Filtern
Volltext vorhanden
- nein (36)
Erscheinungsjahr
Dokumenttyp
- Wissenschaftlicher Artikel (36) (entfernen)
Sprache
- Englisch (36) (entfernen)
Gehört zur Bibliographie
- ja (36) (entfernen)
Schlagworte
- Aggression (1)
- Committee of Ministers (1)
- Council of Europe (1)
- European Court of Human Rights (1)
- Statute (1)
Institut
The article analyses whether the Palestinian-Israeli conflict has served as a catalyst for the development of international law, as well as whether international law has been instrumental in attempting to find solutions for the said conflict.
In several ways, this conflict has made a significant contribution to understanding and interpreting the UN Charter. It also brought along important developments about the role of third parties, both under the Geneva Conventions and under the law of state responsibility, which provides for an obligation of not recognizing as legal, or not rendering aid or assistance to situations caused by serious violations of jus cogens.
International judicial institutions (and also domestic ones) play a rather limited role in this respect, due both to a lack of courage to address fundamental questions, and/or a disregard of the outcome of the proceedings by at least one of the parties to the conflict. Other reasons are Israel's reluctance of accepting the jurisdiction of either the ICJ or the ICC, and its view on the non-applicability of human rights treaties outside of its territory, as well as Palestine's uncertain status in the international community limiting its access to international courts. However, the ICJ's 2004 (formally non-binding) advisory opinion on the Israeli Wall provided answers to some of the most fundamental questions related to the conflict, unfortunately without having any immediate impact on the situation on the ground. Given Palestine's accession to the Rome Statute in early 2015, time has yet to show which role in the process will be played by the ICC.
Other issues arising from the conflict, and examined by this article, are that of (Palestinian) statehood, going beyond the traditional concept of statehood and including the consequences of the jus cogens-character of the right of self-determination, as well as questions of treaty succession and succession in matters of State responsibility with regard to acts committed by the PLO.
State sucession in treaties
(2012)
Deforestation is a prominent anthropogenic cause of erosive overland flow and slope instability, boosting rates of soil erosion and concomitant sediment flux. Conventional methods of gauging or estimating post-logging sediment flux often focus on annual timescales but overlook potentially important process response on shorter intervals immediately following timber harvest. We resolve such dynamics with non-parametric quantile regression forests (QRF) based on high-frequency (3 min) discharge measurements and sediment concentration data sampled every 30-60 min in similar-sized (similar to 0.1 km(2)) forested Chilean catchments that were logged during either the rainy or the dry season. The method of QRF builds on the random forest algorithm, and combines quantile regression with repeated random sub-sampling of both cases and predictors. The algorithm belongs to the family of decision-tree classifiers, which allow quantifying relevant predictors in high-dimensional parameter space. We find that, where no logging occurred, similar to 80% of the total sediment load was transported during extremely variable runoff events during only 5% of the monitoring period. In particular, dry-season logging dampened the relative role of these rare, extreme sediment-transport events by increasing load efficiency during more efficient moderate events. We show that QRFs outperform traditional sediment rating curves (SRCs) in terms of accurately simulating short-term dynamics of sediment flux, and conclude that QRF may reliably support forest management recommendations by providing robust simulations of post-logging response of water and sediment fluxes at high temporal resolution.
As part of the current overall process of de-formalization in international law States increasingly chose informal, non-legally binding agreements or ‘Memoranda of Understanding’ (‘MOUs') to organize their international affairs. The increasing conclusion of such legally non-binding instruments in addition to their flexibility, however, also leads to uncertainties in international relations. Against this background, this article deals with possible indirect legal consequences produced by MOUs. It discusses the different legal mechanisms and avenues that may give rise to secondary legal effects of MOUs through a process of interaction with and interpretation in line with other (formal) sources of international law. The article further considers various strategies how to avoid such eventual possible unintended or unexpected indirect legal effects of MOUs when drafting such instruments and when dealing with them subsequent to their respective ‘adoption’.