scholarly journals Kedudukan dan Daya Mengikat Konvensi Denhaag 1954 Tentang Perlindungan Obyek Budaya Dalam Sengketa Bersenjata Terhadap Pihak-Pihak Yang Bersengketa (Amerika Serikat-Irak) Menurut Konvensi Wina 1969 Tentang Perjanjian Internasional

2013 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hilda Hilda
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Law ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Hague Convention ◽  
The United States ◽  
Crucial Issue ◽  
Cultural Objects ◽  
The Hague ◽  
The Hague Convention ◽  
Binding Power

Status and Binding Power of the Denhaag Convention 1954. Armed conflict between the United States and Iraq indicates that the two parties neglect cultural objects. The disobedient towards the provisions of international law, particularly the 1954 Hague Convention and its additional protocols, regarded as one of the conspicuous reasons for the fatal damage of cultural objects. The only justification to avoid from the obligation od protecting cultural objects is that one of the party does not bind to the instrument of international law. This has made the position and power of the Hague Convention 1954 becomes a crucial issue to the extent of its effectiveness. DOI: 10.15408/jch.v1i1.2984

scholarly journals THE PRINCIPLE OF NEUTRALITY AT SEA AFTER UN CHARTER AND UNCLOS 1982

2018 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 588
Author(s):  
Enny Narwati
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Hague Convention ◽  
The Other ◽  
International Treaties ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
The Hague ◽  
The Law ◽  
Set Up ◽  
The Hague Convention

The purpose of this paper is to analyze an implementation of neutrality principles at sea in time of armed conflict. It because the law of neutrality at sea has not progressed and seem stagnant since 1907 on the Hague Convention. Indeed, the UN Charter and UNCLOS 1982 set up significant developments on international law. On the other hand, there still found a lack of rules available in particular area, therefore international community provide San Remo Manual 1994. The San Remo Manual created based on the Hague Convention of 1907, the UN Charter, UNCLOS 1982, other international treaties and customary international law. To conclude, that the law of neutrality at sea should respected the sovereignty of neutral countries

scholarly journals Legal Protection of Cultural Objects in the Armed Conflict

2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 79-97
Author(s):  
Akbar Kurnia Putra ◽  
Bernard Sipahutar ◽  
Vrandza Iswenanda ◽  
Sulhi Muhammad Daud
Keyword(s):  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Hague Convention ◽  
Cultural Property ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Cultural Objects ◽  
Legal Method ◽  
The Hague ◽  
The Hague Convention

This article aims to overview how the International Humanitarian Law regulates the protection of cultural heritages at the event of armed conflict. Applying a normative legal method, this article coclude that the protection for the cultural objects during an armed conflict is regulated in the Hague Convention IV of 1907, the Geneva Conventions IV of 1949, the Hague Convention of 1954, and the Second Protocols to the Hague Convention of 1954 for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict 1999. The Hague Convention of 1954 mentions about safeguarding of the cultural property from any harm as a result of armed conflicts and about respect for the cultural objects. Each nation is responsible to avoid, prevent, and forbid any harfmul acts against cultural property. However, no stipulation is mentioned on how the victims whose cultural objects are destroyed could sue for any destructions. Therefore it is recommended that a special International Body be formed to supervise any harmful activities toward the cultural objects. Such a body might be more than just an International Court of Justice whose function is to settle any objections, sues, or claims from parties whose cultural objecs have been destroyed during armed conflicts.

War and Cultural Property: The 1954 Hague Convention and the Status of U.S. Ratification

2001 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 217-245 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chip Colwell–Chanthaphonh ◽  
John Piper
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Hague Convention ◽  
The United States ◽  
Cultural Property ◽  
Current Status ◽  
Policy And Practice ◽  
The Balkans ◽  
Relevant Today ◽  
The Hague ◽  
The Hague Convention

In May of 1954, the Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict (Hague Convention) was adopted in an attempt to curb the destruction of movable and immovable cultural property during war. Recent conflicts, such as the continuing war in the Balkans, remind us that the Hague Convention is as relevant today as it was fifty years ago. Although this Convention is the most comprehensive and internationally recognized treaty to protect cultural property in time of war, the United States remains one of the few signatories that has yet to ratify it. In January 1999, former President William J. Clinton forwarded the Hague Convention to the Senate with the recommendation that it ratify the Convention and part of Protocol I. Although this presented perhaps the first real opportunity in nearly half a century for the United States to join one hundred countries and ratify the Hague Convention, its fate remains uncertain. Generally oriented towards the United States' policy and practice, this article broadly discusses the Hague Convention, its history, its weaknesses and strengths, and the current status of U.S. ratification.

Comparing Interpretations of States’ and Non-State Actors’ Obligations Toward Cultural Heritage in Armed Conflict and OccupationMilitary Manuals and the Law of War

2020 ◽  
pp. 56-81
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Varner
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Cultural Heritage ◽  
International Law ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Hague Convention ◽  
The United States ◽  
Cultural Property ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
The United Kingdom

The 1954 Hague Convention on the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict (1954 Hague Convention) remains the leading treaty on the treatment of cultural heritage during armed conflict and occupation. After several decades of relative dormancy, eleven States have joined the 1954 Hague Convention in the last decade, including two major military powers: the United States and the United Kingdom. In addition to the 1954 Hague Convention, a host of laws touch on the protection of cultural property in armed conflict, as well as those under customary international law. Nonetheless, there are disagreements in interpretations of States’ obligations toward cultural property during armed conflict stemming from a variety of factors. These factors can include: whether States are Parties to the instrument that conveys the obligation or if the obligation is one of customary international law, which itself is often contested; the individual State’s interpretation; interpretation by tribunals; and a plethora of other factors. Given these discrepancies in interpretation, a review of States’ military manuals is useful to see if they shed any light on the State’s interpretation of their obligations toward cultural property under the law of armed conflict (LOAC) and international obligations in LOAC more generally. This chapter will analyze and compare the military manuals of the United States and the United Kingdom to determine how they elucidate several key issues in the protection of cultural property during armed conflict, such as the definition of ‘cultural property’, requirements for ‘respect’, the doctrine of military necessity, and laws applicable in non-international armed conflicts.

Legal Concerns Against Auctions and Securities Conventions

2006 ◽  
pp. 293-305
Author(s):  
Takashi Kubota
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Side Effects ◽  
Small Business ◽  
Hague Convention ◽  
The United States ◽  
Internet Auctions ◽  
Emerging Issues ◽  
The Hague ◽  
The Hague Convention ◽  
The Eu

This chapter introduces the two newly emerging issues in the C2C and B2B area in the Japanese IT laws: (a) anti-fraud measures in Internet auctions and (b) treatment of the Hague Securities Convention. An auction provider’s liability for a tenant’s fraud beyond the freedom of contracts is not clear. If consumers bear risk, adequate disclosure should be promoted. In addition, as this issue is complex, several measures including advertisement regulations against the small business consumers and development of escrow payment techniques, should be promoted. Regarding the Hague Securities Convention, the United States pushes other countries to ratify it but the EU questions to ratify it. This chapter considers that the ratification of the Hague Convention for unifying the conflict of laws and the UNIDROIT Convention for unifying the substantive laws should be done at the same time, in order to avoid some side effects.

United States Ratifies Hague Convention on the International Recovery of Child Support and Other Forms of Family Maintenance

2017 ◽  
Vol 111 (1) ◽  
pp. 191-196
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Child Support ◽  
Financial Incentive ◽  
Hague Convention ◽  
The United States ◽  
Legal Structure ◽  
Initial Resistance ◽  
The Hague ◽  
The Hague Convention

The United States deposited its instrument of ratification for the Hague Convention on the International Recovery of Child Support and Other Forms of Family Maintenance (the Convention) in September 2016. The Convention entered into force for the United States several months later. Ratification was facilitated by the passage of novel federal implementing legislation that—rather than directly mandating alterations to the domestic legal structure—created a financial incentive for states to change their child support laws. While the Idaho legislature displayed some initial resistance, by early 2016 all fifty states had changed the relevant laws, enabling the submission of U.S. ratification.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document