The devastating events of 9/11 triggered the adoption of Resolution 1373 (2001) by the UN Security Council, a contentious development which was much debated and was widely seen as presaging a new type of activity by the Security Council – legislating for all UN member states. And yet, in the counter-terrorism sphere at least, the Council’s legislative activity in the years following 9/11 was relatively modest. Both quantitatively and qualitatively, that activity has been far exceeded by the Council’s response to the emergence of ISIL in 2014. This more recent activity is of interest beyond the confines of counter-terrorism, but has received far less scrutiny to date. This article will remedy this gap, revisiting, in light of the recent activity, the relative merits and disadvantages of making counter-terrorism law through Security Council resolutions. It makes two main contentions. The first is that – due to some factors which were anticipated in the early 2000s and many which were not – Security Council resolutions on terrorism constitute a distinctive category of international law-making and pose serious challenges for the application of organizing principles and processes of general international law. The second is that, for these reasons as well as doubts as to the necessity and efficacy of recent action, making counter-terrorism law through Security Council resolutions should be the exception rather than the norm.

中文翻译：

---

重新审视安全理事会对恐怖主义的行动：新威胁；（很多）新法律；同样的老问题？

9/11 的破坏性事件促使联合国安理会通过了第 1373（2001）号决议，这一有争议的事态发展引起了很多争论，并被广泛认为预示着安理会将开展一种新型活动——为所有联合国会员国立法状态。然而，至少在反恐领域，安理会在 9/11 之后几年的立法活动相对温和。安理会对 2014 年伊黎伊斯兰国出现的反应在数量和质量上都远远超过了这一活动。这一较近期的活动在反恐范围之外引起了人们的兴趣，但迄今为止受到的审查要少得多。本文将弥补这一差距，根据最近的活动重新审视，通过安全理事会决议制定反恐法的相对利弊。它提出了两个主要论点。首先是——由于一些在 2000 年代初就已经预料到的因素，而许多因素并未预料到——安全理事会关于恐怖主义的决议构成了国际立法的一个独特类别，并对普遍的组织原则和进程的应用提出了严峻的挑战。国际法。二是基于这些原因以及对近期行动的必要性和有效性的怀疑，通过安理会决议制定反恐法应该是例外而不是常态。首先是——由于一些在 2000 年代初就已经预料到的因素，而许多因素并未预料到——安全理事会关于恐怖主义的决议构成了国际立法的一个独特类别，并对普遍的组织原则和进程的应用提出了严峻的挑战。国际法。二是基于这些原因以及对近期行动的必要性和有效性的怀疑，通过安理会决议制定反恐法应该是例外而不是常态。首先是——由于一些在 2000 年代初就已经预料到的因素，而许多因素并未预料到——安全理事会关于恐怖主义的决议构成了国际立法的一个独特类别，并对普遍的组织原则和进程的应用提出了严峻的挑战。国际法。二是基于这些原因以及对近期行动的必要性和有效性的怀疑，通过安理会决议制定反恐法应该是例外而不是常态。