The legitimacy of the unilateral use of force against non state actors and the transformation of the law of self defence

Abstract

Over the past decades the UN Charter regime has been readjusted and bent to permit forcible responses to terrorism in more lenient conditions. The right to self-defense against non-state actors has increasingly been invoked and accepted in the practice of states. Nonetheless the acknowledgement of this right has had to overcome a vital obstacle; that of justifying why the right of territorial sovereignty of a host State is not being violated by the self-defensive force in its territory. The 9/11 attack in 2001, the Garissa attack in 2015 are part of example of the growing phenomenon of terrorism in our world today. With terrorism acts causing ripples effects across the global, it is without a doubt that close to billions of citizens have lost their lives as warfare and mass weapons of distraction continues to advance and modify. As weapons advance non- state actors do as well. Not only do they grow more resilient but also in numbers. Non- State actors are shaping today’s international relations yet the international Community has not acknowledged their presence conclusively. In practice aggrieved States have had to rely on state involvement/attribution or consent in order to justify their invasion in the host territory. However in one way or another the two justifications have fallen short of making a conclusive ground. Consent may never be given or sometimes the host state has no involvement. This paper seeks to demonstrate a solution already in existence in law but is evidently not yet fully been incorporated looking at Self-defense as a circumstances precluding wrongfulness. The paper takes the position that the self-defense doctrine is transforming if not already transformed and embarks on evidencing the transformation in order to acknowledge and legitimize self-defensive force against non-state actors