No abstract

The North and South divide in the practice and application of international laws have been previously perceived to be evident in international environmental law where the Global developed North countries on the one hand advocate for a collective action to protect the environment while the Global developing Southern countries, on the other hand, argue for social and economic justice in practice. However, in recent times the North and South divide has permeated other aspects of international law such as International Human right and International Humanitarian law (IHL), hence the essence of this article. Thus, this article contributes to the existing literature by providing evidence to the existence of the North and South divide in the application of IHL and human right law.The article is divided into four main parts. The first part gives an introduction to the North and South divide in the application of international law. The second part reviews the literature on the existence of North and South divide in the application of international environmental laws. The third part gives a new dimension to the North and South divide in the application of international humanitarian and human right laws with the Syrian Crisis, Malaysian Airline flight MH17 and the 2007 draft resolution on the peace and security of Myanmar as the case studies. The last part concludes by giving an overview of how this phenomenon threatens world peace and consequently offers some recommendations.

No abstract

This paper is an attempt at analysing the intricacies between international law, the concept of Responsibility to Protect and its implications for the sovereignty of modern states. The paper examines how the concept of responsibility to protect (as stipulated by the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS)) impacts on the sovereignty of states. It adopts the essay style of writing and reviews a number of documents on the subject of international law, sovereignty and the responsibility to protect.The paper consequently argues that though the ICISS claims that its "purpose is not to license aggression with fine words, or to provide strong states with new rationales for doubtful strategic designs" (ICISS, 2001, p. 35), the Commission's very attempt to exempt the permanent five and other so-called major powers from intervention does just that whether intentionally or unintentionally. It consequently recommends that much effort should be made to address the inequalities within the international system through the formulation of appropriate policies and international regulations that address the sovereign equality of states in the international system, especially on the question of intervention.

In this essay, we use the implementation of multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs) in developing countries (specifically, the implementation of the Convention on Biological Diversity in Ghana) to illustrate why and how States can implement international agreements and for that matter comply with international law without necessarily compromising on equally implementing effective policies to meet their domestic responsibility, particularly when such MEAs may be deemed by some as instruments that curtail the enjoyment of benefits from a State’s natural resources and endowments. The essay examines the nexus between compliance with international law (international obligation) and meeting domestic responsibility (particularly when the international treaty or agreement to be complied with seems to have some negative implications for the domestic population or State policy). Do States always have an incentive to comply with and execute their international obligations? Should the need for or argument against an international agreement or treaty necessarily lead to its abandonment by States? Can States effectively balance the execution of international obligation with meeting domestic responsibility? Should the effective implementation of a State’s international obligation be regarded as a zero sum for the State’s domestic responsibility? What should be the basis for compliance in international law? These are some of the few questions that this essay seeks to address.