The Effect of Changes of Sovereignty on Nationality

1927 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 268-278 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. Luella Gettys

In the vast field of international relationships, one of the intricate problems is that which has centered around the question of nationality. No uniform rules have been laid down either by conventional or by customary international law for the determination of nationality. Unfortunately the whole matter is regulated by municipal law, and in consequence of the diversity of regulations many conflicts have resulted. There are additional complications encountered in that phase of the problem which deals with the relation of state succession and nationality. When a state acquires new territory by gift, cession, conquest, or by whatever means, the political status of the inhabitants of the territory must be determined.

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
William A. Schabas

Many areas of international law developed first as custom and were only subsequently, generally in the course of the twentieth century, subject to codification. Human rights law was different. It was viewed as quintessentially a matter of domestic concern, a subject shrouded in State sovereignty. Only following the Second World War was international human rights law recognised as a source of binding obligations, mainly through the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other instruments of the United Nations as well as the regional systems. Later, jurists began contending that the norms in these instruments might also be customary in nature. They struggled with identifying the two classic elements in the determination of custom, opinio juris and State practice. Most analysis of the content of customary international law was rather perfunctory and also quite conservative, confining itself largely to civil and political rights.


Author(s):  
De Wet Erika

This chapter explores potential formal requirements that may affect the validity of consent to direct military assistance. Customary international law only imposes two specific, formal limitations on the legal construct of military assistance on request. The first would be that the request for or consent to military assistance must be issued (and withdrawn) by the highest officials of a state, namely, the head of state and/or government. Where these two positions are not combined within the same person and there is disagreement between them as to whether consent exists, the domestic law of the country in question may be decisive in determining who has the final say in the matter. However, such disagreement between the two highest state officials is likely to be an indication of the political fragility of the consent, which should caution against relying exclusively on consent as the legal basis for the forcible measures. The second constraint imposed by customary international law concerns the requirement that ex ante consent as expressed in pro-invasion treaty clauses must be complemented by ad hoc consent at the time of the forcible measures. Apart from these two constraints, customary international law does not seem to impose any particular formal requirements on states expressing consent to forcible measures on its territory.


2020 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 704-739
Author(s):  
Xuexia Liao

Abstract This article revisits the package deal nature of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (LOSC) and its implications for determining customary international law. A survey of the case law illustrates that the International Court of Justice (ICJ) has not given particular weight to the fact that the LOSC was negotiated and accepted as a package deal. Nevertheless, the ICJ’s declaration that Article 121, paragraph 3 of the LOSC is a customary rule tends to be based on a ‘package deal approach’, which focuses on the textual and logical links between the paragraphs that manifest an ‘indivisible régime’. By exploring the difficulties of determining the customary status of Article 76(2)–(7) concerning the continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles, which may arise in the pending Nicaragua v. Colombia II case, this article calls for a cautious attitude towards determination of customary rules from the LOSC.


2018 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 131-149
Author(s):  
Cameron Miles

Article 38(1)(d) of the ICJ Statute provides that “judicial decisions” may serve as a subsidiary means for the determination of customary international law. The absence of a qualifying adjective to the term “judicial decisions” confirms that, at least ex facie, there is no priority to be given to international over domestic judgments in this respect. And yet – as the International Law Commission’s Draft Conclusions on Formation and Identification of Customary International Law confirms – the reality of international adjudication is one in which domestic judicial decisions are often side-lined. In this paper, I question the ILC’s assertion that this is due to the relative expertise of international versus domestic courts, and instead posit a model based on the shifting architectonics of international adjudication. Two related developments are key: (1) the florescence of international adjudicative bodies in the post-1945 era, and (2) the tendency for international courts and tribunals to see domestic judicial decisions as evidence of state practice and opinio juris under Article 38(1)(b), rather than as subsidiary means for the determination of custom – that is, as factual rather than legal precedents.


Author(s):  
Azaria Danae

Chapter 3 analyses the scope and content of treaty obligations regarding transit, revealing a variety of primary rules. The exercise in this chapter assists in the determination of when and how a breach of transit obligations takes place, thus providing the framework for the discussion in all the following chapters. Treaty obligations regarding transit are classified as obligations of conduct or of result. Finally, security exceptions in the GATT, the ECT and other language in bespoke pipeline agreements and the Model Inter-Governmental Pipeline Agreement prepared by the Energy Charter Secretariat, is examined with a view to establishing whether they constitute special circumstances precluding wrongfulness displacing countermeasures under customary international law or whether they form part of primary obligations incumbent on treaty parties.


2019 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 741-757
Author(s):  
Elisabeth Schweiger

AbstractOver the last decade, the concept targeted killing has received much attention in debates on the customary interpretation of the right to self-defence, particularly in the context of practices such as US armed drone attacks. In these debates, government silence has often been invoked as acquiescence to the jus ad bellum aspects of targeted killing. Focusing on the question of state silence on targeted killing practices by the Israeli and US governments in recent years, this article investigates over 900 UN Security Council and Human Rights Council debates and argues that there has been no tacit consent to targeted killing. The analysis firstly shows that the majority of states have condemned Israeli targeted killing practices and have raised concerns about armed drone attacks, while falling short of directly protesting against US practices. The article, secondly, applies the customary international law requirements for acquiescence and challenges the idea that silence on US armed drone attacks can be understood as a legal stance towards targeted killing. The article, finally, investigates the political context and engages with alternative interpretations of silence. Contextualizing acts of protest and lack of protest within an asymmetrical political context, the article posits that the invocation of silence as acquiescence in the case of targeted killing is problematic and risks complicity of legal knowledge production with the violence of hegemonic actors.


Pólemos ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 25-42
Author(s):  
Annalisa Ciampi

Abstract This paper explores the power of images vis-à-vis the practice and theory of international law, with a focus on rules of customary international law, i. e. the unwritten general rules of international law, that apply to all states (as well as to non-state actors falling within their scope of application), irrespective of specific acceptance. As Sherwin writes: “We are awash in images.” States, international organizations (IOs), non-governmental organizations (NGOs), insurgents, terrorists and other groups of individuals of all sort, are in the news and our movies, on our TV screens, newspapers, internet and social media. Modern technologies, visual digital technologies, in particular, have a profound impact on the means and speed of communications across the globe and immensely facilitate the task of seeking information of all sort. In international law, images are a means for spreading knowledge about the practice of states and other actors. As with law in general, images are also found to be a valuable resource in explicating the rules of international law. They aid and clarify the analysis of international law and the determination of the existence and content of rules of customary international law. In contemporary international settings, however, modern technologies of visual representation are also a means for influencing the development of international law, i. e. the existence and content of international norms. Moreover, looking at implementation, at no time in history has there been more information available to governments and the public about violations of international norms (particularly, but not exclusively human rights violations): more and more these violations are documented through images. Yet, international law doctrines have failed so far to comprehensively assess the power of images, beyond that of a toolkit for thick cultural description – the power of narrative – and analysis. The present essay offers a contribution in this direction.


Author(s):  
Vladislav V. Gruzdev ◽  
Dmitriy A. Babichev ◽  
Natal'ya A. Babicheva

The article is devoted to the burning problem that arose in 2014 in the Ukraine, in the regions of Lugansk and Donetsk, and that concerns the right of the people of Donbass to self-determination. This problem is not only of a local territorial nature, but it is also one of the most complex debatable problems of international law. Since the right to self-determination contradicts the principle of territorial integrity of the state, the consideration and solution of this issue is the most burning for the whole population living on the territory of the self-proclaimed people's republics of Lugansk and Donetsk. In the article, the authors analyse the concept of "self-determination of the people" and give a generalised characteristic of it, approving that it is the right of every nation to solve the issues of state structure, political status, economic, social and cultural development independently and at its own discretion. The author also examines the historical past of the people of Donbass, where, in terms of the Republic of Donetsk and Krivoy Rog and various documentary historical and legal materials, we come to the conclusion that the population of Donbass has the right to social, economic, cultural, spiritual and other development just as all the recognised countries of the world.


Author(s):  
Pocar Fausto

This chapter explores how the proliferation of newly independent states and state dissolution has resulted in greater complexity on the issue of state succession of treaty obligations. In particular, between the theories of tabula rasa succession and automatic state succession. The Human Rights Committee, the Convention on Succession of States in respect of Treaties, and the development of customary international law all bolster the imposition of automatic state succession with respect to international human rights and humanitarian law treaties. Automatic state succession is required by the special nature of human rights and humanitarian law. Thus, once a population is granted the protection of such rights, these rights devolve with the territory and a state cannot deny them. Furthermore, other international institutions have enforced these obligations resulting in the continuity of international human rights and humanitarian law treaties.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document