 | SEOKA NaoMajor in Global Studies Associate Professor | ||
Last Updated :2024/04/19
Researcher Information
Degree
- Ph.D.（Doshisha University）
- LL.M.（New York University School of Law）
- Master of Law（Doshisha University）
J-Global ID
Research Interests
- 強行規範 ジェノサイド条約 国際的正統性 体制転換 政府承認 The Security Council 平和のための結集決議 Responsibility to Protect Veto Power Humanitarian Intervention Use of Force Collective Security System The United Nations
Research Areas
- Humanities & social sciences / International relations
- Humanities & social sciences / International law
Academic & Professional Experience
- 2019/04 - Today Kindai UniversityFaculty of International Studies准教授
- 2014/04 - Today Doshisha UniversityLawPart-time lecturer
- 2018/04 - 2019/03 Kindai UniversityFaculty of International Studies, Department of International Studies
- 2016/04 - 2018/03 Kindai UniversityInternational StudiesLecturer
- 2014/04 - 2016/03 Osaka School of International Public PolicyJSPS Research Fellow
- 2009/10 - 2016/03 Osaka Prefectural UniversityEconomicsPart-time lecturer
- 2011/04 - 2014/03 Doshisha UniversityLawAssistant Professor
- 2009/10 - 2011/03 Nara Prefectural University地域創造学部Part-time lecturer
- 2009/10 - 2011/03 Doshisha UniversityLawPart-time lecturer
- 2006/04 - 2008/03 Doshisha UniversityLawPart-time lecturer
Education
- 2008/08 - 2009/05 New York University School Law LL.M. (International Legal Studies) [Fulbright scholar]
- 2002/04 - 2006/03 Doshisha University Graduate School of Law Ph.D
- 2000/04 - 2002/03 Doshisha University Graduate School of Law Master
- 1996/04 - 2000/03 Doshisha University Law 法律学科
Association Memberships
Published Papers
- ウクライナ情勢に関するロシアの拒否権行使の合法性瀬岡直国際法学会エキスパート・コメント No.2024-1 2024年1月 2024/01 [Refereed][Invited]
- The Inherent Constraints on the Use of Veto Power in the United Nations: A Critical Analysis of the Russian Vetoes in the Russia-Ukraine ConflictNao SeokaThe United Nations Studies, Number 24, 2023 103 - 130 2023/06 [Refereed]
Russia’s use of veto against the UN Security Council resolutions denouncing its military actions in Ukraine in February 25 and September 30, 2022, prompted scholars of international law and relations to explore whether such exercise of veto is consistent with the rationales of veto power provided by the UN Charter and with the evolving purposes and principles of the Charter. Maintaining and relying on the textual interpretation of Article 27, paragraph 3, of the Charter, however, most of the legal analyses failed to recognize that the constrains to the veto right were in fact present at its creation. Some scholars, particularly in the field of international politics and relations, furthermore, reached a simple conclusion that the veto power is instrumental for the P5 to maintain the balance of power and interests. The veto power originally introduced into the UN Charter was arguably based on the two fundamental rationales – “veto as a right” and “veto as a responsibility.” First, the veto power is a privilege granted by the Charter that allows each P5 member to block a draft resolution and justify such an action by invoking its right to protect its vital interests. At the same time, veto is a responsibility – P5 are expected to fulfill their special responsibility to contribute to the UN main purposes, namely the maintenance of international peace and security, the protection of human rights, and the right of self-determination of people, by exercising its veto power. Although these rationales are not stipulated in Article 27, paragraph 3 of the Charter, they should be considered as the inherent constraints of the veto power. Applying the veto rationales to the Russian vetoes in the Russia-Ukraine conflict, these vetoes are unjustifiable not only from the perspective of the ‘veto as a right’, but also of ‘veto as a responsibility’. This analysis is supported by the reactions to the Russian vetoes in the UN, including the joint statement by 50 UN members which criticize the Russian vetoes as an abuse of power, as well as the adoption of General Assembly resolution that seeks to hold the permanent members accountable when they exercise the veto right. - The Relationship between the Veto and Jus Cogens in Mass Atrocity Situations瀬岡直Journal of International Studies 7 17 - 32 2022/06
- 政府承認の近年の動向：ミャンマー軍事政権とタリバン暫定政権をめぐって瀬岡直国際法学会エキスパート・コメント No.2022-5 2022/03 [Refereed][Invited]
- （書評）Jennifer Trahan, Existing Legal Limits to Security Council Veto Power in the Face of Atrocity Crimes, Cambridge University Press, 2020, xvii+355pp.」瀬岡直『国際法外交雑誌』 120 (4) 121 - 125 2022/01 [Refereed]
- ジェノサイド条約の防止義務に基づく拒否権の 法的制限に関する一考察 ―J. Heieckの議論をめぐって―瀬岡直Journal of International Studies 5 43 - 73 2020/11
- パレスチナ紛争に関するアメリカの拒否権行使に対する批判的検討：国際連合における拒否権の本質的制約の視点から瀬岡直日本国際連合学会編『国連と大国政治』（国際書院、2020年） 2020/06 [Refereed][Invited]
- 保護する責任と体制転換のジレンマに関する一考察－リビア紛争におけるカダフィ政権の政府性をめぐって－瀬岡直国際法外交雑誌 117 (2) 135 - 163 2018/08 [Refereed]
- The Gradual Normative Shift from ‘Veto as a Right’ to ‘Veto as a Responsibility’: The Suez Crisis, the Syrian Conflict, and UN ReformSeoka NaoHuman Rights and Power in Times of Globalisation 196 - 224 2018
- Seoka NaoJournal of International Studies Faculty of International Studies, Kindai University 1 (1) 67 - 97 2432-292x 2016/11[Abstract] The purpose of this article is to examine the fundamental dilemma characterized by the tension between protection of civilians and regime change, with a particular focus on the legality and legitimacy of the use of force by the United Nations Operation in Côte d'Ivoire (UNOCI) in April 2011. It can be argued that the UNOCI acted outside of its mandates to protect civilians stipulated in Security Council Resolution 1975 in light of the basic principles of "robust" PKO. Given the dilemma, however, it should be emphasized that it was difficult, if not impossible, for UNOCI, supported by French forces, to implement its civilian protection mandates without disabling the capacity of Gbagbo forces to use heavy weapons against the civilians. Therefore, the article concludes that the UNOCI's military operations can be legitimate, if not strictly legal, under the U.N. Charter.
- 国連システム学術評議会（ACUNS）2015年度年次研究大会に参加して瀬岡直日本国際連合学会編『国連：戦後70年の歩み、課題、展望』（国連研究第17号） 2016/06
- 国際連合における拒否権の意義と限界 －シリア紛争における中露の拒否権行使に対する批判的検討－瀬岡直日本国際連合学会編『ジェンダーと国連』（国連研究第16号） 2015/06 [Refereed]
- 国際の平和及び安全の維持に関する拒否権の行使・威嚇に対する批判的検討－スエズ危機における英仏の拒否権行使に対する国連加盟国の対応を素材として－瀬岡直同志社法学 63 (4) 1 - 49 2011/11
- 国連集団安全保障体制における拒否権の意義と限界ー「平和のための結集」決議の起草過程を素材としてー同志社法学 第340号 119 - 152 2010/03
- （書評）Fred Gr?nfeld and Anke Huijboom, The Failure to Prevent Genocide in Rwanda: The Role of Bystanders, xxix＋299pp（Transnational Publishers, 2007)Asian Yearbook of International Law 第13巻 317 - 318 2009/04
- Seoka NaoThe Doshisha law review Doshisha University 59 (第320号) 47 - 129 0387-7612 2007/05論説(Article)
- 国連集団安全保障体制における拒否権の意義と限界−ヤルタ会談を素材として−同志社法学 (第315号) 95 - 136 2006/07
- 国連集団安全保障体制における拒否権の意義と限界−ダンバートン・オークス会議を素材として−同志社法学 (第314号) 521 - 567 2006/06
- Seoka NaoThe Doshisha law review Doshisha University 57 (第306号) 203 - 313 0387-7612 2005/05
- （書評）T. M. Franck, Recourse to Force: State Action against Threats and Armed Attacks (Cambridge University Press, 2002, xii＋205pp.)瀬岡直国際法外交雑誌 102巻 (2号) 238頁 - 242頁 2004/08 [Refereed]
- Seoka NaoThe Doshisha law review Doshisha University 55 (第292号) 186 - 248 0387-7612 2003/05研究ノート
Books etc
- 実証の国際法学の継承瀬岡直 (Joint work政府承認論の最近の展開－「シリア人民の正統な代表」としての「シリア国民連合」の意味合い)信山社 2019/12
- Ekaterina Yahyaoui Krivenko ed, Human Rights and Power in Times of GlobalisationSeoka Nao (Joint workThe Gradual Normative Shift from ‘Veto as a Right’ to ‘Veto as a Responsibility’: The Suez Crisis, the Syrian Conflict, and UN Reform, pp.196-224.)BRILL / NIJHOFF 2018 9789004346406
- The Implications and Limitations of the Veto Power in the United Nations: A Critical Review of the Practice from its Birth to Suez Crisis (in Japanese)Nao Seoka (Single work)Shinzansha Publisher 2013/01 4797267062 216
Conference Activities & Talks
- 国際連合における拒否権の本質的制約 －ウクライナ情勢におけるロシアの拒否権行使をめぐって－ [Invited]瀬岡直日本国際連合学会第23回研究大会 2022/06
- The International Legitimacy of Governments as a concept in statu nascendi: the implications of the loss of legitimacy of the Qaddafi regime in the Libyan case [Not invited]瀬岡直Democratic Governance and International Law: 25 Years Later, the Manchester International Law Center, the Manchester, the United KIngdom 2017/11 Mahchester International Law Center
- 国際的正統性と政府承認の切り替え－リビア紛争を契機として [Not invited]瀬岡直国際法学会2017年度研究大会（於：朱鷺メッセ 新潟コンベンションセンター） 2017/09 朱鷺メッセ：新潟コンベンションセンター
- The Gradual Normative Shift from "Veto as a Right" to "Veto as a Responsibility" : The Suez Crisis, the Syrian Conflict, and UN reform [Not invited]Seoka Nao"Taming Power in Times of Globalization: What Role for Human Rights?", the Irish Centre for Human Rights, National University of Ireland, Galway 2015/11
- The Implications and Limitations of the Veto Power in the United Nations: A Critical Analysis of the Use of Veto by China and Russia in the Case of Syria [Not invited]Seoka NaoAcademic Council on the United Nations System, the 2015 Annual Meeting, in The Hague, Netherlands 2015/06
- 国際連合における拒否権の意義と限界－拒否権制限の「指針」作成への試み－ [Not invited]瀬岡直日本国際連合学会第16回研究大会（於：北九州市立大学） 2014/06
- 国際連合における拒否権制度－国際法学は拒否権の「政治性」に対していかに向き合うべきか？－ [Not invited]瀬岡直世界法若手研究会（於：東北大学） 2014/05
- 国際連合における拒否権の意義と限界－『あるべき法』としての拒否権制度の構築を探る視点から－ [Not invited]瀬岡直国際法学会2013年度研究大会（於：静岡県コンベンションアーツセンター） 2013/10
Research Grants & Projects
- 「保護する責任」と体制転換の緊張関係－既存政府の国際的正統性の観点から－日本学術振興会：科研費（若手研究）Date (from‐to) : 2018/04 -2021/03Author : 瀬岡直
- 国際連合における拒否権の意義と限界－PKO及び重大な人権侵害の事例を中心に－日本学術振興会：特別研究員奨励費Date (from‐to) : 2014/04 -2016/03Author : 瀬岡直
- The Implications and Limitations of the Veto Power in the United Nations日米教育委員会：フルブライト奨学金（大学院留学プログラム）Date (from‐to) : 2008/07 -2009/05Author : 瀬岡直
Media Coverage
- Date : 2023/02/19Writer: Other than myselfPublisher, broadcasting station: NHKProgram, newspaper magazine: NHKスペシャル 混迷の世紀 第9回取材協力 Media report 番組概要：「７８年前「世界の平和と安全の維持」を掲げて創設された国連。ところが、対話による解決を目指す安全保障理事会では議論がかみあわず、和平への糸口を見つけられずにいる。国連で何が起きているのか。取材班は安保理の議長国を務めた日本の１か月に密着。各国を巻き込んでロシアを対話の場に引き戻そうという水面下の攻防が見えてきた。力と力がぶつかり合う混迷の時代に国際社会は何ができるのか。国連安保理の姿を通じて考える。」2/26(日) 午後9:49 までオンライン配信