“保护的责任”:制度化进程之夭折  

The Responsibility to Protect(R2P):A Premature End of Its Process of Institutionalization

作　　者：徐崇利[1] 

机构地区：[1]厦门大学法学院,福建厦门361005

出　　处：《法律科学（西北政法大学学报）》2018年第6期179-187,共9页Science of Law：Journal of Northwest University of Political Science and Law

基　　金：国家社科基金重点项目(12AFX015)"软硬实力与中国对国际法的影响及相应对策研究"

摘　　要：本世纪初,"保护的责任"概念提出之后,在联合国的框架内,作为其核心选项的人道主义干预之制度化,无论是采取以"原则"为起点的"自上而下"的路径,抑是以"规则"为起点的"自下而上"的路径,还是以"规范"为起点的"承上启下"的路径,无一不面临绝境。"保护的责任"制度化进程事实上已经夭折,其所剩的只是一具躯壳;而要维持这具躯壳存在之意义,必须回到2005年联合国《世界首脑会议成果文件》规定之原点——对确有必要实施的人道主义干预之授权,应根据《联合国宪章》的有关规定,由安理会逐案处理。实际上,这也是中国的立场和主张。Since the concept of Responsibility to Protect （R2P） was put forward at the beginning of this century, the institutionalization of humanitarian intervention as its core choice, via whether the way of ＂up to down＂ on basis of princi- ple, or the way of ＂down to up＂ on basis of rules, or the way of ＂middle to up and to down＂ on basis of norms, has gotten into impasse, that is to say, it has come to a premature end in fact, and left a skeleton. If the concept of R2P could keep on its value, it shall go back to the original point which the UN World Summit Outcome adopt in 2005 indicated that indispensable humanitarian intervention shall be authorized by the Security Council, in accordance with UN Charter, as well as the China＇s standpoint.

关 键 词：“保护的责任” 人道主义干预 制度化 路径选择 

分 类 号：DF90[政治法律—国际法学]