Suchergebnisse

A growing demand for natural resources embedded in current changes of the international order will put pressure on states to secure the future availability of these resources. Some political discourses suggest that states might respond by challenging the foundations of international law. Whereas the UN Charter was inter alia aimed at eliminating uses of force for economic reasons, one may observe an on-going trend of securitization of matters of resource supply resulting into the revival of self-preservation doctrines. The chapter will show that those claims lack a normative foundation in the current framework of the prohibition of the use of force. Moreover, international law has sufficient instruments to cope with disputes over access to resources by other means than the use of force. The international community, therefore, must oppose claims that may contribute to normative uncertainties and strengthen already existing instruments of pacific settlement of disputes.

The paper shows that a comparison of the appropriately-weighted sum of households' marginal willingness to pay for a public good with the net effect of the increased supply of the public good on shadow, as distinct from actual, government revenue is a generally valid rule for public good provision. This rule does not depend on any assumption that existing policy is optimal. The practical problems in measuring the true social cost of additional public good provision involve the need to estimate shadow prices of non-traded goods and goods which are not traded at given world prices The marginal cost of public funds is not required in order to measure the social cost of public good provision.

This topic subscribes very strongly to the quest for the enforcement of an agreement to arbitrate. Sometimes, when a dispute arises, it may not be easy to get an arbitration to take off, even where an agreement covering the dispute is in existence. This sort of situation may arise either because one of the parties is reluctant to arbitrate or because he ignores the agreement and commences an action in court against the other party on the very dispute which should be resolved by arbitration, thus the need for the enforcement of the commercial arbitration agreement. Findings show that the courts in developing countries such as Nigeria do not only recognize the place of arbitration in dispute settlement but also cloth arbitral awards with the garb of estoppels per rem judicatam thereby discouraging the dethronement of arbitration agreements.1 Parties to disputes may therefore agree, or statute may stipulate, that such issues be referred to arbitration for resolution. Findings further show that an issue that will always arise is whether the vesting of jurisdiction in an arbitral tribunal constitutes an ouster of the court's jurisdiction. However, it is recommended that extensive and explicit provisions should be added to the various Arbitration legislations and rules of developing countries to ensure the enforcement of commercial arbitral agreements.

It seems that during the Interwar period the legal act on the working procedure of the interwar Lithuanian executive authorities was not adopted. If it was, it was not published in the Government Gazette, although the statutes of other institutions, such as the Institute of Lithuanian Studies, the National Economic Council, and the Secondary Music Schools, were published. During this period, several attempts were made to adopt such a legal act, called either the Statute of the Cabinet of Ministers or the Statute of the Administrative Order. The drafts of this legislation were produced in 1919, 1925–1927, and 1939. The most comprehensive was the draft of the Statute of the Administrative Order, initiated by the Council of State in 1939. The intention was that this document should regulate not only the composition, competences, and working arrangements of the Council of Ministers, but also the legal status of the Prime Minister, their relationship with the Head of the State, and the text of the oath of the Prime Minister and other ministers. It would also regulate social guarantees, including restrictions on ministerial activities and official responsibility, and the administrative structure of ministries. It was the first time that the procedure of receiving and examining complaints and requests in the ministries was regulated by the norms of the Statute. The failure to adopt such a document within two decades can be explained by the fact that at first the young state faced major challenges which had to be dealt with immediately, including the Territory of Vilnius, the Memel Territory, foreign policy, and state credits. Later it faced challenges such as the establishment of the authoritarian regime and the unclear division between state powers, and the fact that other acts related to the executive power – the Law on the Civil Service, the Law on the Administrative Court – were not adopted in the interwar period at all. This study was mainly based on documents kept in the Central State Archives of Lithuania.

It seems that during the Interwar period the legal act on the working procedure of the interwar Lithuanian executive authorities was not adopted. If it was, it was not published in the Government Gazette, although the statutes of other institutions, such as the Institute of Lithuanian Studies, the National Economic Council, and the Secondary Music Schools, were published. During this period, several attempts were made to adopt such a legal act, called either the Statute of the Cabinet of Ministers or the Statute of the Administrative Order. The drafts of this legislation were produced in 1919, 1925–1927, and 1939. The most comprehensive was the draft of the Statute of the Administrative Order, initiated by the Council of State in 1939. The intention was that this document should regulate not only the composition, competences, and working arrangements of the Council of Ministers, but also the legal status of the Prime Minister, their relationship with the Head of the State, and the text of the oath of the Prime Minister and other ministers. It would also regulate social guarantees, including restrictions on ministerial activities and official responsibility, and the administrative structure of ministries. It was the first time that the procedure of receiving and examining complaints and requests in the ministries was regulated by the norms of the Statute. The failure to adopt such a document within two decades can be explained by the fact that at first the young state faced major challenges which had to be dealt with immediately, including the Territory of Vilnius, the Memel Territory, foreign policy, and state credits. Later it faced challenges such as the establishment of the authoritarian regime and the unclear division between state powers, and the fact that other acts related to the executive power – the Law on the Civil Service, the Law on the Administrative Court – were not adopted in the interwar period at all. This study was mainly based on documents kept in the Central State Archives of Lithuania.

The article attempts to re-construct the motivation behind the current North Korean policies, especially in the domestic sphere. It is argued tht North Korean leaders have valid political reasons not to imitate the Chinese-style reform, and are likely to

The article attempts to re-construct the motivation behind the current North Korean policies, especially in the domestic sphere. It is argued tht North Korean leaders have valid political reasons not to imitate the Chinese-style reform, and are likely to

The article attempts to re-construct the motivation behind the current North Korean policies, especially in the domestic sphere. It is argued that North Korean leaders have valid political reasons not to imitate the Chinese-style reform, and are likely to limit themselves to moderate changes which would not jeopardize political stability and the domination of the present-day elite. The most critical factor is the maintenance of control over the access to information. (Pac Rev/DÜI)

Local self-government has so long prevailed in English constitutional practice, and in recent times has been so generously extended to colonies and dominions, that it might seem an anomaly for Home Rule to be ardently desired in Ireland, yet bitterly contested and thus far withheld. Many favorable generally to the idea of autonomy without special reference to the condition of Ireland have believed this to result from a stubborn obstinacy and blind perverseness, perpetuating in tragic fashion a tragedy of olden times. But it might be suspected that such reluctance arose in part from circumstances of a great while ago, which continue or have bequeathed consequences not to be neglected; and an examination of the controversial literature which appeared just before the war reveals many objections which, in so far as they were actual and honestly held, were undoubtedly valid and potent. Certainly a great many people believed that Home Rule was not only unnecessary for the interests of Ireland, and really to the detriment of the Irish people, but that whatever might be the results with respect to that country, without doubt self-government, so far as it tended to separation and the erecting of an independent or hostile government, would be fatal to some of the largest interests of England and the British Empire.