ABSTRACT

Legal certainty as a component of the rule of law is inherently linked to both the legality and legitimacy of Security Council action. Legal certainty is the explanatory element of a resolution, showing what the Council has identified as a threat, why it has chosen to respond in this way and what the extent of such response should be. The fact that certain resolutions are open to interpretation is an indictment of the process by which such decisions emanate from the Council chamber. The negligence of the Council in doing so for all resolutions results in ambiguity for United Nations (UN) member states which forage for information and pore over the records of Council meetings. As a political organ, it is understandable that the Council must balance the end with the means, particularly given, as some might argue, that 'the Security Council's role under the Charter is to further international peace and security and not the rule of law'.