Responsibility to protect-effort to institutionalization-example of Libya

There has long been serious debate in international law about the legitimacy of intervention with its sovereignty when a state is incapable or perpetrator of acts to protect its citizens from war crimes, crimes against humanity, ethnic cleansing and genocide. After the United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan reacted to the mass violence in Rwanda and Serebrenica and called on the international community, the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty created by the Government of Canada was first established in 2001 by the "responsibility to protect" (RtoP) (R2P) defined the concept. With the adoption of this term, where "sovereignty as responsibility" is mean, this term began to be used instead of "humanitarian intervention". The United Nations institutionally supported this approach, and the responsibility to protection was accepted by definition in paragraphs 138, 139 and 140 of the 2005 Earth Summit resolutions. It was examined whether the military intervention in Libya in 2011, based on the resolutions of the United Nations Security Council, is in accordance with international law in the context of the responsibility to protect. The Security Council adopted these resolutions, citing that international peace and security was disturbed or threatened. Therefore, the responsibility to protect is not a new legal norm in international law. Responsibility to protect is a new form of humanitarian intervention. However, the United Nations continues to institutionally support this approach by including it in its decisions and in the annual reports of the Secretary General.