ABSTRACT
The Secretary-General underlined the continuity and consistency of the resolutions passed on the subject, by declaring 'fully justified the stand of the Security Council on all acts of violence, including those which reflectecfa policy of retaliation'. The declarations made by the various delegates during the debates in the Council are also of the greatest interest. They reveal not only a radical rejection of the very idea of armed reprisals, but also the grounds on which they are held to be unlawful, which lie both in the principles of the Charter and in more general considerations. According to an authoritative interpretationt, the International Court of Justice itself stated the unlawfulness of armed reprisals in its judgment of April 9th 1949, regarding the Corfu Channel Case. The admissibility of armed reprisals would appear, to be ruled out even de jure condendo, by reference to the obligations deriving from the Charter.
