| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
176053
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Continuing its work on the sources of international law, the International Law Commission decided, at its seventieth session, to include the topic “General principles of law” in its current programme of work. By taking up the topic, the Commission aims to shed light on various aspects of this source and provide guidance to States, international organizations, courts and tribunals and all others that may be called upon to deal with general principles of law. The present article provides an overview of the first debate on the topic that took place within the International Law Commission and the Sixth (Legal) Committee of the UN General Assembly in 2019, focusing on certain key issues that will be central to the treatment of the topic.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
176052
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
On 5 October 2016, the President of the UN Residual Mechanism for International Criminal Tribunals officially notified the United Nations Security Council of the failure of the Republic of Turkey to comply with a judicial order issued by the Mechanism which requested the authorities of Turkey to cease all legal proceedings against the MICT Judge Aydin Akay due to his immunity. This paper aims to examine issues pertinent to the immunity of an international judge arising from this situation. It also seeks to explore the conflicts behind the arrest of Judge Akay and draw some conclusions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
176050
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
A “crisis” of international human rights is under way. This article focuses on the “neoliberalism and human rights” debate. It argues that the current human rights crisis hinges on the evolution of neoliberalism as a “totalizing project”. A way out may be provided by the notion of the “human person” conceived as the individual in his/her uniqueness and complexity against any form of (market-induced or other) massification. The article concludes by suggesting that we place the (decommodified) human person, empathy, and school/education center stage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
176049
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The idea of the hierarchical superiority of jus cogens norms in relation to all other norms or actions has gained track. Hence, today, the widely held view is that even decisions of the Security Council cannot contravene imperative norms. This runs counter to the indispensable powers of this organ to do whatever it takes to maintain peace. The argument is that the Security Council can, in the face of a threat or breach of peace, one that, in extremis, has the potential to eradicate the human race, take or authorise necessary action even if this action collides with jus cogens. Such decisions of the Security Council may target every single world entity or individual. Moreover, the world peace body can also legislate and create peremptory norms that are binding upon the whole world. This Article fleshes out the constitutional framework in which the exercise of these powers should be understood and uses as illustrations the old alleged right of humanitarian intervention and the new jus cogens crime of terrorism.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|