Suchergebnisse

In its judgment No. 238/2014 the Italian Constitutional Court, whilst appearing to show respect for the ICJ's 2012 judgment in Jurisdictional Immunities of the State, makes notable criticisms of that judgment and insists on its own role in the progressive development of international law in the field of State immunity. In particular, the main legal argument of the Constitutional Court, based on the fundamental and inviolable character of the right of access to justice in constitutional law, can also be used, although modified to some extent, in international law. The Court's argument can also resolve the possible conflict between the international norm of State immunity, on the one hand, and the international norms on fundamental human rights and access to justice, on the other. The present contribution seeks to demonstrate that: (a) the right of access to justice and the connected right to reparation for violations of fundamental human rights are established by two customary international norms; (b) there is a potential conflict between these norms and the norm of State immunity; (c) this conflict becomes real and concrete when the limits on access to justice and reparation laid down by immunity are unjustified in accordance with the rule of "equivalent protection"; and (d) the solution to that conflict derives from the normative superiority of the customary norms on access to justice and reparation (being peremptory in nature when functionally linked to the violation of fundamental human rights) over the norm of State immunity. The judgment of the Constitutional Court, utilizing legal reasoning that can also translate to the level of international law, demonstrates that osmosis may occur between the arguments used in constitutional and international law, and that today there is growing interaction between the domestic and international legal orders and their common values. The law of human rights, placed at the very center of the Constitutional Court's judgment, is the field in which this community of values emerges most clearly.

The material is a review of the scientific monograph of D.R. Salikhov "Protest relations in Consti-tutional Law: from theory to practice of constitutional and legal regulation". The comments and suggestions made do not in any way affect the high assessment of the peer-reviewed work, which undoubtedly has theoretical and practical significance for the development of the science of Consti-tutional Law. The author presents an exceptionally relevant, original and comprehensive study con-tributing to the development of the problems of Constitutional Law. The results of the analysis are fully reflected in the text of the reviewed monograph

This series aims to provide authoritative guidance on all aspects of the law of international organizations. This area of law has, over the years, developed into a separate field of study within the discipline of public international law. While it covers the law of individual organizations such as the United Nations, the World Trade Organization, the International Criminal Court, and the European Union, it also includes thematic institutional law topics such as membership, decision-making, legal personality, and responsibility of international organizations. In these and other areas, international organizations face similar questions and share a number of common characteristics. The series aims to include works written by practitioners as well as academics