Weaknesses of the United Nations legal framework in the International Community
Sovereign nations’ interactions with one another are governed by the legal framework established by the United Nations (UN). Recently, the body has been involved with human rights groups like the Red Cross and Save the Children Fund to ensure that human rights are protected nationally (Thompson, 2018). The UN has good intentions regarding protecting people’s rights, but its legal framework has some serious flaws that make it incapable of effectively governing the international community. The primary problem with the United Nations’ legal system is that the international rules it formulates and enforces are drafted by nations that seek to control others and, as a result, are biased in favor of those countries. This analysis seeks to draw attention to and examine the UN’s present legal structure’s shortcomings in the international community. This paper will have four sections; the first section is the introductory paragraph, which defines the thesis statement. in section two, it highlights and discusses the weakness in the United Nations’ legislature and gives examples. The third section discusses the weakness in the judicial system in the legal framework on the United Nations and highlights examples. The last section is the conclusion paragraph the states my stance.
Weakness in the UN’s Legislature Legal Framework
Failure to properly execute policies, measures, and punishments is a key flaw in the UN’s legal system. Sovereign states uphold international law through their culture, politics, and diplomacy, and these states will eventually resist UN legislation. Countries cannot be coerced into doing anything in practice since United Nations legislation was designed to ease rather than manage international interactions. The UN’s legal framework is weakened by this arrangement since violations of the law go unpunished. The US invasion of Iraq and the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait in 1990 are two examples of times when the UN’s laws were disregarded (Khullar et al., 2019). The UN’s infrastructure is weak because it is regulated by culture and politics and since it is human nature to disobey regulations.
There is no institution within the framework of international law with the power to draft new rules for the international community that would adequately address their evolving demands. The UN Charter says the General Assembly is responsible for deliberating and recommending international peace and security, but it is not a world legislative or parliament. It cannot pass laws, and its rulings are not binding on individual states. Recommendations made in General Assembly resolutions are not to be treated as legislation. Therefore, member nations are not required to implement the resolutions. The resolutions passed by the UN General Assembly are just a symbolic act by the international community to shame and publicly denounce the conduct of governments. The Resolution of 1761, which condemned Apartheid in South Africa that affected the human rights negatively, (David, 2019). The resolution did not prevent the South African government from enforcing its racist policies, and Nelson Mandela was nevertheless sentenced to life in prison two years later.
However, the UN’s legal framework has a serious flaw that makes it difficult for the organization to execute the law impartially. International law is intertwined with a culture in which many nations blame others when they break international norms. The Treaty of Westphalia, signed in 1648, is considered the founding document of international law since it established the sovereign rights of individual nations to exercise control over their territory (O’Halloran, 2020). This pact made sense once when nations were far less dependent on one another. The UN has a hard time enforcing its regulations since states that disobey them will always have a justification for doing so. The United Nations General Assembly is different from a global parliament or legislative. Since it lacks the authority to enact laws, any judgments or resolutions it makes are purely symbolic gestures by the international community to shame.
Weakness in the UN’s Judiciary Legal Framework
There are no courts with binding jurisdiction, as evidenced by the International Court of Justice’s (ICJ) role within the United Nations legal system. Because going to the ICJ is voluntary, but it is not much more effective than the national legal system. As a general rule, there is no requirement that any one court exercise its jurisdiction. Only when both parties to a disagreement agree and present their case to the ICJ does the ICJ have jurisdiction. This is evident in light of Article 36(1) of the ICJ Statute, which details the ICJ’s six voluntary jurisdictions. According to paragraph one of Article 36 of the Statute, the Court has jurisdiction over any dispute by the parties (O’Halloran, 2020). Ordinarily, such situations are brought before the Court by notifying the Registry of a so-called “special agreement,” which the parties have negotiated for this very purpose.
For instance, Malaysia and Singapore were at odds over the sovereignty of three islands known as Pulau Batu Puteh, South Ledge, Middle Rocks, and Pedra Branca. These three islands are at the center of a sovereignty dispute between Malaysia and Singapore, and the International Court of Justice (ICJ) has been asked to make a ruling. Since both Malaysia and Singapore agreed to have this matter heard and decided by the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the ICJ has jurisdiction over the dispute. Given that the ICJ can only possess jurisdiction once both parties to a dispute grant their consent and present their case to ICJ (O’Halloran, 2020). It is clear that a shortcoming of the United Nations’ legal structure is the lack of tribunals with compulsory jurisdiction.
In conclusion, disparate flaws in the UN legal framework operate together to undermine the organization’s ability to enforce its own rules across the world. Some countries are immune to the organization’s strong enforcement of sanctions since they participated in creating the rules and thus face less severe penalties if they disobey UN statutes (O’Halloran, 2020). In addition, the UN’s regulations cannot be strictly implemented in the international community since the intertwining of politics and culture provides nations with an out when they do not follow UN principles.
References
David, M. (2019). United states-south African relations—1962–67. Economic Coercion and U.S. Foreign Policy, 215-229. Web.
Khullar, N., Scull, N. C., Bhatti, S. F., Wah, A., & Al-Zouman, F. (2019). Resistance and resilience during the 1990 Iraqi occupation of Kuwait: A qualitative study. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 25(1), 24-36. Web.
O’Halloran, K. (2020). Human rights, religion and international law.
Thompson, S. K. (2014). Children and armed conflict. The United Nations Security Council in the Age of Human Rights, 98-120. Web.