By Resolutions No. 1483 and 1511 (2003), the Security Council authorized the occupying powers in Iraq to intervene in the political and economic affairs of the occupied territory beyond the limits provided for by international law of war. At the same time, this authorization restricts the right of the Iraqui peole to self- determination, considered in its external aspect. Thus, the problem arises whether it is within the Security Council's powers to adopt resolutions which restrict the enjoyment of rights protected by rules of jus cogens. Furthermore, because the occupying government interpreted these resolutions broadly, it may be asked whether this interpretation is lawful. From a close examination of both the text of the resolutions and the travaux préparatoires, it seems that, in the opinion of the member States, the Security Council can lawfully authorize States to exercise, in an occupied territory, more powers than those recognized by international law. Thus, States believe that the Security Council can restrict the right of self-determination of the people who live in the occupied territory, if this is necessary for restoration of international peace. Nevertheless, according to the views of the member States, only this solution is acceptable if effective means of direction and control are forseen. However, in reality the means of control envisaged by Resolutions No. 1483 and 1511(2003) were far from being proportionate to thier purpose and the UN played a minimal role in the execution of the resolutions. Finally, the broad interpretation unilaterally given by the occupying powers to Resolutions 1483 and 1511 (2003) seems in contrast with the purpose of these resolutions and with the fundamental character of the right of self-determination.
|Number of pages||34|
|Journal||REVUE GÉNÉRALE DE DROIT INTERNATIONAL PUBLIC|
|Publication status||Published - 2004|