To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: Self-Defence of State.
Journal articles on the topic 'Self-Defence of State'
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the top 50 journal articles for your research on the topic 'Self-Defence of State.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Browse journal articles on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.
1
Renzo, Massimo. "State Legitimacy and Self-defence." Law and Philosophy 30, no. 5 (June 2, 2011): 575–601. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10982-011-9105-2.
Full text
2
TSAGOURIAS, NICHOLAS. "Self-Defence against Non-state Actors: The Interaction between Self-Defence as a Primary Rule and Self-Defence as a Secondary Rule." Leiden Journal of International Law 29, no. 3 (June 22, 2016): 801–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0922156516000327.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractThis article examines the law of self-defence as applied to non-state attacks in light of the coalition air strikes against ISIL in Syria. It critiques the two current interpretations of the law of self-defence – one based on attribution and the other on the ‘unable or unwilling’ test – for failing to address adequately the security threat posed by non-state actors or for not addressing convincingly the legal issues arising from the fact that the self-defence action unfolds on the territory of another state. For this reason, it proposes an alternative framework which combines the primary rule of self-defence to justify the use of defensive force against non-state actors, with the secondary rule of self-defence to excuse the incidental breach of the territorial state's sovereignty.
3
Khanna, Pallavi. "STATE SOVEREIGNTY AND SELF-DEFENCE IN CYBERSPACE." BRICS Law Journal 5, no. 4 (December 15, 2018): 139–54. http://dx.doi.org/10.21684/2412-2343-2018-5-4-139-154.
Full textAbstract:
Given the increasing role and use of cyberspace in our daily lives, it is important to consider the large-scale dynamics of the cyber forum. Shifting the focus from individuals to nation states as participants that engage in activities in cyberspace raises doubts over the status of nations in this domain. Do they continue to remain sovereign entities on such a platform? Do they have the right to defend themselves against attacks from other nations? These questions have been subject to a lot of debate in the context of international law. The aim of this paper is to study the implications of the principle of state sovereignty and selfdefence in cyberspace. The paper focuses on two prime considerations of sovereignty and self-defence in the context of cyberspace and its link to international law. Thus the scope is limited to concepts such as territorial jurisdiction, sovereignty, attribution and selfdefence. While doing so, the researcher seeks to answer questions such as, Is international law applicable to cyberspace? Can cyberspace be called a sovereign domain? Do principles of territorial jurisdiction apply to cyberspace? How does the attribution mechanism work in cyberspace? Under what circumstances are states permitted to exercise the right of self-defence against cyber attacks? and What are the deficiencies in international law governing cyberspace?
4
Barber, N. W. "SELF-DEFENCE FOR INSTITUTIONS." Cambridge Law Journal 72, no. 3 (November 2013): 558–77. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0008197313000706.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractThis article reflects on a group of constitutional devices: mechanisms that empower one state institution to defend itself against another. The institution is given a shield to protect against the attentions of another body, or is given a sword it can use to repel an attack. Self-defence mechanisms are interesting for many reasons, but particularly for the light they cast on the separation of powers. These measures seem contrary to the normal prescriptions of that principle, allocating a capacity to a body that it appears ill suited to possess. Understanding why the separation of powers requires these surprising allocations helps explain its operation in ordinary contexts.
5
VAN STEENBERGHE, RAPHAËL. "Self-Defence in Response to Attacks by Non-state Actors in the Light of Recent State Practice: A Step Forward?" Leiden Journal of International Law 23, no. 1 (February 2, 2010): 183–208. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0922156509990380.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractThis article analyses the recent state practice in which the right of self-defence has been invoked in order to justify the use of force in response to attacks by non-state actors. The main purpose of this analysis is to determine whether the law of self-defence has evolved through this practice. It is submitted that the latter confirms the tendency, evidenced by the US operation ‘Enduring Freedom’ in Afghanistan in 2001, towards allowing states to respond in self-defence to private armed attacks, that is, attacks which are committed by non-state actors only. The article also aims to shed some light on other fundamental conditions of the law of self-defence which played a significant role in the legal assessment of the recent state practice. It is argued in this respect that this practice confirms that any armed attack must reach some level of gravity – which may be assessed by accumulating minor uses of force – in order to trigger the right of self-defence, and that proportionality of the action taken in self-defence may be assessed in quantitative terms, but only as a means of making a prima facie judgement about the necessity of this action.
6
Tams, Christian J., and James G. Devaney. "Applying Necessity and Proportionality to Anti-Terrorist Self-Defence." Israel Law Review 45, no. 1 (March 2012): 91–106. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0021223711000033.
Full textAbstract:
Recent years have seen increasing reliance on self-defence as a concept justifying the use of force against armed attacks by terrorists operating from within a foreign state. While the matter has prompted major debates, a good case can be made that contemporary international law now begins to recognise a right of self-defence against attacks by terrorists. (We will refer to this in the following as ‘anti-terrorist self-defence’, meaning a response directed against an attack carried out by a terrorist organisation.) This article deliberately does not rehearse the major debates about the scope of self-defence, but moves beyond them. It seeks to assess whether and how the two main limitations on the exercise of self-defence – namely necessity and proportionality – could be adapted to self-defence outside the inter-state setting. It shows that both limitations do indeed require some adaptation in order to be applied to anti-terrorist self-defence.With respect to necessity, we argue that this adaptation is actually a chance to make sense of a requirement that is of very limited practical relevance in the inter-state setting. As the article shows, necessity can assume a crucial role in the anti-terrorist setting: in order for trans-border uses of force to be necessary, states invoking self-defence must demonstrate that the terrorist threat cannot be repelled by the host state (on whose territory the terrorists are based).As for proportionality, recent debates about anti-terrorist self-defence expose the weaknesses of proportionality as a restraint on self-defence. Construed primarily as a prohibition against excessive force, even in the inter-state setting, proportionality has always been dependent on the nature of the aims pursued in the name of self-defence. Recent anti-terrorist practice suggests that many states are prepared to accept far-reaching uses of force against terrorists. It also suggests that, in applying proportionality, the targeted (or otherwise) character of the response is of crucial importance. The law is clearly in a state of flux, but in debates such as those about Turkey's use of force against the PKK or Israel's military operations against Hamas or Hezbollah, one can see the beginning of a process of developing guidelines on proportionality.
7
Müllerson, Rein. "Self-defence against Armed Attacks by Non-State Actors." Chinese Journal of International Law 18, no. 4 (December 1, 2019): 751–75. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/chinesejil/jmz037.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Armed attacks in the sense of Article 51 and customary international law can be carried out not only by States, but also by non-State actors (NSA). Self-defensive responses to attacks by NSAs, due to their specific characteristics, may contain a combination of elements of anticipatory self-defence and defensive reprisals. If a State, from the territory of which an attack originates, is unable to prevent an NSA attacking a third State, it has to ask for and to accept the assistance of the victim State, other States, or relevant international organisations. The latter cannot use military force in self-defence in such circumstances without having first sought the consent of the territorial State. However, if a State is unwilling to prevent an NSA, operating from its territory, from attacking third States, it becomes an accessory-after-the-fact to armed attacks of the NSA. Self-defensive, either individual or collective, measures can be carried out on the territory of such a State even without its consent.
8
Palchetti, Paolo. "Armed Attack against the Military Force of an International Organization and Use of Force in Self-Defence by a Troop-Contributing State: A Tentative Legal Assessment of an Unlikely Scenario." International Organizations Law Review 7, no. 2 (2010): 241–60. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/157237410x543350.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractIf the military force of an international organization is made the object of a military attack by a State, that international organization may be regarded as being entitled to use force in self-defence. However, since the forces of international organizations are generally composed of national contingents which States put at the disposal of the international organizations, the question may be raised as to whether, in case of an armed attack against such forces, the sending State would also be entitled to use force in self-defence to protect its national contingent. This question, which was addressed, albeit in a very cursory manner, in the 2009 Report of the EU Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on the Conflict in Georgia, has to be answered taking into account the status of national contingents as organs of the sending States. By attaching relevance to the contingent's dual status and to the rationale underlying the rule on self-defence, this study argues that whenever the national contingent is made the object of an armed attack the possibility for the sending State to invoke self-defence cannot be excluded. In particular, the invocability of self-defence by the sending State should be admitted in those cases in which the armed attack is clearly aimed at targeting that State.
9
PADDEU, FEDERICA I. "Use of Force against Non-state Actors and the Circumstance Precluding Wrongfulness of Self-Defence." Leiden Journal of International Law 30, no. 1 (October 19, 2016): 93–115. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0922156516000583.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractThe right of self-defence against non-state actors is increasingly invoked and accepted in the practice of states. However, the recognition of this right must overcome a fundamental obstacle: that of explaining why the rights of the host state, in particular its right of territorial sovereignty, is not infringed by the self-defensive force used within its territory. In practice, states invoking self-defence against non-state actors rely on the involvement of the host state with those actors to justify the use of force in that state's territory. It is not clear, from a legal standpoint, how to rationalize the fact of involvement as a form of legal justification. For some, involvement amounts to attribution. For others, involvement is a form of complicity. For others still, involvement may entail a breach of the host state's due diligence obligation to protect the rights of other states in its territory. All of these solutions are deficient in some way, and have failed to receive general endorsement. This article considers whether there may be a different, as yet neglected, solution: self-defence as a circumstance precluding wrongfulness. The article shows that this is not a perfect solution either, since positive law remains uncertain on this point. Nevertheless, it is a solution that may provide a better normative framework for the development of the law of self-defence against non-state actors.
10
Walulya, Gerald, and Goretti L. Nassanga. "Democracy at Stake: Self-Censorship as a Self-Defence Strategy for Journalists." Media and Communication 8, no. 1 (February 25, 2020): 5–14. http://dx.doi.org/10.17645/mac.v8i1.2512.
Full textAbstract:
The media play an essential role of informing and mobilising voters as well as facilitating a two-way communication process between citizens and those vying for electoral offices during elections. This allows citizens to get information on various issues from the contenders, which largely informs their electoral decisions. In most less democratic societies however, this media function is increasingly becoming difficult to fulfil due to challenges journalists encounter during electoral processes. Using Uganda’s last general elections in 2016 as a case study, this article discusses the safety of journalists during elections basing on findings from a bigger study on the media coverage of the 2016 elections, supplemented by in-depth interviews with 10 journalists who covered the elections. In addition, the analysis makes reference to the 2016 Uganda Press Freedom Index. Findings of this research show that journalists face more safety and security risks during elections particularly perpetuated by state security agencies. Compared to previous elections, the 2016 elections also recorded the highest number of victims who were female journalists. This article highlights key challenges journalists face during elections, which include: state harassment and intimidation, arrest of those considered critical to the state, and denial of access to important information. Due to concerns of their own safety, journalists have responded to the insecure work environment by engaging in self-censorship, thereby giving biased or limited information to the public. The article identifies gaps that media development agencies can help to close if the media are to play their rightful role in a democratic society, especially during the electoral process.
11
DE SOUZA, I. M. LOBO. "Revisiting the Right of Self-Defence against Non-State Armed Entities." Canadian Yearbook of international Law/Annuaire canadien de droit international 53 (August 15, 2016): 202–43. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cyl.2016.5.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractThis article explores and appraises international legal developments regarding the right to self-defence against vicarious aggression — that is, armed attacks by non-state entities that are sponsored or hosted by a foreign state. Despite efforts to develop a normative framework and mechanisms of accountability to curb states’ use of non-state entities as proxies for armed activity, some states continue to view these entities as valuable tools for the realization of their foreign policy goals. Consequently, international practice shows general recognition of a right of self-defence against non-state armed entities. There is also an emerging body of authoritative opinion, backed by an evolving state practice, that supports the extension of the application of this right against a non-state entity’s host or sponsoring state, provided some conditions are met.
12
Tang, Yongkang, and Jianye Wang. "Built-in self-monitor-based finite state machines Trojans detection and self-lock defence." Journal of Engineering 2016, no. 4 (April 1, 2016): 62–63. http://dx.doi.org/10.1049/joe.2016.0012.
Full text
13
Bernsmann, Klaus. "Private Self-Defence and Necessity in German Penal Law and in the Penal Law Proposal — Some Remarks." Israel Law Review 30, no. 1-2 (1996): 171–87. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s002122370001503x.
Full textAbstract:
Self-defence and necessity are central institutions of the General Part of German Penal Law. Numerous problems of considerable practical and theoretical relevance are connected with them. How to deal with “self-defence” and “necessity” is also an indicator of liberality or, on the other hand, of the minimum solidarity and public spirit which a State can concede to its citizens or demand of them. In German criminal theory, “self-defence” and “necessity” are closely connected with the release of the distinction between justification and excuse and all conclusions derived thereof.Instead of elaborating on fundamental or purely theoretical problems concerning self-defence and necessity, an illustration of the contents of the German provisions of self-defence and necessity from a more technical, but nevertheless practical, point of view will be discussed. In the course of the discussion, some differences between the Israeli Draft law and the German law will be pointed out, and some problems which are unsolved in German law and may possibly confront Israeli law in the future will be brought to your attention.
14
Henriksen, Anders. "Lawful State Responses to Low-Level Cyber-Attacks." Nordic Journal of International Law 84, no. 2 (June 1, 2015): 323–51. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15718107-08402008.
Full textAbstract:
The article discusses the sources of international law that may justify a state to respond to harmful interferences in cyberspace that occur outside times of armed conflict and that are not sufficiently serious to merit a rersort to self-defence under the un Charter. The focus is primarily aimed at the more immediate measures a targeted state may adopt in order to bring on-going harmful cyber-activities to a halt. The article opens with a discussion of the application of the traditional principles of sovereignty to activities in cyberspace and subsequently analyses how the principles of countermeasures may be applied to various forms of harmful cyber-incidents that fall below the threshold for triggering a right to self-defence. The article also examines the extent to which a plea of necessity may be invoked in order to justify the use of immediate defensive measures against cyber-attacks that may have an effect on other states.
15
Brunnée, Jutta, and Stephen J. Toope. "SELF-DEFENCE AGAINST NON-STATE ACTORS: ARE POWERFUL STATES WILLING BUT UNABLE TO CHANGE INTERNATIONAL LAW?" International and Comparative Law Quarterly 67, no. 2 (November 6, 2017): 263–86. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0020589317000458.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractCan a few primarily Western States expand the right to self-defence against non-State actors, incorporating the unwilling or unable standard? Even on a traditional reading of customary law formation, the answer is no because proponents have failed to attract consistent and widespread support. What is more, using our interactional international law approach, we show that efforts to date have not been successful because they have failed to address fundamental rule of law concerns. The current state of world politics has perhaps caught proponents of the unwilling or unable standard in a difficult bind. We suggest how proponents might carefully develop the law on self-defence against non-State actors.
16
KAMMERHOFER, JÖRG. "The Armed Activities Case and Non-state Actors in Self-Defence Law." Leiden Journal of International Law 20, no. 1 (March 2007): 89–113. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s092215650600392x.
Full textAbstract:
In the Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo case the International Court of Justice has – for the first time in its history – found a state to have violated the prohibition of the use of force in Article 2(4) of the UN Charter. For the first time also, the Court has discussed the scope of self-defence directly under Article 51. In this article the focus lies on this aspect of a wide-ranging judgment. In finding that Uganda had violated the Charter, the Court kept to its jurisprudence constante; it did not bow to ‘post-11 September’ pressure to extend the logic of Article 51 to private actors. This article discusses the merits of the scholarly claims for both sides, but warns of drawing conclusions for the Court's future jurisprudence – the apparent unity among judges may have to do more with the case rather than the wider issue.
17
VAN STEENBERGHE, RAPHAËL. "The Law of Self-Defence and the New Argumentative Landscape on the Expansionists’ Side." Leiden Journal of International Law 29, no. 1 (February 1, 2016): 43–65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0922156515000643.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractRecent developments in legal scholarship evidence that the orthodoxy on the law on the use of force has dramatically switched from a restrictivist to an expansionist perspective. This article seeks to analyse this recent shift, especially with respect to the law of self-defence, from an expansionist point of view. Its purpose is to examine the argumentative landscape which currently exists on the expansionists’ side about that law. It observes that such argumentative landscape has significantly changed, as expansionists tend to pay less attention to the traditional arguments based on state practice and increasingly rely on policy considerations in order to strengthen and to go deeper in their wide conception of the law of self-defence. It calls into question such increasing recourse to policy oriented arguments and argues that those arguments cannot justify alone any evolution of the law of self-defence, while emphasizing that state practice remains central in that respect and explaining the different ways through which this practice may play such a role.
18
Bastani, Amir, and Colin Gavaghan. "Challenges to "a Most Dangerous Doctrine" or a "Fantastic Theory" of Volitional Insanity." Victoria University of Wellington Law Review 47, no. 4 (December 1, 2016): 545. http://dx.doi.org/10.26686/vuwlr.v47i4.4788.
Full textAbstract:
In theory, an insanity defence can take two forms: the cognitive form (C-insanity) and the volitional form (V-insanity). The defence of C-insanity recognises that a disordered state of mind can make the ability to understand the nature of an action impossible. On the other hand, V-insanity is recognised in some common law jurisdictions, such as all jurisdictions in Australia except for Victoria and New South Wales, and is a full defence. It recognises that a disordered state of mind can make the exercise of self-control impossible. However, that disordered state of mind does not necessarily affect the understanding of the nature of the act impossible.
19
Miller, Edward. "Self-Defence, International Law, and the Six Day War." Israel Law Review 20, no. 1 (1985): 49–73. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0021223700008608.
Full textAbstract:
“As long as war is regarded as wicked,it will always have its fascination.”Oscar WildeAccording to the textbooks, the unfettered right of a state to go to war was, until modern times, regarded as one of the essential trappings of statehood, an indispensable aspect of sovereignty. Such a broad assertion does however require qualification, as ever since the time of Saint Augustine, scholars have attempted to set limits to the extent of the state's discretion to go to war. The task has not been an easy one, and it may indeed aptly be remarked that “Warfare has been as difficult to justify satisfactorily in theory as it has been endemic in practice”.
20
Kułaga, Łukasz. "UŻYWANIE DRONÓW W CELU ZWALCZANIA TERRORYZMU ŚWIETLE ‘IUS AD BELLUM’." Zeszyty Prawnicze 16, no. 2 (December 9, 2016): 141. http://dx.doi.org/10.21697/zp.2016.16.2.07.
Full textAbstract:
The Use of Drones in Combating International Terrorism from the Perspective of ‘ius ad bellum’Summary The increasing practice of using armed unmanned aerial vehicles (military UAVs, commonly known as drones) by some countries to eliminate suspected terrorists raises a number of controversies from the perspective of international law. These controversies are also related to the specific features of military UAVs, which make it possible to kill targeted individuals without risk to the military personnel of the country concerned, and thereby may encourage the abusive interpretation of the applicable legal regulations. This article discusses these issues from the perspective of ius ad bellum, in particular the right to self-defence. It shows the main controversial points on the scope of invoking the right to self-defence in such cases, in particular the possibility of invoking the right to self-defence in response to an attack by a non-state entity, the question of pre-emptive self-defence, the importance of the severity of the force used as a condition allowing for the use of force in self-defence, and the relevance of the principles of proportionality and necessity. The article also presents an outline of the vast and highly controversial issues associated with the definition of terrorism from the point of view of international law.
21
Trapp, Kimberley N. "Back to Basics: Necessity, Proportionality, and the Right of Self-Defence Against Non-State Terrorist Actors." International and Comparative Law Quarterly 56, no. 1 (January 2007): 141–56. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/iclq/lei153.
Full textAbstract:
The International Court of Justice's decision inDRCvUgandatouches on, but fails to address, the circumstances under which a State has a right to use force in self-defence against non-State actors.1In particular, the Court holds that, because the attacks carried out by anti-Ugandan rebels operating from the Democratic Republic of Congo's (DRC) territory are not attributable to the DRC, Uganda has no right to use force in self-defenceagainst theDRC.2The separate opinions inDRC v Ugandalament the Court's failure to take the opportunity to address the right to act in self-defence against non-State actors3–an issue of such obvious importance to the international community in an age of terrorism. As will be examined below, there are arguably good reasons–on the facts of the case–for the Court's refusal to pronounce itself on the matter. Furthermore, its decision need not be read as absolutely precluding a use of force in foreign territory in response to armed attacks by non-State actors.
22
Permana, Deny Surya. "IMPLEMENTASI PROSES PEMBELAJARAN PENDIDIKAN KEWARGANEGARAAN BAGI PENGEMBANGAN SEMANGAT BELA NEGARA MAHASISWA." Pro Patria: Jurnal Pendidikan, Kewarganegaraan, Hukum, Sosial, dan Politik 1, no. 1 (August 31, 2018): 62–76. http://dx.doi.org/10.47080/propatria.v1i1.144.
Full textAbstract:
This study is back grounded by author’s anxiety toward the fading of state defence spirit of citizen included college students. This study use qualitative approach with descriptive method. Data of study is obtained by interview, observation, and documentation study. Result of study reveal that: 1) Lecturer team of Civic Education, MKDU Department develop Syllabus by concerning student’s cognitive, affective and psychomotor domain, then this Syllabus is used to become reference to develop Lecturing Program Unit by civic education lecturers; 2) Syllabus and Lecturing Program Unit that have been designed in implementation in class undergo much adjustments; 3) The development of student’s state defence spirit is done in learning process by discussing more deeply Indonesia geo politic and geo strategy topics because state defence topic is integrated in those two subject matter. Whereas strategy that is implemented by lecturer is by giving example of state defence behaviour and through the story of nation struggle history that contain nationalism and patriotism value; 4) State defence spirit is done by college student by learning persistently to actualize knowledge potency, active in university student affair organization, have achievement, fortify him/herself from negative foreign culture, and apply Indonesian-ness values in attitude and behaved. Thus, college student’s predicate as agent of change, social control, and iron stock can be actualized, because self devote according to his/her profession and predicate as a college students for the sake of nation and state interest included in state defence.
23
Elliott, Catherine. "What Future for Voluntary Manslaughter?" Journal of Criminal Law 68, no. 3 (June 2004): 253–63. http://dx.doi.org/10.1350/jcla.68.3.253.34453.
Full textAbstract:
This article examines the Law Commission's Consultation Paper, Partial Defences to Murder, which was published in June 2003. There are fundamental problems with the defence of provocation. The author suggests that this partial defence should therefore be abolished and replaced by a new partial defence of self-preservation. This could provide a defence where the offender, or another person with whom he or she is closely associated, has been repeatedly subjected to serious violence or tormenting behaviour. This conduct must have caused the offender to be in a state of severe emotional disturbance at the time of the killing.
24
Elliott, Catherine. "What Future for Voluntary Manslaughter?" Police Journal: Theory, Practice and Principles 68, no. 3 (July 1995): 253–63. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0032258x9506800311.
Full textAbstract:
This article examines the Law Commission's Consultation Paper, Partial Defences to Murder, which was published in June 2003. There are fundamental problems with the defence of provocation. The author suggests that this partial defence should therefore be abolished and replaced by a new partial defence of self-preservation. This could provide a defence where the offender, or another person with whom he or she is closely associated, has been repeatedly subjected to serious violence or tormenting behaviour. This conduct must have caused the offender to be in a state of severe emotional disturbance at the time of the killing.
25
Gazzini, T. "A Response to Amos Guiora: Pre-Emptive Self-Defence Against Non-State Actors?" Journal of Conflict and Security Law 13, no. 1 (June 18, 2008): 25–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jcsl/krn016.
Full text
26
de Wet, Erika. "The invocation of the right to self-defence in response to armed attacks conducted by armed groups: Implications for attribution." Leiden Journal of International Law 32, no. 01 (November 14, 2018): 91–110. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0922156518000560.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractThe right to self-defence in Article 51 of the United Nations Charter is increasingly being invoked in response to armed attacks conducted by armed groups located in a territory of another state, with or without the (direct) assistance of such a state. This article examines the implications of the invocation of the right to self-defence under these circumstances for the principles of attribution within thejus ad bellumparadigm. First, it illuminates how the threshold requirements for indirect armed attacks (that is, the state acting through a private actor) have been lowered since the 1986Nicaraguadecision of the International Court of Justice. In so doing, the article suggests that in order to prevent a complete erosion of the benchmarks of an indirect armed attack, the notions of ‘substantial involvement’ in an armed attack, ‘harbouring’, and ‘unwillingness’ should be interpreted as manifestations of due diligence. Thereafter, the article illustrates that there is also an increasing attribution of armed attacks directly to non-state actors, notably those located in areas over which territorial states have lost control. Such states could be depicted as being ‘unable’ to counter the activities of non-state actors. The article further submits that particularly in these instances, the principle of necessity within the self-defence paradigm can play an important role in curbing the potential for abuse inherent in the vague notion of ‘inability’, if interpreted in light of Article 25 of the Articles on State Responsibility for Internationally Wrongful Acts.
27
Lingam, Ravi, and Simon Mason. "Self-cannibalism and cannibalism: a perverse defence against depression." International Journal of Forensic Psychotherapy 2, no. 1 (June 30, 2020): 42–51. http://dx.doi.org/10.33212/ijfp.v2n1.2020.42.
Full textAbstract:
This observational article describes three cases of self-cannibalism and cannibalism by patients in a secure setting. These are studies of severe personality disordered patients, each of whom have perpetrated terrible offences, usually on others. In our view, the inner world of the cannibalistic patient is committed to a narcissistic biting grip on his objects and is bent upon appropriating their good aspects. In our practice, we have observed a countertransference enactment that may be characterised as a roadblock to explore the past: to feel, to understand, and to repair. The aim of the perverse pact is to remain in a stuck state to protect the self from any awareness of feelings of depression. This is an enactment of the inherently deathly, inner relationship of the individual perpetrator. We believe it is essential to attempt to open up a space to explore the unthinkable act of cutting and eating flesh in the context of the person’s developmental history. Failure to do so within systems of care sets in motion a repeating cycle of a traumatic victim–victimiser dynamic associated with ever increasing risk.
28
Wake, Nicola. "‘His home is his castle. And mine is a cage’: a new partial defence for primary victims who kill." Northern Ireland Legal Quarterly 66, no. 2 (August 17, 2018): 151–77. http://dx.doi.org/10.53386/nilq.v66i2.148.
Full textAbstract:
This article provides an in-depth analysis of the Crimes Amendment (Abolition of Defensive Homicide) Act 2014 which had the effect of repealing the Australian state of Victoria’s only general ‘partial defence’ of defensive homicide, and replaced the existing statutory self-defence in murder/manslaughter provisions and general common law self-defence rules with a single test. The abolition of defensive homicide means there is now no general ‘partial defence’ to accommodate cases falling short of self-defence. The change is likely to mean that some primary victims will find themselves bereft of a defence. This is the experience in New Zealand where the Family Violence Death Review Committee recently recommended the reintroduction of a partial defence, postabolition of provocation in 2009. Primary victims in New Zealand are being convicted of murder and sentences are double those issued pre-2009. Both jurisdictions require that a new partial defence be introduced, and accordingly, an entirely new defence predicated on a fear of serious violence and several threshold filter mechanisms designed to accommodate the circumstances of primary victims is advanced herein. The proposed framework draws upon earlier recommendations of the Law Commission for England and Wales, and a comprehensive review of the operation of ss 54 and 55 of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009, but the novel framework rejects the paradoxical loss of self-control requirement and sexed normative standard operating within that jurisdiction. The recommendations are complemented by social framework evidence and mandatory jury directions, modelled on the law in Victoria. A novel interlocutory appeal procedure designed to prevent unnecessary appellate court litigation is also outlined. This bespoke model provides an appropriate via media and optimal solution to the problems faced by primary victims in Victoria and New Zealand.
29
DE HOOGH, ANDRÉ. "Restrictivist Reasoning on theRatione PersonaeDimension of Armed Attacks in the Post 9/11 World." Leiden Journal of International Law 29, no. 1 (February 1, 2016): 19–42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0922156515000631.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractThis contribution investigates restrictivist reasoning on the origin of armed attacks, and concentrates on the interpretation of Article 51 of the UN Charter and the use of state practice. One particular aspect is examined: the linkage of the armed activities of non-state actors to a state required for an exercise of the right of self-defence to be justified in relation to that state. Many authors have moved away from a restrictive interpretation of Article 51 of the Charter and customary international law, and have proposed various legal constructs –complicity, aiding and abetting, harbour and support, unwillingness or inability to act– to allow for the invocation of self-defence even when armed activities of non-state actors cannot be attributed to a state and its substantial involvement is doubtful. Noticeable among authors generally, with certain exceptions, is a certain lack of concern to account for whatever method of interpretation or analysis they employ.
30
Rao, Pemmaraju Sreenivasa. "Non-state actors and self-defence: a relook at the UN Charter Article 51." Indian Journal of International Law 56, no. 2 (June 2016): 127–71. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40901-017-0049-4.
Full text
31
Grimmig, Alexander. "The German Constitutional Court's Pronouncement on Self-Defence Against Non-State Actors in Syria." Volume 62 · 2019 62, no. 1 (January 1, 2021): 539–56. http://dx.doi.org/10.3790/gyil.62.1.539.
Full text
32
HEINZE, ERIC A. "The evolution of international law in light of the ‘global War on Terror’." Review of International Studies 37, no. 3 (September 1, 2010): 1069–94. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0260210510001014.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractThis article explores how various aspects of the ‘global War on Terror’ may be affecting the future development of international law on the use of force. I examine these effects within three areas of international law – the law of anticipatory self-defence, the law of self-defence against non-state actors, and the applicability of international humanitarian law to non-state armed groups. Only in the latter two areas do I find evidence that international law is evolving to accommodate the new realities of global terror. While such developments in the law reflect the supposed need by states to use military means to combat terrorism, they also seem to confer at least a limited international legal personality upon terrorist groups such asAl-Qaeda. This not only indicates a shift in the basis for legal personality, but also potentially undermines the legitimacy of international law and frustrates states' efforts at combating terrorism.
33
van Steenberghe, Raphaël. "State practice and the evolution of the law of self-defence: clarifying the methodological debate." Journal on the Use of Force and International Law 2, no. 1 (January 2, 2015): 81–96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/20531702.2015.1043096.
Full text
34
VAN STADEN, ALFRED. "The Political and Legal Force of the Prohibition of Force: Assessing State Behaviour." Leiden Journal of International Law 21, no. 4 (December 2008): 995–1003. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0922156508005499.
Full textAbstract:
Recent political developments on the global scene have shed new light on established rules concerning the employment of military force while giving rise, among other things, to a reappraisal of the scope and limits of the right of self-defence. The terrorist attacks of September 2001 raised the question of whether actions by non-state actors can fall within the concept of ‘armed attack’. Those attacks were defined by UN Security Council Resolution 1368, under Article 39 of Chapter VII of the UN Charter, as ‘a threat to international peace and security’, but the ambiguous formulation left sufficient scope for upholding the prevailing view that Article 51 may only be invoked in the case of conflict between states. According to this view, which meanwhile has been contested, any resort to self-defence for legally justifying unilateral military action against terrorist organizations operating in other countries needs to be supported by evidence or argumentation that attacks perpetrated by those organizations can be attributed to a state. In defending the military campaign conducted to oust the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, the US government could credibly argue that this regime, exercising effective control over the country, was to be held accountable since it was harbouring members of al Qaeda on its territory and was actively supporting them.
35
Lehto, Marja. "The Fight against isil in Syria. Comments on the Recent Discussion of the Right of Self-defence against Non-state Actors." Nordic Journal of International Law 87, no. 1 (March 14, 2018): 1–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15718107-08701003.
Full textAbstract:
The legal debate on self-defence against non-state actors is still inconclusive after two decades. At the same time, it has created a fertile ground for attempts to find a silver bullet: a new legal theory that could bridge the conceptual gap between the law of the un Charter and the expanded notion of self-defence. The article gives an overview of the legal rationales presented in relation to the fight against isil in Syria as well as scholarly comments, focusing on the emerging doctrine of ‘unwilling or unable’. It argues that the ‘unwilling or unable’ test has little to offer as a solution to the problem of responding to massive non-state violence. It does not amount to a coherent doctrine, and is in many respects at odds with established interpretations of law. The apparent simplicity of the ‘unwilling or unable test’ may be politically attractive but makes it open to abuse.
36
Nguyen, A. Minh. "The Authority of Expressive Self-Ascriptions." Dialogue 47, no. 1 (2008): 103–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0012217300002407.
Full textAbstract:
ABSTRACTWhat explains first-person authority? What explains the presumption that an utterance is true when it is a sincere intelligible determinate first-person singular simple present-tense ascription of intentional state? According to Rockney Jacobsen, self-ascriptions each enjoy a presumption of truth because they are systematically reliable. They are systematically reliable because they are typically both truth-assessable and expressive. Such self-ascriptions, if sincere, are certain to be true. This article presents a defence and a critique of Jacobsen's theory. It is argued that the purported prevalence of expressive self-ascriptions is at best contingent. This contingency cannot explain why self-ascriptions are necessarily authoritative.
37
Steinschneider, Klara. "Self-Responsibility of the Japanese Hostages in Iraq: Discourse Analysis of Japanese Daily Newspapers Concerning the Self-Responsibility Discussion in April 2004." Vienna Journal of East Asian Studies 2, no. 1 (December 1, 2011): 85–113. http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/vjeas-2011-0010.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Two successive Japanese hostage cases in Iraq in April 2004, where hostage-takers demanded the withdrawal of the Self Defence Forces in return for release of the hostages, turned into a discussion about ‘self-responsibility’. This paper concentrates on an analysis of the discursive representation of ‘self-responsibility’. The aim is to explain how the media discourse on the hostage crisis and the hostages’ ‘self-responsibility’ is regulating and determining social structures with respect to which tasks self-responsibility has to take over, on the basis of the critical discourse analysis proposed by Norman Fairclough The argument is that the principle of self-responsibility has come to replace the hitherto valid responsibility of the state to protect its citizens. This is happening in favour of the newly emerging principle of not accepting terrorism and of fulfilling one’s duty as an international state.
38
Paddeu, Federica I. "Self-Defence as a Circumstance Precluding Wrongfulness: Understanding Article 21 of the Articles on State Responsibility." British Yearbook of International Law 85, no. 1 (2014): 90–132. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bybil/brv015.
Full text
39
Asonov, N. V. "The Emergence of the Russian state Controlled by the Church as a New Model of a Political Entity." Humanities and Social Sciences. Bulletin of the Financial University 10, no. 3 (November 2, 2020): 58–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.26794/2226-7867-2020-10-3-58-66.
Full textAbstract:
The article unveils the political role of Alexander Nevsky in the formation of a new (at the time) state structure of a church-controlled Russian government, which was formed as a result of numerous victories of “defence-conciliatory” political forces over “defence-marshalling” camp. This circumstance has led to subsequent subdual of Ancient Rus’ to an Emperor of the Horde. It was effectively deciding the character of the following discrediting of Duchy-Nobilities system of feudal governing as well as the traditions of councils of “Veche” in favour of self-owning merger in which the key role belonged to one ruler. Its church-controlled nature of such institution dictated the leadership of ecclesiastic powers, led by a Metropolitan Bishop, as well as a strict orientation to Church Law and its values and objectives in the normative, cultural, and ideological subsystems of the state government.
40
Stroud, Barry. "Doing something intentionally and knowing that you are doing it." Canadian Journal of Philosophy 43, no. 1 (2013): 1–12. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00455091.2013.774838.
Full textAbstract:
A defence of the idea that an agent's knowledge that he is intentionally doing such-and-such is not ‘based on’ or ‘derived from’ any ‘experience’ of the agent or any item or state he is aware of in acting as he does. The explanation of agents' knowing, in general, what they are intentionally doing lies in the capacity for self-ascription and self-knowledge that is a required for being a subject of any intentional attitudes, and so for competent intentional agency.
41
Di Marco, Graziella, Zira Hichy, Sharon Coen, and Noelia Rodriguez-Espartal. "The Effect of Values and Secularism on Attitude towards Pre-Implantation Genetic Diagnosis of Embryos." Social Sciences 7, no. 11 (October 31, 2018): 216. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/socsci7110216.
Full textAbstract:
In this study we tested the associations of four high-order values (openness to change, self-transcendence, conservation, and self-enhancement, devised according to Schwartz’s model) and secularism of state with individuals’ attitude towards pre-implantation genetic diagnosis of embryos. Moreover, we tested the mediating effects of secularism of state on the relationship between values and attitude towards this issue related to embryos. Participants were 289 Spaniards who completed a questionnaire. Results showed that attitude towards pre-implantation genetic diagnosis was negatively affected by conservation and positively by self-transcendence. Moreover, results indicated that attitude towards a secular state positively correlates with attitude towards pre-implantation genetic diagnosis. Finally, results showed that secularism mediated the effects of conservation and self-transcendence, but not the effect of openness to change and self-enhancement on attitude towards pre-implantation genetic diagnosis. Taken together, results of this study suggest that people adopting values emphasizing the defence of the tradition reject pre-implantation genetic diagnosis because they want state laws to represent religious traditional values; on the other hand, people endorsing values emphasising the welfare of all accept pre-implantation genetic diagnosis because they want state laws to be free from religious values.
42
Khdir, Rebaz R. "Jihad Between Islamic Jurisprudence and Practice of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria." European Scientific Journal, ESJ 14, no. 5 (February 28, 2018): 40. http://dx.doi.org/10.19044/esj.2018.v14n5p40.
Full textAbstract:
Islam is the extension of the monotheistic religions. It essentially claims for peace and tranquility but also allows war in some circumstances. War in Islam is referred to as jihad. However, jihad is border and includes spiritual struggle as well. Classical Islamic scholars interpreted combative jihad as self-defence against aggression and global war to spread Islam. The majority of modern scholars consider the political and cultural differences between the early periods of Islam and modern era. They interpret the concept as only self-defence and ask Muslims to resort to civil means to convey their message. However, some scholars and groups still follow the classical interpretation of the concept. Scholars generally set forth some preconditions for combative jihad. The preconditions are the existence of a reason, a purpose, permission of a legitimate ruler and adherence to humanitarian rules. ISIS launched intensive military attacks against the Islamic countries of Iraq and Syria between 2013 and 2014 and captured large areas after committing many atrocities and devastating the two countries. The group eventually announced an Islamic Caliphate and identified Abubakr al-Bagdadi as the Caliph. It later asked Muslims to pledge allegiance to its Caliph and join its ranks. This article argues that the ISIS war does not satisfy the Islamic jurisprudential conditions to be qualified as jihad because the group waged its war based on no religious reason for a political purpose without the authorization of a legitimate Islamic ruler and outside of the confines of the humanitarian rules.
43
Bhushan, Gopal, and M. Madhusudan. "DRDO and Expectations of Stakeholders." Defence Science Journal 69, no. 6 (December 16, 2019): 613–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.14429/dsj.69.12685.
Full textAbstract:
DRDO is India’s major credible research and development organization that enables self-reliance and indigenisation of defence technologies and weapon systems to empower India in the emerging geo-political balance. The Organisation has its genesis in a technical inspection agency which over the years have transformed into a highly professional R&D organization with strong design and technology capabilities and skilled entrepreneurship to undertake development of state-of-the-art defence systems. DRDO driven R&D efforts have catalysed the growth of domestic defence and civilian industries in the country as well. The overarching endeavours of DRDO encompassing academia, private industry and Defence PSUs have helped in establishing a self-reliant defence industrial eco-system and collectively all have contributed in the Hon’ble Prime Minister’s vision of “skill development” and “Make-in-India”. Yet, DRDO’s struggle at the national level continues since Armed Forces continue to depend on imports for major acquisitions. Indigenous options have not always established themselves as the preferred options even when they are available. The acceptability of DRDO developed products remains at a low ebb. The question is what more DRDO should do to ensure the acceptability of the users? This study examines the evolution of the DRDO and whether over the years DRDO has done enough or should do more to increase its visibility, acceptability, credibility and respectability? And how DRDO should reposition itself beyond MoD/Armed Forces in the national and international context to fulfill the ambitions of the country to play global roles? This paper also discusses how building the brand “DRDO” may possibly help DRDO.
44
CANOR, IRIS. "When Jus ad Bellum Meets Jus in Bello: The Occupier's Right of Self-Defence against Terrorism Stemming from Occupied Territories." Leiden Journal of International Law 19, no. 1 (March 2006): 129–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0922156505003213.
Full textAbstract:
Can an occupier invoke the right of self-defence against terrorism stemming from territories which it occupies? In its Advisory Opinion on the Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory the International Court of Justice responded to this question in the negative. This article critically analyses the reasoning presented by the Court concerning the specific question of the right of self-defence, not least in the light of the fact that it was harshly criticized by a number of judges in their individual opinions and by the Supreme Court of Israel in the subsequent Mara'abe (Alfei Menashe) case. It is also suggested that the issues discussed in this article, such as state responsibility for an armed attack, the principle of effective control, and the interplay between jus ad bellum and jus in bello, loom beyond the scope of the concrete question and concern more theoretical issues of international law.
45
Raby, Jean. "The Right of Intervention for the Protection of Nationals : Reassessing the Doctrinal Debate." Les Cahiers de droit 30, no. 2 (April 12, 2005): 441–93. http://dx.doi.org/10.7202/042953ar.
Full textAbstract:
The legality of a forceful intervention by a state to protect its nationals has been the subject of a continuing controversy over the past 15 years. Many see it as an unlawful use of force prohibited by the Charter of the United Nations, others see it as a lawful exercice of a self-standing right recognized under contemporary international law, some finally claim it falls under the scope of self-defence. The author proposes not to restate that debate, but more to reassess it, examining and challenging some of the arguments raised on both sides of the question. Within that debate, it will be concluded that the international legal order does indeed recognize the validity of the use of force for such a purpose : if the avenue of self-defence is rejected, for conceptual as well as practical reasons, the right of intervention to protect nationals is indeed, for the author, part of the comtemporary international legal order. Then, the author wishes to broaden the debate and proposes another option, which has not been explored by scholars and publicists but which is found more satisfactory than any other approach : intervention to protect nationals can be justified under international law because of the existence, in a particular case, of a "state of necessity" as defined by the International Law Commission.
46
Schmitt, Michael N. "The conduct of hostilities during Operation Iraqi Freedom: an international humanitarian law assessment." Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law 6 (December 2003): 73–109. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s138913590000129x.
Full textAbstract:
The war in Iraq thrust international law into the global spotlight as has no conflict since Vietnam.Jus ad bellumdebates grew increasingly heated as the launch of hostilities in March 2003 approached. Did Security Council resolution 1441 authorise Operation Iraqi Freedom (hereafter, OIF)? Perhaps the attack was an exercise of self-defence against state-support to terrorism. Did the purported doctrine of ‘preemptive self-defence’, enunciated in the 2002 US National Security Strategy, offer a legal justification? What of humanitarian intervention, democratisation or regime change? Or was the sole normative basis the one formally asserted by the United States and United Kingdom — breach of a ceasefire set forth in a Security Council resolution adopted a dozen years earlier? Thejus ad bellumbrouhaha resurfaced in April 2005 with the revelation that British Attorney General Lord Goldsmith had issued a classified memorandum on the legality of hostilities that differed from the public justification he proffered, with OIF days away, just over a week later.
47
LAM, Peng Er. "Japan's Politics: Crossing the Rubicon." East Asian Policy 08, no. 01 (January 2016): 71–78. http://dx.doi.org/10.1142/s1793930516000064.
Full textAbstract:
In 2015, an unprecedented set of security bills was passed in Japanese parliament, permitting Tokyo to engage in collective security by aiding allies against third parties and to loosen the tight restrictions on the Self-Defence Force in United Nations Peace Keeping Operations, its rules of engagement and other multilateral deployment abroad. With these bills, Japan has crossed the Rubicon and evolved into a “normal” state in international affairs.
48
Maogoto, Jackson Nyamuya. "The Apple Does Not Fall Far from the Tree: Self-Defence in the Context of State-Sponsored Terrorism." Groningen Journal of International Law 6, no. 1 (August 31, 2018): 49. http://dx.doi.org/10.21827/5b51d52f7dc95.
Full textAbstract:
The Article will examine the parameters of state-sponsored terrorism through an evaluation of the tenets of state responsibility. Under customary international law, States are not perpetrators of terrorism because terrorism is a penal offence and states are not subjects of international criminal law. Nonetheless, General Assembly resolutions repeatedly condemn States that undertake and/or support acts of terrorism. It reflects the absolute prohibition on the use of force except in reaction to a conventional armed attack and the seeming metamorphosis and fluidity of the traditional understanding.
49
Castel, J. G. "The Legality and Legitimacy of Unilateral Armed Intervention in an Age of Terror, Neo-Imperialism, and Massive Violations of Human Rights: Is International Law Evolving in the Right Direction?" Canadian Yearbook of international Law/Annuaire canadien de droit international 42 (2005): 3–33. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0069005800008481.
Full textAbstract:
SummaryWith the end of the Cold War, the United States has emerged as the sole remaining superpower whose ambition is to create a new open and integrated world order based on principks of democratic capitalism. To ensure its hegemony, the United States is prepared to resort to military action with or without UN approval when its international and national security interests are at stake. The intervention in Iraq by the Coalition of the Willing is a good example of this policy and raises the question of its legality and legitimacy under contemporary international law. May or must a state resort to military intervention against a state sponsoring terrorism or depriving its nationals of their internationally recognized human rights? The so-called “Bush doctrine” of anticipatory or preventive self-defence against a state accused of supplying weapons of mass destruction to a foreign terrorist organization, which was one of the reasons advanced by the Coalition of the Willing for intervening in Iraq, meets neither the conditions laid out in Article 51 of the UN Charter nor those of customary international law. Thus, at the present stage of development of international law, the Bush doctrine is not even lege ferenda. It is not an extension of the customary international law right of pre-emptive self-defence. Only with the approval of the Security Council pursuant to Chapter VII of the UN Charter or when it takes place within the strict confines of self-defence, can armed intervention be legitimate.The second reason for intervening in Iraq given by the Coalition of the Willing is based on humanitarian considerations, which raises the question whether the protection of human rights can be assured from the outside. Here, international law is evolving in the right direction since the international community is prepared to adopt the concept of responsibility to protect, which justifies the use of force to protect and enforce human rights as an exception to Article 2(4) and (7) of the UN Charter. Again, such intervention is legal only when approved by the Security Council acting pursuant to Chapter VII on the ground that human right crises do not fall “essentially within the jurisdiction of any state.” However, the international community, with the exception of the Coalition of the Willing, is not yet prepared to support a right of unilateral military intervention as a last resort when the Security Council is incapable and unwilling to do so. This includes intervention motivated by the non-democratic form of government of the targeted state. Although the primary responsibility to deal with human right crises rests with the United Nations based on the responsibility to protect, it is argued that one should not rule out unilateral military action based on a customary international law right of intervention to meet the gravity and urgency of the situation provided the intervening state fully observes the necessary precautionary principles governing such type of intervention. The conclusion is that terrorism and human rights abuses can only be effectively challenged through a concerted multilateral collective approach not through the politics of unilateralism.
50
Horton, A. V. M. "British Administration in Brunei 1906–1959." Modern Asian Studies 20, no. 2 (April 1986): 353–74. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0026749x00000871.
Full textAbstract:
The tiny, oil-rich Sultanate of Brunei, situated on the north-west coast of Borneo, regained full independence at the end of 1983, when the United Kingdom surrendered responsibility for its defence and foreign policy. Internally, the predominantly Muslim, Malay State has been self-governing since 1959, albeit by an autocratic monarchy. In this article, however, I shall focus on the British ‘Residency’ in Brunei, which lasted from January 1906 until September 1959.