Suchergebnisse

"Assembling a series of voices from across the field, this book demonstrates how posthuman theory can be employed to better understand and tackle some of the challenges faced by contemporary international law. With the vast environmental devastation being caused by climate change, the increasing use of artificial intelligence by international legal actors, and the need for international law to face up to its colonial past, international law needs to change. But in regulating and preserving a stable global order in which states act as its main subjects, the traditional sources of international law - international legal statutes, customary international law, historical precedents and general principles of law - create a framework that slows down its capacity to act on contemporary challenges, and to imagine futures yet to come. In response, this collection maintains that posthuman theory can be used to better address the challenges faced by contemporary international law. Covering a wide array of contemporary topics - including environmental law, the law of the sea, colonialism, human rights, conflict, and the impact of science and technology - it is the first book to bring new and emerging research on posthuman theory and international law together into one volume. This book's posthuman engagement with central international legal debates, prefaced by the leading scholar in the field of posthuman theory, provides a perfect resource for students and scholars in international law, as well as critical and socio-legal theorists, and others with interests in posthuman thought, technology, colonialism and ecology"--

DergiPark: 849863 ; klujfeas ; Uluslararası hukukun temel kaynaklarından bir tanesi devletler arasında imzalanan uluslararası antlaşmalardır. Devletler kendi aralarındaki antlaşmalara ahde vefa ilkesi gereği genellikle uyma eğilimi göstermektedirler. Ancak devletlerin kendi aralarında imzaladıkları antlaşmalara zaman zaman uymadıkları da görülmektedir. Anarşik bir uluslararası sistemde devletler arasında uyuşmazlıklar çok sık görülmektedir. Devletler çıkarlarına ters düştükleri durumlarda ister istemez farklı devletler ile uyuşmazlığa taraf olabilmektedirler. Uyuşmazlıkların çözümü için uluslararası hukukta barışçıl çözüm ve yargısal çözüm olmak üzere iki çözüm yolu bulunmaktadır. Yargısal çözüm devletlerin ancak yargı yetkisini kabul ettikleri bir mahkeme veya tahkim ile mümkün olabilmektedir. Barışçıl çözüm yolları Birleşmiş Milletler Antlaşmasının 33. Maddesinde belirtilmiştir. Bu çözüm yollar görüşme, soruşturma, arabuluculuk, uzlaşma, hakemlik ve yargısal çözümdür. Bunun yanında bazı uluslararası antlaşmalar kendi yargısal çözüm mekanizmalarını da oluşturmuştur. 1982 Birleşmiş Milletler Deniz Hukuku Sözleşmesi, Avrupa Birliği'nin yargı organları bu alanda verilebilecek başlıca örneklerdir. Bu çalışmada barışçıl ve yargısal yoldan anlaşmazlıkların çözümü ile uluslararası hukukta uygunluğun sağlanması mekanizmaları karşılaştırılacaktır. ; One of the main sources of international law is international treaties signed between states. States generally tend to comply with the treaties among themselves, as required by the pacta-sunt-servanda principle. However, it is also seen that states sometimes do not comply with the treaties they have signed among themselves. In an anarchic international system, conflicts between states are very common. States may inevitably be a party to disputes with different states when they conflict with their interests. There are two solutions in international law for the settlement of disputes, namely, peaceful and judicial solutions. Judicial settlement can only be possible with a court or arbitration where the states accept their jurisdiction. Peaceful solutions are specified in Article 33 of the United Nations Charter. These solutions are negotiation, investigation, mediation, reconciliation, arbitration and judicial solution. Besides, some international agreements have also created their own judicial solution mechanisms. 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, the judicial bodies of the European Union are the main examples that can be given in this field. In this study, the mechanisms of peaceful and judicial dispute resolution and ensuring compliance with international law will be compared.