| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
106152
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
187407
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
On 31 October 2021, an agreement was signed between Antigua and Barbuda and Tuvalu that established a commission with the power to request an advisory opinion from the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS). Since ITLOS’s advisory jurisdiction has been tested in only one case, I explain and evaluate the procedural obstacles facing this commission, as well as the potential questions it might submit to ITLOS. The analysis draws upon the jurisprudence of the International Court of Justice to indicate how ITLOS could articulate and apply its jurisdiction in an advisory case. I conclude that although there appear to be few insurmountable obstacles to securing ITLOS’s jurisdiction, care must be taken by the Commission of Small Island States on Climate Change and International Law to ensure that the questions presented to ITLOS are carefully drafted so that ITLOS has no concerns over the judicial propriety of giving an advisory opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
122374
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2013.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
If Russia consistently pursues its policy of cooperation with Arctic countries on the basis of the Law of the Sea and with due regard for their common interests in the region, there will be no grounds for attempts to justify NATO's more active involvement in Arctic affairs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
160674
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The South China Sea disputes involve both island and maritime claims among sovereign states and the issue has long been a point of debate in international politics. It involves not only the countries in dispute but also other major world powers, including the United States. Its important strategic location and the abundant resources make the South China Sea a target of contention among the claimant countries. The arbitral ruling in July 2016 gives a new momentum to the dispute. The article examines the strategic relations of China and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) by analyzing the positions and steps taken by ASEAN and China, as well as ASEAN-China joint initiatives. It also discusses the challenges and viable solutions to the dispute.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
011968
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
April 1997.
|
| Description |
263-282
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 6 |
ID:
020938
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2001.
|
| Description |
531-551
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 7 |
ID:
106563
|
|
|
| 8 |
ID:
011626
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
Winter 1996-97.
|
| Description |
69-88
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 9 |
ID:
013301
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
Summer 1997.
|
| Description |
65-85
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 10 |
ID:
146543
|
|
|
| 11 |
ID:
148500
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
John Mearsheimer has compared China’s attitude towards the South China Sea to the Monroe Doctrine of the United States. Mearsheimer does not accord international law much weight and certainly does not regard it as determinative of political outcomes. But many observers of China’s disputes in the South China Sea look to international law for rules and processes that could facilitate peaceful resolution of the disputes. In doing so they are variously puzzled, bemused, and/or angered by China’s assertion of the nine-dash line (南海九段线). This article draws more broadly on the literature on the Monroe Doctrine, viewing the doctrine as: a unilateral pronouncement of foreign policy; representing resistance; embedded in domestic as opposed to international law; and an assertion of legitimate regional hegemony. Through applying the analogy of the Monroe Doctrine, the article seeks fresh insights into China’s legal position in relation to the South China Sea and into the significance of the nine-dash line in terms of international law.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 12 |
ID:
190489
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
New Haven, Yale University Press, 2023.
|
| Description |
xiv, 398p.hbk
|
| Standard Number |
9780300256475
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 060357 | 341.45/KAR 060357 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 13 |
ID:
131369
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article analyses the characteristics of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf as an international decision-making institution in the process of establishing the seaward limits of the continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles from the baselines of the territorial sea under Article 76 of the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. The Commission may be compared to scientific bodies established to give advice relating to the implementation of treaty provisions. However, in the exercise of its functions, the Commission also performs legal-administrative tasks, and its recommendations to individual coastal states entail significant legal effects; for instance, as a means of interpretation under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. The Commission's functions and competencies must be taken into account in classifying and understanding this unique international institution.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 14 |
ID:
124566
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2013.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Conciliation is an age-old peaceful means of dispute settlement. The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea provides for both voluntary and compulsory conciliation. The importance of conciliation under UNCLOS is obvious, yet it has received little focused attention.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 15 |
ID:
008540
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
Feb 1995.
|
| Description |
29-31
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 16 |
ID:
172435
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The international legal framework with regard to “the Area,” comprising the deep seabed and the subsoil beyond the boundaries of national jurisdiction, has been modified significantly through the years. It was first established by part XI of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, but the 1994 Implementation Agreement introduced several changes. These general rules and principles are further developed in the “Mining Code,” referring to the comprehensive set of regulations and procedures issued by the International Seabed Authority. The Authority has already produced rules for the first phases of mining activities (prospecting and exploration) in the Area, but has yet to adopt exploitation regulations. Nevertheless, the most recent draft of the exploitation regulations provides a good indication of the current state of play. This article analyzes the current draft of the exploitation regulations, which will shape the future deep seabed mining regime, in order to evaluate whether the relevant provisions are sufficient and effective to attain two prominent goals with regard to the Area: the protection of the marine environment and the equitable sharing of financial and economic benefits. The Law of the Sea Convention indeed states that the resources of the deep seabed are considered common heritage of mankind and prioritizes these objectives. Therefore, the exploitation regulations should strike an appropriate balance between commercial exploitation, environmental protection, and the interests of developing countries. The strengths and weaknesses of this document and the overarching international legal framework are identified and possible corrections are suggested.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 17 |
ID:
110907
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2012.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Under its quasi-constitutional mandate to strive for the peaceful settlement of international disputes, the European Union (EU) acts as litigator and political mediator in diplomatic practice. Accordingly, this article presents the legal foundations and practical material where the Union litigated cases as a party before the World Trade Organization or UN Convention on the Law of the Sea dispute settlement bodies, or submitted amicus curiae briefs before international tribunals. It then recalls the EU's contributions to conflict management through military, police, rule of law and border missions based on a request from the third party or the third parties involved. Moreover, the EU's role in the conflicts between Russia and Georgia, in the Cyprus problem and in the Slovenia/Croatia border conflict is reviewed. The author concludes that there is ample evidence of relevant Brussels-based practice supporting the principle of peaceful settlement of international disputes, as enshrined under Article 33 of the UN Charter. The fact that such practices stem from an international organization shows that the principle remains a major achievement of the global legal system, which encompasses all international actors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 18 |
ID:
007608
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
1995.
|
| Description |
1377-1410
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 19 |
ID:
153006
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article looks at the South China Sea dispute and its impact in international relations. It analyses why the Southeast Asian states are highly sovereignty sensitive, and how such sensitivity has made non-intervention the bedrock of managing their foreign policies. China has long viewed the near seas as regions of geostrategic interest, and thus the SCS is not an exception. On the one hand it brings hope and prosperity, and on the other uncertainty and threat. At the end, the article argues whether China’s assertive position regarding other countries’ sovereignty claims in the Arctic might undermine its own position in contested areas like the SCS, and suggests that China will at least have to learn how to share and bear (term coined by the author) as a member of the international community.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 20 |
ID:
187409
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The Geneva Declaration on Human Rights at Sea was officially launched on 1 March 2022. The document was produced by the nongovernmental organization Human Rights at Sea, and responds to an undoubted need to prevent human rights violations at sea and to provide redress to victims of such abuses. Connecting the international human rights regime with the law of the sea has been one of many challenges to respond to this issue. This article explores the content of the Geneva Declaration and its alignment with existing law of the sea. Beyond the jurisdictional complexities presented, it is important to consider how this informal instrument holds relevance for international lawmaking. While there are obstacles, the Geneva Declaration creates a needed opportunity to bring attention to and clarity around the legal protections of human rights at sea.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|