The Contribution of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea to the Protection of the Marine Environment

In its 25 years’ history, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea has dealt with a number of environmental cases. This has primarily occurred in the context of proceedings relating to the prescription of provisional measures and in advisory proceedings. This article explains how the Tribunal has reaffirmed and developed the basic environmental principles in Part XII of the Law of the Sea Convention, including the obligation to protect and preserve the marine environment, the precautionary approach, the duty to conduct environmental impact assessments, and the duty to cooperate, as well as the duty of due diligence, thereby contributing to the protection of the marine environment. Part XII of the Convention is a product of the 1970s and its provisions therefore reflect the state of international environmental law at that time. However, the Tribunal has interpreted and applied the aforementioned principles consistently with the contemporary state of international environmental law.

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF STAGES AND METHODS OF ARMENIAN GENOCIDE IN THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE AND TUTSI GENOCIDE IN RWANDA

In genocide studies, for a more comprehensive, objective study of genocide committed against victim groups, the method of comparative analysis is used, which allows to identify both similarities and features between different examples of this crime. In the framework of the article, a comparative analysis of the stages and methods of the Armenian-Tutsi genocides was made. The choice of the Rwandan genocide as a subject of comparison with the Armenian Genocide is due to the fact that, unlike the organizers of the Armenian Genocide in the Ottoman Empire, who were convicted by Turkish military tribunals, the organizers of the Tutsi genocide in Rwanda were prosecuted by the International Tribunal, created by the UN Security Council in 1994. Revealing the similarities between the stages and methods of committing two identical crimes will provide an opportunity to reveal the precedent of condemning the Rwandan Genocide in the International Tribunal and the possibilities of applying it to the Armenian Genocide case in the future in an international court. As a result of the comparative analysis of the stages of the two genocides, the methods of implementation, in addition to many similarities, significant differences were registered, from which we have separated the following: 1. In order to end the Armenian Genocide, the Turkish authorities chose the period of World War II, when influential world politicians were engaged in hostilities on different fronts of the war and they would not be able to intervene and prevent its implementation, while the Tutsi genocide in Rwanda took place during the civil war that broke out in this country. 2. If the Russian Caucasus Army was an obstacle to the criminal policy of genocide of the Armenian population of the Ottoman Empire, which during the hostilities on the RussianTurkish front with the support of Armenian volunteer units occupied the provinces of Erzurum, Van, Bitlis in Western Armenia, as well as Trabzon. The complete extermination of the Tutsis in Rwanda was halted by the advance of their military formation, the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RWF), which managed to enter the capital, Kigali, to end the Houthi regime's criminal policy against the Tutsis. Unlike the RSF, the Armenian volunteer detachments in the Russian Caucasus Army did not act independently, they were not a military force capable of stopping the genocidal policy of the Ottoman Empire against the Armenian population. 3. The presence of the Russian Caucasus Army in some parts of Western Armenia, which was to some extent a guarantee of security for the genocidal Armenian population, as well as the Russian-Turkish front line, only temporarily stopped the continuation of the criminal policy of the Turkish authorities towards Armenians. During the revolutionary upheavals in Russia in 1917, the Russian Caucasian army was demoralized and disbanded, after which the Turkish authorities were able to continue the policy of the Armenian Genocide not only in the territories of Western Armenia formerly controlled by Russian troops, but also in Eastern Armenia and the Caucasus. The same can be said about Cilicia, when after the departure of the French troops, the Kemalists had the opportunity to continue the policy of genocide against the Armenians of Cilicia.

Prezența militară rusească în Republica Moldova prin prisma jurisprudenței CEDO / Russian military presence in the Republic of Moldova in the light of ECHR jurisprudence

In the article below, I analyse the role of the Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Ilașcu and others v. Moldova and Russia. This judgment, being pronounced by an international tribunal, benefits from the authority and power of the res judicata. However, this argument was “strategically ignored” by the Moldovan political establishment. I tried to find the answer to the question: Why has Moldovan diplomacy never used this strong argument, provided by the ECHR?

Rebus sic stantibus as a Stabilizing Doctrine in the Climate Crisis

In the face of massive, unanticipated and even disjunctive changes, the balance of the respective interests of the state parties to existing treaties may no longer survive the changed—or changing—climate landscape. While, ideally, the co-contracting states to such treaties could mutually agree to terminate or revise their treaty obligations to accommodate such changes and redress the now imbalance of interests in the treaty, some scenarios are bound to be contentious. In such cases, is there any other procedure that can provide for an orderly and fair adjustment of treaties so as to avert a breakdown of the network of treaties and a destabilization of world order? This article proposes that the rebus sic stantibus doctrine may function as a stabilizing doctrine for maintaining and possibly adjusting treaty regimes in an orderly fashion. Unlike the doctrine of necessity or many explicit treaty carve-outs, such as the security exception of the US Model Bilateral Investment Treaty, the doctrine of rebus sic stantibus may allow for both an objective test and also one that must be pleaded before a third-party arbiter. For this reason, rebus operates within controlled limits. Rebus offers an international tribunal the opportunity to set out a fair termination or revision of a climate-impacted treaty. I trace the evolution of rebus as a stabilizing doctrine and illustrate the potentialities of its application to the climate crisis.

A Satisfactory Answer? The Enrica Lexie Award and the Jurisdiction Over Incidental Questions

This article situates the Enrica Lexie award’s stance on the Tribunal’s jurisdiction over the marines’ immunity within the broader debate on the scope of the jurisdiction of international courts and tribunals over incidental questions. After illustrating the Tribunal’s approach to the question at hand, the paper appraises those instances where an international tribunal with limited jurisdiction can decide issues and apply rules that are “external” to its principal jurisdiction. It then focuses on the question of the jurisdiction over incidental issues, which is the most debated avenue for an international tribunal to engage with substantive matters falling outside the scope of the tribunal’s ratione materiae jurisdiction. Finally, the Tribunal’s approach in the Enrica Lexie award is critically assessed against the above debate. It is submitted that, although the award arguably put an end to the longstanding dispute between India and Italy, the Tribunal’s reasoning does not seem to be in line with the conditions for the exercise of jurisdiction over incidental questions as roughly sketched in relevant case law.

Contractive Practices in History of Serbo-Croatian Relations

The article examines Serbo-Croatian conflict in the XX - early XXI centuries. The history of the formation of the Serbian and Croatian statehood is analyzed; the reasons for the confrontation between two close Slavic peoples are determined and the evolution of their relationship is highlighted; clarified the determinants that determine the antagonistic nature and demonstrative cruelty of the Serbo-Croatian confrontation. The formation after the “Patriotic War” of 1991-1995 of two parallel “worlds” was stated, as a result of which the Croatian and Serbian communities hardly intersect in everyday life. Constant quarrels and fights on ethnic grounds, burning of flags and desecration of state symbols have been and remain daily occurrences from the very beginning of reintegration, and war criminals convicted by an international tribunal are perceived by the two communities as national heroes and defenders of the Motherland. It points to the gradual aggravation of interethnic confrontation in Croatia and the growth of xenophobic sentiments, which has been observed recently. The conclusion about the failure of past and modern attempts to establish Serbo-Croatian cooperation in building a common future has been substantiated. It is emphasized that the Serbo-Croatian conflict does not look exhausted, not only because of the heavy burden of the past, which causes mutual accusations and long-standing hatred. Attention is drawn to the fact that this confrontation is primarily about the future - about the fate of various national projects. The mirage of “Greater Serbia” still tempts a significant part of the Serbs, who are hatching revanchist intentions, while the Croats are determined to defend their won independence. Accordingly, under certain international conditions, the confrontation of political ambitions in the Balkans can easily flare up with renewed vigor, once again confirming the reputation of this region as a “powder keg” of Europe.

Regulatory Coherence

Part II comprises two chapters, Chapter Three and Chapter Four. These chapters together investigate the decisions and advisory opinions of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) and United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) Annex VII tribunals, as well as other Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) cases. The courts and tribunals studied in these chapters make use of a broad range of interpretive methodologies in identifying emerging global regulatory standards, including reliance on the inbuilt logic of the regulatory schemes they are applying. The standards articulated make relatively minimal demands on domestic legal systems compared with more demanding standards that could have been developed. In this respect the standards appear to enhance traditional procedural justifications for international law’s claim to legitimate authority. Chapter Three focuses on tests for ‘regulatory coherence’.

The Concept of Freedom of Navigation in Light of ITLOS Interpretation in the Norstar Case

The long-awaited judgment on the M/V Norstar case has clarified – at least for the time being – the meaning, interpretation and scope of application of the principle of freedom of the seas as a long-standing, customary principle of international law. Through an historical analysis of the principle and a framing of the ruling within the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, this article aims at providing a critical reading of the decision of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea.