Jurisprudence of the Foreign Claims Settlement Commission: Iran Claims

1997 ◽  
Vol 91 (3) ◽  
pp. 436-465 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard B. Lillich ◽  
David J. Bederman

The Foreign Claims Settlement Commission (Commission or FCSC) was granted jurisdiction to determine the validity and amounts of certain claims by U.S. nationals against Iran by the Iran Claims Act and the 1990 Settlement Agreement (lump sum settlement) between the United States and Iran. The Iran Claims Act, a 1985 statute enacted in anticipation of the lump sum agreement settling U.S. “small claims” against Iran, required the Commission to apply: (1)the terms of any settlement agreement [lump sum settlement];(2)the relevant provisions of the Declarations of the Government of the Democratic and Popular Republic of Algeria of January 19, 1981, giving consideration to interpretations thereof by the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal; and(3)applicable principles of international law, justice, and equity.

1983 ◽  
Vol 77 (1) ◽  
pp. 166-167
Author(s):  
Marian Nash Leich

On September 14, 1982, the Department of State submitted proposed legislation (S. 2967) to Congress that would authorize the Foreign Claims Settlement Commission to adjudicate “small” claims of U.S. nationals against Iran, i.e., those for less than $250,000, in the event of an agreement between the United States and Iran for an en bloc settlement to cover such claims. The Commission’s adjudications would be made in accordance with the provisions and procedures of the International Claims Settlement Act of 1949, as amended, subject to the provisions of the relevant claims settlement agreements (the Claims Settlement Agreement of the Algiers Accords and any lump sum settlement agreement negotiated with Iran).


1997 ◽  
Vol 91 (3) ◽  
pp. 493-517
Author(s):  
Marian Nash (Leich)

On March 3,1997, President William J. Clinton transmitted to the Senate for its advice and consent to ratification as a treaty the Agreement Between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of Hong Kong for the Surrender of Fugitive Offenders, signed at Hong Kong on December 20,1996. In his letter of transmittal, President Clinton pointed out that, upon its entry into force, the Agreement would “enhance cooperation between the law enforcement communities of the United States and Hong Kong, and … provide a framework and basic protections for extraditions after the reversion of Hong Kong to the sovereignty of the People’s Republic of China on July 1, 1997.” The President continued: Given the absence of an extradition treaty with the People’s Republic of China, this Treaty would provide the means to continue an extradition relationship with Hong Kong after reversion and avoid a gap in law enforcement. It will thereby make a significant contribution to international law enforcement efforts.The provisions of this Agreement follow generally the form and content of extradition treaties recently concluded by the United States. In addition, the Agreement contains several provisions specially designed in light of the particular status of Hong Kong. The Agreement’s basic protections for fugitives are also made expressly applicable to fugitives surrendered by the two parties before the new treaty enters into force.


1977 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 347-358 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adolf Sprudzs

Among the many old and new actors on the international stage of nations the United States is one of the most active and most important. The U.S. is a member of most existing intergovernmental organizations, participates in hundreds upon hundreds of international conferences and meetings every year and, in conducting her bilateral and multilateral relations with the other members of the community of nations, contributes very substantially to the development of contemporary international law. The Government of the United States has a policy of promptly informing the public about developments in its relations with other countries through a number of documentary publication, issued by the Department of State


1995 ◽  
Vol 89 (2) ◽  
pp. 366-375
Author(s):  
Marian Nash (Leich)

On January 28, 1995, representatives of the Government of the United States and of the Government of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam signed at Hanoi the Agreement Concerning the Settlement of Certain Property Claims and the related Agreement Concerning the Transfer of Diplomatic Properties.


2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 63-74
Author(s):  
Desi Yunitasari

The development of human history has proven that relations between countries are inevitable and are a necessity and often cause conflicts. Along with its development, an unavoidable event is an increase in violations of the provisions of international law, especially with regard to the principle of persona grata where officials or diplomat representatives should get protection when it has been received and placed in the recipient country. As happened in mid-2012 namely regarding the bombing incident carried out through a rocket attack on the United States Embassy (Libya) Office, Libya, in Benghazi City, on September 11, 2012. The attack resulted in the Ambassador and three embassy staff killed. In research that uses normative juridical methods, it is necessary to use secondary data, such as books, laws, and research results on research topics to determine the extent of the legal consequences of the principle of persona grata that has been violated. Based on the results of the study explained that the Libyan Government is responsible for the incident because it fulfills two elements of state responsibility including act or omission that can be imputable to a country, and the act or omission constitutes a violation of an international obligation, especially regarding the principle of persona grata. The Government of Libya as the recipient country is obliged to be responsible based on the 1961 Vienna Convention Article 22 Paragraph (2). As the injured party, the United States can hold the Libyan government diplomatically responsible, namely negotiations, bearing in mind that the benefits of negotiation settlement can be measured in all aspects.


1934 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 669-684 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manley O. Hudson

Though representatives of the United States participated very actively in the drafting of the Constitution of the International Labor Organization in 1919, and though the first International Labor Conference was held in Washington under the presidency of the Secretary of Labor, the Government of the United States had no part in the work of the International Labor Organization during its first fifteen years. In consequence, the United States has hitherto held aloof from one of the most significant of the modern developments of international law. Fortunately, this situation has now been changed. On August 20,1934, the United States became the fifty-ninth member of the International Labor Organization. The steps by which this result has been achieved, and the problems growing out of it, present some interesting legal questions which ought not to escape attention.


2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-59
Author(s):  
Desi Yunitasari

The development of human history has proven that relations between countries are inevitable and are a necessity and often cause conflicts. Along with its development, an unavoidable event is an increase in violations of the provisions of international law, especially with regard to the principle of persona grata where officials or diplomat representatives should get protection when it has been received and placed in the recipient country. As happened in mid-2012 namely regarding the bombing incident carried out through a rocket attack on the United States Embassy (Libya) Office, Libya, in Benghazi City, on September 11, 2012. The attack resulted in the Ambassador and three embassy staff killed. In research that uses normative juridical methods, it is necessary to use secondary data, such as books, laws, and research results on research topics to determine the extent of the legal consequences of the principle of persona grata that has been violated. Based on the results of the study explained that the Libyan Government is responsible for the incident because it fulfills two elements of state responsibility including act or omission that can be imputable to a country, and the act or omission constitutes a violation of an international obligation, especially regarding the principle of persona grata. The Government of Libya as the recipient country is obliged to be responsible based on the 1961 Vienna Convention Article 22 Paragraph (2). As the injured party, the United States can hold the Libyan government diplomatically responsible, namely negotiations, bearing in mind that the benefits of negotiation settlement can be measured in all aspects.


1914 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 73-80
Author(s):  
Nelson Gammans

“The only government of this country, which other nations recognize or treat with, is the Government of the Union; and the only American flag known throughout the world is the flag of the United States.” The Government of the Union, as the only internationally recognized agent of the state, bears the responsibility for any violations of the rights which it owes to aliens, whether these rights are the result of treaty obligations or of international law.


1907 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 13-25 ◽  
Author(s):  
George B. Davis

International law owes much to American judges and to American jurists. The list of those who have contributed to its advancement is not short and includes the names of Marshall, Story and Field, Kent, Wheaton, with his able commentators, Dana and Lawrence, Halleck and Lieber and, among recent writer’s, Taylor, Moore and Snow. Although his name is not connected with a general treatise on the subject of public international law, it may be doubted whether any of his fellow-workers in that field have rendered a more important service to humanity and to international good neighborhood, than has Dr. Francis Lieber in his memorable “Instructions for the Government of the Armies of the United States in the Field.”


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document