International lawyers and jurists have been employing terms varying from secession, partition, disintegration, and dissolution and referring to rights such as self-determination, minority rights, peoples rights and so on. However, there is not always a crystal clarity behind the terminological distinctions and legal issues. The resolution of various legal issues in separatist conflicts is often a complex matter. For instance, it is not possible to respond fully to separatism without understanding the implications of various underlying institutions and what appear frequently to be conflicting rights. (What is self-determination and how does it relate to separatism? What is the difference between an indigenous people and a minority? What is the difference between secession and partition?) This paper seeks to understand these institutions and rights as a means to providing a response to the particular issues raised in the context of separatism in Northern Ireland. As Northern Ireland also represents a territory born out of what is termed 'partition' it is hoped that this paper will reveal any significance between this form of separation and other forms such as, for example, 'secession'. (Abstract shortened by UMI.)

It is indeed strange that the Assembly of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), composed of all the present 183 member States, should have no powers in connection with the principal functions of the Organization (that is, the formulation of Standards and Recommended Practices); nor any over the appointment and creation of the Organization's principal officers and sub-organs. / Stranger still is the fact that even the little and insignificant powers that this Assembly might possess can be easily and constitutionally/conventionally "usurped", or interfered with, by the limited 33-member Council of the Organization. / Much more puzzling is the fact that this limited membership Council, which is normally supposed to be answerable to the Assembly, runs the Organization's entire business exclusively as it sees fit: Without the remaining 150 States having any means whatsoever of checking it. / The result of this strange arrangement has been that the majority of States simply cannot contribute to the advancement of the international aviation cause as they might have: had the universal organ had the voice and say that it now lacks. / The entire constitutional and political set-up of ICAO can hardly be justified in both the Schools of Democracy and of its corollary, the Supremacy of the Assemblies of international organizations. / A serious and meaningful re-evaluation of the ICAO framework and working methods to remedy the anomaly is therefore called for in the present study.

This thesis is aimed at challenging the conventional wisdom regarding trade and competition under the World Trade Organization, namely, that the WTO does not deal with competition matters. This thesis shows that this wisdom cannot be upheld when viewed in conjunction with Karl Wittgenstein's theories of language and with the panel and Appellate Body's decisions in United States-Anti-Dumping Act of 1916. / These decisions confirm the application of such theories to the WTO and indicate, first, that the WTO limits concerning trade and competition are not as clearly defined as followers of the conventional wisdom suggest, and, second, that the Appellate Body and future panels may be willing to incorporate other competition issues within the realm of the WTO, if they are properly presented before it by Member States. / A description of the existing state of the art concerning competition and international trade is presented.

The European Union has established "a new international legal order" whose success was ultimately reflected by the leading role the Community assumed in designing the world's economic agenda. However, the emergence of the Information society put to the test the efficiency of EU's economic and governmental model. The Information revolution challenged its ability to provide timely economic and legal policies to accommodate the existing business environment to technological innovations. As the Community was seemingly slow to react, it allowed the US to surpass it, temporarily, in the race for supremacy in the online economy. Nevertheless, the EU found in its Internal market and its unique legal system the resources to create a coherent and effective approach to e-commerce. It defeated "unflattering" predictions and eventually succeeded in imposing its own standards on the development of online commercial transactions.

This work examines the effect of three emerging satellite technologies on the use and regulation of what might be called Earth Orbital Space. The three new technologies, Direct Broadcasting Satellites (DBS), Global Mobile Personal Communication Services (GMPCS), and Global Navigation Satellite Services (GNSS), are being implemented in or planned for different portions of Earth Orbital Space: the geostationary orbit, low earth orbits, and medium earth orbits, respectively. / Each technology creates different challenges for the International Telecommunication Union which is the organization charged with their regulation. DBS services were regulated in the 1970s and early 1980s prior to their practical use. That early regulation appears, today, to be overly restrictive in many ways. / GMPCS, on the other hand, is now becoming a reality but lacks a solid legal structure to ensure that its potential for global wireless communication can be achieved. / GNSS provides yet a different challenge: that of providing for the civil utilization of military navigation systems. The deployment of these new technologies add to the increasing problem of congestion in the orbit-spectrum resource. / The final chapter details a number of different proposals aimed at increasing both equity and efficiency in the management of the orbit-spectrum resource.

No description available.

This Master's thesis aims to answer two questions: (1) Why do states sign international investment agreements (IIA)?; (2) What determines the substantive strength of these agreements? I use an event history analysis and an ordered logit model, respectively, to answer these questions. I find partial support for the hypothesis according to which the interests of capital-exporting states determine the pattern of IIA diffusion. While the results of my second test are somewhat inconclusive, they allow me to draw a number of interesting lessons for future research. / Ce mémoire de maîtrise a pour objectif de répondre à deux questions: (1) Pourquoi les États signent-ils des accords internationaux d'investissement (AII)?; (2) Qu'est-ce qui détermine la force de ces accords? J'utilise un modèle de survie et une régression logistique ordonnée, respectivement, pour répondre à ces deux questions. Les résultats de mon analyse supportent l'idée selon laquelle l'intérêt des pays exportateurs de capital est un déterminant important de la diffusion d'AIIs. Bien que les résultats de mon second test ne soient pas aussi co ncluants, ils indiquent clairement la route que devraient emprunter les travaux futurs sur le thème des IIAs.

Why do some ethnic groups support the use of terrorism and violence to change the status quo and others do not? Conventional wisdom suggests repression may provoke more violence, but consensus has not been reached on how this relationship works. I propose a Theory of Ethnic Group Support for Terrorism (TEST) that argues that the denial of political access to ethnic groups to resolve conflict through peaceful means creates conditions of structural repression. This structural repression then engenders ethnic groups to mobilize around seeking extra-institutional and often extra-legal avenues of change including terrorism. The avenue chosen depends upon the state's response to ethnic group mobilization, which may include reforming repressive institutions, thus undermining support for violence and terrorism, or may include using agent-driven discrete acts of repression, triggering increases in ethnic group support for terrorism. The TEST is applied and assessed in light of the cases of Northern Irish Catholics and the IRA, Quebecois and the FLQ and Corsicans and the FLNC. Ultimately, the TEST demonstrates that states' willingness to effectively address ethnic group grievances will marginalize, if not eradicate terrorism. In contrast, states that choose to neglect, alienate and discriminate against ethnic groups fail to enable them to use political channels to change the status quo, causing increases in support for terrorism. / Pourquoi certains groupes ethniques appuient-ils l'utilisation du terrorisme et de la violence afin de modifier le statut quo alors que d'autres s'y opposent? Il est généralement admis que la répression peut engendre plus de violence. Or, le sens de cette relation ne fait toujours par consensus dans la littérature. Cette étude présente une théorie visant à expliquer l'appui des groupes ethniques au terrorisme (TEST) et qui suggère que les cas où les groupes ethniques se voient refuser l'accès au politique comme moyen pacifique de résolution de conflits créent des conditions de répression structurelle. Celle-ci devient alors un motif pour les groupes ethnique de se mobiliser afin de trouver des modes extra-institutionnels et des avenues extra-juridiques de résoudre les conflits, incluant le terrorisme. L'avenue choisie par les groupes ethniques dépend de la réponse offerte par l'État à leurs stratégies de mobilisation. Cette réponse peut inclure des réformes aux institutions répressives, minant l'appui des groupes à la violence et au terrorisme, ou l'utilisation discrète d'actes de répression conduits par des individus, générant une augmentation du soutien au terrorisme au sein des groups ethniques. Dans le cadre de cette étude, la théorie TEST est donc évaluée à la lumière des cas des Catholiques irlandais du Nord et de l'IRA, des Québécois et du FLQ, ainsi que des Corses et du FLNC. Elle démontre que, d'une part, la volonté des États de répondre aux revendications des groupes ethniques marginalise, si ce n'est éradique, l'utilisation du terrorisme par ces groupes. D'autre part, les États qui choisissent de négliger, d'aliéner ou de discriminer les groupes ethniques les empêchent d'utiliser les voies politiques de résolution des conflits, provoquant une augmentation de l'appui de ces groupes à l'utilisation de la violence et du terrorisme.

This thesis examines the politics of international legal tutelage in post-independence Kosovo by investigating the dynamics of power interplay between EU's largest civilian mission to date – EULEX and Kosovar stakeholders. Informed by the "practice turn" in IR and borrowing from Bourdieu's sociology of juridical field, the central argument of this thesis posits that the relations between EULEX as an "expertise-rich" entity and Kosovar institutions as "expertise-deficient" as well as their interactions as partners in the monopoly of violence, have resulted in the emergence of a new legal field that has been grounded by the ontological glorification surrounding the notion of "rule of law." The EU's attempt to socialize the nascent Kosovar polity into international liberal norms and European best practices has resulted in daily institutional struggles that continuously define and re-negotiate the principle of the "rule of law." These struggles, in turn, have provided Kosovar institutions and political elite with a platform whereupon they are able to mobilize meaningful symbolic power from a palette of resources, which helps them legitimize their own claims about authority, local ownership and statehood. / Ce mémoire examine la situation politique de la tutelle internationale au Kosovo post-indépendance via l'investigation des dynamiques de pouvoir entre la plus large mission de l'UE à date – EULEX – et la partie prenante Kosovar. Éclairé par le « practice turn » en RI et empruntant à la sociologie du champs juridique de Bourdieu, la thèse centrale de ce mémoire affirme que les relations entre EULEX – en temps qu'entité « riche en expertise » – et les institutions Kosovars – considérés « pauvres en expertise » -, ainsi que leur interactions en temps que partenaires dans l'exercice du monopole de la violence légitime, se sont traduites par l'émergence d'un nouveau champs légal. Ce dernier est largement supporté par la glorification ontologique de la notion d' « État de droit ». Les tentatives de l'UE de socialiser le naissant État Kosovar aux normes libérales internationales ainsi qu'aux pratiques Européennes a résulté en des luttes institutionnelles quotidiennes qui ne cessent de (re)définir et (re)négocier le principe d' «État de droit ». À leur tour, ces luttes on fournit aux institutions et à l'élite politique Kosovar une plateforme sur laquelle elles ont été capable de mobiliser significativement un pouvoir symbolique provenant d'une palette de ressources; ce qui les aide à légitimer leur propres revendications quant à l'autorité, la propriété locale et l'indépendance étatique du Kosovo.

The issue of narcotic drugs and narcotrafficking has gained a preeminent place in the formulation and implementation of U.S. foreign policy, especially in respect to Latin American countries. Inter-American relations, previously defined in the setting of the "Cold War", currently gravitate to a large extent, around the production and trade of illegal drugs. In this new framework, the economic dependency of developing nations provides the United States with enough power to implement unilateral strategies aimed at the achievement of U.S. national interests, through the execution of a coercive diplomacy supported by the threat of economic sanctions. In this context, the government of the United States has advanced the narcotics question as a pretext to obtain political, legislative and judicial changes in Latin American countries, through the "narcotics certification process", which pretends the adoption and implementation of a flawed, prohibition law enforcement oriented antidrug strategy. The certification process, besides its futility in terms of providing a solution to the narcotics dilemma, causes irreparable damage to producer and transit countries, constitutes an obstacle in their development process and a violation of their national sovereignty.