The Status of Outer Mongolia in International Law

1939 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 452-464 ◽  
Author(s):  
Louis Nemzer
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Effective Control ◽  
Central Authority ◽  
Half Century ◽  
Spheres Of Influence ◽  
Legal Relationship ◽  
The Status ◽  
Far Eastern

The steady decline during the last half-century in the degree of effective control wielded by China over the borderlands of her great empire has been accompanied by widespread confusion concerning the international position of these areas. Obscured through the establishment by foreign nations of numerous special concessions, spheres of influence, and protectorates, the exact legal relationship existing between the central authority of China and the governors of these territories has been a cause for frequent and vigorous debate. Those groups which have sought to advance the claims of their governments to wider concessions in these regions, and those publicists who have made unsubstantiated statements about the imperialistic aims of various states in these areas, have profited by this confusion. This condition of uncertainty regarding legal status, which exists in some degree with regard to each of the four Chinese dependencies, is markedly present in the case of Outer Mongolia, a region of growing importance in Far Eastern affairs.

scholarly journals Family Rights of the Child and Their Legislative Support

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (71) ◽  
pp. 205-223
Author(s):  
Vitalii M. Cherneha ◽  
Liudmila V. Kuznetsova ◽  
Oleh V. Fedorchenko ◽  
Olena A. Kaminska ◽  
Sergіі V. Bezpalko
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
State Level ◽  
Free Expression ◽  
Practical Implementation ◽  
Rights Of The Child ◽  
Legal Relationship ◽  
Parents And Children ◽  
The Family ◽  
Legislative Support

The objective of the study was to identify the legal mechanisms for the protection of the family rights of the child and to outline the main problems of their implementation. The child's family rights system was found to contain the child's intangible basic rights, which establish his or her legal status in the family. This system includes the child's right to life, name, citizenship, knowledge of his parents, care of parents, coexistence with parents, preservation of his identity and citizenship, free expression of his own views. It states that the protection of the family rights of the child and the legal relations of parents and children is based on four principles. It is determined that the practical solution of issues related to the exercise of the family rights of the child is regulated by international law, which makes it possible to resolve issues related to the legal relationship between parents and children at the inter-State level. It is concluded that perspectives on legislative support for the family rights of the child demand further empirical research, as well as a theoretical and methodological justification for determining the legal mechanisms of their practical implementation.

scholarly journals Registration of the Legal Status of Korean Migrants in Russia in the 80s 19th Century

2021 ◽  
Vol 38 ◽  
pp. 95-101
Author(s):  
E.S. Burdin ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Legal Status ◽  
Russian Far East ◽  
Far East ◽  
Korean Immigrants ◽  
Diplomatic Relations ◽  
Territorial Unit ◽  
The Status ◽  
Russian Law ◽  
Far Eastern ◽  
The Russian Far East

After the start of Korean migration to Russia in 1864, the Russian authorities began to make attempts to formalize the legal status of the arrived migrants in order to protect them from persecution by the Korean government and its patron China. Areas of compact residence of Korean immigrants were separated into a separate administrative-territorial unit – Suifun District, where the post of “head of Koreans” was established. Separate elements of local self-government were introduced in the Korean settlements. After the establishment of official diplomatic relations with Korea in 1884, the problem of the legal status of Korean migrants in Russia became one of the important topics on the agenda of Russian-Korean negotiations. Due to its decision, Petersburg wanted to stop the uncontrolled transfer of the population from Korea to the Russian Far East and prevent the unauthorized seizure of state lands by Korean settlers. In 1888, the Russian authorities managed to partially resolve the issue of citizenship of the Korean settlers who settled in Russia. From now on, measures to formalize their legal status were carried out on the basis of the norms of the Russian-Korean convention on border relations of 1888, as well as an oral (gentleman's) agreement between K.I. Weber and Kim Yun Sik. An agreement was reached that the Koreans who settled in Russia before the establishment of Russian-Korean diplomatic relations were recognized as equal with Russian subjects. Migrants who settled in the region after the conclusion of this agreement were to liquidate their farms and return to their homeland. The issue of the status of Korean immigrants was finally settled only in 1900. Russian citizenship was granted to all migrants, including those who resettled after 1884. The author comes to the conclusion that the Far Eastern authorities initially perceived the Korean settlers who settled in the South Ussuriysk Territory as subjects of Russia, but could not provide them with all the benefits in accordance with Russian law, since such a step could cause protests from Korea and China.

The Status of Non-Implemented EEA Law in Iceland: Lessons from the Judicial Reactions of the Supreme Court to International Law

2011 ◽  
Vol 80 (4) ◽  
pp. 425-458
Author(s):  
Ólafur Ísberg Hannesson
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
International Law ◽  
Direct Effect ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Trade Association ◽  
European Economic Area ◽  
European Free Trade Association ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Status

AbstractIn October 2007, the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) Court confirmed that the doctrines of direct effect and primacy could not be generated by the European Economic Area (EEA) Agreement alone. Rather, the effects of non-implemented EEA provisions were to remain in the hands of the EFTA States. Hence, the relevant question is what weight should be accorded to such norms in domestic law? The Icelandic Supreme Court has yet to take a stance on the direct effect question relation to incorrectly or insufficiently transposed EEA law. The issue has, however, been addressed several times in connection with the European Convention on Human Rights, before its incorporation. In order to address the unclear legal status of EEA norms in Icelandic law, this contribution takes a closer look at the judicial attitude of the Supreme Court taken towards international law in general and the Convention in particular. The perceived differences between EEA law and the Convention have made it easy for observers to dismiss such comparison on the grounds that the two kinds of legal regime are not readily comparable. The article questions these apparent differences by pointing out that EEA law in fact shares all of the features of the Convention that led judges to enforce it in the Icelandic legal order.

The allocation of responsibility for internationally wrongful acts committed in the course of multinational operations

2013 ◽  
Vol 95 (891-892) ◽  
pp. 727-742 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paolo Palchetti
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
General Rule ◽  
Effective Control ◽  
Specific Focus ◽  
The Status ◽  
Special Rules ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Ultimate Control ◽  
Law Commission

AbstractThe article aims to examine, in light of the codification work of the International Law Commission and of the most recent practice, some issues concerning the allocation of responsibility between an organisation and its troop-contributing states for the conduct taken in the course of a multinational operation (with a specific focus on UN operations). After explaining the general rule of attribution of conduct based on the status of the multinational force as an organ or an agent of the organisation, this article will examine the validity of special rules of attribution of conduct based on the notions of ‘effective control’ or ‘ultimate control’ over the acts of the multinational force. Finally, I will discuss the possibility of dual responsibility of both the organisation and the troop-contributing state concerned.

scholarly journals The Northern Sea Route: Problems of National Status Legitimization under International Law. Part II

2020 ◽  
pp. 130-147
Author(s):  
Pavel GUDEV ◽  
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Northern Sea Route ◽  
The Status ◽  
Ice Conditions ◽  
Legal Position ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Broad Interpretation ◽  
Legal Grounds

The second part of the paper shows that the regime of navigation in the Arctic, particularly on the NSR, defended by Russia today, is much more liberal than that which existed in the Soviet years: up to the Gorbachev’s 1987 Murmansk speech the Soviet Arctic was a closed sea region for foreign navigation. Per-missive order of passage established today at the level of Russian national legislation applies only to civil ships, and in the framework of the 1982 Convention, measures to protect the marine environment from pollution from ships cannot be applied to warships, military auxiliary ships, and ships on the state non-commercial service. However, the presence on the Northern Sea routes of water areas with the status of internal historical waters, including several Arctic straits, plus the special legal status of the Arctic, which is not limited exclusively to the 1982 Convention, allows Russia to insist on the applicability of the permit regime also to foreign warships. This approach is based mainly on the two states’ practice with the longest coastline in the Arctic: the USSR and Canada. Navigation along the NSR in today’s ice conditions is not yet possible without passing through the waters of the Russian Arctic Straits, whose waters are classified by the USSR as internal on historical legal grounds. Although under the 1982 Convention, they can be conditionally regarded as international, the lack of permanent transit through them makes it possible not to recognize them as such. However, the Russian Federation’s task to turn the NSR into an international shipping route may lead to a weakening of the current legal position. A similar situation may arise concerning the enforcement of Article 234 “Ice Covered Areas” of the 1982 Convention, which gives the Arctic countries additional rights in the field of navigation control. Lack of ice cover in the Arctic during most of the year can significantly strengthen the position of Russia’s opponents, who insist on a too broad interpretation of this article on our part. Finally, climatic changes may lead to the NSR becoming more latitudinal, and then the Russian Federation will lose any legal grounds to regulate navigation.

scholarly journals Evolution of Individual Status in International Law

2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 116
Author(s):  
Sayel Mofleh Momani ◽  
Maher Saleh Al-Jubouri ◽  
Noor Akef Al-Dabbas
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Legal Person ◽  
Legal Personality ◽  
The Status ◽  
International Legal Order ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Relationship

Each legal system has individuals who are addressed with its rules and that the legal rules of the legal system are designed to regulate the relationship between these individuals, and one individual can have legal personality in more than one legal system. The legal personality of these individuals is highlighted by the relationship between them and the legal system in which arranges for them rights and impose obligations on them. The rights and duties of a legal person are not the same; they vary from person to person within the same legal system, and vary from one legal system to another. With regard to the international legal order, it has its own international legal persons, foremost among them States. As for the individual, his legal status under general international law is still not clearly defined and is a subject of controversy among the jurists and interpreters of international law. We will present the position of international jurisprudence on the status of the individual in the first demand, the rules of international law that address individuals directly in a second demand, and the right to submit complaints and claims at the international level in a third demand.

5 Customary International Law

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bradley Curtis A
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Common Law ◽  
State Law ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Executive Authority ◽  
Law Of Nations ◽  
The Status ◽  
The U.S

This chapter considers the status in the U.S. legal system of customary international law, which was historically referred to as part of the “law of nations.” After considering what the text of the Constitution suggests about this issue, the chapter discusses how courts historically applied customary international law in cases in which it was relevant and how courts referred to it (in cases such as The Paquete Habana) as “part of our law.” The chapter also recounts the modern debates and uncertainties about the current domestic legal status of customary international law. In particular, the chapter explores the possibility that customary international law might have the status of post-Erie “federal common law” and what such a status might mean for questions of jurisdiction, preemption of state law, and limitations on congressional and executive authority. It also discusses various ways in which customary international law can be important in the U.S. legal system even if it is not applied directly by the courts, such as through the Charming Betsy canon of construction. The chapter concludes by discussing controversies concerning the Supreme Court’s consideration of foreign and international law materials when interpreting the U.S. Constitution.

The Legal Status of Submarine Areas Beneath the High Seas.

1951 ◽  
Vol 45 (2) ◽  
pp. 225-239 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Young
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Legal Principles ◽  
State Practice ◽  
The Status ◽  
Legal Concepts ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
General Assent ◽  
Law Commission ◽  
High Seas

The increasing number of claims by various states to submarine areas beneath the high seas has recently raised anew the question of the status of such claims in international law. The importance of the problem, with its possible impact on traditional legal concepts, has attracted the attention of writers and of several bodies interested in the development of international law, including the International Law Commission of the United Nations. It is to be hoped that out of the present ferment will emerge some sound legal principles which will reconcile new needs with established patterns in such a manner as to win general assent. To this end it may be useful, now that there are some years of state practice and learned discussion to draw upon, to comment on various views that have been advanced.

scholarly journals Kedudukan Hukum Anak Perusahaan Badan Usaha Milik Daerah

Wajah Hukum ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 403
Author(s):  
Sigit Somadiyono
Keyword(s):  
Legal Status ◽  
Limited Liability ◽  
Regional Government ◽  
Holding Company ◽  
Legal Relationship ◽  
The Status ◽  
Owned Company ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
A Company ◽  
Laws And Regulations

Subsidiary is a company that was born due to the transfer or participation of majority shares by another company or it is called the parent company. There are no regulations related to subsidiaries in the laws and regulations related to companies or regarding Regional Owned Enterprises. This has resulted in confusion regarding the position of the regional-owned company subsidiaries, especially the unclear position of state finances in the subsidiary companies. The problem in this research is what is the legal status of ownership of a regional-owned company subsidiary? And what is the responsibility of the holding company of a Regionally Owned Company to its subsidiaries? The purpose of this study was to determine the legal status of the subsidiary and the responsibilities of the Regional Owned Company as the holding company. The research method used is normative juridical analysis of the laws and regulations and the theory of the jurists. From the results of the research, it is found that even though the status is a subsidiary of a Regional Owned Enterprise, the subsidiary is not owned by the Regional Government but has a private or private status, so that there is no special binding legal relationship between the Regional Government as a shareholder of a Regional Owned Enterprise and its owned subsidiary Regional owned enterprises. The responsibility of a Regional Owned Company as the holding company with its subsidiary is limited to the relationship between the shareholders and the company as stipulated in Law Number 40 of 2007 concerning Limited Liability Companies.

A Consideration of the Legal Status of the Gulf of Aqaba

1958 ◽  
Vol 52 (4) ◽  
pp. 660-698 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles B. Selak
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Red Sea ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Water Area ◽  
International Community ◽  
Gulf Of Aqaba ◽  
Religious Significance ◽  
Basic Issue ◽  
The Status ◽  
Freedom Of Navigation

The status under international law of the Gulf of Aqaba has come to be a matter of concern not only to the several littoral states, but also to the international community. The basic issue, that of freedom of navigation in this arm of the Red Sea, has been brought into focus as a result of restrictive efforts of several of the coastal states with respect to Israeli shipping, for Arab-Israeli hostility has given political, strategic, commercial and even religious significance to a water area which, until recently, had attracted little attention.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document