Hallvard Notaker: Arbeiderpartiet og 22. juli
In: Norsk sosiologisk tidsskrift, Band 5, Heft 3, S. 67-69
ISSN: 2535-2512
9 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Norsk sosiologisk tidsskrift, Band 5, Heft 3, S. 67-69
ISSN: 2535-2512
In: Tidsskrift for samfunnsforskning: TfS = Norwegian journal of social research, Band 63, Heft 3, S. 169-171
ISSN: 1504-291X
In: Stat & styring, Band 32, Heft 4, S. 48-51
ISSN: 0809-750X
In: Norsk sosiologisk tidsskrift, Band 5, Heft 3, S. 28-45
ISSN: 2535-2512
In: Norsk sosiologisk tidsskrift, Band 5, Heft 3, S. 70-73
ISSN: 2535-2512
In: Norsk sosiologisk tidsskrift, Band 6, Heft 2, S. 1-16
ISSN: 2535-2512
In: Norsk sosiologisk tidsskrift, Band 5, Heft 3, S. 46-62
ISSN: 2535-2512
In: Arctic review on law and politics, Band 13, S. 393-406
ISSN: 2387-4562
Russia was the first Arctic coastal state to make an official submission to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (CLCS) in 2001. The purpose of Russia's submission was the delineation of the outer limits of the continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles in the Arctic Ocean in accordance with UNCLOS Article 76. The area claimed by Russia is a large portion of the seabed extending even to the exclusive economic zones of Denmark and Canada. However, Russia's actions regarding delineation in the Arctic Ocean have led to criticism from several Russian experts in the field of international law. This paper is a response to a series of articles by Ivan Zhudro and Alexander Vylegzhanin. It argues against their assertion that Russia and the other Arctic states could have established the outer limits of their continental shelf in the absence of CLCS recommendations through the delimitation procedure in accordance with UNCLOS Article 83. The article rejects the argument that during the delimitation the Arctic states could have used meridian lines (sectors) to exclude the existence of an international seabed area in the Central Arctic Ocean. The author challenges the position that the result of delineation under UNCLOS Article 76 would not be fair since the US has not ratified UNCLOS.
In a world marked by surging international conflicts, labour market globalisation, ever-widening economic inequities, steady improvement in the flow of information, and increasing possibilities for mobility over greater distances, the number of migrants on a worldwide basis is hardly likely to decrease in coming years. Immigration regulations are devised within a confluence of national interests, international laws, and attention to migrants' individual rights. The tension between these disparate considerations begs the question: How can we best safeguard both universal rights issues and European economic integration, as well as the Norwegian state's obligation, vis-à-vis the distribution of benefits, to its own citizens. We are moving into extremely complex ethical and legal territory, where there are no easy answers. In this book, the author puts Norway's immigration policy under a moral-philosophical loupe for a thorough analysis of various answers to key questions in the Norwegian immigration debate.
This book is aimed at anyone interested in immigration policy issues, but especially persons working professionally in the field, such as political philosophers, politicians, lawyers, case managers and political scientists. - I en verden der internasjonale konflikter stadig blusser opp, arbeidsmarkedet globaliseres, økonomiske ulikheter blir stadig større, informasjonsflyten kontinuerlig forbedres og mulighetene for å forflytte seg over store avstander er gode, vil antallet migranter på verdensbasis ikke bli lavere i årene som kommer. Innvandringsregulering finner sted i spenningen mellom statlige interesser, internasjonal rett og hensynet til migranters individuelle rettigheter. I lys av disse spenningene må vi stille spørsmålet om hvordan vi best mulig kan ivareta både universelle rettighetshensyn og europeisk økonomisk integrasjon, samt den norske stats forpliktelse overfor egne innbyggere i fordeling av goder. Vi beveger oss inn i et etisk og juridisk felt med stor kompleksitet, hvor ingen enkle svar er gitt. I denne boken legger forfatteren norsk innvandringspolitikk under en moralfilosofisk lupe, og drøfter grundig ulike svar på en rekke sentrale spørsmål i norsk innvandringsdebatt.
Boken retter seg mot alle med interesse for innvandringspolitiske spørsmål, men særskilt personer som arbeider profesjonelt innenfor feltet, slik som politiske filosofer, politikere, jurister, saksbehandlere og statsvitere.