Intervenţia umanitară şi principiul neamestecului în chestiuni care aparţin esenţial competenţei interne a unui stat
Humanitarian Intervention and the Principle of Non-Interference in Matters That Essentially Fall Within the Internal Competence of a State

Summary/Abstract: From Hugo Grotius to the contemporary doctrine of international law, the notion of humanitarian intervention was controversial, dividing law specialists into two camps: supporters and adversaries. First of all, the controversy stems from the fact that the intervention is in a conflict with principles and norms of jus cogens, such as the principle of sovereignty, non-interference in the internal affairs of a state or the renunciation to use of force or threat to use of force in international relations. On the other hand, partisans of the right to intervene try to legitimise it by the higher values they would defend: fundamental human rights, which are also enshrined in international law. In the last period of time, it was promoted at UN level the concept of responsibility to protect. If this concept does not become a legally binding universal norm, its application will give rise to controversy, which means that the problem of humanitarian interference will not have a solution politically convenient for most states - at least in the short and medium term. Recent events of exceptional gravity, such as the Russian Federation’s war of aggression against Ukraine, launched in February 2022, demonstrate how dangerous the distortion of this concept is.

• Details
• Contents