No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 July 2025
This article critically examines the claim that the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) has acquired “legislative powers”, as suggested by the practices over the last two decades. This purported “legislative” role derives from Resolutions 1373, 1540, and 1422. However, an expansive interpretation of Chapter VII powers or viewing the UNSC as a legislative body within a “World Government” does not hold. Additionally, shifts in the international political landscape have made the expansion of UNSC’s legislative powers impossible, and the UNSC has largely refrained from adopting legislative resolutions in the past decade as they have learned the lessons from Resolution 1540. Finally, this article proposes a solution that although these resolutions do not qualify as a direct source of law under Article 38 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), their binding nature remains as acts détournement de pouvoir and shall not be regarded as ultra vires.
1 United Nations Press, “Press Conference by Security Council President” (2 April 2004), online: UN Press https://press.un.org/en/2004/pleugerpc.DOC.htm.
2 SC Res. 2728, UN Doc. S/RES/2728 (2024).
3 Official Record of the Security Council 9586th Meeting, UN Doc. S/PV.9586 (2024), at 5, 8, 15; Member States including China, Slovenia, Sierra Leone and Yemen confirmed the binding force of the resolution.
4 Ibid., at 5–6.
5 Official Record of the Security Council 9596th Meeting, UN Doc. S/PV.9596 (2024) at 12.
6 Prosecutor v. Tadić, Decision on Defence Motion for Interlocutory Appeal on Jurisdiction, [1995] IT-94-1 at para. 35 [Tadić].
7 Vesselin POPOVSKI and Trudy FRASER, eds., The Security Council as Global Legislator (New York: Routledge, 2014) at 6.
8 SC. Res. 1373, UN Doc. S/RES/1373 (2001) at paras. 1–3 [Res 1373]; SC Res. 1540, UN Doc. S/RES/1540 (2004) at paras. 1–3.
9 “International legislation” in John GRANT and Craig BARKER, eds., Parry & Grant Encyclopaedic Dictionary of International Law, 3rd ed. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2009), 301.
10 Martti KOSKENNIEMI, “The Police in the Temple Order, Justice and the UN: A Dialectical View” (1995) 6 European Journal of International Law 325 at 331.
11 John MOORE, “International Law: Its Present and Future” (1907) 1 American Journal of International Law 11 at 12.
12 Examples include the 1815 Congress of Vienna, 1818 Congress of Aix-la-Chapelle, 1856 Congress of Paris, and 1899 The Hague Peace Conference.
13 Jan KLABBERS, An Introduction to International Organizations Law, 3rd ed. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015) at 158.
14 Olawale ELIAS, “Modern Sources of International Law”, in Wolfgang FRIEDMANN et al., eds., Transnational Law in a Changing Society: Essays in Honor of Philip C. Jessup (New York: Columbia University Press, 1972), 34 at 51.
15 Carsten STAHN, The Law and Practice of International Territorial Administration: Versailles to Iraq and Beyond (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007) at 676.
16 Paul SZASZ, “The Security Council Starts Legislating” (2002) 96 American Journal of International Law 901 at 902.
17 Official Record of the Security Council 4453rd Meeting, UN Doc. S/PV.4453 (2002), at 7.
18 Ibid., at 4.
19 Szasz, supra note 16 at 905.
20 Official Record of the Security Council 4950th Meeting, UN. Doc. S/PV.4950 (2004) at 2 [4950th Meeting].
21 Ibid.; Official Record of the Security Council 4950th Meeting (Resumption 1), UN. Doc. S/PV.4950 (Resumption 1) (2004); Letter dated 27 April 2004 from the Permanent Representative of India to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council, UN Doc. S/2004/329 (2004). These states include: Algeria, Pakistan, India, Switzerland, Iran, Egypt, Mexico, South Korea, and Nepal.
22 Daniel SALISBURY et al., eds., Preventing the Proliferation of WMDs: Measuring the Success of UN Security Council Resolution 1540 (Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2018) at 22–3.
23 4950th Meeting, supra note 20. The United States, Russian Federation, France and China largely ignored the “mandate of the UNSC”.
24 Ibid., at 11–12. Instead of “legislating”, the United Kingdom held that Resolution 1540 aimed at promoting “the universalization and strengthening of multilateral treaties” in a “cooperative approach”, and was not an act of legislation
25 Roberto LAVALLE, “A Novel, If Awkward, Exercise in International Law-Making: Security Council Resolution 1540” (2004) 51 The Netherlands International Law Review 411 at 415.
26 Popovski and Fraser, eds., supra note 7 at 62.
27 Salisbury et al., eds., supra note 22 at 45–52.
28 Official Record of the Security Council 4568th Meeting, UN Doc. S/PV.4568 (2002) at 5 [4568th Meeting].
29 Morten BERGSMO et al., “Article 16 Deferral of investigation or prosecution”, in Kai AMBOS and Otto TRIFFTERER, eds., Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court: A Commentary, 3rd ed. (Oxford: Beck/Hart/Nomos, 2016) 770 at 776.
30 Questions of Interpretation and Application of the 1971 Montreal Convention arising from the Aerial Incident at Lockerbie (Libya v. U.K.), Order of 14 April 1992, [1992] I.C.J. Rep. 3 at para. 39 [Lockerbie].
31 Letter dated 12 July 2002 from the Permanent Representatives of Brazil, Canada, New Zealand and South Africa to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council, UN Doc. S/2002/754 (2002).
32 4568th Meeting, supra note 28 at 3, 16.
33 Ibid.; Official Record of the Security Council 4568th Meeting (Resumption 1), UN Doc. S/PV.4568 (Resumption 1) (2002). These states include Canada, New Zealand, South Africa, Denmark, Germany, and France on behalf of the EU, India, Costa Rica on behalf of the Rio Group, Iran, Jordan, Ireland, Brazil, Mauritius, Mexico, Fiji, Guinea, Malaysia, Syria, and Cuba.
34 Official Record of the Security Council 4572nd Meeting, UN Doc. S/PV.4572 (2002).
35 Koskenniemi, supra note 10 at 326; Axel MARSCHIK, “The Security Council as World Legislator?: Theory, Practice and Consequences of an Expanding World Power”, Institute for International Law and Justice, New York University, Working Paper 2005/18, at 8–9, 11–12.
36 WANG Huhua and JIANG Shengli, “Thinking over the Resolutions’ Law-Making of the U.N. Security Council under the International Law” (2015) 13 Present Day Law Science 99 at 100. Examples may include Resolutions 1261 and 1265 calling for civilian protection, or Resolution 1269 reaffirming Member States’ obligation in maintaining international peace and security.
37 Bart DUIJZENTKUNST, “Interpretation of Legislative Security Council Resolutions” (2008) 4 Utrecht Law Review 188 at 195–6; Eric ROSAND, “The Security Council As ‘Global Legislator’: Ultra Vires or Ultra Innovative?” (2004) 28 Fordham International Law Journal 542 at 558–60.
38 Bruno SIMMA et al., eds., The Charter of the United Nations: A Commentary (New York: Oxford University Press, 1994) at 624.
39 Documents of the United Nations Conference on International Organization, San Francisco, 1945, Vol. 12, UN Doc. 881 III/3/46 (1945) at 502–4 [San Francisco Conference].
40 Competence of the International Labour Organization in Regard to International Regulation of the Conditions of the Labour of Persons Employed in Agriculture, Advisory Opinion, [1922] P.C.I.J. Rep. Ser. B No. 2 at 23 [ILO Agriculture].
41 Competence of the International Labour Organization to Regulate, Incidentally, the Personal Work of the Employer, Advisory Opinion, [1926] P.C.I.J. Rep. Ser. B No. 13 at 23 [ILO Personal Work].
42 Certain Expenses of the United Nations, Advisory Opinion, [1962] I.C.J. Rep. 151 at 177 [Certain Expenses].
43 Tadić, supra note 6 at para. 35.
44 Antonio CASSESE, “The Legitimacy of International Criminal Tribunals and the Current Prospects of International Criminal Justice” (2012) 25 Leiden Journal of International Law 491 at 495–6.
45 Draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind, Draft Statute for an International Criminal Court, finalized by Doudou THIAM, UN Doc. A/CN.4/SER.A/1994/Add.l (Part 2) (1994) at 22.
46 José ALVAREZ, International Organizations as Law-makers (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006) at 187.
47 Marschik, supra note 35 at 7–8.
48 Reparation for injuries suffered in the service of the United Nations, Advisory Opinion, Dissenting Opinion of Judge Hackworth, [1949] I.C.J. Rep. 174 at 198.
49 Rosand, supra note 37 at 576.
50 4950th Meeting, supra note 20 at 2.
51 Popovski and Fraser, eds., supra note 7 at 75.
52 Simma et al., eds., supra note 38 at 1119.
53 Leland GOODRICH et al., Charter of the United Nations: Commentary and Documents, 3rd ed. (New York: Columbia University Press, 1969) at 615.
54 Fragmentation of International Law: Difficulties Arising from the Diversification and Expansion of International Law, Report of the Study Group of the ILC, finalized by Martti KOSKENNIEMI, UN Doc. A/CN.4/L/682 (2006), at para. 333.
55 Lockerbie, supra note 30, Dissenting Opinion of Judge Bedjaoui, [1992] I.C.J. Rep. 33 at para. 30; International Criminal Court: The Unlawful Attempt by the Security Council to Give US Citizens Permanent Impunity from International Justice, Report of Amnesty International, AI Index: IOR 40/006/2003 (2003) at 38.
56 Popovski and Fraser, eds., supra note 7 at 20–2.
57 Ibid., at 45–6.
58 Lockerbie, supra note 30, Dissenting Opinion of Judge Weeramantry, [1992] I.C.J. Rep. 50 at 56.
59 Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America), Judgment of 26 November 1984, [1984] I.C.J. Rep. 392 at para. 39 [Nicaragua].
60 San Francisco Conference, supra note 39, Vol. 6, UN Doc. UNX.341.13 U51 (1945), at 28 [Commission I Report].
61 Popovski and Fraser, eds., supra note 7 at 20.
62 Rosand, supra note 37 at 551–9; Stefan TALMON, “The Security Council as World Legislature” (2005) 99 American Journal of International Law 175 at 177–8; Björn ELBERLING, “The Ultra Vires Character of Legislative Action by the Security Council” (2005) 2 International Organizations Law Review 337 at 337–9; Duijzentkunst, supra note 37 at 193–4.
63 Friedrich KRATOCHWIL, “Legalism and the ‘Dark’ Side of Global Governance”, in Rain LIIVOJA and Jarna PETMAN, eds., International Law-making: Essays in Honour of Jan Klabbers (New York: Routledge, 2014), 39 at 49.
64 Salisbury et al., eds., supra note 22 at 115.
65 Cathleen POWELL, “The Role and Limits of Global Administrative Law in the Security Council’s Anti-Terrorism Programme” (2009) 2009(1) Acta Juridica 32 at 46.
66 Jane STROMSETH, “An Imperial Security Council? Implementing Security Council Resolutions 1373 and 1390” (2003) 97 American Society of International Law Proceedings 41 at 44.
67 Gloria ARRIBAS, “Rethinking International Institutionalization through Treaty Organs” (2020) 17 International Organizations Law Review 457 at 462–3; Paul SZASZ, “The Complexification of the United Nations System” (1999) 3 Max Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law 1 at 17.
68 Security Council Considers Terrorists Threats to International Peace, Security, UN Press Release, UN Doc. SC/7522 (2002).
69 Salisbury et al., eds., supra note 22 at 45–6.
70 Report of the Security Council Committee Established pursuant to Resolution 1540 (2004), finalized by Oyarzun MARCHESI, UN Doc. S/2016/1038 (2016), at para. 28 [1540 Report]. The 1540 Committee proposed a total of 64,076 possible measures in their report.
71 Final Document on the 2009 Comprehensive Review of the Status of Implementation of Security Council Resolution 1540 (2004): Key Findings and Recommendations, finalized by Claude HELLER, UN Doc. S/2010/52 (2010) at para. 5.
72 1540 Report, supra note 70, at paras. 45–9.
73 Official Record of the Security Council 7272nd Meeting, UN Doc. S/PV. 7272 (2014) [7272nd Meeting].
74 Simon CHESTERMAN et al., Law and Practice of the United Nations Documents and Commentary (New York: Oxford University Press, 2016) at 149.
75 SC Res. 2178, UN Doc. S/RES/2178 (2014) at paras. 5–6, 8.
76 SC Res. 2396, UN Doc. S/RES/2396 (2017) at paras. 11–13, 15 [Res 2396].
77 David DEBARTOLO, “Security Council ‘Legislation’ on Foreign (Terrorist) Fighters” (2018) 112 Proceedings of the ASIL Annual Meeting 303 at 304.
78 Cory KOPITZKE, “Security Council Resolution 2178 (2014): An Ineffective Response to the Foreign Terrorist Fighter Phenomenon” (2017) 24 Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies 309 at 317.
79 Global Counterterrorism Forum, “The Hague—Marrakech Memorandum on Good Practices for a More Effective Response to the FTF Phenomenon” (1 February 2014), online: GCTF www.thegctf.org/documents/10162/140201/14Sept19_The+Hague-Marrakech+FTF+Memorandum.pdf.
80 Letta TAYLER, “Foreign Terrorist Fighter Laws: Human Rights Rollbacks under UN Security Council Resolution 2178” (2016) 18 International Common Law Review 455 at 462.
81 The convention had acquired 187 state parties by 2014 when Resolution 2178 was adopted.
82 Res 1373, supra note 8 at para. 3(a); SC Res. 1624, UN Doc. S/RES/1624 (2005) at para. 2; SC Res. 2161, UN Doc. S/RES/2161 (2014) at para. 1(b).
83 The United Nations Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy, GA Res. 60/288, UN Doc. A/RES/60/288 (2006) Annex II, at paras. 13, 15.
84 Res 2396, supra note 76 at paras. 11–12.
85 WCO/IATA/ICAO, Guidelines on Advance Passenger Information (2014), paras. 4.1.5, 4.2.8, 4.3.5.
86 International Civil Aviation Organization, Guidelines on Passenger Name Record (PNR) Data (2006), para. 2.4.2.
87 Official Record of the Security Council 8148th Meeting, UN Doc. S/PV.8148 (2017) at 4.
88 SC Res. 2322, UN Doc. S/RES/2322 (2016) at para. 3.
89 Official Record of the Security Council 8116th Meeting, UN. Doc. S/PV.8116 (2017) at 6.
90 7272nd Meeting, supra note 73.
91 Ibid., at 18.
92 Ibid., at 3. Former President Obama represented the US at the 7272nd meeting.
93 Ibid., at 16–17; Kopitzke, supra note 78 at 321. For example, Mr Wang Yi representing China and Mr Lavrov representing Russia.
94 Elberling, supra note 62 at 338.
95 Chebolu LAKSHMI, “COVID-19—Bioterrorism” (2020) 3 International Journal of Law, Management and Humanities 104, 106–8.
96 Secretary-General Calls for Global Ceasefire, Citing War-Ravaged Health Systems, Populations Most Vulnerable to Novel Coronavirus, UN Press Release, UN Doc. SG/SM/20018 (2020), online: UN Press https://press.un.org/en/2020/sgsm20018.doc.htm.
97 SC Res. 1308, UN Doc. S/RES 1308 (2000); SC Res. 2177, UN Doc. S/RES/2177 (2014).
98 Erika DE WET, Chapter VII Powers of the United Nations Security Council (Portland: Hart Publishing, 2004) at 58.
99 Resolution 1368, condemning the 9/11 attacks and calling for implementation for Resolution 1269, was passed only one day after the attacks, followed by the binding Resolution 1373 within two weeks. A similar instance was the Ebola outbreak in 2014, as Resolution 2177 was passed within a month of receiving the joint request for coordinated international action.
100 Bruno CHARBONNEAU, “The COVID-19 test of the United Nations Security Council” (2021) 76 Canada’s Journal of Global Policy Analysis 6 at 12.
101 United Nations, Update on the Secretary-General’s Appeal for a Global Ceasefire, (New York: United Nations, 2020) at paras. 7–10.
102 Charbonneau, supra note 100 at 12–13.
103 José ALVAREZ, “Hegemonic International Law Revisited” (2003) 97 American Journal of International Law 873 at 879–80.
104 Daniel DREZNER, “The Song Remains the Same: International Relations After COVID-19” (2020) 74 International Organization Supplement E18 at E26.
105 Edward LUCK, “A Council for All Seasons: The Creation of the Security Council and Its Relevance Today”, in Vaughan LOWE et al., eds., The United Nations Security Council and War: The Evolution of Thought and Practice since 1945 (New York: Oxford University Press, 2008), 61 at 63.
106 Report of the Open-ended Working Group on the Question of Equitable Representation on and Increasing in the Membership of the Security Council, General Assembly Official Records, UN Doc. A/58/47 (2004) at 23 [Equitable Representation Report].
107 David MALONE, ed., The UN Security Council: From the Cold War to the 21st Century (Boulder: Lynne Rienner, 2004) at 263.
108 Frederic KIRGIS Jr, “The Security Council’s First Fifty Years” (1995) 89 American Journal of International Law 506 at 512.
109 Talmon, supra note 62 at 176.
110 Detlev VAGTS, “Hegemonic International Law” (2001) 95 American Journal of International Law 843 at 844.
111 4950th Meeting, supra note 20 at 12.
112 Reducing Space Threats through Norms, Rules and Principles of Responsible Behaviours, Report of the Secretary-General, UN Doc. A/76/77 (2021) at para. 13.
113 Report of the Group of Governmental Experts on Further Practical Measures for the Prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space, UN Doc. A/79/364 (2024) at para. 34.
114 SC Draft Res. 2024/302, UN Doc. S/2024/302 (2024).
115 SC Draft Res. 2024/383, UN Doc. S/2024/383 (2024) at paras. 4, 8 [2024/383].
116 United States Mission to International Organizations in Geneva, “Remarks by Ambassador Robert Wood for the Session on the Prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space” (1 June 2021), online: US Mission Geneva https://geneva.usmission.gov/2021/06/01/remarks-by-ambassador-wood-for-the-session-on-the-prevention-of-an-arms-race-in-outer-space/.
117 Letter Dated 12 February 2008 from the Permanent Representative of the Russian Federation and the Permanent Representative of China to the Conference on Disarmament Addressed to the Secretary-General of the Conference Transmitting the Russian and Chinese Texts of the Draft “Treaty on Prevention of the Placement of Weapons in Outer Space and of the Threat or Use of Force against Outer Space Objects (PPWT)” Introduced by the Russian Federation and China, UN Doc. CD/1839 (29 February 2008); Paul LARSEN, “Outer Space Arms Control: Can the USA, Russia and China Make This Happen” (2018) 23 Journal of Conflict and Security Law 137 at 148.
118 2024/383, supra note 115 at para. 8(1); Official Record of the Security Council 9630th Meeting, UN Doc. S/PV. 9630 (2024), at 5 [9630th Meeting].
119 Ibid., at 2.
120 The Amendment was put forward by Russia and China to amend Draft Resolution 2024/302.
121 Official Record of the Security Council 9616th Meeting, UN Doc. S/PV. 9616 (2024) [9616th Meeting] at 5.
122 9630th Meeting, supra note 118 at 4.
123 Ibid., at 2–4.
124 Ibid., at 8.
125 Ibid., at 7–9.
126 9616th Meeting, supra note 121 at 11.
127 Commission I Report, supra note 60 at 28.
128 Ibid., at 25–6.
129 Ibid., at 29, 33.
130 Ibid., at 29–30.
131 Benedetto CONFORTI and Carlo FOCARELLI, The Law and Practice of the United Nations, 5th ed. (Leiden: Brill Nijhoff, 2016) at 236.
132 Nigel WHITE and Matthew SAUL, “Legal Means of Dispute Settlement in the Field of Collective Security: The Quasi-Judicial Powers of the Security Council”, in Duncan FRENCH et al., eds., International Law and Dispute Settlement: New Problems and Techniques (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2010) 191 at 195.
133 Commission I Report, supra note 60 at 22.
134 Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Yugoslavia), Order of 13 September 1993, Separate Opinion of Judge Lauterpacht, [1993] I.C.J. Rep. 325 at paras. 100–4.
135 Kadi v. Council and Commission, Case T-315/01, The Court of First Instance of the European Communities, Second Chamber [2005] ECR II-03649, at paras. 228–30; Ayadi v. Council, Case T-253/02, The Court of First Instance of the European Communities, Second Chamber [2006] ECR II-02139, at para. 116.
136 Prosecutor v. Tadić, Appeals Judgment, [1999] IT-94-1-A at para. 296.
137 United Nations Department of Peacekeeping Operations, United Nations Peacekeeping Operations Principles and Guidelines (New York: United Nations, 2008) at 47.
138 Statement by the President of the Security Council, UN Doc. S/PRST/1994/22 (1994) at 1–2.
139 2005 World Summit Outcome, GA Res. 60/1, UN Doc. A/RES/60/1 (2005) at para. 139.
140 Development and the responsibility to protect: recognizing and addressing embedded risks and drivers of atrocity crimes, UN Doc. A/77/910-S/2023/409 (2023), at para. 1.
141 Letter dated 14 December 2015 from the Permanent Representative of Liechtenstein to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General, UN Doc. A/70/621–S/2015/978 (2015).
142 Draft Articles on the Law of Treaties with commentaries, Reports of the Commission to the General Assembly, UN Doc. A/CN.4/SER.A/1966/Add.1 (1966), at 220–1.
143 Legal Consequences for States of the Continued Presence of South Africa in Namibia (South West Africa) Notwithstanding Security Council Resolution 276 (1970), Dissenting Opinion of Judge Sir Gerald Fitzmaurice, [1971] I.C.J. Rep. 294 at para. 115 [Southwest Africa].
144 Jeremy FARRALL, “Does the UN Security Council Compound the Global Democratic Deficit?” (2009) 46 Alberta Law Review 913 at 917–18.
145 Alvarez, supra note 103 at 881.
146 Official Record of the Security Council 2529th Meeting, UN Doc. S/PV.2529 (1984), at 26–7.
147 Official Record of the Security Council 2963rd Meeting, UN Doc. S/PV.2963 (1990), at 105–8; Burns WESTON, “Security Council Resolution 678 and Persian Gulf Decision Making: Precarious Legitimacy” (1991) 85 American Journal of International Law 516 at 523–4.
148 Alvarez, supra note 103 at 880.
149 Weston, supra note 147 at 524.
150 4950th Meeting, supra note 20 at 2.
151 William TAFT and Todd BUCHWALD, “Preemption, Iraq, and International Law” (2003) 97 American Journal of International Law 557 at 559–63; Alvarez, supra note 46 at 212. Commentators believed that Resolutions 1373 and 1540 may encourage future armed intervention in the name of “implied authorization”.
152 Alvarez, supra note 103 at 882.
153 Certain Expenses, supra note 42 at 168.
154 Matthew HAPPOLD, “Security Council Resolution 1373 and the Constitution of the United Nations” (2003) 16 Leiden Journal of International Law 593 at 599.
155 Lockerbie, supra note 30, Dissenting Opinion of President Schwebel, [1992] I.C.J. Rep. 64 at 73–4 [Schwebel].
156 Commission I Report, supra note 60 at 453–4.
157 Malone, ed., supra note 107 at 8–9.
158 Francis FUKUYAMA, The End of History and the Last Man (London: Penguin Books, 2012) at 280–7.
159 Michael BARNETT and Martha FINNEMORE, “The Politics, Power, and Pathologies of International Organizations” (1999) 53 International Organization 699 at 717.
160 9616th Meeting, supra note 121 at 11.
161 Ronald MACDONALD, “The Charter of the United Nations as a World Constitution”, in Michael SCHMITT, ed., International Law Across the Spectrum of Conflict (Newport: Naval War College, 2000), 263 at 265.
162 Certain Expenses, supra note 42 at 168; Bardo FASSBENDER, The United Nations Charter as the Constitution of the International Community (Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff, 2009) at 100.
163 Martti KOSKENNIEMI, ed., Sources of International Law (New York: Routledge, 2017) at 65.
164 Nuclear Tests (Australia v. France), Judgment of 20 December 1974, [1974] I.C.J. Rep. 253 at para. 43; Frontier Dispute (Burkina Faso/Republic of Mali), Judgment of 22 December 1986, [1986] I.C.J. Rep. 554 at paras. 39–40.
165 Jan KLABBERS et al., eds., The Constitutionalization of International Law (New York: Oxford University Press, 2009) at 87. The example mentioned was Resolution 276, which created legally binding obligations. Such an interpretation is misleading, as the obligations set in Resolution 276 did not flow directly from the resolution itself, but the obligations under the UN Charter.
166 Koskenniemi, ed., supra note 163 at 29.
167 Ibid., at 6.
168 Ibid., at 3–4.
169 Prosper WEIL, “Towards Relative Normativity in International Law?” (1983) 77 American Journal of International Law 413 at 415.
170 Koskenniemi, ed., supra note 163 at 79–80.
171 The Case of The S.S. “Lotus”, [1927] P.C.I.J. Ser. A No. 10, at 3, 18.
172 American Law Institute, Restatement of the Law, Third: The Foreign Relations Law of the United States (St. Paul: ALI Publishers, 1986) at 18.
173 Weil, supra note 169 at 418.
174 David KENNEDY, “Theses About International Law Discourse” (1980) 23 German Yearbook of International Law 353 at 378.
175 South West Africa Cases (Ethiopia v. South Africa; Liberia v. South Africa), Second Phase, Dissenting Opinion of Judge Tanaka, [1966] I.C.J. Rep. 250 at 291 [Tanaka].
176 Hersch LAUTERPACHT, “Codification and Development of International Law” (1955) 49 American Journal of International Law 16 at 35–8. Sir Lauterpacht took ILC as the example: “a report, adopted after mature consideration and after taking into account the views expressed by governments, is bound to exercise an influence and to rally around it the support of enlightened states”.
177 Koskenniemi, ed., supra note 163 at 14.
178 Christoph SCHREUER, “Recommendations and the Traditional Sources of International Law” (1977) 20 German Yearbook of International Law 103 at 105.
179 Western Sahara, Advisory Opinion, [1975] 1.C.J. Rep. 12, at paras. 52–9; Nicaragua, supra note 59, Judgment of 26 June 1986, [1986] I.C.J. Rep. 14 at para. 195.
180 Southwest Africa, supra note 143, Advisory Opinion, [1971] I.C.J. Rep. 16 para. 116.
181 Jonathan CHARNEY, “Universal International Law” (1993) 87 American Journal of International Law 529 at 548–50.
182 Equitable Representation Report, supra note 106 at 7.
183 De Wet, supra note 98 at 135.
184 Martin BINDER and Monika HEUPEL, “The Legitimacy of the UN Security Council: Evidence from Recent General Assembly Debates” (2014) 59(2) International Studies Quarterly 238 at 239.
185 Alexander THOMPSON, “Coercion Through IOs: The Security Council and the Logic of Information Transmission” (2006) 60 International Organization 1 at 27.
186 Erik VOETEN, “The Political Origins of the UN Security Council’s Ability to Legitimize the Use of Force” (2005) 59 International Organization 527 at 528.
187 Weil, supra note 169 at 417.
188 Tanaka, supra note 175 at 292–3.
189 Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, [2004] I.C.J. Rep.136 at paras. 86, 99.
190 Draft Conclusions on Identification of Customary International Law, with Commentaries, finalized by Michael WOOD, UN Doc. A/73/10 (2018), at 130–1
191 Rosand, supra note 37 at 555; DeBartolo, supra note 77 at 304–5.
192 Salisbury et al., eds., supra note 22 at 25.
193 Certain Expenses, supra note 42 at 168.
194 Ibid., Separate Opinion of Judge Morelli, [1962] I.C.J. Rep. 151 at 221–2 [Morelli]; Constitution of the Maritime Safety Committee of the Inter-Governmental Maritime Consultative Organization, [1960] I.C.J. Rep. 150 at 171.
195 Elberling, supra note 62 at 352.
196 Morelli, supra note 194 at 223–4.
197 Certain Expenses, supra note 42 at 168.
198 Ibid.; Schwebel, supra note 155 at 73–4.
199 Klabbers, supra note 13 at 186.
200 Case of Certain Norwegian Loans (France v. Norway), Separate Opinion of Judge Sir Hersch Lauterpacht, [1957] I.C.J. Rep. 9 at 56–7.
201 Certain Expenses, supra note 42, Dissenting Opinion of Judge Bustamante, [1962] I.C.J. Rep. 151 at 292–3.
202 Force majeure and necessity are distinct concepts. Force majeure refers to actions due to “irresistible force or of an unforeseen event”, typically observed in bilateral disputes between an international organization and member states. Meanwhile, necessity is invoked to “safeguard against a grave and imminent peril an essential interest”, a more appropriate justification for the circumstances in Certain Expanses and the UNSC “legislation”. Draft Articles on the Responsibility of International Organizations, with Commentaries, Report of the ILC Sixty-third session, UN Doc. A/66/10 (2011), at 48–51
203 Ibid., at 52.
204 Responsibility of International Organizations: Comments and Observations Received from International Organizations, UN Doc. A/CN.4/637/Add.1 (2011), at 28.
205 Louis CAVARÉ, “Les sanctions dans le cadre de l’ O.N.U” (1952) Recueil des cours 191 at 223; Nicolas POLITIS, “La Réduction Progressive du Domaine Réservé” (1925) 6 Recueil des cours 61 at 84.
206 Michel DENDIAS, “Contribution à la Notion du Pouvoir Discrétionnaire et du Détournement de Pouvoir” (1962) 11 German Yearbook of International Law 77 at 95.
207 James FAWCETT, “Détournement de Pouvoir by International Organizations” (1957) 33 British Yearbook of International Law 311 at 316.
208 Politis, supra note 205 at 87.
209 Barcelona Traction, Light and Power Company, Limited (Belgium v. Spain), Judgment of 5 February 1970, [1970] I.C.J. Rep. 3, at para. 37; Réplique du Gouvernement Belge, [1967] I.C.J. Pleadings Vol. V, at paras. 597–8. In this case, the abuse of rights by Spain was referred to as acts détournement de pouvoir by Belgian Government.
210 Dendias, supra note 206 at 96.
211 Corfic Channel Case, Judgment of 9 April 1949, [1949] I.C.J. Rep. 4 at 39.
212 Cavaré, supra note 205 at 224.
213 Case concerning certain German interests in Polish Upper Silesia (The Merits), [1926] P.C.I.J. Ser. A No. 7, at 30.
214 Case of the Free Zones of Upper Savoy and the District of Gex, [1932] P.C.I.J. Ser. A/B No. 46 at 167.
215 Conditions of Admission of a State to Membership in the United Nations (Charter, Art. 4), Public Sitting Record, [1948] C.I.J Mérioires, Plaidoiries et Documents at 76 [Conditions of Admission].
216 Walter Fletcher Smith Claim (Cuba, USA), [1929] 2 Recueil des Sentences Arbitrales 913 at 917.
217 Treaty establishing the European Coal and Steel Community, EU Doc. 11951 K/TXT (1951), Art. 33(2).
218 Paul REUTER, “Les institutions” (1952) 81 Recueil des cours 543 at 560–1.
219 Oriol LA ROSA, “Abuso de Derecho, Desviacion de Poder y Responsibilidad Internacional” (1970) 23 Revista Española de Derecho Internacional 465 at 482.
220 Legality of the Use by a State of Nuclear Weapons in Armed Conflict, Advisory Opinion, [1996] I.C.J. Rep. 66 at para. 25.
221 Politis, supra note 205 at 87.
222 Jurisdiction of the European Commission of the Danube, [1927] P.C.I.J. Ser. B No. 14 at 64.
223 Aubert and 14 others v. Secretary-General, Judgment of the UNAT No. 2, UN Doc. AT/DEC/2 (1958), at 4.
224 Cavaré, supra note 205 at 218.
225 Duijzentkunst, supra note 37 at 195–7.
226 Conditions of Admission, supra note 215, Dissenting Opinion of Judges Basdevant, Winiarski, Sir Arnold McNair and Read, [1948] I.C.J. Rep. 82 at 93.
227 Politis, supra note 205 at 85.
228 Conditions of Admission, supra note 215, Advisory Opinion, [1948] I.C.J. Rep. 57 at 63.
229 Kadi and Al Barakaat International Foundation v. Council, Joined Cases C-402/05P and C-415/05P, European Court of Justice, Grand Chamber [2008] ECR I-06351, at paras. 226–38.
230 Szasz, supra note 16 at 905.
231 ILO Agriculture, supra note 40 at 37; ILO Personal Work, supra note 41 at 15.