maintaining global peace and security was the talk of the day and a body which became known as the League of Nations soon surfaced. However, with the manifestation of the Second World War the essential failure of the League of Nations was evident and led to the creation of a new body along with a dream to prevent the same kind of disastrous conflict the world had just witnessed for a second time from occurring again. The idea that a single body would in essence control the fate of world security matters was brought to life and the United Nations Security Council essentially emerged, reflecting the power balance that ensued at the end of World War 2 – the United States, Britain, the Soviet Union, China and France suddenly became the most powerful nations in the world. With the existence of regional organisations pre-dating that of both the League and the United Nations, the debate as to the ideal relationship between the global body and regional bodies developed. Despite the fact that the UN Charter essentially instilled a hierarchy, with the Security Council holding primacy over matters of security governance4 whilst allowing regional organisations to act unilaterally only in limited circumstances,5 this debate has continued to the present day. Since the conception of the United Nations, the traditional role of regional organisations in matters of security governance were mostly limited to peacekeeping and preventative diplomacy and the inaction of the Security Council during the Cold War saw an increase in the activity of these bodies, albeit in these forms.

The Security Council has sometimes failed to perform its main duty, which is the maintenance of international peace and security. The Council’s responsibilities in this regard have grown as new international challenges have emerged. These challenges include global environmental issues, refugee flows and mass migration across borders, the rapid spread of infectious diseases, civil war that threatens international peace and security, global terrorism, transnational crime and illegal stocks of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons. The Security Council has thus become the subject of both severe criticism and calls for its structural reform. A variety of reform proposals have been offered by scholars and politicians, almost all of which have focused solely on state-based solutions. The current study considers that reforming the Council through such means would not alter its current state to any significant extent. International law no longer reflects the state-based system of the Westphalian World Order. The international legal order does not involve only nationstates, and state-based systems are not able autonomously to deal with problems such as these in the post-Westphalian era. It is widely acknowledged that there are many non-state actors that could contribute to enhancing the Council’s representativeness, effectiveness and accountability. It is thus concluded that a reform proposal for the Security Council must consider these factors and produce a non-state based solution. It is proposed that the Council must consider granting formal access to Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) that have, as non-state actors, been active in the international legal order, and that have already made significant contributions to the above-mentioned issues.

This thesis argues that a tension exists between a new individualized norm of security within the counter-terrorism context and human security framework of the United Nations Security Council, focusing on the implications of the resolution 1267 counter-terrorism regime. This topic is of particular relevance as the threat of terrorism continues to grow and evolve. While the human security framework has been well studied, the individualization of security through counter-terrorism is a more recent development, and its tensions and implications have not been fully considered. This thesis uses a discourse analysis in order to demonstrate that counter-terrorism is constructed as a norm, and that there has been a shift in norms within the UN Security Council in relation to counter-terrorism and human rights. It will trace how a set of norms has emerged in order to make terrorism a part of the Security Council’s agenda, and how and why these have changed. In order to trace these norms, terrorism has been separated into two stages: state-sponsored and international terrorism, where terrorism was viewed as a threat stemming from state-governments and; transnational terrorism, where it was viewed as a trans-border threat arising from individuals. Within these stages, the objectives, targets and tools of the Council’s counter-terrorism policies will be studied in order to demonstrate how they work together to reinforce a norm. The analysis will be used to show how the case of Kadi v. Council and Commission came about in the transnational terrorism stage as a direct result of the Security Council’s counter-terrorism regime and its alleged breach of human rights. The Kadi case demonstrates that a tension does exist between the norm of individualization of security within the counter-terrorism context and the human security framework.

In the wake of the 11 September 2001 attacks in the United States (U.S.), many states, responding to United Nations (UN) Security Council Resolutions, began to adopt an increased array of counter-terrorism measures.The Security Council had not in the beginning pre-empted the risk of counter-terrorism measures violating counter-terrorism human rights as it failed to immediately refer to states‟ duty to respect human rights in their responses to terrorism. It was only in 2003, in Resolution 1456, that the Security Council stated such duty by providing that „states must ensure that any measures taken to combat terrorism must comply with all their obligations under international law, in particular international human rights, refugee and humanitarian law". / Thesis (LLM (Human Rights and Democratisation in Africa)) -- University of Pretoria, 2010. / Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of Law University of Pretoria, in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree Masters of Law (LLM in Human Rights and Democratisation in Africa). Prepared under the supervision of Prof. Nii A. Kotey, Faculty of Law, University of Ghana. Ghana. 2010. / http://www.chr.up.ac.za/ / Centre for Human Rights / LLM

In the aftermath of the South African election, as a non-permanent member of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) in 2011, the country amongst other things, promised to pursue an African Agenda for Peace and Stability on the continent and in all regions of the world, especially in the Global South. This was coupled with the promise to promote the importance of developing effective partnerships between the United Nations (UN) as well as regional and sub-regional organizations in maintaining international peace and security. These became fundamental foreign policy principles of how South Africa would behave in the Security Council. The UN Charter mandates the primary responsibility for maintaining international peace and security to the Council. Scholars that have analysed the United Nations often argue that the Council’s decision-making process is driven by the interests of the five permanent members who possess veto power. Thus, it is widely believed that, members that have continuous membership and veto power not only affect the passage of resolutions but also prevent certain issues from entering the agenda through the threat of a veto. While veto-wielding member states can use the veto to bargain their positions, non-permanent members of the Council can have limited influence on the agenda due to the unequal distribution of power. The power-politics argument is widely discussed in the literature of the United Nations; however, limited systematic analytical research has been done to understand how countries other than big powers exercise their influence in the UN Security Council, despite lacking the right to veto power. To contribute to the understanding of the power-politics argument, ways in which emerging countries influence the agenda will be identified. This research report analyses whether and how South Africa delivered on the promise to pursue African interests during its tenure in the UNSC in 2011-2012. This study embarks on content analysis of selected South African interventions and reports regarding African issues in the UNSC. / Mini Dissertation (MDIPS)--University of Pretoria, 2018. / Political Sciences / MDIPS / Unrestricted

Throughout the years many have called for a reform of the United Nations and more specifically its most influential body the United Nations Security Council. The Security Council has the authority to pass resolutions with the sole purpose to preserve the peace around the globe, in theory at least. As there are conflicts that have been going on for a decade without any kind of solution from the Security Council and with huge humanitarian toll, just like Syria and Yemen, the need for a reform is clearly needed for the Security Council to be able to act better in conflict solving. In the Council five members have veto rights which are also permanent members and are not elected. As this has been considered unfair, both the notion of a permanent member and also the notion of a veto, some reform proposals have been brought up by organizations or countries to change the Security Council. This work is concerned with the Weak Veto reform proposal as analysing possible reforms using discourse analysis can predict possible future behaviour of states and can introduce a different view on the future of international organizations.

This thesis examines the decision to invade Iraq and the failed planning for the occupation of Iraq. Since Janis introduced groupthink in 1972, the groupthink perspective has been used to explain foreign policy disasters such as the failure to anticipate the Pearl Harbor attack and the Bay of Pigs. However, the groupthink perspective is not universally useful for explaining foreign policy mishaps. While some have attributed the Iraq war to groupthink, the groupthink perspective has not been systematically applied to these events. This thesis will examine Janis's original groupthink theory, and subsequent research that tested the effectiveness of the groupthink perspective. It will apply the groupthink perspective to the events leading up to the invasion of Iraq. It will also examine the failed planning for the occupation of Iraq. The application of the groupthink perspective to both the invasion decision and occupation planning suggests that groupthink was not the primary cause of either event. The thesis will conclude by describing alternative explanations for the decision to invade Iraq, such as ideological agenda setting, and other cognitive errors besides groupthink. / Master of Arts

No description available.

LL.M. (International Law) / Since 1945 there has been a noticeable broadening of what constitutes a threat to international peace and security. Traditionally, the definition of “threat to international peace” was limited to a conflict among nations, which were conflicts common in the world. The core threat to international peace used to be organized inter-state conflicts only. Today however, the nature of threats to international peace has changed drastically to include internal conflicts – as there are examples of cases where these have spread across the borders or have led to massive refugee situations. In this dissertation, I review the mandate of the United Nation’s inter alia the changing definition of ‘threat to international peace’.

"Mémoire présenté à la Faculté des études supérieures En vue de l'obtention du grade de Maître en droit (L.L.M)" / L'interprétation est un domaine du droit très complexe, dont l'intérêt est de définir ou de déterminer le sens et la portée des règles de droit en vigueur. L'interprétation va ainsi clarifier un texte juridique. Là où l'obscur réside, l'interprétation, telle une lanterne, vient éclaircir l'acte juridique. L'interprète aura alors recours à une argumentation pour convaincre son auditoire. Certains États interpréteront de manière extensive les textes juridiques. Ce phénomène se constate notamment au moment de l'interprétation des résolutions du Conseil de sécurité. Face au pouvoir discrétionnaire des États, la mise en place d'un régime juridique donné éviterait toutes interprétations abusives. La première partie de cette étude aura pour objet d'étudier les différentes règles en matière d'interprétation, telles précisées dans la Convention de Vienne sur le droit des traités de 1969. La deuxième partie sera consacrée d'une part à un historique des résolutions du Conseil de sécurité et d'autre part à l'application des règles d'interprétation à deux études de cas. L'historique retracera l'évolution des résolutions avec comme césure la fin de la Guerre Froide. Ensuite, nous verrons à travers deux exemples, comment les États peuvent interpréter de manière extensive, voir abusive les résolutions du Conseil de sécurité. Ces études de cas nous conduiront à étudier la pertinence de l'argumentaire utilisé par les États pour justifier leur interprétation. Ceci aura pour intérêt de montrer le rôle stratégique du phénomène interprétatif pour la mise en oeuvre des intérêts étatiques. Cela permettra d'ouvrir une réflexion sur le contrôle de la légalité des résolutions du Conseil de sécurité, ce dernier devenant nécessaire face à la liberté dont jouie le Conseil. Ce contrôle permettrait d'une part de rétablir un équilibre organique au sein du système onusien, et il permettrait d'autre part de redorer le blason du Conseil de sécurité en lui conférant une certaine légitimité. / Interpretation is a very complex dimension of law whose relevance lies in defining or determining the meaning and the scope of the legal mIes. In this respect, interpretation elucidates a judicial text. Where obscurity lies, interpretation -like a lantem- brings light to the judicial act. The interpreter will thus resort to argumentation in order to convince the « interpretative community ». Sorne States will not hesitate to interpret judicial texts in a broad manner. This phenomenon can better be observed in the interpretation of Security Council resolutions. Faced with the discretionary powers of States, the creation of a judicial framework would bring to an end most instances of abusive interpretations. Part 1 studies the several mIes in of interpretation as established by the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Rights of Treaties. Part II will focus on both the history of the Security Council resolutions of and the application of the interpretation mIes of the Vienna Convention in light of two cases. The historical overview will retrieve the evolution of the resolutions until the end of the Cold War. Following this, we will see through the examples of the Kosovo and Iraq conflicts, how broadly, and even abusively, States can interpret Security Council resolutions. The two case studies will lead us to an analysis of the pertinence of the argumentation used by the States to justify their interpretation. This will show the strategie role that the interpretative phenomena play in the carrying out of State interests. It will lead to a reflection on the control of the legality of Security Council resolutions, a control necessary considering the liberty that the Council currently enjoys. On the one hand, this control would allow to reestablish an organic equilibrium within the UN. On the other hand, it would enhance the Security Council's image by conferring on it a certain legitimacy.