The Legality of Humanitarian Intervention
2005
- 20,125Usage
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Usage20,125
- Downloads18,538
- 18,538
- Abstract Views1,587
- 1,587
Article Description
Intervention in the domestic affairs of sovereign states by other sovereign state(s) is one of the ‘hot’ issues in international law today. The issue is ‘hot’ because the concept of human rights is on the ascendancy whilst international law had from time immemorial held the concept of sovereignty and its key feature, the principle of non-interference in high esteem. In fact, the concept of sovereignty has long been regarded as the bedrock of international relations. However, the doctrine of unilateral humanitarian intervention allows state(s) to intervene in the domestic affairs of sovereign states in the event of massive human rights violations, usually in the form of mass murders and genocide. The doctrine of humanitarian intervention, therefore, is an affront to one of the core principles of international law, namely, “non-interference” and as such its validity is hotly contested. This paper examines the legality of the doctrine of unilateral humanitarian intervention.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know