The International Court of Justice
In: The international & comparative law quarterly: ICLQ, Band 13, Heft 2, S. 665-666
ISSN: 1471-6895
6984024 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: The international & comparative law quarterly: ICLQ, Band 13, Heft 2, S. 665-666
ISSN: 1471-6895
In: International Journal, Band 7, Heft 2, S. 165
In: 12 Chicago-Kent Journal of International and Comparative Law 1 (2012)
SSRN
SSRN
Working paper
In: Vestnik MGIMO-Universiteta: naučnyj recenziruemyj žurnal = MGIMO review of international relations : scientific peer-reviewed journal, Band 1, Heft 58, S. 26-41
ISSN: 2541-9099
In: Temple International & Comparative Law Journal, Band 20, Heft 1
SSRN
In: The United States and the Rule of Law in International Affairs, S. 250-283
In: Developments in international law 67
In: The international & comparative law quarterly: ICLQ, Band 51, Heft 3, S. 709-718
ISSN: 1471-6895
On 16 March 2001 the International Court of Justice gave judgment in what was then its most longrunning case. It was in 1987 that Qatar and Bahrain had begun a process of attempting to agree upon the submission of their differences to the Court, but although they were able to agree upon the subject matter in dispute, they could not agree upon its legal characterization and the manner in which the dispute should be placed before the Court. That notwithstanding, and basing itself upon the agreed minutes of a meeting held at Doha in December 1990, Qatar unilaterally instituted proceedings against Bahrain on 8 July 1991. Bahrain raised preliminary objections to the jurisdiction of the Court and the admissibility of the case which were first addressed by the Court in its judgment of July 19941 and, following a reformulation of elements of the Qatari application in November 1994, the application was declared admissible in February 1995.2 During the course of the subsequent written pleadings a further dispute arose concerning the authenticity of 82 documents annexed to the Qatar Memorial and, following exchanges on the matter, Qatar announced that it would not rely on the disputed documents.3 Oral hearings were held in May 2000 and judgment given some ten months later. The two principal elements of the case concern, first, the disputed title to, and status of, a number of islands, maritime features and a portion of the Qatar peninsula and, secondly, the course of the maritime boundaries between them. The case was extremely complex, with disputed characterizations of the physical and legal
In: American journal of political science: AJPS, Band 39, Heft 2, S. 459-489
ISSN: 0092-5853
"In this introduction, we attempt to elucidate three theoretical perspectives that are helpful in framing the contributions to this volume. In the course of this elucidation we also attempt to indicate some important problems that the debate currently faces. We do this through discussions of international legitimacy, international justice and the relations between ideal and non-ideal theory"--Provided by publisher
The issue of the defining elements of a truly fair justice system has become a constant and consistent concern of international and/or regional political and legal organisations. Given the scale of the phenomenon of establishing and resorting to international courts and tribunals, reflecting, among others, the preference and availability of international actors for settling their disputes by independent and impartial decision-makers, the principles and values of the international judiciary have been subjected to discussions in an increasingly elaborate manner. Among these, judicial independence occupies a special position, being tightly connected to the issue of the legitimacy of such institutions, as an essential factor in ensuring voluntary compliance to the internationally adopted decisions. In this context, the present paper addresses the independence of the judiciary in international courts, both in terms of the fundamental theoretical contributions and from a practical perspective, by following the institutional provisions and guarantees for ensuring an independent and impartial judiciary in the statutes of two of the most relevant international courts, namely the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Court.
BASE