HUMANITARIAN INTERVENTION AND TERRITORIAL SOVEREIGNTY: TWO INCOMPATIBLE PRINCIPLES IN INTERNATIONAL LAW

Abstract

Humanitarian intervention and territorial sovereignty are separate and invaluable principles in international law. There are the unrepentant apostles of both principles on both sides. Some said that nations are supreme within their boundaries; while humanitarian interventionists strongly believe that humanitarian intervention is permissible on good ground, where such violates territorial sovereignty to curb human rights abuses. There are some crossroads inherent in the applicability of both principles. Accordingly, this paper examines the nature of the principles of territorial sovereignty and humanitarian intervention, evaluates instances there have been humanitarian intervention in territorial sovereignty, as well as the crossroad usually experienced when both principles intermix with one another.  It was the findings of this paper amongst others that some nations only carry out humanitarian intervention activities based on their self-interest. While others fan domestic /crises, as well as support autocratic governments/warring groups for their hidden agenda, illicit arms trade, foreign investment protection etc within the targeted nations. That humanitarian intervention in territorial sovereignty is legally justifiable in certain circumstances. It was recommended amongst others that the United Nations should put in motion measures to tackle the challenges associated with humanitarian intervention. Good governance should be encouraged in nations of the world. Various governments should administer their nations, well and not create problems that will necessitate the international community from infringing on their territorial sovereignty under the disguise of humanitarian intervention.