|
|
This is only a preview of the paper
Click here to register and get the full text.
Existing members click here to login
|
|
|
The international community’s handling of South Africa’s occupation of Namibia proved a trial for international law and its sources. Having a “body of rules, principles and standards to which states and international organizations are bound,” (Encyclopedia Americana, 301) as international law is commonly defined, provides guidelines that are to be strived for as states, international organization, and other entities conduct relations with one another. Such a framework was instrumental in demonstrating the illegality of the South African Republic’s presence in Namibia. However, it provides an interesting case that reflects the challenges still to be overcome in asserting the viability of the international legal system. The problem of South Africa’s presence in Namibia put the United Nation’s Security Council, General Assembly, and the International Court of Justice to a difficult test. Once the illegality of South Africa’s presence in Namibia was established with the help of General Assembly Resolution 2145 (1966) and by Security Council Resolution 269 (1969), the paramount question would not be how to enforce the called for withdrawal of South Africa from Namibia (though this question is far from irrelevant), but what the international community- in this case, the UN, especially the Security Council-had for options in addressing the fact of South Africa’s mandate turned occupation.
Approximate Word count = 808
Approximate Pages = 3.2
(250 words per page double spaced)
|
|
|
|
|
|