Is the Saudi War on Yemen Legal?

The city of Sana'a in Yemen was taken over by the Houthis
last year.  But is the attack from Saudi Arabia a legal
response?
Image:  Shutterstock

Is the Saudi Arabian-led war on Yemen legal?  The issue isn’t cut and dried, to say the least.

A coalition of Saudi-led countries has been bombing Yemen in an attempt to depose an Iranian-backed rebel group that took control of the capital Sana’a late last year.  The bombings have killed hundreds of people, including many civilians.  The Saudi justification for the attack was that they were coming to the aid of a neighboring country in need after a specific request from its governing authority—Yemen President Abdu Rabu Mansour Hadi.

However, the legitimacy of Hadi’s rule is in question, making the entire proceedings potentially illegal.

The Houthi rebels, a northern Zaidi sect that has been in conflict with the government off and on for years, seized control of Sana’a in September, at which point very little of the Yemeni army was still responsive to Hadi.

Hadi came into power after the Arab Spring protests that removed Ali Adullah Saleh, but the democratic election that brought Hadi to the forefront saw him as the only candidate.  His term was extended with full democratic elections in 2014, but from there, it has continued without a poll.

In January, with his palace blockaded by the Houthis, Hadi announced his resignation.  However, after he escaped to the port city of Aden, he reversed his position.  Afterward, he fled to Saudi Arabia, where he is now based.

So who actually has the authority to make legal decisions for the country?

“If Hadi were still in Sana’a and had a relatively modest rebellion on his hands, there is little doubt he could consent to have other states come in and help him. That is not particularly controversial in international law,” said Ashley Deeks, associate professor at the University of Virginia Law School and a former assistant legal adviser at the US Department of State.  “But it does get increasingly controversial the less control the requester has. At this point, the country seems to have spun out of control.”

Hadi claims his request is justified based on Article 51 of the UN Charter, which gives countries the right to engage in self-defence when under attack.  But Article 51 is relevant to international conflicts, not domestic disputes.

According to experts, Hadi’s legal options are limited to working with the UN Security Council; however, no ruling has been passed or appears to be in the works at this time.  Hadi could also have the invasion legalized if Saudi Arabia or another neighboring country felt the conflict presented a threat to their own security, making Article 51 legally relevant.

In the meantime, the confusion and violence continues, and civilians are paying the price.