This thesis investigates the weaponization of law in New Caledonia, focusing on the 2024 French electoral reforms that triggered the May 2024 uprising and their impact on Kanak self-determination. Through a qualitative case study combining legal and discourse analysis of key legal documents, including the French Constitution and the Nouméa Accord, alongside media discourse from Le Monde and Les Nouvelles Calédoniennes during the May 2024 uprising, the research explores how legal authority is constructed and used as a tool for domination and resistance. The analysis reveals that France’s constitutional universalism functions as a form of domination, subordinating international decolonization mandates to metropolitan sovereignty. Concurrently, Kanak actors engage in counter-lawfare by invoking UN Resolution 1514 and international human rights frameworks to legitimize their claims. This thesis positions these dynamics within broader postcolonial and orientalist discourses, demonstrating how structural violence is embedded in legal reforms that marginalize Indigenous populations. The findings support prior research on lawfare and postcolonial legal orders, while highlighting the role of international law as both a liberational and oppressive force. Ultimately, this thesis contributes to understanding the relationship between law, power, and decolonization, and calls for further research on the efficacy of international legal mechanisms in postcolonial contexts.