UNIVERSITY OF ZAMBIA

NAME:

COMPUTER NUMBER:

COURSE NAME:

COURSE CODE:

LECTURE:

ASSIGNMENT QUESTION:
"We can’t build a future for our grandchildren with a system built for our grandparents," says
António Guterres, emphasizing the need to update international law. This essay explores the
historical context, current failures, and the necessity for comprehensive legal reform.

To begin with, the foundation of modern international law was largely laid as a result of World
War II, marked by the establishment of the United Nations (UN) in 1945 and the creation of key
treaties, such as the UN Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR)1. These
legal instruments were crafted to prevent a recurrence of global conflict, promote human rights,
and foster international cooperation. However, it is essential to recognize that these frameworks
were developed in a different era, tailored to address the specific challenges of that time, including
the maintenance of peace and security in a world scarred by the devastations of war.

Moreover, the principles enshrined in the UN Charter, such as the prohibition of the use of force,
respect for state sovereignty, and the promotion of human rights, have indeed guided international
relations for several decades2. Nevertheless, these principles are increasingly being tested by
emerging global challenges that were unforeseen by the architects of these instruments. Issues such
as climate change, cyber warfare, and transnational terrorism demand a different approach one that
the existing system, originally built to address the concerns of the mid-20th century, struggles to
address adequately.

One of the most pressing issues of our time is climate change. Although the Paris Agreement of
2015 represents a significant milestone in international environmental law, it is not without its
limitations3. The Paris Agreement is the first legally binding global treaty on climate change, yet
it operates on the basis of nationally determined contributions (NDCs), which are not legally
enforceable. This lack of enforceability significantly diminishes the effectiveness of the treaty in
ensuring that states meet their climate obligations.

The Urgenda Foundation v. State of the Netherlands (2019) case shows how domestic courts can
push governments to act on climate change, but it also underscores the need for a comprehensive

1
United Nations. (1948). Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
2
United Nations. (1945). Charter of the United Nations.
3
United Nations. (2015). Paris Agreement.
1|Page
international legal framework to hold all states accountable. The current international legal system
is outdated and inadequate for addressing climate challenges, highlighting the urgent need for
stronger, enforceable global instruments to ensure meaningful contributions from all states.

Furthermore, human rights law, another cornerstone of the international legal system, also faces
significant challenges in the modern era. The UDHR and subsequent human rights treaties, such
as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International Covenant
on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), were revolutionary at the time of their
adoption4. However, the enforcement of human rights obligations remains inconsistent, with
numerous states failing to uphold their commitments.

The principle of Responsibility to Protect (R2P), endorsed by the UN General Assembly in 2005,
was intended to address some of these shortcomings by providing a framework for international
intervention in cases of mass atrocities5. Nevertheless, the selective application of R2P, as
evidenced by the contrasting international responses to crises in Libya and Syria, reveals the
limitations of the current system. The politicization of human rights discourse and the absence of
a binding international legal framework to hold states accountable for human rights violations
underscore the pressing need for reform.

Similarly, the ongoing Rohingya crisis in Myanmar exemplifies the failures of the current system.
Despite widespread condemnation and substantial evidence of atrocities, the international
community has struggled to hold the perpetrators accountable, leaving the victims to continue
suffering. While the International Court of Justice (ICJ) has taken steps by ordering Myanmar to
take provisional measures to prevent genocide6, the enforcement of such rulings remains a
significant challenge. This situation accentuates the necessity for stronger mechanisms to protect

4
United Nations. (1966a). International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
United Nations. (1966b). International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural
Rights.
5
United Nations. (2005). World Summit Outcome Document.
6
International Court of Justice. (2020). Application of the Convention on the Prevention
2|Page
human rights and hold violators accountable, ensuring that the international legal system is capable
of addressing contemporary human rights challenges effectively.

Additionally, the changing nature of conflict in the 21st century presents significant challenges to
the existing international legal framework. Traditional notions of warfare, as governed by the
Geneva Conventions, are being challenged by new forms of conflict, including cyber warfare,
hybrid warfare, and the rise of non-state actors7. The Tallinn Manual on the International Law
Applicable to Cyber Warfare represents an attempt by legal scholars and practitioners to apply
existing international law to cyber conflicts8. However, the lack of a comprehensive international
treaty specifically addressing cyber warfare underscores the inadequacies of the current legal
framework.

The ongoing conflict in Ukraine, marked by Russia’s annexation of Crimea and subsequent
military actions in Eastern Ukraine, further exposes the limitations of international law in
preventing and addressing acts of aggression by powerful states. The ICJ’s ruling in Ukraine v.
Russian Federation (2022), which ordered provisional measures against Russia, illustrates the
difficulties of enforcing international law in the face of geopolitical realities9. The absence of
effective enforcement mechanisms and the paralysis of the UN Security Council due to the veto
power of its permanent members further complicate the international legal system’s ability to
maintain global security.

As conflicts shift to cyberspace and involve non-state actors, traditional legal frameworks are
becoming obsolete. New legal instruments are urgently needed to address modern warfare and
ensure international law remains effective in maintaining global peace. The challenges of today
demand a multifaceted reform of international law to stay relevant in addressing contemporary
issues.

7
International Committee of the Red Cross. (1949). Geneva Conventions.
8
Schmitt, M. N. (2013). Tallinn Manual on the International Law Applicable to Cyber
Warfare. Cambridge University Press.

9
International Court of Justice. (2022). Ukraine v. Russian Federation. Order on Provisional
Measures, 16 March 2022
3|Page
Firstly, it is essential to strengthen the enforcement mechanisms of international legal instruments.
This could involve the creation of new institutions or the empowerment of existing ones to ensure
that states comply with their international obligations. The establishment of the International
Criminal Court (ICC) was a significant step in this direction, providing a forum for prosecuting
individuals responsible for the most serious international crimes. However, the ICC's limited
jurisdiction and dependence on state cooperation have hindered its effectiveness, underscoring the
need for further reforms to ensure accountability on a global scale10.

Secondly, international law must adapt to address emerging issues such as climate change, cyber
warfare, and the protection of human rights in an increasingly interconnected world. This could
involve the development of new treaties or the amendment of existing ones to ensure they are fit
for purpose in the 21st century. The ongoing negotiations for a legally binding instrument on
business and human rights, aimed at holding corporations accountable for human rights violations,
exemplify the type of reform needed to address modern challenges11.

Lastly, there is a crucial need for greater international cooperation and political will to reform the
international legal system. The challenges confronting the world today are global in nature and
require collective action. Reforming international law to address these challenges will necessitate
states to put aside their differences and work together towards a common goal.

In conclusion, António Guterres' statement underscores the urgent need to reform international law
for the 21st century. While foundational, existing legal frameworks are increasingly inadequate to
address contemporary global challenges like climate change, human rights, and security.
Strengthening enforcement, developing new instruments, and adapting current frameworks are
essential to ensure international law remains effective in governing global issues and building a
better future.

10
International Criminal Court. (1998). Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.
11
United Nations Human Rights Council. (2014). Elaboration of an international legally binding
instrument on transnational corporations and other business enterprises with respect to human
rights.

4|Page
Bibliography
1. United Nations. (1948). Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
2. United Nations. (1945). Charter of the United Nations.
3. United Nations. (2015). Paris Agreement.
4. Urgenda Foundation v. State of the Netherlands. (2019). Supreme Court of the
Netherlands, Case No. 19/00135.
5. United Nations. (1966a). International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
6. United Nations. (1966b). International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural
Rights.
7. United Nations. (2005). World Summit Outcome Document.
8. International Court of Justice. (2020). Application of the Convention on the Prevention
9. International Committee of the Red Cross. (1949). Geneva Conventions.
10. International Court of Justice. (2022). Ukraine v. Russian Federation. Order on
Provisional Measures, 16 March 2022
11. International Criminal Court. (1998). Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.
12. United Nations Human Rights Council. (2014). Elaboration of an international legally
binding instrument on transnational corporations and other business enterprises with
respect to human rights.
References
International Committee of the Red Cross. (1949). Geneva Conventions.
International Court of Justice. (2020). Application of the Convention on the Prevention and
Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (The Gambia v. Myanmar). Order of 23 January 2020.
International Court of Justice. (2022). Ukraine v. Russian Federation. Order on Provisional
Measures, 16 March 2022.
International Criminal Court. (1998). Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.
Schmitt, M. N. (2013). Tallinn Manual on the International Law Applicable to Cyber Warfare.
Cambridge University Press.
United Nations. (1945). Charter of the United Nations.
United Nations. (1948). Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
United Nations. (1966a). International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
United Nations. (1966b). International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.
United Nations. (2005). World Summit Outcome Document.
United Nations. (2015). Paris Agreement.
United Nations Human Rights Council. (2014). Elaboration of an international legally binding
instrument on transnational corporations and other business enterprises with respect to human
rights.
Urgenda Foundation v. State of the Netherlands. (2019). Supreme Court of the Netherlands, Case
No. 19/00135.