Suchergebnisse

"Despite the unprecedented growth of arbitration and other means of ADR in treaties and transnational contracts in recent years, there remains no clearly defined mechanism for control of the system. One of the oldest yet largely marginalized concepts in law is the public policy exception. This doctrine grants discretion to courts to set aside private legal arrangements, including arbitration, which might be considered harmful to the 'public'. The exceptional and vague nature of the doctrine, along with the strong push of actors in dispute resolution, has transformed it, in certain jurisdictions, to a toothless doctrine. At the international level, the notion of transnational public policy has been devised in order to capture norms that are 'truly' transnational and amenable for application in cross-border litigations. Yet, despite the importance of this discussion--a safety valve and a control mechanism for today's international and domestic international dispute resolution-- no major study has ventured to review and analyze it. This book provides a historical, theoretical and practical background on public policy in dispute resolution with a focus on cross-border and transnational disputes. Farshad Ghodoosi argues that courts should adopt a more systemic approach to public policy while rejecting notions such as transnational public policy, which limits the application of those norms with mandatory nature. Contrary to the current trend, the book invites the reader to re-conceptualize the role of public policy, and transnational dispute resolution, in order to have more sustainable, fair and efficient mechanisms for resolving disputes outside of national courts. The book sheds light on one of the most important yet often-neglected control mechanisms of today's international dispute resolution and will be of particular interest to students and academics in the fields of International Investment Law, International Trade Law, Business and Economics"--Provided by publisher

Der erste Flüchtlingsausweis der Welt war gleich ein Sondermodell: International ausgehandelt, wurde er im Völkerbund 1922 für staatenlose russische Flüchtlinge entwickelt, um eine neue Massenerscheinung im sortie de guerre zu kanalisieren – die von Krieg und Bürgerkrieg, Revolution und Vertreibungen ausgelösten Fluchtbewegungen. Dieses für ganz bestimmte Gruppen reservierte Identitätsdokument war unter Flüchtenden und Exilanten ebenso heiß begehrt wie auch verachtet, denn der während der 1920er-Jahre in mehr als 50 Ländern ausgestellte Pass-Ersatz war in seiner Rechtsqualität äußerst zwiespältig. Das Personendokument soll im Folgenden aus mehreren Forschungsperspektiven knapp beleuchtet werden, um zu einer Historisierung dieser ambivalenten Quelle der internationalen Flucht- und Asylgeschichte des 20. Jahrhunderts beizutragen. Um dieses zweidimensionale »Ding« der Rechtsgeschichte zum Sprechen zu bringen, sind auch Zugänge der Politik- und der Mediengeschichte sowie der Sozial- und der Alltagsgeschichte zu berücksichtigen.

Der erste Flüchtlingsausweis der Welt war gleich ein Sondermodell: International ausgehandelt, wurde er im Völkerbund 1922 für staatenlose russische Flüchtlinge entwickelt, um eine neue Massenerscheinung im sortie de guerre zu kanalisieren - die von Krieg und Bürgerkrieg, Revolution und Vertreibungen ausgelösten Fluchtbewegungen. Dieses für ganz bestimmte Gruppen reservierte Identitätsdokument war unter Flüchtenden und Exilanten ebenso heiß begehrt wie auch verachtet, denn der während der 1920er-Jahre in mehr als 50 Ländern ausgestellte Pass-Ersatz war in seiner Rechtsqualität äußerst zwiespältig. Das Personendokument soll im Folgenden aus mehreren Forschungsperspektiven knapp beleuchtet werden, um zu einer Historisierung dieser ambivalenten Quelle der internationalen Flucht- und Asylgeschichte des 20. Jahrhunderts beizutragen. Um dieses zweidimensionale "Ding" der Rechtsgeschichte zum Sprechen zu bringen, sind auch Zugänge der Politik- und der Mediengeschichte sowie der Sozial- und der Alltagsgeschichte zu berücksichtigen.

Der Autor setzt sich in seinem Vortrag kritisch mit der Internationalen Dekade der Katastrophenprävention der Vereinten Nationen auseinander, die nach seiner Einschätzung wenig positive Ergebnisse aufweist. Er beschreibt die unterschiedlichen Zielvorstellungen in Bezug auf die Prävention, Intervention und Nachsorge von Katastrophen, wobei er insbesondere auf eine "ABCDEF-Modellkatastrophe" eingeht. Diese bezieht sich auf folgende Konstellationen: atomare, biologische und chemische Gefahren, datennetzbezogene Gefahren, Gefahren durch den (nuklearen) elektromagnetischen Impuls sowie spontane Freisetzung von mechanischer und thermischer Energie. Der Autor problematisiert vorhandene Lücken beim Zivil- und Katastrophenschutz in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland und stellt einige Maßnahmen zur Krisenbewältigung vor, die sich z.B. auf die Führung und Zuständigkeit in der Bundeswehr, die internationale Vernetzung und politische Initiativen beziehen. Er geht vor diesem Hintergrund ausführlicher auf die Verantwortung in der Zivilgesellschaft ein. (ICI)

Michel Foucault refers to biopolitics as "the processes by which human life, at the level of the population, emerged as a distinct political problem in Western societies". Yet for Foucault, 'biopower' – power over human life at the population level – remains a force strictly wielded via individuals. This neglects the global biopower wielded by biology itself. Given the sheer influence of disease on global politics, we must move to considering 'international biorelations': a study that recognises diseases as significant non-state 'actors' shaping geopolitical landscapes and giving rise to critical, yet often neglected, transstate dynamics. Doing so would help us capture the co-constitution of global health forces and international structures, reveal the limitations of state-centric IR scholarship, and better understand ...

SUMMARYThe aim of this study is simply that; despite the rising of idealist sentiments after the Cold War, the search for international stability has been taking place in accordance with power considerations. As broadly discussed in the third section, early 90s was a time of idealism, and there were expectations of a less power oriented arrangements for the next century. "Winds of change" blew across Europe and everybody thought that the mentality or perception of the people changed. Freedom and Democracy were the most popular two words. However, what happened in the international system was a change in the balance of power. Therefore the founders of the new international system, to keep it stable, needed to take these power balances into consideration. In the second section I explained the Realist thinking, classical and modern, and the principles of Idealism. It is necessary to understand these two way of thinking to make a proper analysis. If we are talking about a set of relation among units, there is a system, and stability goes together with the systemist thinking. These are also defined in this section. At the end of this part the essence of the Cold War stability is mentioned to give a chance to make comparison. Then the developments of the late 80s and early 90s are told. The indicators of the liberal and idealist thinking is explained. International Organizations like United Nations were given priority. But the break up of the former Yugoslavia and the bloody war in Bosnia was the death of idealism and returning to political realism. In the fifth section new security challenges are defined as destabilizing factors to understand the problems of the international stability. They are mainly power oriented problems and have their roots in the collapse of the Soviet Bloc. These are mainly regional conflicts, which were seen as 'ethnic' clashes, the reunion of Europe and preventing Russia's return to Eastern and Central Europe, the spread of Nuclear Weapons and their technology and terrorism. Mass popular movements and other regional problems are related issues. In the last section responses of the major international actors to these destabilizing security questions are explained. Their perception and efforts to build a new stable security system is analyzed sometimes like a student of history to tell the facts and developments, and mostly as a student of international relations. I think the efforts of founding a stable international system lies in the stability in Europe and is centered by NATO. Secondly US military power is playing major role in preventing spread of local conflicts into regional or global conflicts, as the Gulf War, War in Bosnia and Kosovo proved. The prevention of the use of nuclear and biological weapons by authoritarian regimes is another important stabilizing issue. START Agreements and Non Proliferation Treaty alone cannot reduce the risk of a nuclear war. In my opinion it is the deterrence of second strike capability which prevents the use of these mass killing weapons.

Aus US-amerikanischer Sicht