Le crime d'agression se veut etre un des quatre crimes internationaux sous la juridiction de la CPI. Lorsque les delegues a la Conference de Rome n'eurent point atteint de consensus sur une definition du crime, celui-ci resta, depuis, indefini en droit. En consequence, la CPI n'aura juridiction pour entendre des causes portant sur le crime d'agression qu'une fois la definition sera adoptee par l'Assemblee des Etats Parties au plus tot en 2009. Ce memoire traite trois problematiques liees au crime d'agression : la question de la responsabilite penale individuelle, le role du Conseil de securite de l'ONU, et les parametres du crime en tant que tel. La responsabilite penale individuelle est analysee, inter alia, du point de vue du principe des sources du droit international. Quant al'eventuelle implication du Conseil de securite dans le champ de competence de la CPI sur le crime d'agression, l'auteure soutient tel que suit: Si le Conseil de securite se voit accorde un pouvoir plus large que celui dont il est presentement dote en vertu des articles 13(b) et 16 du Statut de Rome, chaque membre permanent aura un veto sur toute situation d'agression qui serait autrement portee devant la Cour. Ceci aura pour consequence de politiser la CPI en ce qui a trait au crime et rendra hypothethique toute definition eventuelle. Si la definition est bien con9ue et redigee, on fait valoir, qu'il n' est point necessaire de limiter davantage la competence de la CPI. Les parametres de la definition du crime proposes par l'auteure sont etablis selon les conclusions d'une analyse des notions composantes de l'agression. L'essentiel du concept se veut un recours illegal et non-necessaire qui constitue une rupture ala paix. Amoins qu'il ne soit exerce en « legitime defence» ou en vertu d'un mandat du Chapitre VII, Ie recours ala force constitue prima facie une agression et s'il est suffisamment grave, il s'agira d'un crime d'agression. Ce memoire termine avec un projet de definition du crime d'agression en vue d'avancer Ie discours vers un consensus sur ces problematiques majeures. Non seulement est-il possible d'arriver aun consensus sur la definition, croit l'auteure, mais nous sommes plus que jamais al'aube d'y parvenir. / The crime of aggression is one of the four international crimes under the jurisdiction of the ICC. When delegates at the Rome Conference were unable to agree on the content of a definition, the crime was left undefined. As a result, the ICC can only begin prosecuting individuals for the crime of aggression once a definition is adopted by the Assembly of States Parties in 2009, at the earliest. This thesis examines three issues associated with the crime of aggression: the question of individual criminal responsibility, the role of the UN Security Council and the general scope of the definition of the crime of aggression itself Individual criminal liability is reviewed, inter alia, from the perspective of international sources doctrine. Regarding the role of the Security Council in relation to the crime of aggression, the author concludes: if the Security Council is vested with more powers than it already has under Articles 13(b) and 16 of the Rome Statute, each permanent member will have a veto over any situation of aggression that might otherwise be brought before the Court. This would result in a complete politicization of the ICC and render moot any future definition of the crime of aggression. If a definition for the crime of aggression is properly conceived and constructed, it is argued, there is no need to further limit the Court's exercise of jurisdiction. The author proposes general parameters for the scope ofthe definition based on conclusions reached in the analysis of the conceptual components of aggression. At its essence, the act of aggression is the unnecessary, unlawful use of force which constitutes a breach ofthe peace. Unless employed in "self-defence" or under a Chapter VII mandate, the use offorce constitutes prima facie an act of aggression, and if it is sufficiently grave, a crime ofaggression. This thesis concludes with a working definition ofthe crime of aggression to promote dialogue and ultimately a consensus on these core issues. Not only is a definition is within reach, the author believes, we are closer to it than we ever have been before. / "Mémoire présenté à la Faculté des Études supérieures en vue de l'obtention du grade de LL.M. en Maîtrise en droit Option recherche"

The aim of this thesis is to discuss the concepts of humanitarian intervention and the responsibility to protect (R2P), and; to investigate how best to apply the concepts in the face of humanitarian crises, in order to address concerns about their implementation. The failure of the Security Council to react to grave human rights abuses committed in the humanitarian crises of the 1990s, including Iraq (1991), Somalia (1992), Rwanda (1994), Bosnia (1993-1995) Haiti (1994-1997), and Kosovo (1999),triggered international debatesabout: how the international community should react when the fundamental human rights of populations are grossly and systematically violated within the boundaries of sovereign states, and; the need for a reappraisal of armed humanitarian intervention. Central to the debate was whether the international community should continue to adhere unconditionally to the principle of non-intervention enshrined in Article 2(7) of the UN Charter, or take a different course in the interest of human rights. The debate culminated in the establishment of the Canadian International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS) in 2000, with the mandate to find a balance between respect for sovereignty and intervention, for purposes of protecting human rights. Much of the scholarly literature on military intervention for human protection purposes deals with the legality and legitimacy of the military dimension of the concepts. The significance of the thesis is that: it focusesthe investigation on the potential abuse of the use of force for human protection purposes, when moral arguments are used to justify an intervention that is primarily motivated by the interests of the intervener, and; the propensity to use disproportionate force in the attainment of the stated objective of human protection, by powerful intervening states. The central argument of the thesis is that there are double standards, selectivity, abuses, andindiscriminate and disproportionate use of force in the implementation of R2P by powerful countries, and; that, whether a military intervention is unilateral, or sanctioned by the UN Security Council, there is the potential for abuse, and in addition, disproportionate force may be used.The thesis makes recommendations to address these concerns, in order to ensure the survival of the concept. / Public, Constitutional and International Law / LL.D.

The analysis of the rules evolution, in particular internationally, demonstrates normative and principles conflicts that serve as power play instrument and the colonizer-colonized dichotomy, even when its essence is directed to the maintenance of peace. The the Responsibility While protecting (RWP) presented by Brazil in 2011, within the context of the development of global standards, permeated by non-linear conflictual interactions, where the interventions based on a Responsibility to Protect(R2P) civilians, have challenged the existing structures in the global order and therefore has sparked great debate regarding the prevalence of decisions emanating from the United Nations Security Council - UNSC against the sovereignty and self-determination of peoples, since there is no control of legality and legitimacy of that discretion which the United Nations - UN holds. In this sense, the present work aims to analyze if the Responsibility to Protect can be considered as an attempt to influence from the Global South countries in the production of global standards and this can work as a capable principle of safeguarding the coercive nature of measures by of the UNSC, a way of accountability that implies a large extent by the level of responsibility of emanating acts from the UN Security Council that determ interventions, and what tools are needed for the Responsibility to Protect is an effective tool of prior control of legality and legitimacy. In order to meet this goal, we adopted a dialectical approach, drawing on the monographic method, through bibliographical and documentary research and interdisciplinary literature, among others that apply to the subject under study. / A análise da evolução das normas, em específico no âmbito internacional, demonstra conflitos normativos e principiológicos que servem de instrumento de reprodução de poder e da dicotomia colonizador-colonizado, mesmo quando sua essência está voltada para a manutenção da paz. O Princípio da Responsabilidade ao Proteger (RWP, sigla em inglês), apresentado pelo Brasil em 2011, surge no contexto da evolução das normas globais, permeadas por interações não lineares conflituosas, onde a implementação cada vez maior de intervenções baseadas em uma Responsabilidade de Proteger (R2P, sigla em inglês) civis, tem desafiado as estruturas existentes na ordem global e por isso tem suscitado grande debate no que toca a prevalência de decisões emanadas do Conselho de Segurança das Nações Unidas - CSNU face à soberania e a autodeterminação dos povos, uma vez que não há um controle de legalidade e legitimidade desse poder discricionário do qual a Organização das Nações Unidas - ONU é detentora. Nesse sentido, a presente dissertação visa analisar se a Responsabilidade ao Proteger pode ser considerada como uma tentativa de influência a partir dos países do Sul Global na produção de normas globais e se esta pode funcionar como um princípio capaz de acautelar as medidas de natureza coercitiva por parte do CSNU, isto é, uma forma de accountability que implique em um maior nível de responsabilidade por parte dos atos emanados do Conselho de Segurança da ONU que determinem intervenções, bem como quais são os instrumentos necessários para que a Responsabilidade ao Proteger seja uma ferramenta eficaz de controle prévio de legalidade e legitimidade. De forma a cumprir esse objetivo, adotou-se uma abordagem dialética, valendo-se do método monográfico, por meio de pesquisa bibliográfica e documental e literatura especializada interdisciplinar, dentre outras que aplicáveis ao tema em estudo.

La responsabilité de protéger a été élaborée en 2001 par la Commission internationale de l’intervention et de la souveraineté des États. Le concept se voulait une réponse aux controverses suscitées par les interventions armées à des fins humanitaires menées dans les années 1990. Il cherchait à concilier l’intervention à des fins humanitaires et le principe de souveraineté afin d’assurer la protection universelle des populations civiles, notamment par les actions du Conseil de sécurité, tout en respectant les principes qui constituent les fondements de la société internationale basée sur la Charte des Nations Unies. Avec son entérinement par les 191 États membres des Nations Unies lors du Sommet mondial de 2005, la responsabilité de protéger est devenue un sujet incontournable du discours international. En 2011, la mise en œuvre de la responsabilité de protéger par le Conseil de sécurité durant la guerre civile en Libye et la crise postélectorale en Côte d’Ivoire a mis le concept au premier plan de l’actualité internationale. Notre mémoire cherche à déterminer les répercussions juridiques qu’a eues la responsabilité de protéger sur le principe de la souveraineté étatique et sur le fonctionnement institutionnel du Conseil de sécurité. / The Responsibility to Protect was elaborated in 2001 by the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty following the controversies surrounding humanitarian interventions lead during the 1990s. The Responsibility to Protect aimed at reconciling intervention for human protection purposes and sovereignty in order to ensure the universal protection of civilian populations, notably through the Security Council, while respecting the principles constituting the foundation of the international society based on the Charter of the United Nations. Since its acceptance by the 191 Member States of the United Nations during the 2005 World Summit, the concept has become a subject of first importance at the international stage. The implementation of the Responsibility to Protect by the Security Council in 2011 during the Civil War in Libya and the post-electoral crisis in Ivory Coast has put the concept on the headlines of the international news. Our thesis aims at determining the juridical repercussions that the Responsibility to Protect had on the State Sovereignty principle and on the institutional functioning of the Security Council.

Academic literature and the media offer a variety of monikers for emerging states like Brazil, India and China, most prominently, ‘emerging powers’ and ‘emerging markets’. This article argues the terms used to describe these states create assumptions about their behaviour in global governance (GG). In order to accurately assess the impact of emerging states on international institutions, it is necessary to more systematically examine their current participation in GG. Does the use of power and economic interests in GG negotiations distinguish emerging states from traditional powers, as the ‘emerging’ part of these terms suggests? And can the content of GG negotiations predict the dominance of each factor, as implied by the ‘power/market’ part? This article tackles these questions by comparing the behaviour of one emerging state (India) and one traditional power (the United States) in negotiations at the World Trade Organisation and the United Nations Security Council. The results demonstrate that, while there is clearly something distinctive about at least India’s participation in GG, focussing on power or economic interests alone is insufficient to explain that distinctiveness or its implications for relations between rising and traditional powers in GG.

"Mémoire présenté à la Faculté des Études supérieures en vue de l'obtention du grade de LL.M. en Maîtrise en droit Option recherche" / Le crime d'agression se veut etre un des quatre crimes internationaux sous la juridiction de la CPI. Lorsque les delegues a la Conference de Rome n'eurent point atteint de consensus sur une definition du crime, celui-ci resta, depuis, indefini en droit. En consequence, la CPI n'aura juridiction pour entendre des causes portant sur le crime d'agression qu'une fois la definition sera adoptee par l'Assemblee des Etats Parties au plus tot en 2009. Ce memoire traite trois problematiques liees au crime d'agression : la question de la responsabilite penale individuelle, le role du Conseil de securite de l'ONU, et les parametres du crime en tant que tel. La responsabilite penale individuelle est analysee, inter alia, du point de vue du principe des sources du droit international. Quant al'eventuelle implication du Conseil de securite dans le champ de competence de la CPI sur le crime d'agression, l'auteure soutient tel que suit: Si le Conseil de securite se voit accorde un pouvoir plus large que celui dont il est presentement dote en vertu des articles 13(b) et 16 du Statut de Rome, chaque membre permanent aura un veto sur toute situation d'agression qui serait autrement portee devant la Cour. Ceci aura pour consequence de politiser la CPI en ce qui a trait au crime et rendra hypothethique toute definition eventuelle. Si la definition est bien con9ue et redigee, on fait valoir, qu'il n' est point necessaire de limiter davantage la competence de la CPI. Les parametres de la definition du crime proposes par l'auteure sont etablis selon les conclusions d'une analyse des notions composantes de l'agression. L'essentiel du concept se veut un recours illegal et non-necessaire qui constitue une rupture ala paix. Amoins qu'il ne soit exerce en « legitime defence» ou en vertu d'un mandat du Chapitre VII, Ie recours ala force constitue prima facie une agression et s'il est suffisamment grave, il s'agira d'un crime d'agression. Ce memoire termine avec un projet de definition du crime d'agression en vue d'avancer Ie discours vers un consensus sur ces problematiques majeures. Non seulement est-il possible d'arriver aun consensus sur la definition, croit l'auteure, mais nous sommes plus que jamais al'aube d'y parvenir. / The crime of aggression is one of the four international crimes under the jurisdiction of the ICC. When delegates at the Rome Conference were unable to agree on the content of a definition, the crime was left undefined. As a result, the ICC can only begin prosecuting individuals for the crime of aggression once a definition is adopted by the Assembly of States Parties in 2009, at the earliest. This thesis examines three issues associated with the crime of aggression: the question of individual criminal responsibility, the role of the UN Security Council and the general scope of the definition of the crime of aggression itself Individual criminal liability is reviewed, inter alia, from the perspective of international sources doctrine. Regarding the role of the Security Council in relation to the crime of aggression, the author concludes: if the Security Council is vested with more powers than it already has under Articles 13(b) and 16 of the Rome Statute, each permanent member will have a veto over any situation of aggression that might otherwise be brought before the Court. This would result in a complete politicization of the ICC and render moot any future definition of the crime of aggression. If a definition for the crime of aggression is properly conceived and constructed, it is argued, there is no need to further limit the Court's exercise of jurisdiction. The author proposes general parameters for the scope ofthe definition based on conclusions reached in the analysis of the conceptual components of aggression. At its essence, the act of aggression is the unnecessary, unlawful use of force which constitutes a breach ofthe peace. Unless employed in "self-defence" or under a Chapter VII mandate, the use offorce constitutes prima facie an act of aggression, and if it is sufficiently grave, a crime ofaggression. This thesis concludes with a working definition ofthe crime of aggression to promote dialogue and ultimately a consensus on these core issues. Not only is a definition is within reach, the author believes, we are closer to it than we ever have been before.

This thesis explores the pressing need for reform within the United Nations Security Council, a key organization in global governance, in the form of a case study. The main purpose of the research is to understand how its reform could enhance its legitimacy while attending to the possible opposition from the USA, China, and Russia. It encompasses historical information, from the League of Nations to the reform proposals throughout history, culminating in the present debates, as well as useful theoretical approaches for the analysis. Through the Syrian Civil War, it describes the Council struggle to handle contemporary geopolitical issues. The insights of the Intergovernmental Negotiations Framework and the Elements Paper are crucial to research the current reform debates, and other literature from scholars, International Organizations and media are also employed. The analysis investigates the research question and hypothesis, and the conclusion helps summarize the findings. The thesis serves as a call for a better articulated Security Council that can better confront the complexities of our multipolar world with effectivity and effectiveness.

The thesis examines the international law pertaining to the use of force by states, in general, and to the use of force in self-defence, in particular. The main question addressed is whether the use of force, which was purported to be in self-defence, by the United States, the United Kingdom and their allies against al Qaeda, the Taliban and Afghanistan, beginning on 7 October 2001, was lawful. The thesis focuses not only on this specific use of force, but also on the changing nature of conflict, the definition of terrorism and on the historical evolution of limitations on the use of force, from antiquity until 2006. In the six chapters which trace the epochs of international law, the progression of five inter-related concepts is followed: limitations on the resort to force generally, the use of force in self-defence, pre-emptive self-defence, the use of forcible measures short of war, and the use of force in response to non-state actors. This historical analysis includes a particular emphasis on understanding the meaning of the 'inherent right of self-defence', which was preserved by Article 51 of the United Nations' Charter. This analysis is then applied to the use of force against Afghanistan which occurred in 2001. Following the terrorist attacks of 11 September, the US and the UK notified the United Nations Security Council of their resort to force in self-defence under Article 51. Each element of Article 51 is analysed and the thesis concludes that there are significant doubts as to the lawfulness of that decision to employ force. In addition to the self-defence justification, other possible grounds for intervention are also examined, such as humanitarian intervention, Security Council authorisation and intervention by invitation. This thesis challenges the common assumption that the use of force against Afghanistan was an example of states exercising their inherent right to self-defence. It argues that if this particular use of force is not challenged, it will lead to an expansion of the right of self-defence which will hinder rather than enhance international peace and security. Finally, this thesis draws on recent examples to illustrate the point that the use of force against Afghanistan could become a dangerous precedent for the use of force in self-defence.