The Problematics of Iran's Retaliatory Attack on Israel: Evaluation of the Principles of Necessity and Proportionality Based on Article 51 of the UN Charter.

This research analyses the legitimacy of the Islamic Republic of Iran's retaliatory strike against Israel on 1 April 2024 in the context of Article 51 of the United Nations Charter, focusing on the application of the principles of necessity and proportionality in international law. The research method used is descriptive-analytical with a normative approach, where international legal norms and the doctrine of self-defence are analysed to assess the validity of Iran's actions. The results of the analysis show that the claim of self-defence by Iran raises doubts, especially in relation to the principle of necessity, given the 11-day time lag between Israel's initial attack and Iran's retaliation, which may not fully meet the immediacy standard. In addition, the scale of Iran's counter-attack, which involved over 300 drones and missiles, appears disproportionate to the threat faced, raising questions regarding compliance with the principle of proportionality. The implications of these findings point to the need for further affirmation of international legal standards regarding self-defence and an enhanced role for the UN Security Council in overseeing such actions to maintain international peace and security.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Constitutional Law Review
Published
2024-10-02
DOI
https://doi.org/10.30863/clr.v3i2.5606
Primary Topic
Global Peace and Security Dynamics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Problematics of Iran's Retaliatory Attack on Israel: Evaluation of the Principles of Necessity and Proportionality Based on Article 51 of the UN Charter.

Mohammad Irvan, Andri Sutrisno, Afrizal Ode
Constitutional Law Review
Global Peace and Security Dynamics
article

The Problematics of Iran's Retaliatory Attack on Israel: Evaluation of the Principles of Necessity and Proportionality Based on Article 51 of the UN Charter.

Mohammad Irvan, Andri Sutrisno, Afrizal Ode
article en

Abstract

This research analyses the legitimacy of the Islamic Republic of Iran's retaliatory strike against Israel on 1 April 2024 in the context of Article 51 of the United Nations Charter, focusing on the application of the principles of necessity and proportionality in international law. The research method used is descriptive-analytical with a normative approach, where international legal norms and the doctrine of self-defence are analysed to assess the validity of Iran's actions. The results of the analysis show that the claim of self-defence by Iran raises doubts, especially in relation to the principle of necessity, given the 11-day time lag between Israel's initial attack and Iran's retaliation, which may not fully meet the immediacy standard. In addition, the scale of Iran's counter-attack, which involved over 300 drones and missiles, appears disproportionate to the threat faced, raising questions regarding compliance with the principle of proportionality. The implications of these findings point to the need for further affirmation of international legal standards regarding self-defence and an enhanced role for the UN Security Council in overseeing such actions to maintain international peace and security.

Constitutional Law ReviewVol. 3(2)
Universitas Patria Artha (ID), Monash University (AU)
Openalex Percentile: Top 53%
Global Peace and Security Dynamics
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.