بازتعریف حاکمیت ملی در پرتو دکترین مسئولیت حمایت؛ گذار از حاکمیت مطلق به حاکمیت مسئولانه در حقوق بین‌الملل معاصر

زهرا  سبزی لرنژاد; هنگامه غضنفری; فرید  آزادبخت

Authors

Zahra Sabzi Lornejad PhD Student, Department of International Law, Ker.C., Islamic Azad University, Kermanshah, Iran Author https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6386-6213
Hengameh Ghazanfari Department of Private Law, Ker.C., Islamic Azad University, Khorramabad, Iran Corresponding author https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4197-2389
Farid Azadbakht Department of Public and International Law, Ker.C., Islamic Azad University, Kermanshah, Iran Author https://orcid.org/0009-0008-9856-4379

Keywords:

National Sovereignty, Responsible Sovereignty, Responsibility to Protect, Non-Intervention, Contemporary International Law, Atrocity Crimes

Abstract

National sovereignty is a foundational principle of international law that, in its classical formulation, emphasized the supreme authority of the state, political independence, territorial integrity, and the prohibition of intervention in domestic affairs. However, the development of international human rights law, humanitarian law, and international criminal law has transformed the absolute conception of sovereignty. This study aims to explain how national sovereignty has been redefined in light of the Responsibility to Protect doctrine and to examine the transition from absolute to responsible sovereignty. It employs a descriptive-analytical method based on the examination of international instruments, theoretical foundations of sovereignty, and legal scholarship concerning the Responsibility to Protect. The findings indicate that the doctrine does not abolish state sovereignty but reconstructs it as a combination of rights and obligations connected with the protection of populations. Under this framework, each state bears the primary responsibility to protect its population from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity. The international community is expected to assist states through capacity-building, cooperation, and preventive measures and to consider gradual collective action under the United Nations Charter only when a state manifestly fails to fulfil its protective responsibilities. Despite its normative potential, the doctrine faces significant challenges, including selective implementation, double standards, the veto power of permanent Security Council members, the influence of powerful states, and the risk that protective operations may exceed their authorized purposes. The study concludes that the Responsibility to Protect should be regarded as a framework for reconstructing sovereignty rather than eliminating it. The effective realization of responsible sovereignty requires the prioritization of prevention, compliance with necessity and proportionality, collective decision-making, continuous supervision, and accountability for actors implementing international protective measures.

References

Ahmadabadi, M. (2020). The Legitimacy of the Responsibility to Protect Doctrine in Light of the United Nations Charter. Jangal Publications.

Arashpour, A., & Jafari, M. (2015). The Role of the Responsibility to Protect in Ensuring Human Security. Strategic Studies Quarterly, 18(9).

Asadzadeh, M., & Nejadimanesh, H. (2016). The Emergence of a New Framework: The Responsibility to Protect Doctrine. Nations Research Quarterly, 1(9).

Bahman Tajani, S. (2015). Sovereignty and Responsibility in Light of International Criminal Law. World Politics Quarterly, 4(4).

Bellamy, A. J. (2009). Responsibility to Protect: The Global Effort to End Mass Atrocities. Polity Press.

Bellamy, A. J. (2011). Libya and the Responsibility to Protect: The Exception and the Norm. Ethics & International Affairs, 25(3), 263-269.

Bellamy, A. J. (2015). The Responsibility to Protect: A Defense. Oxford University Press.

Deng, F. M. (2010). From Sovereignty as Responsibility to the Responsibility to Protect. Global Responsibility to Protect, 2(4), 353-370.

Etzioni, A. (2006). Sovereignty as Responsibility. Orbis, 50(1), 71-85.

Evans, G. (2008). The Responsibility to Protect: Ending Mass Atrocity Crimes Once and for All. Brookings Institution Press.

Faqih Habibi, A. (2017). Transformation of the Concept of National Sovereignty of States in Light of the Responsibility to Protect Doctrine. International Relations Research, 7(25).

Ghaderi, S. M. H., & Ghorbannia, N. (2013). The Responsibility to Protect Doctrine and Efforts to Confront Humanitarian Catastrophes. Foreign Relations, 5(1).

Ghavam, A., & Ravanbod, A. (2009). The Concept of the Responsibility to Protect: Evaluating the Role of the West and the Non-Aligned Movement in the Formation of a Global Norm. Rahbord Quarterly, 19(55).

Hakkakzadeh, M. R., & Bozorg Doagoo, A. (2019). Examining the Grounds for the Formation and Performance of the Responsibility to Protect Doctrine in International Law. Sepehr-e Siasat, 6(21).

Hehir, A. (2012). The Responsibility to Protect: Rhetoric, Reality and the Future of Humanitarian Intervention. Palgrave Macmillan.

Jamshidi, M. H. (2016). A Theoretical Evaluation of the Relationship between the Responsibility to Protect and State Sovereignty from a Constructivist Perspective. Political and International Research Quarterly.

MacQueen, N. (2011). Humanitarian Intervention and the United Nations. Edinburgh University Press.

Pashabonyad, M., & Mosaffa, N. (2016). Application of the Responsibility to Protect Doctrine in International Law: Responding to Disasters. Public Law Studies Quarterly, 46(4).

Pattison, J. (2010). Humanitarian Intervention and the Responsibility to Protect: Who Should Intervene? Oxford University Press.

Sadeghi, D. (2013). International Responsibility to Protect and State Sovereignty. International Relations Research Quarterly, 6(22).

Zamani, G., & Talaat, A. (2018). The Erosion of National Sovereignty in Contemporary International Law: From Authoritarian Sovereignty to Conditional Sovereignty. International Law Review(62).

Ziaei Bigdeli, M. R. (2020). Public International Law (67th ed.). Ganj-e Danesh.