ABSTRACT
Under the Charter of the United Nations, intervention is absolutely prohibited in matters that are purely domestic to states. However, notwithstanding this general rule of non-intervention, there are happenings that though purely internal to states, have the capability to threaten international peace and security. The United Nations Charter has recognized these happening as worthy justification for intervention. Examples are self defence and authorization by the UN Security Council. Other exceptions have been created under customary international law such as humanitarian intervention, etc However, within the last 69 years so many events have happened as a result of which the rule of non-intervention has been widely breached majority of which could be justified on grounds of economic, cultural, social and political imperatives. Therefore, the task of this thesis is to examine states practice as it affects the principle of non-intervention by creating diplomatic, political and economic problems throughout the globe. It is against this background that this research tries to analyse modern practice of states at international law to see that to what extent the principle of non-intervention has been abused. To achieve this, a doctrinal method of research was adopted. After analysing the principle of non-intervention, the research concludes that the principle is meant to protect and preserve the territorial integrity, political independence and sovereign equality of states. Consequently, all forms of illegal interventions constitute violation of the Charter of the UN. However, it is found that states still intervene illegally in many parts of the world. It is recommended that some coherence be brought in to the principle of non-intervention and the application of the exceptions to the principle be carefully defined.