hamlet代写：NSAs的权利和义务
在文献中有人认为，应将非国家行为者纳入国际法治(IROL)框架内。但是，应该认识到，国际法治的概念尚未得到最后的界定。正式的和实质性的法治概念之间的分歧在国际上和在国家一级一样活跃。因此，这本身就对将非国家行为者纳入国际法框架提出了挑战。其他的挑战存在于理解非国家行为者是否具有法律人格。为了具有法律人格，一个实体必须在法律体系内拥有权利和义务。因此，如果认为NSAs具有法律人格，则应认识到国际法赋予它们权利，并将义务强加于它们。根据文书的内容和意图，有一些国际文书列举了NSAs的各种权利和义务。从不同文献的证据和文章中收集的数据将被用来定义这样的公司的挑战是如何存在的。
hamlet代写：NSAs的权利和义务
例如，在传统的以国家为中心的国际法中，不赋予国家安全机构法律人格的最大挑战之一是，各国不愿与国家安全机构分享其权力和权力。此外，还存在一种恐惧，即通过承认NSAs的法律地位和人格，将其合法化。这可能反过来导致他们使用暴力的合法化。NSAs既有积极的作用，也有消极的作用。NSAs的消极作用可以从不同的角度进行分析，例如，各国政府，特别是威权政权如何认识到，NSAs在国际法中的法律地位尚未确立，因此NSAs不能对其行为承担法律责任。此外，由于各国不愿其合法性受到国际社会的质疑。因此，他们可能会寻求与个人、反对团体和少数群体共同选择NSAs。
hamlet代写：NSAs的权利和义务
It has been argued in literatures that non-state actors should be brought within the framework of the international rule of law (IROL). It should be recognized, however, that the idea of the international rule of law has yet to be conclusively defined. The divide between formal and substantive conceptions of the rule of law is as active internationally as it is at the national level. So this by itself challenges a proper incorporation of non-state actors into International law frameworks. Other challenges exist in the form of understanding whether the non-state actor has a legal personality. In order to have legal personality, an entity must possess rights as well as obligations within a legal system. If therefore it is to be regarded that NSAs have having legal personality, it should come to be recognized that international law confers rights and imposes obligations upon them. There are international instruments which have enumerated various rights and obligations for NSAs, depending on the content and intent of the instrument. Data collected from different literature evidence and articles on the issue would be used to define how challenges exist for such incorporation.
hamlet代写：NSAs的权利和义务
For instance, one of the most significant challenges that exist for not endowing NSAs with legal personality in traditional state-centred international law is that the states would be reluctant to share their powers and authorities with NSAs. Furthermore, there is a fear of legitimizing the NSAs’ unlawful actions by recognizing their legal status and personality. This may in turn lead to the legitimization of their use of violence.NSAs might have negative roles as well as positive roles. The negative role of NSAs can be analysed from different points of view, such as how governments, in particular authoritarian regimes, are aware that the legal status of NSAs in international law is not well established and because of that NSAs cannot be held legally responsible for their actions. Furthermore, since states are unwilling for their legitimacy be questioned in international community. Therefore, they may seek to co-opt NSAs for use against individuals, opposition groups and minorities.