Search

The Western Sahara is often called the 'Last Colony in the World,' in reference to its anachronistic status as a territory deemed to have self-determination by the United Nations and ICJ, but still under the rule of another country. Scholarship on the Western Sahara tends to concentrate on the protracted stalemate in their war of independence against Morocco, highlighting the roles of several individual actors, such as France, the United States, the United Nations, and the Polisario, and how these actors create a particular structure to the conflict. This Note focuses on the role of the International Legal Order, as created and upheld by actors such as the United Nations and the United States, in developing and maintaining the stalemate. First, this Note examines the way the rules on the prohibition on the use of force have asymmetrically limited the ability of the Sahrawi people and the Polisario to respond to colonial violence and to pursue their right to self-determination. Second, this Note examines how the principles of self-determination as defined by the International Legal Order further the power imbalances which allow the oppression of the Western Sahara to continue. Following in the tradition of Third World Approaches to International Law, this Note highlights the displacement of the local legal order in the Western Sahara, and aims to demonstrate that by stifling the right to resistance in the Western Sahara, the International Legal Order merely perpetuates the power imbalances of colonialism., I. INTRODUCTION 308 A. Summary 310 II. THE WESTERN SAHARA 312 A. Overview of Modernized Western Sahara 312 B. Demographic and Cultural Background 315 III. LAW AND GOVERNANCE IN THE [...]

Within the course of digitalisation, data have become a substantial factor of production. They serve not only as a resource for the creation of surplus value but also change the [...]

In this article, we explore the theme of sovereignty in the context of fragmented international law. We observe that the sovereignty of States may become relativized, not only by the political power of other States, but by its exposure to multiple, functionally separate fields of law. We analyze this theme by asking whether trade agreements as instruments of economic law offer a venue for discussing the sovereignty of sub-statal entities that lack standing on the more traditional international forums. Our analysis focuses first on a recent decision by the Court of Justice of the European Union, which concerned the status of Western Sahara in the framework of the EU-Morocco trade agreement. We then consider the implications of that case, if any, on the situation in the region of Abkhazia within Georgia in the context of the EU-Georgia Association Agreement. We show how trade agreements in some cases may (EU-Morocco), and in other cases may not (EU-Georgia), affect the integrity of States in a novel way, depending on the intricacies of the facts and the strictures of the terms of the applicable Agreement. Reflecting the fragmentation of law, trade agreements thus have the potential to grant an avenue for sub-statal entities to establish standing before a regional court (in our case, the Court of Justice of the EU), or an international tribunal. That, in turn, may allow these entities to reinforce their claims for self-determination under international law. Beyond the possible theoretical implications on the (relativity of) sovereignty, the findings seem worth considering carefully in the context of concluding and formulating regional and international agreements in different fields of law., I. INTRODUCTION 354 II. SOVEREIGNTY AND STATEHOOD 357 A. The notions of sovereignty and statehood in international legal thought 357 B. ICJ Advisory Opinion on 362 Western Sahara C. Earned [...]

TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 681 I. DEFINING 'PRIVATE MILITIAS' AND TRACING THEIR ORIGINS 685 A. What Is a 'Private Militia?': Choosing a Workable Definition 685 B. How Did We Get [...]

This article provides guidance to non-Niuean lawyers, and particularly for New Zealand lawyers, who want to ascertain the Niue law on a particular matter. The need arises because a New Zealand statute that was extended to be part of the law of Niue may still be in force in New Zealand and in Niue but, because of the passage of time and legislative action in one or both of the countries, the text and effect of the statute may be different in each country., I INTRODUCTION This article analyses the New Zealand legislation that refers to Niue and discusses the effect of that legislation. It also contrasts the corresponding position in Niue law, where [...]

This article critically examines the current discourse on the legal status and substance of the international law concept of 'sovereignty' in cyberspace against the backdrop of conflicting political-ideological attitudes. It first traces the origins of the interpretation of 'respect for sovereignty' as a primary rule of international law, and then discusses two approaches to cyberspace that challenge the emerging consensus: 'cyber imperialism,' embodied by the US and the other Five Eyes members on the one hand, and 'cyber-Westphalia,' represented by China, Russia, and Iran on the other. Both groups conceive cyberspace in ways fundamentally irreconcilable with prevailing legal views. A third group of states endorses the 'sovereignty-as-rule' understanding but leaves this legal position vulnerable to both authoritarian co-optation and imperialist dismissal. This article contributes to the discussion on sovereignty by offering an alternative interpretation of state practice and international jurisprudence that constructs sovereignty as a principle with derivative primary rules. It shows that, despite not by itself having the status of a rule, the principle of sovereignty allows for the identification of rules that protect the territorial integrity and political independence of states beyond the traditional notions of the prohibition of intervention and the use of force. It carefully analyzes evidence in existing practice in support of this novel, doctrinally more precise understanding of sovereignty. Based on the argument's legal implications, it concludes with an assessment of the policies of 'persistent engagement' and 'cyber sovereignty.', INTRODUCTION 62 I. THE EXPERTS HAVE SPOKEN: IDENTIFYING 'SOVEREIGNTY AS A RULE' 64 II. CYBER IMPERIALISM 67 A. The End of History and the Dream of the Internet 68 B. [...]

On Thursday, 24 November 1927, a public meeting in the town of Peace River, Alberta discussed a proposal from Charles Frederick, the editor and publisher of the Peace River Record, [...]

I. INTRODUCTION Throughout the twenty-first century, the United States has popularized the use of targeted economic sanctions to encourage foreign governments and financial institutions to further U.S. foreign policy goals. [...]

This Article critically examines the United Nations (U.N.) commitment to international law by revisiting General Assembly Resolution 181(II) of 29 November 1947 recommending the partition of Mandate Palestine into a Jewish State and an Arab State. The main claim advanced is that Resolution 181(II) was an expression of an international rule by law, rather than an international rule of law, through which law was used, abused or selectively applied with grossly iniquitous results. To this end, it undertakes a critical international legal analysis of Resolution 181(II) with specific reference to the verbatim and summary records of the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine whose report of September 1947 formed the basis of both the Resolution's text and its underlying rationale. Rather than being governed by the objective application of international law, the Resolution was driven by distinctly European political goals, which privileged support for the European Zionist program in Palestine. The result was to legislate into U.N. law the two-state framework as the legal cornerstone of the Organization's position on Palestine against the wishes of the country's indigenous Arab majority. In this sense, Resolution 181(II) can be understood as the opening act of Palestine's disenfranchisement and contingency in the U.N., a subaltern position which continues to this very day., I. INTRODUCTION 2 II. THE UNITED NATIONS AS THE STANDARD-BEARER OF 6 THE INTERNATIONAL RULE OF LAW III. RESOLUTION 181(II) AND THE UNITED NATIONS AS 8 A SITE OF THE [...]