Prohibition of intervention: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Content added Content deleted
Reviewer601 (talk | contribs) |
(Prohibition of intervention icon change) |
||
Line 6:
! scope="col" style="background-color:#ffffaa;"| [[Prohibition of intervention]]
|-
|[[File:
# The act must bear on those matters in which States may decide freely. The spectrum of such issues is particularly broad and it includes both '''internal affairs''' (such as “choice of a political, economic, social, and cultural system”<ref name=":PI0">''[https://www.icj-cij.org/files/case-related/70/070-19860627-JUD-01-00-EN.pdf Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v US)]'' (Merits) [1986] ICJ Rep 14, para 205.</ref>), and '''external affairs''' (“formulation of foreign policy”<ref name=":PI0" />)—the so-called ''domaine réservé'' of States.<ref>See, for example, Katja Ziegler, [http://opil.ouplaw.com/view/10.1093/law:epil/9780199231690/law-9780199231690-e1398 “Domaine Réservé”], in Rudiger Wolfrum (ed), ''Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law'' (OUP 2008) (updated April 2013) (defining the ''domaine réservé'' as those “areas where States are free from international obligations and regulation”).</ref> The content of the DR is determined by by the scope and nature of the state's international legal obligations.
|
Revision as of 12:35, 28 March 2019
Definition
Prohibition of intervention |
---|
The obligation of non-intervention, a norm of customary international law prohibits States from intervening coercively in the internal or external affairs of other States. Prohibited intervention was authoritatively defined by the International Court of Justice in the judgment on the merits in the 1986 case Nicaragua v United States:In order for an act, including a cyber operation, to qualify as a prohibited intervention, it must fulfil the following conditions:
|
Appendixes
See also
Notes and references
- ↑ Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v US) (Merits) [1986] ICJ Rep 14, para. 205.
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v US) (Merits) [1986] ICJ Rep 14, para 205.
- ↑ See, for example, Katja Ziegler, “Domaine Réservé”, in Rudiger Wolfrum (ed), Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law (OUP 2008) (updated April 2013) (defining the domaine réservé as those “areas where States are free from international obligations and regulation”).
- ↑ Tallinn Manual 2.0, commentary to rule 66, para 19.
- ↑ Tallinn Manual 2.0, commentary to rule 66, para 21.
- ↑ Tallinn Manual 2.0, commentary to rule 66, para 21.
- ↑ Tallinn Manual 2.0, commentary to rule 66, paras 19, 27.
- ↑ Tallinn Manual 2.0, commentary to rule 66, para 24 (The exact nature of the causal nexus was not agreed on).