The dissertation sheds light on the norm of Responsibility to Protect famously known as R2P. It studies the development of the norm and its evolution from the concept of Humanitarian intervention by using the Indian intervention in East Pakistan and the NATO intervention in Kosovo as the basis for the discussion of the legality- legitimacy debate. It analyses the responses of the international community towards the two interventions and the reason why the international community felt the need to develop a norm to protect civilian populations from grave violations of human rights. The norm first introduced by the ICSISS report in the year 2002 was adopted into the international system by the United Nations members vide the World Summit Outcome Document 2005. The World Summit outcome document authorised the United Nations Security Council to invoke the norms of R2P providing no alternative measures as a result there is no alternative measure to protect the civilians against atrocities carried out against them by their own governments. The researcher compare the two documents in the third chapter and critically discuss the loopholes surrounding the norms and hope to address them. The norm was shortly put to use by the United Nations Security Council in multiple cases. In this paper I shall be analysing the human rights atrocities in Darfur, Libya, Cote d Ivoire and Syria and the differential reaction to the conflict by the international community specifically the UNSC. Following that the study shall focus on the use and abuse of the norms of R2P by the international community by analysing the reactions of the international community to the atrocities in Libya and Syria. The reactions present two cases where R2P was invoked and the other where R2P was not invoked.