Imminent is a word that means soon or about to happen. It often refers to a disaster, threat, or misfortune. Its legal definition is enshrined in the UN Charter. In addition to its definition, imminent has examples in both Malayalam and English.
Imminent is an adjective that means happening soon or ready to take place.
The word imminent means something is about to occur or take place shortly. In this sense, the imminent danger is anything that can threaten the safety of a person or a group of people. This can include a situation where a person has been held hostage by a gunman or exposed to a potentially toxic substance. To qualify as an imminent hazard, a situation must involve a real threat to a person’s life or physical efficiency.
The Latin word imminent comes from the Latin imminent, which means “to hang over.” So, something that might be imminent for you to drive into a mailbox.
Individuals use it.
Imminent is a word with many uses. It’s used to suggest that something is about to happen, but avoiding it is impossible. It’s also commonly used in legal terms and the context of mental illness. The word is derived from the Latin imminent, related to the words Mineo and mons, which mean “mount.” The word has become a legal requirement in the United Nations Charter, which was adopted after the Second World War.
When used in the context of individuals, imminent means that something is happening immediately or shortly; it also refers to something inherent or within the person. For example, an eminent person is highly respected.
It is a legal requirement in the UN Charter.
To establish imminence of attack, the Charter’s legal requirement for using force requires the threat to be ‘imminent’ in its nature. The definition of imminence is complex, requiring careful interpretation in light of contemporary developments. The concept of imminence must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis, based on the circumstances of the threat. It must be based on an objective assessment and appropriate criteria.
There are two primary schools of interpretation. The more restrictive view holds that a state must wait until an attack occurs to use force. The less restrictive interpretation holds that a state may use force before an attack occurs based on its inherent right to self-defense. The less restrictive approach draws on the French translation of the UN Charter, which includes the phrase ‘armed aggression.’
Comments are closed, but trackbacks and pingbacks are open.