scholarly journals Some problems of ad hoc recognition in the modern international law

2020 ◽  
pp. 23-27
Author(s):  
Ivanna Maryniv ◽  
Alyona Morozova
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Community ◽  
Scientific Article ◽  
Main Body ◽  
Practical Application ◽  
State Recognition ◽  
Scientific Papers ◽  
Theoretical Issues ◽  
Official Recognition

Formulation of the problem. The article deals with general theoretical issues related to the institution of international legal recognition. The basic theories of state recognition, problems arising in connection with their practical application and forms of state recognition are studied. Questions are raised about the problem of codification of this institution. Particular attention is paid to the practice of forced relations with unrecognized states. With the growth of globalization, the question of the formation of unrecognized states is becoming more frequent and more acute. In an interdependent, interconnected world that is gaining global integrity, one of the highest values has become independent statehood. The emergence of unrecognized states is a global problem for the international community, which cannot always be resolved even by such influential and powerful organizations as the UN and NATO. Analysis of recent research and publications. Among scholars who specialize in international law, there are many scientific papers on the problems of recognition. M. Aleksievets, S. Vidnyansky, V. Golovchenko, A. Zlenko, O. Ivchenko, B. Korneenko, Y. Makar, V. Matvienko, L. Chekalenko and many other domestic authors devoted their works to this issue. The purpose of the scientific article is a general overview of theories, procedures, forms of recognition of states, and the study of relevant practices in this area. Article’s main body. The article deals with issues related to the international recognition of the newly created states by other states. In this regard, there are a number of unresolved issues in international law in terms of their justification and regulation. The authors point out that when a new state is created, the international community should cooperate in some way with it, and there are no certain international norms on how to act. The article examines the main provisions of theories of recognition of states: constitutive and declarative, and the problems that arise in connection with their practical application. The authors consider the thesis that there is a world practice when states can enter into certain relations with other states before their official recognition, explaining this by the existence of three possible forms of recognition: “de jure”, “de facto”, “ad hoc”. At the same time, diplomatic relations and exchange of embassies arise only during the official recognition – recognition “de jure”. Conclusions and prospects for the development: The lack of an international act that would define the procedure and criteria for the recognition of states is due to the uniqueness of each case and the complex system of international relations. Currently, there are no clear and specific criteria that would determine when and under what conditions a new state can be recognized or not recognized by the international community. The emergence of an increasing number of unrecognized states in the international arena requires new approaches and research.

Crossing the red line: The use of chemical weapons in Syria and what should happen now

2017 ◽  
Vol 99 (906) ◽  
pp. 959-993 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yasmin Naqvi
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Community ◽  
Chemical Weapons ◽  
Accountability Mechanism ◽  
Red Line

AbstractThe use of chemical weapons in the armed conflict in Syria has attracted universal and widespread condemnation and has led to unified responses by various international bodies. This article examines the international community's responses to chemical weapons use in Syria from the perspective of international law. It also analyzes the potential options for accountability that are available for chemical weapons-related crimes. The intention is ultimately to make the case that the special status the international community has ascribed to chemical weapons crimes could be harnessed to create an accountability mechanism, such as an ad hoc tribunal, that could help pave the complex road towards a negotiated peace.

The Law of Genocide

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Weiner
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Crime ◽  
International Community ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Genocide Convention ◽  
Sovereign State ◽  
Winston Churchill ◽  
United Nations General ◽  
International War

Genocide is described as the most extreme form of crime against humanity; Winston Churchill even called it the “crime with no name.” The word “genocide” was coined by Raphael Lemkin, a Polish lawyer who embarked on a mission to persuade the international community to accept genocide as an international crime under international law. In 1946, the first session of the United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution declaring genocide as a crime under international law. This resolution became the basis for the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, introduced in 1948. However, it would take another fifty years before the Genocide Convention would establish an International Criminal Court that would prosecute international war criminals. In the 1990s, special ad hoc tribunals were created for Yugoslavia and Rwanda to deal with international crimes such as genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. In reaction to the failure of the international community to deal with genocide in Rwanda, a great deal of emphasis has been placed on the norm of “the Responsibility to Protect.” The Genocide Convention was tested in the case brought by Bosnia and Herzegovina against Serbia (originally Serbia and Montenegro) in 1993. It was the first time in history that a sovereign state was placed on trial for the commission of genocide. The implications and ramifications of the International Court of Justice’s ruling that the Serbian government did not commit genocide in Bosnia became a subject of considerable debate among legal scholars.

Sports competitions as an atypical way to recognize ad hoc in international law

2020 ◽  
pp. 87-92
Author(s):  
Ivan Shchehlakov
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
The State ◽  
The Other ◽  
International Exchange ◽  
Intercultural Dialogue ◽  
Main Body ◽  
Legal Consequences ◽  
Problem Setting

Problem setting. Nowadays there are frequent cases of sports competitions between states, which are not formally a recognition of the state, but show the establishment of certain relations between the states, one of which does not recognize the other one. In addition, since the second half of the 20th century sport has become an integral part of international relations. Furthermore, it contributes to the intensification of international exchange, allowing people to establish intercultural dialogue and overcome political nature’s conflicts. Target research. To determine the legal consequences of sports competitions between states, one of which is not recognized by the other, and to find out whether these cases constitute an ad hoc recognition. Analysis of recent researches and publications. The topic of recognition in international law was an object of research of a large number of both domestic and foreign scientists, among which Janatayev H. M., Mitik O. V., Tunkin G. I., Holina E. A., Feldman D. Yi., whose doctrinal developments provide an important theoretical basis for studying the issue of determining atypical ways of an ad hoc recognition. Article’s main body. Features of ad hoc recognition were analyzed in the article. It was established that for an ad hoc recognition a participation of official representatives of the states in negotiations are important. It is also determined that competitions with the participation of Kosovo Republic and other states which did not recognize it, are recognition ad hoc. Conclusions and prospects of development. It is proposed to consider the participation of non-State entities, which are authorized by the State to represent it in certain sports, in preparation for inter-state competitions in which the states, one of which do not recognize the other one, take part as an ad hoc recognition.

Contemporary International Tribunals

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antônio Augusto ◽  
Cançado Trindade
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals ◽  
International Human ◽  
International Tribunals ◽  
Cross Fertilization

More recently, jurisprudential cross-fertilization has kept on being pursued in particular by international human rights tribunals and international criminal tribunals. This is reassuring, as, despite their distinct jurisdictions, their work is complementary, in their common mission of imparting justice, in distinct domains of international law. Jurisprudential cross-fertilization fosters cohesion and the unity of law. Particularly attention is currently devoted to the preservation of the legacy of the ad hoc international criminal tribunals.

Identifying Community Interests in International Law

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rüdiger Wolfrum
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
International Community ◽  
Available P ◽  
General Question ◽  
Global Commons ◽  
Settlement Systems ◽  
Community Interest ◽  
National Jurisdiction ◽  
Advisory Opinions

This chapter explores the general question of how to establish that the regulation of a certain matter constitutes a matter of community-wide concern, which is the necessary step for the recognition of community obligation. The hypothesis is that such a qualification must, first, be well founded factually and, secondly, accepted as such in a legal or political legitimizing process. On this basis, the chapter suggests that the governance of spaces beyond national jurisdiction constitutes a community interest and has to be guided by the interests of the international community. Exploring this question with respect to key common spaces and particular issues, the chapter notes the difficulty of most of the dispute settlement systems, which, being bilateral, are not fully adequate to address questions related to the management of global commons as well as for the protection of the environment. To avoid this difficulty, the chapter suggests greater reliance on advisory opinions where available.

Advances and progress in the obligation to return the remains of missing and forcibly disappeared persons

2017 ◽  
Vol 99 (905) ◽  
pp. 709-733
Author(s):  
Grażyna Baranowska
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
International Community ◽  
International Courts ◽  
Missing Persons

AbstractThis article analyzes the evolution in international law of the obligation to search for and return the remains of forcibly disappeared and missing persons. Receiving the remains of forcibly disappeared and missing persons is one of the primary needs of their families, who bring the issue to international courts and non-judicial mechanisms. This obligation has been incrementally recognized and developed by different human rights courts, which have included the obligation to search for and return the remains of disappeared persons in their remedies. In parallel to the development of the obligation by international courts, the international community has begun to become more involved in assisting in return of the remains of forcibly disappeared and missing persons to their families.

Individual Criminal Responsibility before the International Criminal Court

2012 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-70 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara Goy
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
Individual Criminal Responsibility

For more than 15 years the two ad hoc Tribunals, the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), have interpreted the requirements of different forms of individual criminal responsibility. It is thus helpful to look at whether and to what extent the jurisprudence of the ICTY/ICTR may provide guidance to the International Criminal Court (ICC). To this end, this article compares the requirements of individual criminal responsibility at the ICTY/ICTR and the ICC. The article concludes that, applied with caution, the jurisprudence of the ICTY/ICTR – as an expression of international law – can assist in interpreting the modes of liability under the ICC Statute. ICTY/ICTR case law seems to be most helpful with regard to accessorial forms of liability, in particular their objective elements. Moreover, it may assist in interpreting the subjective requirements set out in Article 30 ICC Statute.

scholarly journals Kurdish Regional Self-rule Administration in Syria: A new Model of Statehood and its Status in International Law Compared to the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) in Iraq

2016 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 468-488 ◽  
Author(s):  
LOQMAN RADPEY
Keyword(s):  
Civil War ◽  
International Law ◽  
International Community ◽  
Regional Government ◽  
Autonomous Region ◽  
New Model ◽  
Northern Iraq ◽  
Syrian Population ◽  
The Creation ◽  
Self Rule

AbstractHaving been supressed and denied their rights by successive Syrian governments over the years, Syrian Kurds are now asserting ade factoautonomy. Since the withdrawal of the Syrian President's forces from the ethnically Kurdish areas in the early months of the current civil war, the inhabitants have declared a self-rule government along the lines of the Kurdistan regional government in northern Iraq. For Syrian Kurds, the creation of a small autonomous region is a dream fulfilled, albeit one unrecognized by the international community. Some 15% to 17% of the Syrian population is Kurdish. Whether they can achieve statehood will depend on a reading of international law and on how the international community reacts. There are certain aspects which differentiate Kurdish self-rule in Syria from its counterpart in Iraq.

The Decay of Consent: International Law in an Age of Global Public Goods

2014 ◽  
Vol 108 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-40 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nico Krisch
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Public Goods ◽  
International Law ◽  
International Community ◽  
Global Public Goods ◽  
Community Values ◽  
International Legal Order ◽  
The Face ◽  
Common Policies ◽  
The Cost

The consensual structure of the international legal order, with its strong emphasis on the sovereign equality of states, has always been somewhat precarious. In different waves over the centuries, it has been attacked for its incongruence with the realities of inequality in international politics, for its tension with ideals of democracy and human rights, and for standing in the way of more effective problem solving in the international community. While surprisingly resilient in the face of such challenges, the consensual structure has seen renewed attacks in recent years. In the 1990s, those attacks were mainly “moral” in character. They were related to the liberal turn in international law, and some of them, under the banner of human rights, aimed at weakening principles of nonintervention and immunity. Others, starting from the idea of an emerging “international community,” questioned the prevailing contractual models of international law and emphasized the rise of norms and processes reflecting community values rather than individual state interests. Since the beginning of the new millennium, the focus has shifted, and attacks are more often framed in terms of effectiveness or global public goods. Classical international law is regarded as increasingly incapable of providing much-needed solutions for the challenges of a globalized world; as countries become ever more interdependent and vulnerable to global challenges, an order that safeguards states’ freedoms at the cost of common policies is often seen as anachronistic. According to this view, what is needed—and what we are likely to see—is a turn to nonconsensual lawmaking mechanisms, especially through powerful international institutions with majoritarian voting rules.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document