Sovereign Equality of States in the System of Basic Principles of International Law

10.12737/3457 ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 2 (5) ◽  
pp. 5-21 ◽  
Author(s):  
Олег Тиунов ◽  
Olyeg Tiunov

In the article have defined of the role of the principle of the sovereign equality of the states in the system of the principles of international law. The contemporary of the signs of the sovereign equality became aparent the grand total of the development of the international law. Its substance development was under the influence of the different history formations. The Charter of the United Nations there is the basic document of the contemporaneity in which has sealed the principle of the sovereign equality of the states as the part of the system of the principals the modern international law. The legal signs of the sovereignty appears on the supreme sovereignty within the limits of the state, and they must be independence of the state in the international relations. The basic principles of international law there are interdependence. They must be conform to the context each other.

Author(s):  
Higgins Dame Rosalyn, DBE, QC ◽  
Webb Philippa ◽  
Akande Dapo ◽  
Sivakumaran Sandesh ◽  
Sloan James

This chapter begins by discussing the notion of disaster relief. Disaster relief is the relief provided by entities following a disaster, for present purposes, by actors outside the state affected by the disaster. As with the notion of a disaster, different instruments take different approaches to the content of disaster relief. The international law of disaster relief exists as a patchwork of norms. There are a few multilateral conventions in the area, which regulate the response to specific types of disasters, or to particular aspects of disasters. Other conventions of more general applicability also contain provisions that concern disaster relief. The remainder of the chapter covers the historical provision of disaster relief; the role of the United Nations (UN) in the creation of international law relating to disaster relief; and the provision of disaster relief, including coordination, cooperation, legal standards, funding, and reporting.


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.                                                                        


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):  
Marina Mancini

This chapter explores how a state of war or armed conflict affects the relations between belligerents, between belligerents and third states, and the belligerents’ subjects. It begins by describing how a state of war arose between two states, along with its far-reaching consequences, in classical international law. The effects on diplomatic relations, trade relations, treaties, and contracts are highlighted. The chapter then considers the prohibition on the use or threat of armed force in international relations and its implications for the concept of a state of war as well as the consequences traditionally attached to it. It also looks at state practice regarding the creation of a state of war in the United Nations era and concludes by analysing the effects of an interstate armed conflict in contemporary international law.


Author(s):  
Andrew Clapham

How are human rights put into practice? What does it mean when governments announce that their foreign policy is concerned with promoting and protecting human rights? Where is the enforcement of these rights? ‘Human rights foreign policy and the role of the United Nations’ considers human rights in terms of foreign policy and international law and examines the UN’s Universal Periodic Review process and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. It is only recently that governments have actively involved themselves in how another state treats its nationals, but enthusiasm for human rights in foreign policy ebbs and flows.


2000 ◽  
Vol 49 (4) ◽  
pp. 910-925 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine Chinkin

The use of force has been prohibited in international relations since at least the United Nations Charter, 1945. Article 2 (4) of the Charter states:All members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the United Nations.


2003 ◽  
Vol 97 (3) ◽  
pp. 590-598 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard A. Falk

President George W. Bush historically challenged the United Nations Security Council when he uttered some memorable words in the course of his September 12, 2002, speech to the General Assembly: “Will the UN serve the purpose of its founding, or will it be irrelevant?” In the aftermath of the Iraq war there are at least two answers to this question. The answer of the U.S. government would be to suggest that the United Nations turned out to be irrelevant due to its failure to endorse recourse to war against the Iraq of Saddam Hussein. The answer of those who opposed the war is that the UN Security Council served the purpose of its founding by its refusal to endorse recourse to a war that could not be persuasively reconciled with the UN Charter and international law. This difference of assessment is not just factual, whether Iraq was a threat and whether the inspection process was succeeding at a reasonable pace; it was also conceptual, even jurisprudential. The resolution of this latter debate is likely to shape the future role of the United Nations, as well as influence the attitude of the most powerful sovereign state as to the relationship between international law generally and the use of force as an instrument of foreign policy.


2019 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 47-55
Author(s):  
Aleksandra Musiał

The essay compares selected Kantian ideas stated in The Perpetual Peace with the institutions established by the Charter of the United Nations and the Statute of the International Court of Justice. The concept of a nation and its position in international law in view of the Charter will be presented and linked with the Kantian theory of sovereignty of Nations. The core of the paper is an afterthought on the supremacy of three separate powers over the Nations, hence the question of the rules of procedure held by the International Court of Justice will be regarded as the consequence of the idea of sovereign equality. The Kantian concept: "Nations, as states, may be judged like individuals”: (Kant, 1917, p. 128) is observed from the perspective of state’s demand for independence. The institution of the International Court of Justice is presented as a universal supreme body. The key issue of the essay is the federative character of union as a guarantee of eternal peace seen as common point in both of the documents discussed.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document