Search

Journal home page at https://msupress.com/en/catalogue/magazines/politika-en/1444/. Introduction. This is an article on whether Crimea’s declaration of independence is illegal or not. Is it contradictory to international law? My working hypothesis is that “people’s” right to selfdetermination and selfgovernment are part of its “residual rights”. Referendum confirms the authenticity of the popular will; declaring independence. The main topic is whether remedial secession is contrary to international law. Materials and methods. The legal basis are the Articles 1.2, 55, 73 and 76 of the Charter of the United Nations (UN) and the practice of the International Court of justice in the Hague confirming the since ancient times “general principles of law”. Discussion. “Peoples” benefitting from principle of sovereignty and unilateral secession from other states do include diverse amalgamated groups, i.e. territory inhabited by different ethnic, linguistic and religious residents. A wide range of cases illustrates this, i.e. practice of Lithuania, Croatia, Kosovo etc. Thus, a mixed multicultural or ethnical group at a defined territory is a people. Results of the study. Therefore, the question arises whether the Crimea elected representatives declared independence, confirmed by referendum, contradicts international law. This is made evident by the cases of Armenia, Bangladesh and Kosovo, while the former is acknowledged by the international societies of states, the latter is also confirmed by the International Court of Justice in The Hague. However, it does not require independence in international recognition de facto or de jure (“acting declaring political realities”). Another objection is that there is no provision for a declaration of independence. As stated by the ICJ, this cannot be justified: “Thus, the sphere of operation of the principle of territorial integrity is limited to the sphere of relations between states” [1, p. 437]. Conclusion. Thus, a geographically defined mixed multicultural or ethnic group declaring independence from its mother country, is a people that lawfully is practicing its residual rights. The Serbian constitutional rule of territorial integrity did not prevent the Kosovar Albanian population from seceding from Serbia.

Krabber er populær sjømat, men kan inneholde til dels store mengder miljøgifter. Innholdet er mange steder i Norge så høyt at inntak av brunmaten generelt bør frarådes.

Source at https://www.ustb.edu.pk/burjis/. Social norms are mixtures of extralegal and legal principles. The International Court of Justice‟ in The Hague‟s (ICJ) adjudication subtracts normative structures from different sources, moral, ethical, religious etc. dogmas amplifying its case law. The failing Israel-Palestine reconciliation that results from “power asymmetries” and “supreme emergency exception”, illustrates how absence of concomitant social norms fosters extremists destined to wage war. War is not the answer to the two-state talks‟ collapse but civilized methods of dispute settlement. Neither negotiations nor “Gods divine plan” for Jews has solved the Israel-Palestine boundary conflict. Prayers, pronouncements etc. may ease tensions, but has failed to bring peace. Since territorial demarcation is a secular event, religious leaders should request ICJ adjudication. Other peaceful mechanisms, i.a. ICJ-justification, is however imminent. The courts frames are well-known legal and extralegal principles i.a. religious morals incorporated into general principles of law. Thus, i.a. the World Council of Religious Leaders (WCRL) should trust that ICJ not only propels “world peace” but also the “work of the United Nations (UN) in our common quest for peace”. Such attainments assume Council‟s diplomatic pressure on Security Council (SC).

This discussion paper aims to initiate an informed debate in the Nordic countries and elsewhere on how to allocate the trans-boundary fish stocks in the North East Atlantic in the future and how to resolve possible allocation conflicts. The paper maps the current legal framework and international fisheries agreements in the North East Atlantic Ocean which forms the basis for allocation agreements. It considers the relevance of the biological status of the fish stocks and the economic situation of the coastal states in the area for the allocation of fishing rights and further proposes a dynamic allocation methodology and a decision making process including the handling of allocation conflicts. The paper is compiled by an inter-disciplinary Nordic group of fisheries experts.

Published version. Source at http://dx.doi.org/10.17585/arctic.v6.93. >. License in accordance with the journal's policy - CC-BY-NC. This lex ferenda article examines EU efforts to change the criticized and now-repealed 2002 “top-down” management regulation with its discard system, vessel decommissioning, fishing effort management, and quota allocations. The 2013 regulation’s objective is to remedy the Common Fisheries Policy’s “five structural failings.” Unfortunately, the new regulations have failed to improve the situation. Political obstruction, lax enforcement, transitional costs, and the weight of the status quo hamper future amendments.

Book review of Leena Heinämäkis book from 2010. Rovaniemi: Lapland University Press. 380 p, softcover.