SELF-DEFENCE, NECESSITY AND RESCISSION

(a) There are some who consider the suppression of insurrections as a
legitimate case of defense, and maintain that by reason thereof, the State is
exempt from responsibility for the damages caused, provided that these do
not exceed the limits of actual necessity. This is the opinion stated by the
Government of South Africa in its reply to the inquiry of the Preparatory
Committee.! However, this view is not acceptable. There are various cases
in which the State is free from responsibility, and these are: first, selfdefense
 understood in its strict meaning; second, reprisals; and third, cases
of necessity. It is considered that damages caused under any of these circumstances
 do not entail in every case the obligation to indemnify. Selfdefense
 is both a right and a duty of all persons and communities. It implies
an undue and unjust assault, either actual or threatened, against which
immediate reaction is imperative. In its international aspect the doctrine of
self-defense is not, as in the penal jurisprudence, a rule of law with clear
and well defined limitations. Upon being exercised, its limits are liable to be
exceeded, and its consideration by international courts will always be a very
delicate matter. Nevertheless, the doctrine is essential. It cannot be dispensed
 with as a reason for justification when a State has been forced to
prevent or repel an attack without the necessary time to curb it in the usual
way. However, this is not the case either with reprisals or the so-called
“cases of necessity”. Reprisals are the remaining traces of an utterly disorganized
 community of states. They are not an unavoidable reaction and
should be abolished. However, as they could not be banished outright, it
would be advisable to restrict them, by subjecting them, when authorized,
to certain conditions of tact and discretion, such as have been communicated
by the governments of Denmark, Great Britain and Switzerland.2 In dealing
 with responsibility, however, the question of reprisals cannot be directly
considered. But if severe measures should be provided as regards responsibility
 arising out of reprisals, there is no doubt but that this would have a

* Point XI of the Inquiry of the Preparatory Committee.
"Inquiry of the Preparatory Committee.