Search results

SommaireL'autodétermination des peuples autochtones suscite la controverse en droit international contemporain depuis que le processus de décolonisation s'est achevé, à la fin des années 1960. Parce qu'ils craignaient avant tout des désordres nationaux, de nombreux pays ont refusé de reconnaître que les peuples autochtones ont le droit de se séparer du territoire national et d'obtenir leur indépendance. Cependant, même la reconnaissance d'un droit moins vaste, soit un droit de recevoir un statut spécial et d'obtenir l'autonomie politique dans le cadre des frontières étatiques existantes, demeure une question litigieuse, car aucune définition claire des bénéficiaires et de la substance de ces droits ne peut être établie. De toute façon, la disparité des conditions politiques, économiques, sociales et climatiques dans lesquelles vivent les peuples autochtones du monde entier rend futile la création d'un seul et unique concept d'autodétermination qui s'appliquerait au monde entier. Pour sortir de cette impasse, on propose d'adopter une approche procédurale, au lieu d'essayer de fixer ces questions dans des termes juridiques stricts.Le fait de qualifier le concept d'autodétermination de processus, au lieu de le décrire comme étant une série de règles exactes et préétablies, a pour avantage d'apporter un élément de flexibilité, car il permet aux deux parties, c'est-à-dire les États et les peuples autochtones, de trouver des appuis pour défendre leurs intérêts et d'imaginer une solution viable qui tienne compte des circonstances particulières de chaque cas. Mais toutes les parties concernées devraient tout d'abord accepter trois conditions préalables:(1) Le droit de sécession immédiate et d'indépendance complète, en tant qu'aspect du droit à l'autodétermination, devrait être réservé aux peuples autochtones des territoires d'outre-mer.(2) Les États ont le devoir de favoriser l'autonomie de leurs peuples autochtones et le fardeau de prouver qu 'ih offrent la plus grande autonomie possible aux peuples autochtones vivant sur leurs territoires.(3) Une fois que des ententes relatives à l'autonomie ont été conclues, les États ne peuvent pas les révoquer, les abréger ou les modifier unilatéralement.L'auteur de cette note examine ensuite le régime d'autonomie du Groenland et conclut que ce régime semble satisfaire aux critères énoncés, bien que la question du statut actuel du Groenland (et des îles Faroe) au sein du royaume danois demeure incertaine sur le plan constitutionnel. Le régime d'autonomie implique un transfert irrévocable des pouvoirs législatifs et administratifs des autorités danoùes aux autorités du Groenland, ce qui a pour effet de créer un régime juridique indépendant au Groenland. Par ailleurs, il est entendu que le régime d'autonomie du Groenland permet d'établir un système judiciaire indépendant, si les tribunaux danois du Groenland ne reconnaissent pas la validité de la Loi d'autonomie du Groenland.

AbstractWhy states comply with international law has long been at the forefront of international law and international relations scholarship. The compliance discussion has largely focused on negative incentives. We argue that there is another, undertheorized mechanism: rewarding. We provide a typology and illustrations of how rewards can be applied. Furthermore, we explore the rationale, potential, and limitations of rewarding, drawing on rationalist and psychological approaches. Both approaches provide ample justifications for making greater use of rewarding in international law.

Also available as an e-book Pan-Africanism offers a unique vantage point to study Africa's encounters with international law : first, as a continent whose political entities were excluded from the scope of application of the Eurocentric version of international law that was applied among the self-styled club of "civilized nations" ; second, through the emergence of African States as subjects of international law willing to contribute to the reform and further development of the law as a universal interstate normative system; and third, as members of the OAU and the AU acting collectively to generate innovative principles and rules, which, though applicable only in the context of intra-African relations, either go beyond those existing at the universal level or complement them by broadening their scope. This study examines those encounters through the various stages in the evolution of Pan-Africanism from a diaspora-based movement, engaged in the struggle for the emancipation of the peoples of the continent, to groupings of independent States and intergovernmental organizations which continue to promote African unity and influence the development of international law to make it more reflective of diverse legal traditions and values

A theory of customary international law Jack L. Goldsmith and Eric A. Posner -- A compliance-based theory of international law Andrew T. Guzman -- Do human rights treaties make a difference? Oona A. Hathaway -- Treaty reservations and the economics of Article 21(1) of the Vienna Convention Francesco Parisi and Catherine Ševčenko -- Competing for capital : the diffusion of bilateral investment treaties, 1960-2000 Zachary Elkins, Andrew T. Guzman and Beth A. Simmons -- The concept of legalization Kenneth W. Abbott ... [et al.]. -- The cost of credibility : explaining resistance to interstate dispute resolution mechanisms Andrew T. Guzman -- Judicial independence in international tribunals Eric A. Posner and John C. Yoo -- Self-enforcing voting in international organizations Giovanni Maggi and Massimo Morelli -- Public versus private enforcement of international economic law : standing and remedy Alan O. Sykes -- An economic analysis of state and individual responsibility under international law Eric A. Posner and Alan O. Sykes -- Sanctions Jonathan Eaton and Maxim Engers -- Economics of alliances : the lessons for collective action Todd Sandler and Keith Hartley -- Optimal war and Jus ad Bellum Eric A. Posner and Alan O. Sykes

Diplomacy is a series of crises, and the navigational beacon for a nation is international law. This book is a collection of articles on six selected international legal issues concerning Japan. It addresses various issues, including self-defence, post-war legal issues, chemical weapons, the law of the sea, consular immunities, and hijacking. It is a legal documentary through which the reader can look into the minds of Japanese officials challenged by one crisis after another. As a coherent whole, this book ably represents 'Japan's Practice of International Law' and portrays international law in action from a Japanese practitioner's perspective.

The United States Department of Defense Law of War Manual: Commentary and Critique provides an irreplaceable resource for any politician, international expert, or military practitioner who wishes to understand the approach taken by the American military in the complex range of modern conflicts. Readers will understand the strengths and weaknesses of US legal and policy pronouncements and the reasons behind the modern American way of war, whether US forces deploy alone or in coalitions. This book provides unprecedented and precise analysis of the US approach to the most pressing problems in modern wars, including controversies surrounding use of human shields, fighting in urban areas, the use of cyberwar and modern weaponry, expanding understanding of human rights, and the rise of ISIS. This group of authors, including academics and military practitioners, provides a wealth of expertise that demystifies overlapping threads of law and policy amidst the world's seemingly intractable conflicts

The problem of recognition of states and governments has neither in theory nor in practice been solved satisfactorily. Hardly any other question is more controversial, or leads in the practice of states to such paradoxical situations.The reason for this lies in the fact that the term recognition points to twoentirely different acts, not clearly separated either in theory or in practice. A codificationof the norms of general (common) international law concerning recognition must above all furnish a clear distinction between the two functions known as recognition.