Exceptions

I. Scobbie
{"title":"Exceptions","authors":"I. Scobbie","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3340197","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This chapter initially examines philosophical approaches to the international use of force in an historical context before examining the development of the doctrine of collective security as the unifying value of international relations at the end of the First World War and subsequently. States’ right of self-defence is seen as an exception to this doctrine. Drawing on analytical legal theory and theories of legal reasoning, it explores the nature of an exception to a rule. This classification can be difficult to identify as legal propositions can compete rather than exist in a hierarchical rule-exception relationship. The parameters of self-defence as an exception to the doctrine of collective security and the prohibition on the use of force is explored in this light, casting doubt on the validity of contemporary attempts to expand self-defence to justify extra-territorial attacks on non-state actors within states deemed unwilling or unable to curb their hostile activity.","PeriodicalId":102121,"journal":{"name":"Exceptions in International Law","volume":"64 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Exceptions in International Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3340197","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

This chapter initially examines philosophical approaches to the international use of force in an historical context before examining the development of the doctrine of collective security as the unifying value of international relations at the end of the First World War and subsequently. States’ right of self-defence is seen as an exception to this doctrine. Drawing on analytical legal theory and theories of legal reasoning, it explores the nature of an exception to a rule. This classification can be difficult to identify as legal propositions can compete rather than exist in a hierarchical rule-exception relationship. The parameters of self-defence as an exception to the doctrine of collective security and the prohibition on the use of force is explored in this light, casting doubt on the validity of contemporary attempts to expand self-defence to justify extra-territorial attacks on non-state actors within states deemed unwilling or unable to curb their hostile activity.
异常
本章首先考察了在历史背景下国际上使用武力的哲学方法,然后考察了集体安全学说在第一次世界大战结束时及其后作为国际关系统一价值的发展。国家的自卫权被视为这一原则的例外。借鉴分析法学理论和法律推理理论,它探讨了规则例外的本质。这种分类可能难以识别,因为法律命题可以相互竞争,而不是存在于分层规则-例外关系中。从这个角度探讨了作为集体安全和禁止使用武力学说的例外的自卫参数,对当代企图扩大自卫以证明对被认为不愿或无法遏制其敌对活动的国家内的非国家行为体进行域外攻击的合法性提出了怀疑。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信