Постановление Международного Суда ООН от 19 апреля 2017 года в общем контексте научного дискурса о проблемах применения временных мер
This article is based on the materials of a contribution made during an expert discussion that centered on the Order of the International Court of Justice from April 19, 2017, imposing provisional measures in the case of Application of the International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism and of the International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination (Ukraine v. Russia). The Order from April 19, 2017, is considered by the author in the general context of the scientific discussion of problems connected to the International Court of Justice’s applying provisional measures. Among those noted are the loss of this procedural instrument’s exclusive character, the complexity of establishing the accountability of the state for not implementing provisional measures and the unsatisfactory situation of cases with the execution of such orders.
The present article examines the jurisprudence of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea relating to disputes which involve both international environmental and international economic relations. In the analyzed cases International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea prescribed provisional measures to prevent transboundary harm for the marine environment, taking into account that risk of such harm is connected with economic activity.
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled in an advisory opinion on 22 July 2010 that Kosovo’s 17 February 2008 unilateral declaration of independence from Serbia did not violate international law. The Kosovo Parliament’s declaration of independence stated that Kosovo would continue to be bound by the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1244 (1999) (hereinafter “SC Resolution 1244 (1999)”), as well as the Ahtisaari plan. UN Special Envoy for Kosovo Martti Ahtisaari’s proposal, produced in February 2007, defined Kosovo’s internal settlement, minority-protection mechanisms, and allowed for independence under international supervision. The proposal increased the powers devolved to Kosovar institutions but without providing for the complete removal of international oversight and authority. SC Resolution 1244 (1999) authorized the creation of an international military presence (KFOR) led by the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO), an international civil presence (the United Nations Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo (UNMIK), and laid down a framework for the administration of Kosovo. The powers and responsibilities laid out in SC resolution 1244 (1999) were set out in more detail in UNMIK regulation 2001/9 of 15 May 2001 on a Constitutional Framework for Provisional Self-Government (hereinafter “Constitutional Framework”), which defined the responsibilities relating to the administration of Kosovo between the Special Representative of the Secretary-General and the Provisional Institutions of Self Government of Kosovo.
Not all the questions related to the protection of right to life in armed conflicts have become subject of consideration of the international judicial and quasi-judicial bodies. Nonetheless already existing case-law allows to draw a conclusion that the role of International Human Rights Law in regulation of right to life has been changing, at least, in respect of non-international armed conflicts. These changes by their nature reflect the process of integration between norms of International Humanitarian and Human Rights Law, which leads to the strengthening of human rights protection in the specific circumstances of armed conflicts.
The commentary analyses the proceedings before the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea in the case of the Dutch ship "Arctic Sunrise", which was arrested in the exclusive economic zone of the Russian Federation, and the Tribunal's decision on provisional measures to release the vessel and its crew. For the first time in its history, the Russian Federation boycotted interstate proceedings in the international court. The author addresses the possible consequences of this decision.
The article is devoted to a particular form of freedom of assembly — the right to counter-demonstrate. The author underlines the value of this right as an element of democratic society, but also acknowledges the risk of violent actions among participants of opposing demonstrations. Due to this risk, the government may adopt adequate measures restricting the right to counter-demonstrate, certain types of which are analyzed in this paper.
Development of standards of international controllability is reviewed in the article. Institutional approach is applied to development of international legal regime of Energy Charter. Definition of controllability is connected to development of international standards of dispute settlement, which are described in the article in detail. In connection with controllability, Russian interest, defense of investment in European Union and ecological investment encouragement, is reviewed in the article.
мировое управление и управляемость, Мировая экономика, международное экономическое право, энергетическая хартия, International control and controllability, International economics, international economic law, Energy Charter
международное частное право; недвижимость; ; школа бартолистов; бартолисты; теория статутов; статуарная теория/