Suchergebnisse

This is the third volume in the series by the Leiden Journal of International Law dealing with the Decade of International Law and International Dispute Settlement. In this book, the 50th anniversary of the International Court of Justice is commemorated. Its past and future role is examined from various angles which have been defined as roles played by the Court. First and foremost, its role as a mechanism for the settlement of disputes is examined. The analysis goes beyond the traditional frontiers of disputes between states and also explores the possibilities of granting international organizations and individuals access to the Court. The second role that is looked into is its supervisory role, or, in other words, its possible role as supreme court in international law. Thirdly, the Court in its advisory function is examined. The last role that is focused upon is the Court in its role as developer of rules of international law. The book ends with a conclusion from both a legal and a political perspective

Cover Page -- Title Page -- Copyright Page -- Republic of Slovenia: Staff Report for the 2014 Article IV Consultation -- Contents -- Box -- Figures -- Tables -- Annexes -- Context and Recent Developments -- 1. Macroeconomic Developments -- 2. Labor Market -- 3. Corporate Sector Developments -- 4. External Sector Developments -- 5. Fiscal Developments -- 6. Asset Prices -- 7. Financial Sector Developments -- Outlook and Risks -- Policy Discussions -- A. Financial Sector -- B. Corporate Sector -- 1. Corporate Debt Restructuring -- C. Fiscal Policy -- D. Structural Reforms -- 8. Structural Indicators -- Staff Appraisal -- 1. Selected Economic Indicators, 2010-16 -- 2. Balance of Payments, 2010-20 -- 3. General Government Operations, 2010-20 -- 4. Macroeconomic Framework, 2010-20 -- 5. Financial Soundness Indicators, 2008-14 -- I. Public Debt Sustainability Analysis -- II. External Debt Sustainability Analysis -- III. External Assessment -- IV. Risk Assessment Matrix -- Contents -- Republic of Slovenia: Staff Report for the 2014 Article IV Consultation-Informational Annex -- Fund Relations -- Statistical Issues -- Republic of Slovenia: Staff Report for the 2014 Article IV Consultation-Supplementary Information -- IMF Executive Board Concludes Article IV Consultation with the Republic of Slovenia -- Statement by Ibrahim Halil Çanakci, Executive Director for the Republic of Slovenia and by Borut Repansek, Advisor to the Executive Director, February 13, 2015 -- Footnotes -- Republic of Slovenia: Staff Report for the 2014 Article IV Consultation -- Republic of Slovenia: Staff Report for the 2014 Article IV Consultation-Supplementary Information -- IMF Executive Board Concludes Article IV Consultation with the Republic of Slovenia

In an historical moment in 1992, the United Nations General Assembly proclaimed December 3rd to the the International Day of Persons with Disabilities. This was done in a bid to increase awareness, and understanding, of disability issues, and to highlight the gains to be derived from the integration and inclusion of people in all aspects of political, social, economic and cultural life.

International organizations (IOs) dispatch fact-finding missions to establish epistemic authority by objectively and impartially assessing contested facts. Despite this technocratic promise, they are often controversial and sometimes even fuel international disputes that challenge the epistemic authority of the dispatching organizations. Although the twenty-first century has witnessed a proliferation of United Nations (UN) commissions of inquiry, they have received surprisingly little attention in international relations (IR) scholarship. How can we explain this trend and the successes and failures of fact-finding missions, which sometimes even backfire on the IO authority? Drawing on IR theories of delegation, epistemic authority, and IO field operations as well as public international law scholarship on commissions of inquiry, this article develops an analytical framework for studying the delegation, implementation, and dissemination of fact-finding missions. It theorizes how and under what conditions international fact-finding missions close or widen credibility gaps and thus help to establish, maintain, or weaken the epistemic authority of IOs. The article illustrates this framework with a case study of the Ad Hoc Working Group on the Human Rights Situation in Chile, sent by the UN Commission on Human Rights in 1974 to investigate allegations of human rights violations and torture. The conclusion outlines a comparative research agenda on international fact-finding missions for IR that contributes to the study of knowledge production in IOs and the enforcement of international norms.

Expanded revision of article translated from Rivista Internazionale di Scienze Economiche e Commerciali, Jan., 1964.

AbstractIn the work of the International Law Commission (ILC) on 'the general principles of law' in Article 38(1)(c) of the Statute of the International Court of Justice, one question has given rise to an inordinate amount of controversy: does this category of principles include principles formed within the international legal system or does it embrace only principles derived from national legal systems? In the draft conclusions adopted on first reading in 2023, the ILC accepts the existence of general principles of law formed within the international legal system, but only in a very narrow manner. Prominent commentators have argued that such a narrow approach is correct. It has been contended, furthermore, that the category of general principles of law formed within the international legal system is an innovation of the ILC's, and one that lacks any real support in State practice. These views are based on assumptions to the effect that the traditional view concerning the meaning of Article 38(1)(c) was that it referred only to general principles of law derived from national legal systems. The present article takes issue with these assumptions. It seeks to prove, by an analysis of the position in 1920 when the Statute was drafted, of the practice of States, both before and after 1920, and the writings of leading commentators, that general principles of law formed within the international legal system are no less part of 'general principles of law' than general principles of law derived from national legal systems.