Making the Law of the Sea: A Study in the Development of International Law. By Par James Harrison. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011. 340 pages.

2012 ◽  
Vol 49 ◽  
pp. 625-632
Author(s):  
Yacouba Cissé
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Cambridge University ◽  
The Law

Book Reviews

2021 ◽  
Vol 62 (1) ◽  
pp. 649-680
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Law School ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Professor Emeritus ◽  
Public International Law ◽  
Cambridge University ◽  
Oxford University ◽  
The Law ◽  
Oxford University Press

W. A. Schabas, The Trial of the Kaiser, Oxford University Press, Oxford 2018, 432 pages, ISBN 9780198833857. (Prof. J. M. Reijntjes, Prof.em. in Criminal Law, The Open University of the Netherlands and the University of Curaçao.) Harold Hongju Koh, The Trump Administration and International Law, Oxford University Press, Oxford 2018, 232 pages, ISBN 9780190912185. (David l. Sloss, John A. and Elizabeth H. Sutro Professor of Law, Santa Clara University School of Law) Gina Heathcote, Feminist Dialogues on International Law: Success, Tensions, Futures, Oxford University Press, Oxford 2019, 256 pages, ISBN 9780199685103. (Aoife O'Donoghue, Professor of International Law and Governance, Durham University Law School) Steven Wheatley, The Idea of International Human Rights Law, Oxford University Press, New York 2019, 204 pages, ISBN 978-0-19-874984-4. (Mark A. Chinen, Professor of Law at the Seattle University School of Law and a Fellow of the Fred T. Korematsu Center for Law and Equality) Marco Longobardo, The Use of Force in Occupied Territory, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2018, xxix+320 pages, ISBN 9781108473415. (Michael Bothe, Professor Emeritus of Public Law, Johann Wolfgang Goethe University, Frankfurt am Main) Shavana Musa, Victim Reparation Under the Ius Post Bellum: An Historical and Normative Perspective, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2019, 290 pages, ISBN 9781108471732. (Dr. Jens Iverson, Assistant Professor of Public International Law, Leiden Law School, Leiden University) Russell Buchan, Cyber Espionage and International Law, Hart, Oxford 2019, xxviii+219 pages, ISBN 9781782257363. (François Delerue, Research Fellow in Cyberdefense and International Law, Institut de Recherche stratégique de l'Ecole militaire (IRSEM) and Lecturer, Sciences Po Paris) Alejandro Rodiles, Coalitions of the Willing and International Law: The Interplay Between Formality and Informality, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2018, xx+287 pages, ISBN 978-1-10-849365-9. (Matteo Tondini, Legal Advisor and Researcher Member, Italian Group, International Society for Military Law and the Law of War) Cindy Wittke, Law in the Twilight: International Courts and Tribunals, the Security Council and the Internationalisation of Peace Agreements Between State and Non-State Parties, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2018, 244 pages, ISBN 9781108335676. (Kimana Zulueta-Fülscher, Head of International IDEA's MyConstitution Programme (Yangon, Myanmar)) P. Chandrasekhara Rao and Philippe Gautier, The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea: Law, Practice and Procedure, Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham 2018, xxvii+363 pages, ISBN 9781786433008. (Valentin J. Schatz, Research Associate, Chair of International Law of the Sea and International Environmental Law, Public International Law and Public Law (Alexander Proelß), Faculty of Law, University of Hamburg) Lloyd Freeburn, Regulating International Sport. Power, Authority and Legitimacy, Brill/Nijhoff, Leiden 2018, 277 pages, ISBN 978-90-04-37978-7. (Christian J. Tams, Chair of International Law, University of Glasgow; Director, Glasgow Centre of International Law & Security)

scholarly journals Book Review: Dispute Settlement in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea

2019 ◽  
Vol 36 (4) ◽  
pp. 867
Author(s):  
Joanna Mossop
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Detailed Examination ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Cambridge University ◽  
The Past ◽  
Unilateral Action ◽  
Solid Foundation ◽  
The Law

This article is a book review of Natalie Klein Dispute Settlement in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2005) (418 pages). The law of the sea has been one of the most dynamic and disputed areas of international law for most of the past several centuries. The fact that the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea contains a dispute settlement provision that involves compulsory adjudication was a move away from the contentious past characterised by unilateral action. Mossop states that Klein has written a technically excellent text outlining the history and development of the dispute procedures, the requirement of each part of the process, and the extent to which the cases heard under the dispute procedures have cast light on the operation of the procedures. Although the book will be of significant value to practitioners and scholars dealing with this area of the law, Mossop argues that the detailed examination of the topic means that the book will not be suitable as a student textbook. It is concluded that the book is a solid foundation against which later cases can be compared. 

The International Law Commission Tomorrow: Improving its Organization and Methods of Work

1991 ◽  
Vol 85 (4) ◽  
pp. 595-612 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. Graefrath
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Term Effect ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Long Term Effect ◽  
The Law ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Law Commission

The history, operation and tasks of the International Law Commission (ILC) have often been described and its success in codifying general international law is well-known and widely acknowledged. The conduct of international relations today is unthinkable without such basic instruments, first drafted by the Commission, as the conventions on diplomatic and consular relations, the law of treaties and the law of the sea. Moreover, other ILC drafts that have not been adopted as treaties have had a long-term effect on the development of international law; for example, the Draft Declaration on the Rights and Duties of States, the Principles of International Law Recognized in the Charter of the Nürnberg Tribunal and in the Judgment of the Tribunal, and the Model Rules on Arbitral Procedure.

Normative propositions of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 3-18
Author(s):  
Roman Kolodkin
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Legal Reasoning ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
International Tribunal ◽  
Legal Norms ◽  
Judicial Decisions ◽  
The Law ◽  
Obiter Dictum ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Advisory Opinions

Normative propositions of the international courts, including these of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, are considered in the paper as provisions in the judicial decisions and advisory opinions, spelling out, formulating or describing international law norms, prescriptions, prohibitions or authorizations, which are applicable, in the court’s view, in the case at hand and the similar cases. Such a proposition is considered to be a description of a legal norm, its spelling out by a court, but not a norm or its source. In contrast with legal norms, judicial normative propositions are descriptive, not prescriptive; they may be true or wrong. Normative propositions are not transformed into norms solely by their repetition in judicial decisions. The author considers not only ITLOS decisions but also the Tribunal’s and its Seabed disputes chamber advisory opinions containing normative propositions to be subsidiary means for the determination of the rules of law under article 38(1(d)) of the International Court of Justice Statute. The legal reasoning of the Tribunal’s decision, not its operative provisions, usually features normative propositions. While strictly speaking, the decision addresses the parties of the dispute, normative propositions in the reasoning are in fact enacted by the Tribunal urbi et orbi aiming at all relevant actors, ITLOS including. They bear upon substantive and procedural issues, rights and obligations of relevant actors; they may also define legal notions. The Tribunal provides them as part of its reasoning or as obiter dictum. It is those provisions of the Tribunal’s decisions that are of particular importance for international law through detailing treaty- and verbalizing customary rules. However, the States that have the final and decisive say confirming or non-confirming the content and binding nature of the rules spelt out or described by the Tribunal in its normative propositions. Meanwhile, States are not in a hurry to publicly react to the judicial normative propositions, particularly to those of ITLOS, though they refer to them in pleadings or when commenting on the International Law Commission drafts. At times, States concerned argue that international judicial decisions are not binding for third parties. While the States are predominantly silent, ITLOS reiterates, develops and consolidates normative propositions, and they begin to be perceived as law. The paper also points to the possibility of the Tribunal’s normative propositions being not correct and to the role of the judges’ dissenting and separate opinions in identifying such propositions.

The South China Sea

Asian Survey ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 55 (3) ◽  
pp. 455-477 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stein Tønnesson
Keyword(s):  
South China Sea ◽  
International Law ◽  
South China ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
The South China Sea ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
The South ◽  
Government Behavior ◽  
China Sea ◽  
The Law

The article looks at three ways in which international law has affected government behavior in the South China Sea. It has exacerbated disputes. It has probably curtailed the use of force. And it has made it difficult to imagine solutions that violate the law of the sea.

scholarly journals Theoretical and Practical Significance of the Issue of Maritime Delimitation in the Law of the Sea

2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 125-129 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bojana Lakićević-Đuranović
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Practical Significance ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
The Creation ◽  
The Law

This paper aims to show the significance of maritime delimitation in the Law of the Sea, as well as the contribution of international jurisprudence to the creation of the rules of maritime delimitation. The decisions of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and the awards of arbitration tribunals are especially significant in the part of the Law of the Sea dealing with maritime delimitation. Based on the analysis of the principle of equity and the method of equidistance, the jurisprudence of the courts is shown to have established precedents and to have an irreplaceable role in the development of the international Law of the Sea, particularly in the segment of maritime delimitations.

An analysis of stagnation in multilateral law-making – and why the law of the sea has transcended the stagnation trend

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-22
Author(s):  
Andreas Motzfeldt Kravik
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Current Trend ◽  
The United States ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Great Powers ◽  
Great Power ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
The Law ◽  
Law Making ◽  
Multilateral Treaties

Abstract The article explores the current stagnation in multilateral law-making based on an analysis of recent treaty attempts across various subfields of international law. It further examines why the law of the sea has continued to evolve despite this trend. The article demonstrates that states still regularly seek multilateral treaties to address new challenges. While there is some evidence of general treaty saturation, it is the current inability of traditional great powers to negotiate new binding norms which is the most constraining factor on multilateral law-making. This in turn is related to deeper geopolitical shifts by which traditional great powers, notably the United States and its allies, have seen their relative influence decline. Until the current great power competition ends or settles into a new mode of international co-operation, new multilateral treaties with actual regulatory effect will rarely emerge. The law of the sea has avoided the current trend of stagnation for primarily three reasons (i) a global commitment to the basic tenets of the law of the sea; (ii) a legal framework that affords rights and obligations somewhat evenly disbursed, allowing less powerful states to use their collective leverage to advance multilateral negotiations, despite intermittent great power opposition; and (iii) the avoidance of entrenched multilateral forums where decisions are reached by consensus only.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document