Search results

On 5 September 2019, Advocate General Bobek delivered his Opinion in the Budapest Bank case following a request for a preliminary ruling from the Hungarian Supreme Court. AG Bobek advised on several matters such as the existence of an obligation for National Competition Authorities to expressly indicate which type of collusion they condemn and whether the facilitating, accepting and implementing of an agreement amounts to a concerted practice. However, this Opinion is particularly interesting because of the clarification it brings to the analytical framework to assess whether a practice could be considered a 'by object' restriction.

AbstractThis article examines the evolution of humanitarian interventions in the 1990s and examines whether or not R2P can be a catalyst for shifting the norm of humanitarian intervention from a permissive condition – whereby it is generally considered allowable in the international system – to an obligation on states to protect against mass violence against civilians. I conclude that shifting to a norm of obligation is likely to be a tough sell in the United States. While Americans express general support for responding to genocide, there are strong indications that both the public and elites are not likely to endorse a new norm that obligates the deployment of American troops into regional and civil conflicts around the globe. This article examines the prospects of American support for this pillar of R2P. It begins with an examination of the literature on how norms are created and then provides an overview of the process by which the norm of humanitarian intervention emerged in the 1990s and the degree to which it is embedded in American public opinion and decision-making circles. It then examines the challenges of gaining American public and political support for transforming the permissive norm of humanitarian intervention into a more formal obligation under R2P.

AbstractThis article explores the legal obligations of Occupying Powers with regard to climate change adaptation for local populations and their environment under the law of occupation, specifically in the context of prolonged belligerent occupations. It focuses on the critical matter of water and food security, in light of the increasing frequency and severity of extreme weather events. After shedding light on the intricate issues that arise at the intersection of climate change and belligerent occupation, the article argues that the general obligations incumbent upon the Occupying Power under occupation law, when viewed through a climate lens, can be construed as addressing the heightened climate vulnerability faced by occupied populations.

AbstractAdministrative weaknesses in post colonial Africa have not commonly been assessed against notions of responsibility. Regarded as involving both institutionalized controls and moral obligations, responsibility provides a useful means of assessing the limitations and weaknesses of administration. Having elucidated the ideal of responsibility, the article takes Zambia as illustrating a situation present in different third world countries where administration is unsatisfactory judged against the ideal. Weaknesses are elaborated and the reasons for failures discussed. Emphasis is placed on the overcentralization of control in the person of the President and the failure in staff development and training to recognize the importance of encouraging a sense of moral obligation and the undue emphasis on management techniques.

Introduction -- I: The International Legal Framework. A. International Responsibility and Reliability. B. Authorization and Supervision. C. Registration. D. Conclusions -- II: The National Legal Framework. A. United States of America. B. Russian Federation. C. Australia. D. United Kingdom. E. Ukraine. F. Sweden. G. South Africa. H. Japan. I. France. J. Canada. K. Harmonization and New Rules. L. Conclusions -- III: Argentine Space Law and Policy. A. National Application of International Law. B. Nature of Argentine National Space Law. C. Responsibility and Liability. D. Implementation of the Authorization and Supervision Principle. E. Implementation of the Registration Obligations. F. Conclusions -- IV: Conclusions and Proposal. A. Conclusions Regarding the International Legal Framework. B. Conclusions Regarding the National Legal Framework. C. Conclusions Regarding Argentine Space Law and Policy. D. Recommendations and Proposal -- About the Author -- Bibliography -- List of Acronyms.

Human rights — International law — Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, 1951, Article 33(2) — Non-refoulement principle — Relationship with wider human rights obligations — Effect in national law — Constitution of KenyaAliens — Refugees — Non-refoulement — Exceptions for national security and crime — Whether exceptions to be construed restrictively — Relationship between Article 33(2) of the Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, 1951 and human rights instruments — Requirement of individual assessment — The law of Kenya

Human rights — Admissibility of authors' communication to Human Rights Committee — Consideration of merits — Right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion — Assessment of claim of conscientious objection to military service — Whether within ambit of Article 18 of International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966 — Whether restriction on authors permitted under Article 18(3) of Covenant — Whether necessary — Whether State Party violating its obligations under Article 18(1) of Covenant — Effective remedy

States as international persons — State succession — Succession with regard to contractual obligations — Delivery of goods to and work done for the Government of British India — Independence of India — Formation of two new States of India and Pakistan — Places where goods delivered and work done becoming part of Pakistan — Devolution of liability on successor — Whether the new State of Pakistan liable — Indian Independence (Rights, Property and Liabilities) Order 1947 — The law of Pakistan.

State succession — Succession with regard to obligations for torts — Pillage of private neutral property by soldiers — Acts committed by Imperial Russian soldiers — Soviet Decree of 1919 repudiating liability — Effect of — Claim under United States International Claims Settlement Act, 1949.State responsibility — In general — Attributability — Responsibility for improper conduct of military operations — Pillage of neutral property — Responsibility of State for acts of its armed forces — Acts of Imperial Russian soldiers in 1915 — Responsibility of Soviet Government.

This paper hopes to challenge the existing paradigm in refugee studies, which presents the development of domestic asylum policies as being essentially driven by a conflict between international humanitarian norms and the self-interest calculations of sovereign states. This paper will show that asylum policies are determined more by conflicting domestic principles, and that the dominance of one or another of the competing domestic principles is decided largely by the prevailing 'social contract' notions held by the state. That is, notions about social contract determine what the perceived obligations and priorities of the state are; this 'hierarchy of obligations' is clearly manifested in, and indeed guides the development of, asylum policies. Looking first at the macro level, the paper outlines some of the important philosophical dimensions of the social contract idea, some possible variations, as well as the role of the social contract in international refugee and human rights law. Moving on to the chosen case studies, the second half of the paper examines the dominant notions of 'social contract' in Turkey and Germany, and highlights some of the many ways these notions impacted upon refugee protection in each country during the 1990s. Finally, the paper compares and contrasts briefly some of the themes and processes which emerged in the two case studies, and concludes by evaluating these results in light of the existing refugee studies paradigm.

Une nouvelle version de l'Organisation commune des marchés de la banane entre en vigueur le 1er janvier 1999, ses objectifs sont : respecter la préférence communautaire et les obligations internationales; garantir le revenu des producteurs communautaires; permettre un écoulement sur le marché à des prix équitables pour les consommateurs, les producteurs communautaires, ACP et des pays tiers; respecter les flux et les circuits commerciaux traditionnels tout en laissant au système la possibilité d'évoluer

The debate on the UN's possible use of drones for peacekeeping took a turn in 2013 when the Security Council granted the Department of Peacekeeping Operations (DPKO) permission to contract surveillance drones for MONUSCO, its peacekeeping mission in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC).This article examines what drone capability may entail for UN peacekeeping missions. We find that surveillance drones can help missions acquire better information and improve the situational awareness of its troops, as well as inform decision-making by leadership, police, and civilian components of the mission. We see a significant potential in the use of surveillance drones to improve efforts to protect civilians, increase UN troops' situational awareness, and improve access to vulnerable populations in high-risk theaters. The use of drones can dramatically improve information-gathering capacities in proximity to populations at risk, thereby strengthening the ability of peacekeepers to monitor and respond to human rights abuses as well as violations of international humanitarian law (IHL). Drones may also enable peacekeepers to maintain stealth surveillance of potential spoilers, including arms smugglers and embargo breakers. They could additionally improve UN forces' own targeting practices, further contributing to the protection of civilians (PoC). Furthermore, we emphasize how drone capability significantly increases peacekeepers' precautionary obligations under IHL in targeting situations: the availability of drones triggers the obligation to use them to gather information in order to avoid civilian casualties or other violations of IHL or international human rights law.There may soon come a shift among human rights groups, from being skeptical of the use of drones by UN peacekeepers to demanding that peacekeeping operations be equipped with surveillance drones for humanitarian and human rights reasons – shifting the current debate, which has focused largely on the negative impact of the use of drones, to a more balanced debate that considers more objectively what drones are and what they can be used for. Finally, the debate about armed drones looms on the horizon for the UN as well – and we outline some of the key dilemmas that the inclusion of such a capability will entail.

Background. Transplant tourism is a phenomenon where patients travel abroad to purchase organs for transplants. This paper presents the results of a fieldwork study by describing the experiences of Dutch transplant professionals confronted by patients who allegedly purchased kidney transplants abroad. Second, it addresses the legal definition and prohibition of transplant tourism under national and international law. The final part addresses the legal implications of transplant tourism for patients and physicians. Methods. The study involved seventeen interviews among transplant physicians, transplant coordinators and policyexperts and a review of national and international legislation that prohibit transplant tourism. Results. All Dutch transplant centers are confronted with patients who undergo transplants abroad. The estimated total number is four per year. Transplant tourism is not explicitly defined under national and international law. While the purchase of organs is almost universally prohibited, transplant tourism is hardly punishable because national laws generally do not apply to crimes committed abroad. Moreover, the purchase of organs (abroad) is almost impossible to prove. Conclusions. Transplant tourism is a legally complex phenomenon that warrants closer research and dialogue. The legal rights and obligations of patients and physicians confronted with transplant tourism should be clarified.

В 1946 г. Нюрнбергский процесс установил правовые итоги Второй мировой войны. Грубые и массовые нарушения прав человека в Европе стали мощным стимулом к учреждению эффективных гарантий основных прав человека на региональном уровне (Совет Европы). Международно-правовые обязательства Российской Федерации, связанные с ее участием в Европейской конвенции о защите прав человека и основных свобод, предусматривают необходимость исполнения государством постановлений Европейского Суда по правам человека, вынесенных в отношении Российской Федерации. Правозащитные ценности, составляющие основу Конституции Российской Федерации и Европейской конвенции о защите прав человека и основных свобод, не вступают в противоречие друг с другом в силу конституционных положений, которые не могут быть противопоставлены друг другу. Реализация Европейской конвенции о защите прав человека и основных свобод как международного договора не может сопровождаться свободой усмотрения государства относительно обязывающего характера постановлений Европейского Суда по правам человека. Отношение к правовым позициям Европейского Суда по правам человека должно базироваться на принципе уважения практики межгосударственных органов по защите прав и свобод человека. Во-первых, государство, признавшее юрисдикцию межгосударственного органа по защите прав и свобод человека, обязано учитывать практику этого органа по делам в отношении соответствующего государства. Во-вторых, государство не может заявлять о невозможности исполнения решений межгосударственного органа по защите прав и свобод человека, вынесенных по результатам рассмотрения индивидуальных обращений, или иным образом игнорировать взятые на себя международные обязательства. В то же время, допуская возможность вмешательства государства в осуществление тех или иных прав и свобод, Европейская конвенция о защите прав человека и основных свобод предусматривает наличие у государства определенной свободы регулирования прав и свобод человека. Эволюция Европейского Суда по правам человека как института международной защиты прав и свобод человека должна базироваться на признании государствами-членами Совета Европы принципа уважения практики Европейского Суда по правам человека. ; In 1946, the Nuremberg trials established the legal end of the Second World War. Gross and massive violations of human rights in Europe were a powerful incentive to the establishment of effective guarantees for fundamental human rights at the regional level (the Council of Europe). International legal obligations of the Russian Federation in connection with its participation in the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms require the state of execution of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights issued in respect of the Russian Federation. Human rights values forming the basis of the Constitution of the Russian Federation and the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms do not come into conflict with each other in the force of constitutional provisions which cannot be opposed to each other. The implementation of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms as an international treaty could not be accompanied by the discretion of the state in relation to the binding nature of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights. Attitude towards the legal positions of the European Court of Human Rights should be based on the principle of respect for the practice of intergovernmental bodies for the protection of the rights and freedoms of the individual. First, the state recognized the jurisdiction of the intergovernmental body on protection of the rights and freedoms of the individual, obliged to consider the practice of this body in the matter in respect of the state concerned. Second, a state may not plead impossibility of performance of decisions of the intergovernmental body for the protection of the rights and freedoms of the individual, issued upon review of individual complaints, or otherwise ignore the undertaken international obligations. At the same time, admitting the possibility of state interference in the exercise of those rights and freedoms, the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms requires the state some discretion to regulate the rights and freedoms of the individual. Evolution of the European Court of Human Rights as an institution of international protection of the rights and freedoms of the individual should be based on the recognition by member States of the Council of Europe the principle of respect for the practice of the European Court of Human Rights.