Water Resources and International Law9 Dispute Settlement Over Non-Navigational Uses Of International Water Courses: Theory And PracticeCentre for Studies and Research in International Law and International Relations

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Muhammad Iqbal Baiquni

<div><p class="abstract">The case of espionage or spying by Australia against Indonesia is not the first time, but there have been several attempts of espionage against Indonesia. This espionage act is an act of secretly collecting intelligence data in international relations in a country. In this paper, we discuss the wiretapping case and its resolution. This paper uses normative legal research with a qualitative approach. This paper examines the chronology of cases of tapping by Australia against Indonesia, wiretapping in human rights and international law, as well as the final settlement of tensions between Indonesia and Australia through an agreement on the Code of Conduct to normalize bilateral relations between the two countries.</p></div>


2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (22) ◽  
pp. 130-137
Author(s):  
Omar Ahmed Hussein ◽  
Khadijah Mohamed

This paper aims to examine Iraq’s rights, being the downstream country, towards the use of Tigris and Euphrates Rivers and the extent to which international water resources are protected under international law. Being the downstream country, projects constructed on the banks of Tigris and Euphrates Rivers had significantly impacted Iraq as less water flows into the country. The discussion in this paper outlines principles of the existing international conventions and protocols in this area by adopting a doctrinal legal research approach which has great significance to understand the relevant substantive law through the analysis of legal rules, court judgments, and statutes. The paper concludes that historically, Iraq had an acquired right, a right confirmed by the international rules and principles, to share the usage of water from the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers with the upstream countries comprising of Turkey, Syria, and Iran. This paper suggests that all riparian countries of the Tigris and the Euphrates should abide by the rules of international law and recognize Iraq’s historical water ratios of these rivers based on the principle of the acquired right under international law.


Author(s):  
Rémi Bachand

Abstract The main objective of this article is to explore the background of the World Trade Organization’s (WTO) Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) crisis using Marxist, neo-Marxist or, at least, Marxist-influenced theories of political economy and international relations. Its purpose is twofold. First, to propose an interpretation of the actual WTO crisis that will address alternative interpretations’ gaps. Second, to advance theoretical inputs founded on Marxist or Marxist-influenced writing in political economy, inputs which could be useful elsewhere in critical studies in international law. At the root of the crisis lies the functioning of neoliberalism (understood as the regime of accumulation promoted by US-dominant classes) and the institutions it uses to regulate itself, to deal with contradictions that hurt its capacity to produce profit, and to allow capital accumulation. One of the most important of these institutions, at the international level, is the WTO. We argue that neoliberalism’s incapacity to continuously provide, since the Asian crisis in 1997, a satisfying rate of profit to US capitalists (and to Western capitalists in general, even if our argument focuses on the former) lured it into a crisis. Since the WTO’s main function is to prevent neoliberalism from being hurt by contradictions that would limit its capacity to provide profits allowing capital accumulation, it was inevitable that one day or another, the struggle faced by the latter would also drag the former down in an institutional crisis.


2011 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 237-254 ◽  
Author(s):  
Owen McIntyre

AbstractWhile the Draft Articles on the Law of Transboundary Aquifers adopted in 2008 by the International Law Commission (ILC)1 follow the same format as the 1997 UN Watercourses Convention2 and might reasonably have been expected to adopt a similar normative approach wherever possible, the Preamble to the Draft Articles fails to make any reference to this or to other seminal instruments or codifications in the area of international water resources law and the document takes, in some respects, a radically different and less progressive stance. The principal difference in the Draft Articles, and one which can be linked to most of the other deviations, is the inclusion of an express reference to the sovereignty of aquifer States in a manner implying that this is the key guiding principle of the instrument. This emphasis on State sovereignty over shared, and often migratory, water resources appears to represent something of a retreat from the distributive equity inherent in the firmly established principle of equitable and reasonable utilization and from the intense procedural and institutional cooperation required to achieve the community of interests approach necessary to give meaning to this principle. Reliance on sovereignty implies instead a drift towards a position based more on the narrow and immediate self-interest of States. In order to avoid such an interpretation, it would have been better if the Draft Articles had sought to establish two separate but parallel regimes, one based on sovereignty and covering the static geological formation of the aquifer, and one covering the shared water resources contained in, and transiting through, the formation and based on equitable and reasonable utilization.


Lex Russica ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 73-86
Author(s):  
Yu. A. Sluchevskaya

The article is devoted to the problem of formation of modern international legal regime of joint use and protection of international watercourses that is aimed at effective provision of water to the States of international watercourse with due respect to new challenges and threats that have a negative impact on international water resources. The model is based on the concept of “international watercourse” that has the following features: 1) international watercourses include surface and ground waters; 2) a spatial and territorial criterion of an international watercourse that means crossing of the border between two or more States or being on their border; 3) the use of international watercourses affects the interests of two or more States; 4) the special international legal regime for the use of international watercourses that has developed within the framework of international law development; 5) special requirements for the protection of ecosystems of international watercourses that include protection from pollution and other forms of degradation of lands and forests adjacent to international watercourses, their fauna and flora; as well as seas into which watercourses flow; 6) a high conflict potential in the use of water resources of international watercourses. The analysis of the provisions of the doctrines of joint use and protection of transboundary waters shows that the formation of international water law should timely take into account human factors, technological and socio-economic changes. The modern international law model of the joint use and protection of international watercourses is a system of international legal norms regulating inter-state relations in the following areas: prevention, limitation and reduction of transboundary impact; protection of ecosystems of international watercourses; rational use of waters of international watercourses, effective management of water resources of international watercourses (including establishment and functioning of international basin organizations); information support of the population with regard to international watercourses.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document