International law
In: Law express
30 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Law express
In: The international & comparative law quarterly: ICLQ, Band 69, Heft 1, S. 203-220
ISSN: 1471-6895
AbstractIn its Chagos Advisory Opinion, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled that the UK's detachment of the Chagos Archipelago from the colony of Mauritius on the eve of independence constituted a violation of customary international law (CIL). This article analyses the Court's approach to establishing the emergence and content of the right to self-determination in this frustrated case of decolonisation. It goes on to examine the argument that self-determination's peremptory character has decisive consequences in this specific context—a contention which found favour with several judges in their Separate Opinions. The article explores the extent to which the claims and counterclaims, made during the advisory proceedings, turned on countervailing readings of not only the key sources of custom but also of the principle of inter-temporal law. The final sections consider the significance of the Chagos Opinion for the Chagossians, both in relation to the Archipelago's resettlement and for their outstanding appeal in the UK courts (where the European Convention on Human Rights performs a pivotal role).
In: The British yearbook of international law
ISSN: 2044-9437
In: International legal materials: ILM, Band 58, Heft 3, S. 445-602
ISSN: 1930-6571
In its Chagos Advisory Opinion, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) addressed two questions posed in a request from the UN General Assembly. First, had Mauritius's decolonization been completed when it gained independence in 1968, after the excision of the Chagos Archipelago? Second, what were the legal consequences flowing from the United Kingdom's continued administration of the Archipelago? It was thought that the Court might shy away from giving an Opinion in this case as, arguably, it concerned a bilateral sovereignty dispute that the United Kingdom had not agreed to have resolved by judicial decision. However, as it turned out, the Court delivered surprisingly robust responses to the questions posed. The Opinion—and the numerous Separate Opinions that accompanied it—offer a thorough re-evaluation of the customary international law (CIL) concerning the right to self-determination in cases of decolonization.
In: International legal materials: ILM, Band 57, Heft 4, S. 671-707
ISSN: 1930-6571
On February 8, 2018, the U.K. Supreme Court delivered its judgment in R (Bancoult No 3) v. Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs. The case concerned a challenge to the validity of a Marine Protected Area (MPA) extending 250,000 square miles around the British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT or Chagos Archipelago). Declared in 2010, the MPA was justified on the ground of environmental protection and resulted in a ban on all commercial fishing in this zone. The appellant alleged that the MPA had been established for an improper purpose—to prevent the Chagos Islanders from resettling the Archipelago. He claimed that this was evidenced by a diplomatic cable sent from the U.S. embassy in London. It recorded a 2009 meeting in which U.S. and British officials discussed the reasons behind the MPA. The cable was subsequently leaked via the WikiLeaks website and published in two national newspapers. Accordingly, as Lady Hale rightly observed, "[t]he crucial legal issue in this case is therefore the admissibility of the cable."
In: Ocean development & international law, Band 48, Heft 3-4, S. 313-330
ISSN: 1521-0642
In: Human rights law review, Band 16, Heft 4, S. 771-797
ISSN: 1744-1021
In: Hart Publishing, October 2014
SSRN
In: House of Commons & Allen , S 2012 , Draft Energy Bill: Pre-legislative Scrutiny . vol. HC 275-1 , The Stationery Office Ltd (House of Commons) , London .
This select committee report scrutinised and influenced the government's 'electricity market reform' programme.
BASE
In: REFLECTIONS ON THE UNITED NATIONS DECLARATION ON THE RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES AND INTERNATIONAL LAW, Stephen Allen, Alexandra Xanthaki, eds., Hart Publishing, Forthcoming
SSRN
Cover -- Half Title -- Title Page -- Copyright Page -- Table of Contents -- Preface -- Acknowledgements -- Chapter 1 Introduction -- Chapter 2 Self-Determination and the Western Sahara Question -- A. UN and ICJ Involvement up to the Creation of the SADR in 1976 -- (i) The General Assembly's Early Involvement (1963-1974) -- (ii) The UN's Visiting Mission and the Western Sahara Advisory Opinion -- (iii) Overview of the UN's Subsequent Involvement in the Western Sahara Question -- B. The SADR's Struggle for Recognition as a State -- Chapter 3 The Doctrine of Recognition and Morocco's Claim to Western Sahara -- A. The Duty of Non-Recognition -- B. The Discretionary Character of Acts of Recognition -- C. Formalism and Implied Recognition -- (i) EU/Morocco Trade and Fishing Agreements and Implied Recognition -- D. The Consequences of the Duty of Non-Recognition -- (i) Persistent Illegal Situations and Territorial Claims -- (ii) The African Court's Judgment in the Bernard Mornah Case -- Chapter 4 Recent Developments in UN Practice Concerning Western Sahara -- A. The Security Council's Approach to the Western Sahara Question Since 2018 -- B. The General Assembly and Western Sahara in Recent Years -- (i) C24 and Fourth Committee Meetings Since 2020 -- (ii) Recent General Assembly Resolutions on Western Sahara -- Chapter 5 Implications of Growing Support for the Moroccan Position on Western Sahara -- A. Growing Support for the Moroccan Autonomy Plan: Has a Tipping Point Been Reached? -- B. Establishing Consulates in Western Sahara and Implied Recognition -- The Territorial Foundations of Consular Representation -- Chapter 6 Conclusion: The Future of Western Sahara and the Future of International Law -- Index.
This book analyses recent developments concerning the application of the international legal doctrines of recognition and self-determination in relation to the Western Sahara Question. It investigates the emergent shift in favour of Morocco's sovereignty claim to Western Sahara as apparent from the positions adopted by an increasing number of third States in the United Nations and the recent spate of third States establishing consulates in Western Sahara, with Morocco's encouragement. It reflects on what the functioning of the doctrines of recognition and self-determination in this situation reveals about contemporary international law in practice more generally. The work will be of interest to scholars, researchers, and postgraduate students as well as practitioners of public international law who have a particular interest in decolonisation, self-determination disputes, and/or conflicts about natural resource entitlements. It will also appeal to readers with an interest in the work of International Organisations, including the United Nations, the European Union, and the African Union, and to specialists in international relations and regional politics.
In: The World of Small States Ser. v.4
Intro -- Contents -- About the Contributors -- Chapter 1: Introduction -- 1.1 Introduction -- 1.2 The Aim of This Collection -- 1.3 The Contributors -- References -- Chapter 2: Justifying Bancoult (No 2): Why Justice Hercules Must Sometimes Disappoint Us -- 2.1 Introduction -- 2.2 Bancoult (No 2) and Its Critics -- 2.2.1 Was the Prerogative Power of Colonial Governance Limited by a Fundamental Right? -- 2.2.2 Did the Formulation 'Peace, Order and Good Government' Connote a Limited or Plenary Prerogative Power? -- 2.2.3 Did Judges Have the Power to Review the Reasons Given by the Government for Removing the Chagossians Islanders? -- 2.3 Positivism and Pragmatism in Bancoult (No 2) -- 2.3.1 What's Wrong with Positivist Textual Analysis? -- 2.3.2 A Pragmatist Way Out? -- 2.4 Enter Justice Hercules -- 2.4.1 Interpreting Bancoult (No 2) -- 2.4.2 Two Competing Schemes of Principle: 'Moral No-Difference' and 'Moral Difference' -- 2.4.2.1 Moral No-Difference -- 2.4.2.2 Moral Difference -- 2.5 Isn't It Justice Hercules's Job to Do Justice? -- 2.6 Conclusion -- References -- Chapter 3: Environmental Protection v the Right of Abode: A Case-Study in the Misuse of Power -- 3.1 Introduction -- 3.2 The Legal Flaws in the 2009 Consultation -- 3.3 The Position Today -- References -- Chapter 4: How Public Law Has Not Been Able to Provide the Chagossians with a Remedy -- 4.1 Introduction -- 4.2 Background -- 4.3 First Attempts at a Remedy: The Vencatassen Case -- 4.3.1 Settlement Terms Are Mis-Described -- 4.3.2 Chagossians Are Misinformed -- 4.4 The Judicial Review in Bancoult (No. 1) and Its Evolution -- 4.4.1 Procedural Reform -- 4.4.2 Do Your Homework First -- 4.4.3 How Did the High Court Declare the Exile Unlawful? -- 4.5 The Group Litigation: Chagos Islanders v Attorney General and HM BIOT Commissioner [2003] EWHC 2222 (QB).
In: Bloomsbury collections