Refine
Year of publication
- 2023 (16)
- 2022 (34)
- 2021 (24)
- 2020 (24)
- 2019 (4)
- 2018 (9)
- 2017 (1)
- 2016 (2)
- 2015 (2)
- 2014 (11)
- 2013 (9)
- 2012 (12)
- 2011 (9)
- 2010 (3)
- 2009 (7)
- 2008 (16)
- 2007 (12)
- 2006 (32)
- 2005 (15)
- 2004 (41)
- 2003 (22)
- 2002 (18)
- 2001 (24)
- 2000 (16)
- 1999 (21)
- 1998 (11)
- 1997 (11)
- 1996 (15)
- 1995 (19)
- 1994 (8)
- 1993 (2)
- 1992 (3)
Document Type
- Article (453) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (453) (remove)
Keywords
- Rentenversicherung (3)
- European Union (2)
- Jahresrechnung (2)
- 1991 Polish-German Treaty (1)
- Artificial Intelligence Act (1)
- Biofuels (1)
- CESCR Committee (1)
- Committee of Ministers (1)
- Coronaimpfung (1)
- Council of Europe (1)
Institute
- Öffentliches Recht (453) (remove)
Article 22
(2011)
Draft Article 15 of the International Law Commission’s project on crimes against humanity — dealing with the settlement of disputes arising from a proposed convention — attempts to strike a balance between state autonomy and robust judicial supervision. It largely follows Article 22 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, which renders the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) conditional upon prior negotiations. Hence, the substance of the clause can be interpreted in light of the recent case law of the ICJ, especially in the case Georgia v. Russia. In addition, this contribution discusses several issues regarding the scope ratione temporis of the compromissory clause. It advances several proposals to improve the current draft, addressing its relationship with state responsibility — an explicit reference to which is currently missing — as well as the relationship between the ICJ and a possible treaty body. It also proposes to recalibrate the interplay of the requirement of prior negotiations with, respectively, the possibility of seizing a future treaty body and the indication of provisional measures by the ICJ.
Angesichts der dramatischen Lage in der Ukraine untersucht der folgende Beitrag, auf welchem Wege, vor welchen völkerrechtlichen Gerichten, in welchem Umfang und mit welcher Aussicht auf Erfolg die Ukraine oder einzelne ukrainische Staatsangehörige Sicherheitsschutz vor der russischen Invasion und/oder den im Zusammenhang damit bereits begangenen oder noch bevorstehenden Völkerrechtsverstößen Rechtsschutz erlangen können. Im Einzelnen handelt es sich hierbei um zwei anhängige Verfahren vor dem Internationalen Gerichtshof, mehrere Staaten- sowie eine große Vielzahl von Individualbeschwerden vor dem Europäischen Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte; ein Verfahren vor dem Internationalen Seegerichtshof; zahlreiche Investitionsverfahren vor internationalen Schiedsgerichten sowie schließlich zwei "Situationen" vor dem Internationalen Strafgerichtshof. Abschließend wird die Option der Schaffung eines ad-hoc-Tribunals für das Verbrechen der Aggression behandelt.
Over the years, the Security Council has on several occasions dealt with humanitarian assistance issues. However, it is Security Council Resolution 2165(2014), related to the situation in Syria, that has brought the role of the Security Council to the forefront of the debate. It is against this background that the article discusses the legal issues arising from Security Council action facilitating humanitarian assistance to be delivered in situations of non-international armed conflict.
Following a brief survey of relevant practice of the Security Council related to humanitarian assistance, the article considers the relevance, if any, of Article 2(7) of the Charter of the United Nations (UN) to humanitarian assistance to be delivered in such situations. It then moves on to analyse whether a rejection by the territorial state of humanitarian aid to be delivered by third parties may amount to a situation under Article 39 of the UN Charter. It then considers in detail whether (at least implicitly) Resolution 2165 has been adopted under Chapter VII and, if this is not the case, whether it can be still considered to be legally binding.
The article finally considers what impact the adoption of Security Council Resolution 2165 might have on the interpretation of otherwise applicable rules of international humanitarian law and, in particular, the right of third parties to provide humanitarian assistance in a situation of a non-international armed conflict in spite of the absence of consent by the territorial state, and the obligations that members of the Security Council, permanent and non-permanent, have under Common Article 1 of the Geneva Conventions when faced with a draft resolution providing for the delivery of humanitarian assistance, notwithstanding the absence of consent by the territorial state.