JEAIL > Volume 8(1); 2015 > Articles
Research Paper
Published online: May 30, 2015
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.14330/jeail.2015.8.1.05

Combating Terrorism and the Use of Force against a State: A Relook at the Contemporary World Order

Abdul Ghafur Hamid @ Khin Maung Sein
International Islamic University Malaysia
Ahmad Ibrahim Kulliyyah of Laws, IIUM, P.O. Box 10, 50728 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Corresponding Author: ghafur@iium.edu.my

ⓒ Copyright YIJUN Institute of International Law
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Self-defence has long been understood as an inherent right of a State when it is militarily attacked by another State. After September 11 attacks, however, there have been attempts to reinterpret the meaning of 'armed attack' under Article 51 of the UN Charter to include attacks by terrorists - non-State actors. This paper critically examines the legal and policy considerations that promote a right of self-defence against terrorists by means of thoroughly analyzing the text of the UN Charter, State practice and the jurisprudence of the ICJ. The paper finds that a terrorist attack as such may not be an armed attack within the meaning of Article 51 of the Charter unless it is an act of a State or directly imputable to a State and is on a large scale with substantial effects. The paper concludes that unilateral use of force against a State in the name of self-defence is not the correct way of combating terrorism and that there are effective alternatives such as addressing the root causes of terrorism, resorting to law enforcement mechanisms or coercive countermeasures, and strengthening multilateralism.

Keywords : Terrorism, Self-defence, Article 51. Armed Attack, State Responsibility, Security Council, ICJ

View the Full Text