Pre-emptive use of force in self-defence is one of the most controversial areas under International Law. States attack each other even if the attack appears more distant. The Right of self-defence can only be invoked against an armed attack. Pre-emptive use of force allows states to use coercive measures against perceived future threats. This type of self-defence is used by the states prior to an armed attack which is contrary to the UN Charter. The defending states do not follow the requirement of necessity and proportionality when using force. The Research Questions were to what extent Pre-emptive use of force under International Law is legal and to what extent Pre-emptive use of force in self-defence is stipulated under the United Nations Charter. The objectives were to examine if Pre-emptive use of force under International Law is Legal and to examine if Pre-emptive Use of force in self-defence is stipulated under the United Charter. The study findings based on Primary Data have shown that Pre-emptive use of force in self-defence is not legal under the UN Charter 1945. Also, it was found that Pre-emptive use of force in self-defence under international Law is not stipulated anywhere in the United National Charter of 1945. Also, it was found that the UN Charter does not allow states to defend themselves in pre-emption of an armed attack where there is no actual armed attack or imminent threat. The study recommends that Pre-emptive use of force in self-defence could now be appropriate due to advanced technology, like Artificial Intelligence and cyber attacks. Also threats of terrorism and non-state Actors. The UN Charter should be amended to copy modernized warfar
