The moral and legal implications of the responsibility to protect: the case of Libya

Abstract

This research focused on the moral and legal implications of the Responsibility to Protect, Libya being the case study. It follows that this research provides some information on the progress of peace building in the country. The main problem identified by this study rests on the fact that the Responsibility to Protect doctrine has been held supreme to the lives of the people and quite a number of people have died. More to it, the economy of Libya has declined due to demage of infrastructure that could generate oil exports. This has eventually affected to a larger degree, the most vulnerable, women and children who have actually been seen migrating to the neighboring countries as refugees where they are also viewed with suspicion. This study became worthy studying as it sought to establish the morality and legality of the intervention by NATO as well as the impact that the intervention had. To do this, this study used qualitative methodology, and followed case study research design which gave the researcher an opportunity to have an in depth understanding of the issues. Respondents pointed out that the R2P principle in relation to the Libyan intervention was merely mentioned but never followed. They also pointed to the controversy in interpretation of R2P by countries that constituted the United Nations Security Council brief meeting before the 2011 intervention. Other researches had pointed to the situation during the intervention and some had been superseded by time, so this research found its way in light of the knowledge gaps cited. The research concluded that morality of R2P is relative and the legality of it a paradox as the findings showed controversies on whether R2P was to be used or not. The research study recommended that the UNSC needs to be democratic enough to constitute developing countries whose representative remain a shadow yet resolutions passed there affect them.