The arbitration legislation of Kazakhstan has no direct answer to the problem of possible participation of the third parties therein. The analysis of the Kazakhstani legislation and practice, as well as the comparison of the Kazakhstani approach with international approaches regarding the problem of the third parties have revealed the necessity in the legislative reforms to be taken in Kazakhstan. These reforms are required for stabilization and equilibration of the position of third parties with all rest parties of the arbitration proceedings. Thus, the main aim of this thesis is to elaborate a series of suggestions on the potential development of the arbitration procedural legislative system and to address some of the gaps in the existing arbitration legislation.

In 1997 the Labour Party introduced the White Paper Rights Brought Home: The Human Rights Bill. Bringing rights home was considered necessary to significantly influence rights conception in the UK and internationally. Rights Brought Home argued that incorporation would allow human rights to become a more prominent feature of society. The Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA) was brought into force with optimism and expectations. However, the war of terror has significantly impacted the way in which rights have been understood and appreciated. National security issues have clashed with Convention rights. There is mounting concern that British judges must blindly follow the rulings established by the European Court of Human Rights. There have been problems of public disengagement and hostility. The HRA is characterized by a story of failure. Understanding the relationship between the war on terror and the HRA is central to human rights development.

This dissertation examines the history of humanitarianism in international relations by tracing the relationship between moral obligation and sovereignty from the 16th century to the present. Its main argument is that moral obligations and sovereignty are mutually constitutive, in contrast to a widely held assumption in international relations scholarship that they are opposed to each other. The dissertation’s main theoretical contribution is to develop a framework, using a genealogical method of inquiry, for understanding the relationship between sovereignty and the shifting boundaries of moral obligation during the Westphalian period. This approach makes it possible to identify both elements of continuity and change in the history of humanitarianism and practices of sovereignty. The first chapter demonstrates how the extant literature on sovereignty and humanitarianism fails to adequately account for how states have participated in the construction of new moral boundaries even as they have sought to assert their own sovereignty. Chapter two lays out the dissertation’s theoretical framework, first by outlining an identity-based understanding of sovereignty in relationship to moral obligation, and then discussing the genealogical method that is used in three case studies. The following three chapters contain the dissertation’s empirical contributions, which are three historical cases that represent pivotal moments in the history of moral obligation and sovereignty. Chapter three examines the assistance offered by Elizabeth I to Huguenot refugees from 1558-1603, and relates England’s moral obligations towards Huguenots to the emergence of a sovereign English confessional state. Chapter four examines the relationship between British abolitionist arguments against slavery in the 19th century, and justifications for the extension of empire. Chapter five examines the emergence and evolution of the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) doctrine since 2001, whose advocates posit a modified conception of sovereignty that is explicitly tied to moral obligation. The concluding chapter discusses how the dissertation accounts for both the rise of humanitarianism and the persistence of sovereignty in international relations, as well as provides some reflections on areas for future research.

In 1997 the Labour Party introduced the White Paper Rights Brought Home: The Human Rights Bill. Bringing rights home was considered necessary to significantly influence rights conception in the UK and internationally. Rights Brought Home argued that incorporation would allow human rights to become a more prominent feature of society. The Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA) was brought into force with optimism and expectations. However, the war of terror has significantly impacted the way in which rights have been understood and appreciated. National security issues have clashed with Convention rights. There is mounting concern that British judges must blindly follow the rulings established by the European Court of Human Rights. There have been problems of public disengagement and hostility. The HRA is characterized by a story of failure. Understanding the relationship between the war on terror and the HRA is central to human rights development.

Sri Lanka's trade regime has been gradually liberalized over the last two decades with the aim of deeper integration into the global economy. The purpose of this study is to present a quantitative assessment of the impacts of major unilateral, regional and multilateral trade liberalization on Sri Lanka, and rank the trade policy options in terms of their welfare effects. This study contributes to the empirical literature on trade liberalization. The Global Trade Analysis Project (GTAP) model is used to analyze the welfare effects of trade liberalization in a multi-country, multi-sector general equilibrium framework. The results show that if Sri Lanka implements the South Asian Free Trade Agreement (SAFTA), while maintaining 15 percent external tariffs for the rest of the world, this combined policy would provide the highest welfare gain to Sri Lanka. The SAFTA by its own would provide the second-highest ranked gain from the trade reforms due to the benefits of preferential access to the large SAARC market. The third-highest ranked policy option comes under the unilateral reduction of import tariffs to 15 percent scenario. As results indicate, the Indo-Lanka Free Trade Agreement (ILFTA) offers the fourth-highest policy option for Sri Lanka. Finally, the phasing-out of MFA on Textiles and Clothing under the Uruguay Round Agreement, rank as the fifth-highest policy option for Sri Lanka. Thus, regional trade liberalization is far more preferable to unilateral and multilateral liberalization. However, as the GTAP model permits, these rankings based on only to the static welfare gains, ignoring the dynamic effect of trade liberalization. In addition, the gravity model has been employed to examine the determinants of Sri Lanka's bilateral trade flows with her selected trading partners, in order to sort out the influence of geographical proximity versus preferential trading policies in creating a regional concentration in trade. Our results confirm the validity of geographical factors such as proximity and cultural familiarity, as determinants of Sri Lanka's trade with neighbouring countries. They suggest that the selected trading partners are “natural trading partners” of Sri Lanka. / Subscription resource available via Digital Dissertations only.

Sri Lanka's trade regime has been gradually liberalized over the last two decades with the aim of deeper integration into the global economy. The purpose of this study is to present a quantitative assessment of the impacts of major unilateral, regional and multilateral trade liberalization on Sri Lanka, and rank the trade policy options in terms of their welfare effects. This study contributes to the empirical literature on trade liberalization. The Global Trade Analysis Project (GTAP) model is used to analyze the welfare effects of trade liberalization in a multi-country, multi-sector general equilibrium framework. The results show that if Sri Lanka implements the South Asian Free Trade Agreement (SAFTA), while maintaining 15 percent external tariffs for the rest of the world, this combined policy would provide the highest welfare gain to Sri Lanka. The SAFTA by its own would provide the second-highest ranked gain from the trade reforms due to the benefits of preferential access to the large SAARC market. The third-highest ranked policy option comes under the unilateral reduction of import tariffs to 15 percent scenario. As results indicate, the Indo-Lanka Free Trade Agreement (ILFTA) offers the fourth-highest policy option for Sri Lanka. Finally, the phasing-out of MFA on Textiles and Clothing under the Uruguay Round Agreement, rank as the fifth-highest policy option for Sri Lanka. Thus, regional trade liberalization is far more preferable to unilateral and multilateral liberalization. However, as the GTAP model permits, these rankings based on only to the static welfare gains, ignoring the dynamic effect of trade liberalization. In addition, the gravity model has been employed to examine the determinants of Sri Lanka's bilateral trade flows with her selected trading partners, in order to sort out the influence of geographical proximity versus preferential trading policies in creating a regional concentration in trade. Our results confirm the validity of geographical factors such as proximity and cultural familiarity, as determinants of Sri Lanka's trade with neighbouring countries. They suggest that the selected trading partners are “natural trading partners” of Sri Lanka. / Subscription resource available via Digital Dissertations only.

Sri Lanka's trade regime has been gradually liberalized over the last two decades with the aim of deeper integration into the global economy. The purpose of this study is to present a quantitative assessment of the impacts of major unilateral, regional and multilateral trade liberalization on Sri Lanka, and rank the trade policy options in terms of their welfare effects. This study contributes to the empirical literature on trade liberalization. The Global Trade Analysis Project (GTAP) model is used to analyze the welfare effects of trade liberalization in a multi-country, multi-sector general equilibrium framework. The results show that if Sri Lanka implements the South Asian Free Trade Agreement (SAFTA), while maintaining 15 percent external tariffs for the rest of the world, this combined policy would provide the highest welfare gain to Sri Lanka. The SAFTA by its own would provide the second-highest ranked gain from the trade reforms due to the benefits of preferential access to the large SAARC market. The third-highest ranked policy option comes under the unilateral reduction of import tariffs to 15 percent scenario. As results indicate, the Indo-Lanka Free Trade Agreement (ILFTA) offers the fourth-highest policy option for Sri Lanka. Finally, the phasing-out of MFA on Textiles and Clothing under the Uruguay Round Agreement, rank as the fifth-highest policy option for Sri Lanka. Thus, regional trade liberalization is far more preferable to unilateral and multilateral liberalization. However, as the GTAP model permits, these rankings based on only to the static welfare gains, ignoring the dynamic effect of trade liberalization. In addition, the gravity model has been employed to examine the determinants of Sri Lanka's bilateral trade flows with her selected trading partners, in order to sort out the influence of geographical proximity versus preferential trading policies in creating a regional concentration in trade. Our results confirm the validity of geographical factors such as proximity and cultural familiarity, as determinants of Sri Lanka's trade with neighbouring countries. They suggest that the selected trading partners are “natural trading partners” of Sri Lanka. / Subscription resource available via Digital Dissertations only.

Sri Lanka's trade regime has been gradually liberalized over the last two decades with the aim of deeper integration into the global economy. The purpose of this study is to present a quantitative assessment of the impacts of major unilateral, regional and multilateral trade liberalization on Sri Lanka, and rank the trade policy options in terms of their welfare effects. This study contributes to the empirical literature on trade liberalization. The Global Trade Analysis Project (GTAP) model is used to analyze the welfare effects of trade liberalization in a multi-country, multi-sector general equilibrium framework. The results show that if Sri Lanka implements the South Asian Free Trade Agreement (SAFTA), while maintaining 15 percent external tariffs for the rest of the world, this combined policy would provide the highest welfare gain to Sri Lanka. The SAFTA by its own would provide the second-highest ranked gain from the trade reforms due to the benefits of preferential access to the large SAARC market. The third-highest ranked policy option comes under the unilateral reduction of import tariffs to 15 percent scenario. As results indicate, the Indo-Lanka Free Trade Agreement (ILFTA) offers the fourth-highest policy option for Sri Lanka. Finally, the phasing-out of MFA on Textiles and Clothing under the Uruguay Round Agreement, rank as the fifth-highest policy option for Sri Lanka. Thus, regional trade liberalization is far more preferable to unilateral and multilateral liberalization. However, as the GTAP model permits, these rankings based on only to the static welfare gains, ignoring the dynamic effect of trade liberalization. In addition, the gravity model has been employed to examine the determinants of Sri Lanka's bilateral trade flows with her selected trading partners, in order to sort out the influence of geographical proximity versus preferential trading policies in creating a regional concentration in trade. Our results confirm the validity of geographical factors such as proximity and cultural familiarity, as determinants of Sri Lanka's trade with neighbouring countries. They suggest that the selected trading partners are “natural trading partners” of Sri Lanka. / Subscription resource available via Digital Dissertations only.

Sri Lanka's trade regime has been gradually liberalized over the last two decades with the aim of deeper integration into the global economy. The purpose of this study is to present a quantitative assessment of the impacts of major unilateral, regional and multilateral trade liberalization on Sri Lanka, and rank the trade policy options in terms of their welfare effects. This study contributes to the empirical literature on trade liberalization. The Global Trade Analysis Project (GTAP) model is used to analyze the welfare effects of trade liberalization in a multi-country, multi-sector general equilibrium framework. The results show that if Sri Lanka implements the South Asian Free Trade Agreement (SAFTA), while maintaining 15 percent external tariffs for the rest of the world, this combined policy would provide the highest welfare gain to Sri Lanka. The SAFTA by its own would provide the second-highest ranked gain from the trade reforms due to the benefits of preferential access to the large SAARC market. The third-highest ranked policy option comes under the unilateral reduction of import tariffs to 15 percent scenario. As results indicate, the Indo-Lanka Free Trade Agreement (ILFTA) offers the fourth-highest policy option for Sri Lanka. Finally, the phasing-out of MFA on Textiles and Clothing under the Uruguay Round Agreement, rank as the fifth-highest policy option for Sri Lanka. Thus, regional trade liberalization is far more preferable to unilateral and multilateral liberalization. However, as the GTAP model permits, these rankings based on only to the static welfare gains, ignoring the dynamic effect of trade liberalization. In addition, the gravity model has been employed to examine the determinants of Sri Lanka's bilateral trade flows with her selected trading partners, in order to sort out the influence of geographical proximity versus preferential trading policies in creating a regional concentration in trade. Our results confirm the validity of geographical factors such as proximity and cultural familiarity, as determinants of Sri Lanka's trade with neighbouring countries. They suggest that the selected trading partners are “natural trading partners” of Sri Lanka. / Subscription resource available via Digital Dissertations only.

Given the contradictory reality of a well-developed human rights and humanitarian regime alongside extensive human rights abuses committed in the “Global War on Terror,” the dissertation asks how and why law has shaped contemporary security policy. Focusing on the American case over time, I examine this problem empirically by tracing the changing impact of both international and domestic legal and normative constraints on torture and interrogation, detention and trial, and surveillance practices, culminating in post-9/11 counterterrorism doctrine. I find that policy makers have increasingly violated rules with the adoption of controversial security and intelligence policies, but have simultaneously employed legalistic arguments to evade responsibility for human rights abuses. Using contrasting realist, decisionist, liberal, and constructivist accounts of the nature of state compliance with norms and law found in International Relations and legal scholarship, the dissertation theoretically explains this outcome and with it, law’s ability to moderate national security practice. In so doing, I propose an original reading of law as a permissive constraint, which challenges us to rethink paradigmatic assumptions in a way that accommodates both strategic and normative factors and recognizes the role of practice in giving content to rules.