Suchergebnisse

"This volume, now in its second and revised edition, deals with the legal status of the three Baltic States - Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania - as a consequence of the illegality of the Soviet annexation in 1940-1991. It offers a detailed historical overview of the Soviet takeover of the Baltic States in 1939/1940 and analysis of international law as it was in force, also regionally and bilaterally, at the time. It examines the role of the continuity of the diplomatic representations of the Baltic States and other manifestations of the Western non-recognition of the Soviet annexation. Moreover, the book examines the nature of the restoration of the Baltic States in 1991 based on their State continuity claim. It also studies in detail questions such as borders, citizenship and reparation claims, and asks to what extent State continuity could or could not be restored in practice. Compared to the first edition, the text has been updated (for example, on developments regarding border treaties) but also more background references have been added on the history of the Baltic States, Soviet and post-Soviet Russian responses to the continuity claim of the Baltic States, etc. The book interprets the Soviet annexation and Baltic States' continuity case against the wider backdrop of developments in international law in the 20th century and argues that the outcome reflected important normative developments in international law, away from mere effectivity. The case of the Baltic States will be relevant for current and future cases of illegal annexation, following the threat and use of military force prohibited under international law"--

This volume, now in its second and revised edition, deals with the legal status of the three Baltic States - Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania - as a consequence of the illegality of the Soviet annexation in 1940-1991. It offers a detailed historical overview of the Soviet takeover of the Baltic States in 1939/1940 and analysis of international law as it was in force, also regionally and bilaterally, at the time. It examines the role of the continuity of the diplomatic representations of the Baltic States and other manifestations of the Western non-recognition of the Soviet annexation. Moreover, the book examines the nature of the restoration of the Baltic States in 1991 based on their State continuity claim. It also studies in detail questions such as borders, citizenship and reparation claims, and asks to what extent State continuity could or could not be restored in practice. Compared to the first edition, the text has been updated (for example, on developments regarding border treaties) but also more background references have been added on the history of the Baltic States, Soviet and post-Soviet Russian responses to the continuity claim of the Baltic States, etc. The book interprets the Soviet annexation and Baltic States' continuity case against the wider backdrop of developments in international law in the 20th century and argues that the outcome reflected important normative developments in international law, away from mere effectivity. The case of the Baltic States will be relevant for current and future cases of illegal annexation, following the threat and use of military force prohibited under international law

Russia and European Human-Rights Law critically examines Russia's experiences as part of the European human righs protection system since its admittance in 1998. The authors combine legal and constructivist international relations theory perspectives in this study of Russia's practice and rhetoric in the Council of Europe and before the European Court of Human Rights.

The resolution "Territorial Integrity of Ukraine: Defending the Principles of the Charter of the United Nations" was adopted by the UN General Assembly (UNGA) on October 12, 2022, with 143 UN member states in favor, five against, thirty-five abstentions, and ten not voting. It is another important UNGA resolution on Ukraine, after the UNGA qualified as aggression Russia's invasion of Ukraine since February 24, 2022 in its resolution of 2 March 2022. That resolution had 141 states voting in favor, thus a slight increase in votes supporting Ukraine's rights under international law can be seen in the resolution at issue.

AbstractThis Current Development Essay discusses the international legal implications of constitutional amendments adopted in the Russian Federation by an "all-Russian vote," a quasi-referendum from June 25 to July 1, 2020. The most important of these amendments gives the Russian Constitution priority over decisions made by international courts and treaty bodies. The amendments also address Russia's state succession to the Soviet Union. Another provision protects Russia's territorial integrity. The Essay discusses the background to these amendments, their content, and their significance for international law.

Abstract: This paper examines the content of Part III, Section XIV of the Versailles Peace Treaty which dealt with Russia and 'the Russian States', i. e. States that in 1919 were in the process of secession from Russia. The obvious link between the Versailles Peace Treaty and the earlier German-Soviet Brest-Litovsk Treaty of 1918 is illuminated as far as sovereignty in Eastern Europe is concerned. Moreover, the often less discussed nexus between the Versailles Peace Treaty's Section XIV and the German-Soviet Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact's secret protocols of 1939 is examined. If the Versailles Peace Treaty was the anti-Brest-Litovsk Treaty, then the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact the anti-Versailles Treaty in Eastern Europe. Nevertheless, sovereignty in Eastern Europe as we know it after 1989 and 1991 was to an important extent shaped at Versailles in 1919 which is a continuing legacy of the Versailles Peace Treaty.

Russlands Völkerrechtsverständnis ist paradox: Die Regierung spricht viel über die Bedeutung völkerrechtlicher Normen, wird jedoch in Ländern wie der Ukraine und Georgien als Verletzter ebendieser Normen wahrgenommen. Russlands Völkerrechtsverständnis ist durch einige Besonderheiten gekennzeichnet, die einerseits auf die Geschichte des Landes als Großmacht, andererseits auf die relative Schwäche des öffentlichen Rechts als Einhegungsinstrument der Exekutive zurückzuführen sind. In diesem Beitrag werden einige Aspekte diskutiert, die Russlands heutige Einstellung zum Völkerrecht erklären könnten.