Responses in Washington, the United Nations, and in Europe to the Establishment of the State of Israel: May and June 1948

2022 ◽  
pp. 333-348
2018 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 65-88
Author(s):  
Rafał Soroczyński

The territory to which the State of Israel had a title as a newly-created state corresponded to the areas allotted to Jews by the provisions of the resolution 181(II) adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations on November 29, 1947, which had recommended the partition of Palestine and creation of the Arab state, the Jewish state and the City of Jerusalem as a corpus separatum. As this territorial regime had been modified during the Arab-Israeli war of 1948-1949 and Israel’s government has recognized the areas seized by it during the war as part of its territorial domain, the problem arose as to Israel’s title to those additional territories situated between the 1947 partition lines and the lines established in accordance with the armistice agreements of 1949. Due to important characteristics of the legal status of former mandatory Palestine and to the fact that considerable parts thereof became occupied territories, the process of consolidation of the title thereto required the consent of the international community as a whole. This consent has in fact been granted, both by the international community and by representatives of Palestinian Arabs, in respect of large parts of territories situated between the 1947 partition lines and the 1949 armistice lines. There are no doubts that the State of Israel has sovereign, uncontested rights to these areas. As it constitutes important departure from the generally accepted principle that the use of force in any form cannot serve as a root of title to territory, this situation is of particular interest, providing support for the view that this principle cannot be analyzed without due regard paid to those exceptional situations where the international community decided to depart from its strict application in order to safeguard stability of territorial solutions.


Author(s):  
Julián López Muñoz

Existe la necesidad de crear un concepto o definir, en términos jurídicos, el significado de crimen organizado, en sentido global. A pesar de que Naciones Unidas lo ha intentado, no todos sus países miembros han seguido el mandato. España ha incluido en su Derecho Penal un nuevo tipo delictivo: la organización y el grupo criminal. El orden público, como bien jurídico superior, se verá con esta medida protegido y también el Estado se verá defendido de la acción desestabilizadora procedente de la «gran criminalidad».There is a need to create a concept or define globally, in legal terms, the meaning of the organized crime. Despite the United Nations have attempted it, not all the Member Countries have followed their mandate. Spain has included in its Criminal Law a new category of offence: the criminal organization and group. The public order, as a superior legal right, will be protected by this measure and also, the State will be defended against the destabilizing action from the «great criminality».


2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-19
Author(s):  
Zarisnov Arafat ◽  
Muhammad Gary Gagarin Akbar

Ekstradisi secara universal hingga saat ini mengalami perubahan yang semakin baik, terutama setelah kehidupan bernegara sudah mulai tampak lebih maju sampai abad 20 ini. Hubungan dan pergaulan internasional menemukan bentuk dan substansinya yang baru dan berbeda dengan zaman sebelum Perjanjian Perdamaian Westphalia tahun 1648. Negara-negara yang berdasarkan atas prinsip kemerdekaan kedaulatan dan kedudukan sederajat mulai menata dirinya masing-masing terutama masalah domestik dengan membentuk dan mengembangkan hukum nasionalnya, yang salah satunya di bidang hukum pidana nasional. Hukum pidana nasional masing-masing negara, terutama jenis-jenis kejahatan atau tindak pidananya, disamping pula ada kesamaan dan perbedaannya. Semakin menguat batas wilayah dan kedaulatan teritorial masing-masing negara, semakin menguat pula penerapan hukum nasionalnya di dalam batas wilayah negara masing-masing. Semakin banyaknya perjanjian-perjanjian yang dibuat oleh negara-negara baik bilateral ataupun multilateral untuk mengatur suatu masalah tertentu yang sudah, sedang, dan akan dihadapi. Dalam pembuatan perjanjian tersebut mulai dilakukan pengkhususan atas substansinya, jadi tidak lagi satu perjanjian mencakup berbagai macam substansi yang berbeda-beda. Di Indonesia peraturan mengenai Ekstradisi dibuat pada tahun 1979, mengingat hingga saat ini belum terjadi perubahan di dalam Undang-Undang Nomor 1 Tahun 1979 padahal PBB telah membuat suatu model pembuatan perjanjian ekstradisi pada tahun 1990, sehingga sudah selayaknya peraturan mengenai ekstradisi di Indonesia harus mengalami pembaharuan ke depan yang lebih baik. Kata Kunci: Ekstradisi, Politik Hukum, Hukum Pidana.   Abstract Extradition is universally up to now experiencing increasingly good changes, especially after the state of life has begun to appear more advanced until the 20th century. International relations and relationships find new and different forms and substance from the times before the Treaty of Peace of Westphalia in 1648. Countries that are based on the principle of freedom of sovereignty and equal position begin to organize themselves, especially domestic problems by forming and developing national laws, which one of them is in the field of national criminal law. The national criminal law of each country, especially the types of crime or criminal acts, besides there are similarities and differences. The stronger regional boundaries and territorial sovereignty of each country, the stronger the application of national laws within the borders of each country. The increasing number of agreements made by countries both bilaterally and multilaterally to regulate a particular problem that has been, is being, and will be faced. In making these agreements, specialization of the substance began to be carried out, so no more than one agreement covers a variety of different substances. In Indonesia, the Extradition regulation was made in 1979, considering that until now there had been no changes in Law Number 1 of 1979 even though the United Nations had made a model for making an extradition treaty in 1990, so that proper regulations on extradition in Indonesia must undergo reform better future.                                   Keyword: Extradition, Politics of Law, The Criminal Law.                                                                        


2017 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 65-87
Author(s):  
Mercy Obado Ochieng

Terrorism is indisputably a serious security threat to states and individuals. Yet, by the end of 2016, there was still lack of consensus on the legal definition of terrorism at the United Nations (UN) level. The key organs of the UN, the Security Council (UNSC) and the General Assembly (UNGA), are yet to agree on a legal definition of terrorism. This disconnect is attributed partly to the heterogeneous nature of terrorist activities and ideological differences among member states. At the UN level, acts of terrorism are mainly tackled from the angle of threats to international peace and security. In contrast, at the state level, acts of terrorism are largely defined as crimes and hence dealt with from the criminal justice paradigm. This article argues that the lack of a concrete legal definition of terrorism at the UN level undermines the holistic use of the criminal justice paradigm to counter-terrorism at the state level. To effectively counter-terrorism the UNSC and the UNGA have to agree on a legal definition of terrorism in their resolutions. This will streamline efforts to combat terrorism at the state level and consolidate counter-terrorism measures at the international level. The draft comprehensive Convention on Measures to Eliminate Terrorism (the Draft Convention) should be tailored to fill gaps and provide for a progressive legal definition of acts of terrorism.


1962 ◽  
Vol 107 (628) ◽  
pp. 288-294
Author(s):  
Lord Gladwyn ◽  
Henry Moore

2006 ◽  
Vol 78 (3) ◽  
pp. 197-202
Author(s):  
John Wilkinson

From 1950 West Jerusalem was the capital of the new state of Israel. After the Six Days War, in 1967, the whole of Jerusalem was incorporated into Israel, an action that has been repeatedly condemned by the United Nations. In 1980 Israel declared all Jerusalem to be its capital. The issue of the permanent status of Jerusalem remains a major unresolved cause of contention.


Author(s):  
Adom Getachew

This epilogue charts the fall of self-determination and illustrates that the collapse of anticolonial worldmaking continues to structure our contemporary moment. Picking up in the immediate aftermath of the NIEO, it locates self-determination's fall in two developments—the increasingly critical orientation of Western intellectuals and politicians toward the right to self-determination as well as the diminution of international institutions like the United Nations where anticolonial nationalists had staged their worldmaking. Together the normative erosion of self-determination and marginalization of the United Nations set the stage for the resurgence of international hierarchy and a newly unrestrained American imperialism. At the same time, the critical resources of anticolonial nationalism appeared to be exhausted as the institutional form of the postcolonial state fell short of its democratic and egalitarian aspirations, and anticolonial worldmaking retreated into a minimalist defense of the state.


Author(s):  
Robert L. Tignor

This chapter looks at how W. Arthur Lewis left Ghana as a member of the Ghanaian delegation to the all-African conference meeting in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. He did not return. In Addis, he announced his intention to take up a new post at the United Nations. He did not, however, sever his ties with Ghana, and he was to return briefly in 1963 to offer advice on the Seven-Year Development Plan. Because he had not had time to train a replacement, his departure left the Ghanaians without a fulltime economic adviser. The responsibility for drafting the budget and overseeing the five-year plan devolved on a variety of outside consultants and Ghanaian ministers themselves. At first Ghana drifted in the direction of more state controls over the economy and greater suspicion of the free market; but by 1960 and 1961 the drift had become a full-scale push as the state began to replace the Lewis programs that had featured a mixed economy with ones that looked exclusively to the state. The early pressures to scrap the Lewis economic policies and move to the left came as much in response to problems that had haunted the Ghanaian economy throughout the late 1950s as to ideology, notably trade and budgetary deficits.


2019 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 753-777
Author(s):  
Vera Shikhelman

Abstract In recent years, there has been an increasing amount of research about the implementation of international law. However, there has been almost no empirical research about implementing decisions of international human rights institutions. The decisions of those institutions are usually regarded as soft law, and states do not have a clear legal obligation to implement them. In this article, I bring original empirical data about how and when states implement decisions of the United Nations Human Rights Committee (HRC) in individual communications. I hypothesize that the following factors influence the readiness of states to implement the views of the HRC: (i) the level of democracy and human rights protection in the state; (ii) internal capacity; (iii) strength of civil society; (iv) type of remedy; (v) representation on the HRC; (6) subject matter of the communication. I find that the most important factor for implementing remedies granted by the Committee is the high human rights score of the state. The internal capacity of the state is also significant but to a lesser extent than found in previous studies. Also, I find a certain connection between the state being represented on the HRC and its willingness to implement the remedies.


Author(s):  
Fernando Arlettaz

Summary The League of Nations established, in the interwar period, a legal regime for the protection of minorities which considered them as intermeditate groups between the State and the individuals. On the contrary, the Universal Declaration on Human Rights, adopted in 1948 by the United Nations, assumed a radically individualistic point of view and did not include any mention to minority rights. The travaux préparatoires of the Universal Declaration suggest that the question of minorities caused strong tension among States and that, for this reason, they avoided its inclusion in the 1948 document.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document