Responsibility to protect in international law

The tension between the inviolability of state sovereignty under the Westphalian system and the universalization and protection of human rights is one of the most contraversial issues in international relations after the Cold War. The idea of protecting people from gross and systematic violations of human rights was formulated by the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS) in terms of 21st century values and priorities. ICISS clarified and conceptualized the nature and scope of humanitarian intervention and introduced it as a new concept called the ''Responsibility to Protect'', which has similar roots to Just War theory and the right of humanitarian intervention. The 2005 United Nations World Summit Outcome, which was adopted by the General Assembly, represented a significant achievement in generating a new international consensus on the Responsibility to Protect and established it as an emerging norm in the legality debates of intervention on humanitarian grounds. The most important aspect of this concept, which has changed the course of discussions and is considered a distinction in the literature on humanitarian intervention, is the emphasis on the responsibility aspect of state sovereignty. With the 'sovereignty as responsibility' approach, the sovereign status of the state has been conditioned on the fulfillment of its responsibilities towards its people, resulting in the loss of absoluteness for principles that protect sovereignty and fundamental rights and freedoms transcending national borders and taking precedence over state sovereignty. However, the Responsibility to Protect does not envision a shifth in the state's central role by placing the primary responsibility for the protection of the population on the state. If the state fails to fulfill its responsibility, the international community will have a responsibility for the protection of the population. If peaceful and coercive measures have been exhausted, the international community may intervene militarily as a last resort to protect a population deprived of its fundamental rights and freedoms. The fact that this 'unusual and exceptional' situation is a form of use of force and strictly prohibited in international law. The use of force through the Responsibility to Protect is only possible if it is based on exceptional provisions within the UN Charter's prohibition of force in line with the UN Charter's principles and aims and subject to the UN Security Council's authorization. This study examines and critically evaluates the normative structure of the responsibility to protect in relation to these provisions and its existence within the international legal order.