The Development of the Principle of Non-Intervention in International Jurisprudence:  A Critical Analysis of its Normative Scope and Judicial Interpretation

Dobrosława Budzianowska

doi:10.21697/2025.14.1.01

Published: 2025-08-30

Vol. 14 No. 1 (2025)

The Development of the Principle of Non-Intervention in International Jurisprudence: A Critical Analysis of its Normative Scope and Judicial Interpretation

Dobrosława Budzianowska

Polish Review of International and European Law

Section: Articles

https://doi.org/10.21697/2025.14.1.01

Abstract

This article offers a critical analysis of the principle of non-intervention in international jurisprudence, situating it as a functional corollary of state sovereignty and examining how coercion operates as the legal threshold that transforms influence into unlawful interference. Focusing on the jurisprudence of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and other judicial bodies, the article traces how the legal contours of non-intervention have been developed, interpreted, and, at times, left unresolved. Although widely recognised in both treaty and customary law, the principle’s judicial articulation remains uneven, particularly in relation to the definition of coercion, the attribution of indirect conduct, and the treatment of emerging forms of interference. Using a doctrinal and historical-legal method, the article analyses key decisions including Corfu Channel, Nicaragua, and Armed Activities, alongisde relevant regional jurisprudence. The article concludes that addressing the principle’s normative fragility requires a more coherent legal framework, one that integrates judicial interpretation, doctrinal clarification, and institutional engagement. Ensuring the relevance of the principle of non-intervention requires that it be capable of addressing the complex forms of pressure and influence that shape contemporary international relations.

Keywords:

Sovereignty, Non-intervention, the International Court of Justice (ICJ), Customary international law, Coersion

Download files

PDF

Citation rules

Budzianowska, D. (2025). The Development of the Principle of Non-Intervention in International Jurisprudence: A Critical Analysis of its Normative Scope and Judicial Interpretation. Polish Review of International and European Law, 14(1), 9–50. https://doi.org/10.21697/2025.14.1.01

Cited by / Share

Licence

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

References

African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights. Adopted 27 June 1981. Entered into force 21 October 1986. 1520 UNTS 217.
Google Scholar

African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights v. Libya. Application no. 002/2013. African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights, Judgment of 3 June 2016.
Google Scholar

Ago, Roberto. “Addendum to the Eighth Report on State Responsibility.” Yearbook of the International Law Commission 1980, vol. II, part 1, 13-14. UN Doc. A/CN.4/318/Add.5-7.
Google Scholar

Akande, Dapo, and Antonios Tzanakopoulos. “The International Court of Justice and the Concept of Aggression.” In The Crime of Aggression: A Commentary, edited by Claus Kreß and Stefan Barriga, vol. 1, 214-232. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017.
Google Scholar

Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro). Judgment. [2007] ICJ Rep 43.
Google Scholar

Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Uganda). Judgment. [2005] ICJ Rep 168.
Google Scholar

Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Uganda). Compensation. Judgment. [2022] ICJ Rep 21.
Google Scholar

Boon, Kristen E. “Are Control Tests Fit for the Future? The Slippage Problem in Attribution Doctrines.” Melbourne Journal of International Law 15, no. 2 (2014): 1-23.
Google Scholar

Buchan, Robert. “Cyber Attacks: Unlawful Uses of Force or Prohibited Interventions?” Journal of Conflict and Security Law 17, no. 2 (2012): 211-251.
Google Scholar

Cassese, Antonio. “The Nicaragua and Tadić Tests Revisited in Light of the ICJ Judgment on Genocide in Bosnia.” European Journal of International Law 18 (2007): 649-668.
Google Scholar

Charter of the Organization of American States. Adopted 30 April 1948. Entered into force 13 December 1951. 119 UNTS 3.
Google Scholar

Charter of the United Nations. Adopted 26 June 1945. Entered into force 24 October 1945. 1 UNTS XVI.
Google Scholar

Constitutive Act of the African Union. Adopted 11 July 2000. Entered into force 26 May 2001.
Google Scholar

Corfu Channel Case (United Kingdom v. Albania). Merits. Judgment. [1949] ICJ Rep 4.
Google Scholar

Corten, Olivier. “The Prohibition of the Use of Force.” In The UN Friendly Relations Declaration at 50: An Assessment of the Fundamental Principles of International Law, edited by Jorge E. Viñuales, 51-72. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2020.
Google Scholar

Crawford, James. Brownlie’s Principles of Public International Law. 9th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019.
Google Scholar

Declaration on the Inadmissibility of Intervention in the Domestic Affairs of States and the Protection of Their Independence and Sovereignty. UNGA Res 2131 (XX), 21 December 1965.
Google Scholar

Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations. UNGA Res 2625 (XXV), 24 October 1970.
Google Scholar

Delerue, François. Cyber Operations and International Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2020.
Google Scholar

Gomes Lund (Guerrilha do Araguaia) v. Brazil. Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Series C No. 219, 24 November 2010.
Google Scholar

Gray, Christine. International Law and the Use of Force. 4th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018.
Google Scholar

Higgins, Rosalyn. “Keynote Address.” Proceedings of the Annual Meeting (American Society of International Law) 100 (2006): 388-395.
Google Scholar

Ilascu and Others v. Moldova and Russia. European Court of Human Rights, Grand Chamber. Judgment of 8 July 2004. Application no. 48787/99.
Google Scholar

International Law Commission. Draft Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, with Commentaries. Yearbook of the International Law Commission 2001, vol. II, Part Two. UN Doc. A/56/10.
Google Scholar

Island of Palmas (Netherlands v. United States). Award. 4 April 1928. II Reports of International Arbitral Awards 829.
Google Scholar

Jamnejad, Maziar, and Michael, Wood. “The Principle of Non-Intervention.” Leiden Journal of International Law 22, no. 2 (2009): 345-381.
Google Scholar

Kelsen, Hans. Principles of International Law. 2nd ed. Edited and revised by Robert W. Tucker. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1966.
Google Scholar

Kiessling, Erik. “Gray Zone Tactics and the Principle of Non-Intervention: Can ‘One of the Vaguest Branches of International Law’ Solve the Gray Zone Problem?” Harvard National Security Journal 12 (2021): 101-152.
Google Scholar

https://harvardnsj.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/HNSJ-Vol-12-Kiessling-Gray-Zone-Tactics-and-the-Principle-of-Non-Intervention.pdf
Google Scholar

Kilovaty, Ido. “The International Law of Cyber Intervention”, in Research Handbook on International Law and Cyberspace, ed. Nicholas Tsagourias and Russell Buchan (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 2021), 193-209.
Google Scholar

Klabbers, Jan. “Intervention, Armed Intervention, Armed Attack, Threat to Peace, Act of Aggression, and Threat or Use of Force: What's the Difference?” In The Oxford Handbook of the Use of Force in International Law, edited by Marc Weller, 488-506. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1093/law/9780199673049.003.0023.
Google Scholar

Kohen, Marcelo G. “The Principle of Non-Intervention 75 Years after the UN Charter.” 2020. United Nations Audiovisual Library of International Law.
Google Scholar

Kolb, Robert. The International Court of Justice. Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2013.
Google Scholar

Kriener, Florian. “Intervention, Prohibition of.” Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law, last modified 2023. Oxford Public International Law. https://opil.ouplaw.com/home/MPIL.
Google Scholar

Larsen, Kjetil Mujezinović. “Attribution of Conduct in Peace Operations: The ‘Ultimate Authority and Control’ Test.” European Journal of International Law 19, no. 3 (2008): 509-531.
Google Scholar

Lauterpacht, Hersch. The Function of Law in the International Community. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011.
Google Scholar

Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (Advisory Opinion). [2004] ICJ Rep 136.
Google Scholar

Loizidou v. Turkey (Preliminary Objections). (1995) 20 EHRR 99.
Google Scholar

Ministry of the Armed Forces (France). “International Law Applied to Operations in Cyberspace.” 9 September 2019. Accessed 6 May 2025.
Google Scholar

Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America). Merits. Judgment. [1986] ICJ Rep 14.
Google Scholar

Milanović, Marko. “Revisiting Coercion as an Element of Prohibited Intervention in International Law.” American Journal of International Law 117, no. 4 (2023): 601-650. https://doi.org/10.1017/ajil.2023.33.
Google Scholar

Milanović, Marko. “State Responsibility for Genocide: A Follow-Up.” European Journal of International Law 18 (2007): 669-688.
Google Scholar

Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States. Adopted 26 December 1933. Entered into force 26 December 1934. 165 LNTS 19.
Google Scholar

Moynihan, Harriet. The Application of International Law to State Cyberattacks: Sovereignty and Non-Intervention. London: Chatham House, 2019.
Google Scholar

Murphy, Sean D. Principles of International Law. 3rd ed. St. Paul, MN: West Academic Publishing, 2018.
Google Scholar

Murray, Rachel. The African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights: A Commentary. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019.
Google Scholar

Oppenheim, Lassa. International Law: A Treatise. 3rd ed. Edited by Ronald Roxburgh. Vol. 1. London: Longmans, Green and Co., 1921.
Google Scholar

Prosecutor v. Tadić (Judgment). Case No. IT-94-1-A. Appeals Chamber, International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, 15 July 1999.
Google Scholar

Protocol Relating to the Establishment of the Peace and Security Council of the African Union. 2002.
Google Scholar

Reisman, W. Michael. “Coercion and Self-Determination: Construing Charter Article 2(4).” The American Journal of International Law 78 (1984): 642-645.
Google Scholar

Roscini, Marco. International Law and the Principle of Non-Intervention: History, Theory, and Interactions with Other Principles. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2024.
Google Scholar

Ruys, Tom, and Sten Verhoeven. “Attacks by Private Actors and the Right of Self-Defence.” Journal of Conflict and Security Law 3 (2005): 289-320.
Google Scholar

Ryngaert, Cedric. “Attributing Conduct in the Law of State Responsibility: Lessons from Dutch Courts Applying the Control Standard in the Context of International Military Operations.” Utrecht Journal of International and European Law 36, no. 2 (2021): 170-180.
Google Scholar

Schmitt, Michael N., and Liis Vihul. “Respect for Sovereignty in Cyberspace.” Texas Law Review 95 (2017). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3180669.
Google Scholar

Schmitt, Michael N. “Autonomous Cyber Capabilities and the International Law of Sovereignty and Intervention.” International Law Studies 96 (2020): 549-576, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3755530.
Google Scholar

Schmitt, Michael N. “Preemptive Strategies in International Law.” Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy 28, no. 1 (2006): 513-58.
Google Scholar

Schmitt, Michael N., ed. Tallinn Manual 2.0 on the International Law Applicable to Cyber Operations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017.
Google Scholar

Shan, Wenhua. “Calvo Doctrine, State Sovereignty and the Changing Landscape of International Investment Law.” In Redefining Sovereignty in International Economic Law, edited by Wenhua Shan, Penelope Simons, and Dalvinder Singh, 243-267. Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2008.
Google Scholar

Shea, Donald R. The Calvo Clause: A Problem of Inter-American and International Law and Diplomacy. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1955.
Google Scholar

Simma, Bruno. “Universality of International Law from the Perspective of a Practitioner." European Journal of International Law 20, no. 2 (2009): 265–297.
Google Scholar

Talmon, Stefan. “The Responsibility of Outside Powers for Acts of Secessionist Entities.” International and Comparative Law Quarterly 58, no. 3 (2009): 493-517.
Google Scholar

Tams, Christian J. “Art. 2(4).” In The Charter of the United Nations: A Commentary. 4th ed. Edited by Bruno Simma et al. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2024.
Google Scholar

Tams, Christian J. “The Use of Force against Terrorists.” European Journal of International Law 20, no. 2 (2009): 359-397. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chp031.
Google Scholar

Tay, Xuan W. “Reconstructing the Principle of Non-Intervention and Non-Interference: Electoral Disinformation, Nicaragua, and the Quilt-Work Approach.” Berkeley Journal of International Law 40, no. 1 (2022): 135-174
Google Scholar

Thakur, Ramesh. The United Nations, Peace and Security: From Collective Security to the Responsibility to Protect. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017.
Google Scholar

Tladi, Dire. “The Nonconsenting Innocent State: The Problem with Bethlehem’s Principle 12.” American Journal of International Law 107, no. 3 (2013): 570-576.
Google Scholar

UK Attorney General. “Cyber and International Law in the 21st Century.” Speech, 23 May 2018. Accessed 6 May 2025.
Google Scholar

UN General Assembly. Group of Governmental Experts on Advancing Responsible State Behaviour in Cyberspace in the Context of International Security. UN Doc A/76/135, 14 July 2021.
Google Scholar

Vattel, Emer de. The Law of Nations, or, Principles of the Law of Nature: Applied to the Conduct and Affairs of Nations and Sovereigns. Edited by Joseph Chitty and Edward D. Ingraham. From the new edition. Philadelphia: T. & J.W. Johnson & Co., 1872.
Google Scholar

Velásquez Rodríguez v. Honduras (Merits). Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Series C No. 4, 29 July 1988.
Google Scholar

Williams, John Fischer. International Law and International Financial Obligations Arising from Contract: Including a Short Discussion of the Drago Doctrine and of the Hague Convention of 1907 on the Recovery of Contract Debts: Being Three Lectures Given in August 1923 at the Hague Academy for International Law. Lugduni Batavorum: Brill, 1924.
Google Scholar

Woolsey, Theodore S. “Drago and the Drago Doctrine.” The American Journal of International Law 15, no. 4 (1921): 558-59.
Google Scholar