本文選題：利比亞 + 聯(lián)合國(guó)授權(quán)��； 參考：《上海師范大學(xué)》2012年碩士論文

【摘要】：2010年12月，，始于突尼斯的茉莉花革命對(duì)北非政局產(chǎn)生重要影響，在短短幾個(gè)月的時(shí)間內(nèi)，安吉、利比亞等國(guó)相繼卷入人民示威游行的浪潮中，最終，北非政治鐵三角政權(quán)紛紛倒臺(tái)。 其中，聯(lián)合國(guó)對(duì)利比亞問(wèn)題的處理是一個(gè)典型。隨著利比亞局勢(shì)的變化，聯(lián)合國(guó)安理會(huì)相繼通過(guò)第1970號(hào)決議和第1973號(hào)決議來(lái)處理利比亞問(wèn)題。在聯(lián)合國(guó)對(duì)利比亞問(wèn)題的處理中，出現(xiàn)了新的特點(diǎn)和方式值得我們關(guān)注，本文將從國(guó)際法的角度進(jìn)行解讀。 聯(lián)合國(guó)在處理利比亞問(wèn)題中主要涉及三個(gè)方面。第一個(gè)是在利比亞設(shè)立禁飛區(qū)，授權(quán)采取行動(dòng)保護(hù)平民的利益。這是聯(lián)合國(guó)安理會(huì)的首次“有限授權(quán)”，在行動(dòng)的目標(biāo)、方式、報(bào)告制度等方面都做了一系列的規(guī)定，得到了很多好評(píng)。但是同時(shí)也受到在“合法”行為下干涉他國(guó)內(nèi)政的質(zhì)疑。因此需要從安理會(huì)決議條文的明確到監(jiān)督機(jī)制的完善等一系列方面進(jìn)行改進(jìn)。 第二個(gè)是對(duì)政府承認(rèn)的分析。在聯(lián)合國(guó)大會(huì)上，尚未在全國(guó)獲得完全統(tǒng)治的利比亞“過(guò)渡委”通過(guò)投票的方式成為利比亞在聯(lián)合國(guó)的合法代表。這一結(jié)果與政府承認(rèn)中要求建立起“事實(shí)上統(tǒng)治”的原則存在爭(zhēng)議。對(duì)利比亞“過(guò)渡委”的承認(rèn)具有特殊性，但是鑒于國(guó)際組織在國(guó)際社會(huì)上作用越來(lái)越重要，協(xié)調(diào)好“程序上合法”與“事實(shí)上統(tǒng)治”之間存在的矛盾才是更值得我們思考的問(wèn)題。 第三個(gè)方面將集中討論對(duì)國(guó)際刑事法院對(duì)利比亞前領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人的逮捕審判問(wèn)題、國(guó)際刑事法院對(duì)北約軍隊(duì)和利比亞“過(guò)渡委”指揮的軍隊(duì)在利比亞戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)中可能存在的侵犯人權(quán)事件的調(diào)查問(wèn)題上。本文通過(guò)對(duì)國(guó)際法的分析，認(rèn)為國(guó)際刑事法院能夠?qū)Ψ恰读_馬規(guī)約》締約國(guó)的利比亞前領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人具有合法管轄權(quán)，原因在于對(duì)利比亞具有約束力的聯(lián)合國(guó)安理會(huì)通過(guò)第1970號(hào)決議將利比亞情勢(shì)提交給了國(guó)際刑事法院。聯(lián)合國(guó)安理會(huì)與國(guó)際刑事法院的合作在維護(hù)地區(qū)和平與安全方面是一個(gè)新的動(dòng)向，也是一種很好的實(shí)踐。 直至今天，北非政局仍在動(dòng)蕩，也正是吸取了聯(lián)合國(guó)在處理利比亞問(wèn)題上的失誤，使得在處理敘利亞問(wèn)題上，聯(lián)合國(guó)安理會(huì)的態(tài)度更加謹(jǐn)慎。
[Abstract]:In December 2010, the Jasmine Revolution, which began in Tunisia, had an important impact on the political situation in North Africa. In just a few months, Anji, Libya and other countries were involved in the wave of people's demonstrations, and finally, North Africa's political and iron triangle regime has collapsed. The UN's handling of Libya is a classic example. As the situation in Libya changes, the UN Security Council has adopted Resolution 1970 and Resolution 1973 to deal with Libya. In the United Nations' handling of the Libyan issue, new features and methods have emerged that deserve our attention, and this article will be interpreted from the perspective of international law. The United Nations mainly involves three aspects in dealing with the Libyan issue. The first is the imposition of a no-fly zone in Libya, authorizing action to protect the interests of civilians. This is the first "limited authorization" of the UN Security Council. But it is also questioned by interference in the internal affairs of other countries under "lawful" behavior. Therefore, a series of improvements are needed, from the clarity of the provisions of the Security Council resolutions to the perfection of the oversight mechanism. The second is the analysis of the government's recognition. At the United Nations General Assembly, Libya's "transitional council", which has yet to gain full national rule, voted as Libya's legitimate representative at the United Nations. The result is disputed by the government's recognition of the principle of de facto rule. The recognition of the "Transitional Council" in Libya is unique, but in view of the growing importance of the role of international organizations in the international community, Reconciling the contradiction between "procedural legality" and "de facto rule" is more worthy of our consideration. The third aspect will focus on the arrest and trial of the former Libyan leader by the International Criminal Court. The ICC is investigating possible human rights violations by NATO forces and forces under the command of Libya's "transitional council" in the Libyan war. Through an analysis of international law, this paper concludes that the International Criminal Court can have legitimate jurisdiction over former Libyan leaders who are not parties to the Rome Statute. The reason is that Libya was referred to the International Criminal Court by UN Security Council Resolution 1970, which is binding on Libya. The cooperation between the United Nations Security Council and the International Criminal Court is a new trend and a good practice in maintaining regional peace and security. Even today, the political situation in North Africa is still in turmoil. It is the United Nations' failure to deal with Libya that has made the UN Security Council more cautious in its handling of Syria.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：上海師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D99;D813.2

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 繆因知;;論國(guó)際法上反人道罪的發(fā)生范圍與管轄權(quán)的演進(jìn)[J];安徽大學(xué)法律評(píng)論;2007年02期

2 彭萍萍;關(guān)于伊拉克戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)及其對(duì)國(guó)際政治影響的研究綜述[J];當(dāng)代世界與社會(huì)主義;2004年01期

3 張薇;淺析布什主義對(duì)國(guó)際法的挑戰(zhàn)——從阿富汗戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)到伊拉克戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)[J];湖北社會(huì)科學(xué);2004年04期

4 朱文奇;;北約對(duì)利比亞采取軍事行動(dòng)的合法性研究[J];法商研究;2011年04期

5 孫煥為;區(qū)域組織對(duì)聯(lián)合國(guó)安理會(huì)的挑戰(zhàn)——對(duì)20世紀(jì)主要國(guó)際事例的簡(jiǎn)要法律評(píng)析[J];法學(xué)評(píng)論;2001年01期

6 李鳴;聯(lián)合國(guó)安理會(huì)授權(quán)使用武力問(wèn)題探究[J];法學(xué)評(píng)論;2002年03期

7 戴軼;;試論安理會(huì)授權(quán)使用武力的法律規(guī)制[J];法學(xué)評(píng)論;2008年03期

8 澤偉，曉紅;海灣戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)：聯(lián)合國(guó)安理會(huì)授權(quán)的一次濫用──對(duì)一位美國(guó)學(xué)者觀點(diǎn)之評(píng)介[J];法學(xué)評(píng)論;1996年01期

9 王虎華;論伊拉克組建新政府的國(guó)際法問(wèn)題[J];法學(xué);2003年05期

10 詹穎;;安理會(huì)授權(quán)武力打擊恐怖主義問(wèn)題的初步探討[J];法制與經(jīng)濟(jì)(中旬刊);2009年11期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 薛磊;當(dāng)代國(guó)際法中的承認(rèn)制度[D];華東政法大學(xué);2010年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 邱冬梅;論國(guó)際刑事法院與安理會(huì)的關(guān)系[D];廈門(mén)大學(xué);2006年

本文編號(hào)：2001518