Reflections on the International Legality of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon

This article addresses legal problems posed by Security CouncilResolution 1757 of 30 May 2007, establishing the Special Tribunalfor Lebanon (‘STL’). After describing the historicalbackground of the resolution (section 1) and the plan to establishthe STL as a treaty-based institution (section 2), the paperturns to an analysis of Resolution 1757 (section 3). The authorquestions whether the Council intended to bring the Lebanon-UNagreement into force as an international treaty, and holds thatthe UN Charter does not give the Council a power to unilaterallyimpose on a member state an obligation in the form of a treaty.The author argues that in Resolution 1757 the Council did notsubstitute a Chapter VII decision for the missing ratificationof the agreement by Lebanon, but instead established the STLby making the provisions of the agreement negotiated with Lebanonan integral part of a Chapter VII resolution. Section 4 thenquestions whether the Council was entitled to procure Lebanon'sconsent to be bound by a treaty by threatening unilaterallyto put those provisions into effect through a Chapter VII resolution.After discussing certain rules of the law of treaties concerningthe coercion of a state, the author concludes that it is notthat law but the UN Charter itself that prohibits the Councilfrom exerting pressure on a member state in order to make thatstate ratify a treaty.