This paper analyses the international obligation of solving disputes peacefully and the International Court of Justice role as a jurisdictional means of the United Nations in solving disputes. From this point, it analyses the Court role in the last years and its work solving territorial and maritime disputes, for example, the one between Peru and Chile. It presents an interesting study of the international obligations that led Peru and Chile solve the dispute peacefully and the advantages and disadvantages of it. Finally, it presents the main challenges that arise from turning to the International Court of Justice. / El artículo analiza la obligación internacional de solucionar pacíficamente las controversias y el papel de la Corte Internacional de Justicia como medio jurisdiccional de las Naciones Unidas en la solución de dichas controversias. A partir de ello, analiza el papel de la Corte en los últimos años y su labor en la resolución de disputas territoriales y marítimas, como la que surgió entre Perú y Chile. Se presenta un interesante estudio de las obligaciones internacionales que llevaron a Perú y Chile a solucionar pacíficamente la disputa así como las ventajas y desventajas de este medio. Finalmente, se exponen los principales retos que surgen al acudir a la Corte Internacional de Justicia.

La CIJ en tant qu’organe judiciaire principal des Nations Unies est amenée à connaître de ce type de différend spécifique. En effet, les litiges environnementaux emportent avec eux un certain degré de technicité et font appel à des notions scientifiques particulièrement complexes. La rencontre entre la protection de l’environnement et la CIJ ne pouvait alors que donner lieu à un contentieux particulièrement riche. L’appréhension de ce contentieux par la Cour conduit à s’interroger sur la manière dont cette dernière réceptionne ces litiges. La présente thèse s’intéresse donc aux effets et conséquences résultant du contentieux de l’environnement devant la CIJ. Deux remarques peuvent être formulées : la première concerne le constat d’une intégration progressive des enjeux environnementaux au sein du contentieux international de la CIJ, et la deuxième concerne l’opportunité pour la Cour d’adapter ses règles procédurales. Une adaptation des règles procédurales de la CIJ serait souhaitable. En effet, les enjeux environnementaux tendent à s’intégrer de plus en plus au sein du contentieux international de la CIJ qui contribue de ce fait au développement des règles de droit international de l’environnement. Toutefois, une telle intégration révèle également les limites de la Cour. La Cour pourrait endosser le rôle de juge environnemental, en prenant en considération les spécificités de ce contentieux, notamment par l’adaptation de ses outils procéduraux. Ainsi, c’est une dynamique réciproque qui s’installe entre la Cour et la protection de l’environnement. La préservation de l’environnement est enrichie par la Cour, mais cette dernière pourrait également voir son rôle évoluer grâce à la prise en considération des enjeux environnementaux. La CIJ pourrait alors devenir un véritable juge international de l’environnement dont la communauté internationale manque encore. / The ICJ as the principal judicial organ of the United Nations comes to know of this type of specific dispute. In fact, environmental disputes carry with them a certain degree of technicality and call upon particularly complex scientific notions. The meeting between the protection of the environment and the ICJ could then only give rise to a particularly rich litigation. The Court's apprehension of this kind of litigation raises the question of how the Court deals with these disputes. The present thesis is therefore concerned with the effects and consequences resulting from the environmental litigation before the ICJ.This leads us to two remarks: the first one concerns the phenomenon by which environmental stakes are integrated within international litigation, and, the second one concerns the opportunity for the court to adapt its procedural rules to deal with environmental issues. Indeed, environmental issues tend to be more and more integrated into the international litigation of the ICJ, which contributes to the development of the rules of international environmental law. However, such integration also reveals the limits of the Court. However, the Court could take on the role of an environmental judge, by adapting its procedural tools to the specificities of this particular litigation. Thus, it is a reciprocal dynamic that takes place between the Court and the protection of the environment. The preservation of the environment is enriched by the Court, but the Court could also see its role evolve through the consideration of environmental issues. The ICJ could then become a genuine international environmental judge whose international community is still lacking.

The past few decades have seen a veritable explosion of investment treaty and other arbitration claims brought against States. Many of these claims have been heard through ICSID arbitration. In comparison to other arbitration frameworks, the ICSID regime has its own self-contained rules for enforcement. Thus, given the significant increase in arbitration claims against States, on the one hand, and States’ not too seldom invoking of the defence of sovereign immunity, on the other hand, this treatise is timely in addressing various outstanding issues that award-creditors have and will continue to encounter when dealing with defaulting States.   The doctrine of sovereign immunity translates into the conventional wisdom that a State cannot be sued without its consent in foreign courts. This doctrine derives from the practical consequence that the sovereign makes the law, and consequently can break it too. This idea is an extension of primarily the common law doctrine to the international plane, which emerged largely as a result of international comity.[1] This concept is also based upon principles ‘equality’ in terms of ‘equal sovereign status’. Some authors even call it ‘independence’ and ‘dignity’ etc., In this respect, the ICJ has also held that it was equality, that is the basis, i.e. justification for the general rule of immunity.   The theory of immunity has gradually shifted from absolute to restrictive immunity, making it significantly easier for award-creditors to enforce an arbitral award. However, the barrier vis-à-vis immunity from execution makes the last link in ITA vulnerable. This evolution has made substantially an easier task for award-creditors in ITA and ISDS holding an arbitration award against a sovereign State. In view of this relatively at ease syndrome that award-creditors now possess, the immunity protections granted to State and its assets will be accessed albeit the proportionality test of acta jure imperii (i.e. sovereign or government purpose) &amp; acta jure gestionis (i.e. commercial or mixed purpose) and the measurement standard applied to such tests is UNSCI 2004, which are now largely constituting States customary international law.   Ultimately, to the author’s opinion, the value of international arbitration (‘ITA and ISDS’) as a means and ends of solving disputes is dependent upon the extent to which arbitral awards are honoured and enforced. In this light, the author can vociferously say that sovereign immunity remains a significant impediment against award-creditors seeking to enforce arbitral awards against unwilling States. The barrier is not one that will fade away. Thus, outstanding award-creditors could be advised to exercise some pressure through alternate and viable forms of enforcement measures. Therefore, the States should not stand-alone to shield their commercial assets from enforcement, attachment and execution, especially for de minimis sovereign purposes.[2]  [1] R Doak Bishop (ed), Enforcement of Arbitral Awards against Sovereigns (JurisNet, LLC Publ 2009). [2] R Doak Bishop (ed), Enforcement of Arbitral Awards against Sovereigns (JurisNet, LLC Publ 2009). / <p>My thesis opposition was done through virtual presentation in Zoom. </p>

The past few decades have seen a veritable explosion of investment treaty and other arbitration claims brought against States. Many of these claims have been heard through ICSID arbitration. In comparison to other arbitration frameworks, the ICSID regime has its own self-contained rules for enforcement. Thus, given the significant increase in arbitration claims against States, on the one hand, and States’ not too seldom invoking of the defence of sovereign immunity, on the other hand, this treatise is timely in addressing various outstanding issues that award-creditors have and will continue to encounter when dealing with defaulting States.   The doctrine of sovereign immunity translates into the conventional wisdom that a State cannot be sued without its consent in foreign courts. This doctrine derives from the practical consequence that the sovereign makes the law, and consequently can break it too. This idea is an extension of primarily the common law doctrine to the international plane, which emerged largely as a result of international comity.[1] This concept is also based upon principles ‘equality’ in terms of ‘equal sovereign status’. Some authors even call it ‘independence’ and ‘dignity’ etc., In this respect, the ICJ has also held that it was equality, that is the basis, i.e. justification for the general rule of immunity.   The theory of immunity has gradually shifted from absolute to restrictive immunity, making it significantly easier for award-creditors to enforce an arbitral award. However, the barrier vis-à-vis immunity from execution makes the last link in ITA vulnerable. This evolution has made substantially an easier task for award-creditors in ITA and ISDS holding an arbitration award against a sovereign State. In view of this relatively at ease syndrome that award-creditors now possess, the immunity protections granted to State and its assets will be accessed albeit the proportionality test of acta jure imperii (i.e. sovereign or government purpose) &amp; acta jure gestionis (i.e. commercial or mixed purpose) and the measurement standard applied to such tests is UNSCI 2004, which are now largely constituting States customary international law.   Ultimately, to the author’s opinion, the value of international arbitration (‘ITA and ISDS’) as a means and ends of solving disputes is dependent upon the extent to which arbitral awards are honoured and enforced. In this light, the author can vociferously say that sovereign immunity remains a significant impediment against award-creditors seeking to enforce arbitral awards against unwilling States. The barrier is not one that will fade away. Thus, outstanding award-creditors could be advised to exercise some pressure through alternate and viable forms of enforcement measures. Therefore, the States should not stand-alone to shield their commercial assets from enforcement, attachment and execution, especially for de minimis sovereign purposes.[2] [1] R Doak Bishop (ed), Enforcement of Arbitral Awards against Sovereigns (JurisNet, LLC Publ 2009). [2] Bishop (n 1).

La France est un acteur majeur de la société internationale dont l’attachement aux « droits de l’Homme » constitue un élément caractéristique de sa politique extérieure. Il est alors paradoxal de constater que si la signature de la Convention européenne des droits de l’Homme a été opérée dès 1950, ce n’est qu’en 1974 que celle-ci sera ratifiée et en 1981 que le droit de recours individuel sera reconnu. Il y a donc une ambivalence entre une ligne politique de respect des « droits de l’Homme » et l’acceptation pleine et entière des instruments internationaux correspondants lorsqu’ils instaurent des organes supranationaux de contrôle. Lorsque la France est mise en cause devant la Cour européenne des droits de l’Homme, elle se doit de défendre, non seulement ses propres intérêts, mais également ceux du mécanisme objectif de garantie des droits instaurés par la Convention européenne. Il y a donc une pluralité de rôles qui s’offrent à la France en ce cas. Ensuite, la fonction première de la Cour européenne des droits de l’Homme consiste à vérifier que les organes internes ont bien appliqué et, le cas échéant, réparé les violations à la Convention européenne. Ce n’est qu’en cas de carence des organes de l’Etat que la France devrait être poursuivie devant la Cour. Enfin, l’incidence de la jurisprudence de la Cour sur l’organisation institutionnelle française est fondamentale et dépasse la stricte mise en œuvre de la Convention par les seules juridictions nationales / France is a major actor in the international society whose attachment to the "human rights" is a characteristic feature of its foreign policy. It is a paradox that if the signature of the European Convention on human rights was proceeded in 1950, it was ratified only in 1974, and the individual petition was recognized in 1981. There is an ambivalence between a policy of respect for the "human rights" and the acceptance of the relevant international instruments when it creates an international body to control its application.When France is sued in the European Court of human rights, it must defend, not only its own interests, but also those of the objective mechanism of the guarantee of the rights established by the European Convention. So there is a plurality of characters for France in this case. Thus, the primary function of the European Court of human rights is to verify that internal organs had properly applied the European Convention and, where appropriate, repaired the violations: is that in the case of deficiency of the State’s organs that France should be sued in the Court. Finally, the impact of the Court’s case-law on the French institutional organization is fundamental and exceed the strict implementation of the Convention by only national courts

The situation of Palestinian refugees is one of the most burning issues related to the Arab-Israeli conflict. Its solution is at the same time one of the key conditions for the settlement of this conflict, whose beginning may be traced back already in connection with the first alija - the first wave of Jewish immigration after the anti - Semitic pogroms in 1881. The importance of this problem is confirmed e.g. by the text of the Resolution 242 (S/RES/242) of 1967, which considers the upright solution for Palestinian refugees as one of the prerequisites for lasting peace in the Middle East. This question has been subject of many peace negotiations between the representatives of the concerned states lately, which only illustrates the high international topicality of the given problem. The aim of the dissertation is to define the term Palestinian refugee in the historic, political and legal context and in this connection to determine the position of Palestinian refugees in international law as an initial point, which is followed by the international law analysis of their right to return. First part of the study therefore will try to make a systematic overview in the extent of the term Palestinian refugee. The second part of the dissertation analyses the right of return in the general level and then...

Dolphins, whales, and sharks are some of the world’s most iconic animals. Yet, many people will only ever see these animals via the media. The media, then, hold significant power in creating, modifying, or reaffirming the imaginaries around various species which, in turn, influences how much concern is given to matters related to their welfare and conservation. Given the environmental and ecological concerns presently facing the ocean, protecting, conserving, and preserving the marine ecosystem is vital, and time is of the essence. Through the work of activists, three specific marine wildlife issues have received a lot of publicity across various forms of mainstream media: the killing of dolphins in Taiji, Japan for their meat; Antarctic whaling; and the practice of shark-finning. Three activist films, namely The Cove (2009), Whale Wars (2008-), and Sharkwater (2006), are centred on these issues, and filmmakers attempt to compel viewers to support the activists’ protectionist cause. In order for this goal to have a chance of coming to fruition, rhetorical arguments must be carefully crafted. Yet, the study of rhetoric in animal-focused activist films is still an understudied research area. This thesis contributes to this area of research by using the aforementioned films as case studies by applying Aristotle’s rhetorical proofs of ethos, pathos, and logos to analyse the rhetorical arguments. Ethos is demonstrable when the activists construct themselves as credible, moral heroes and the animals as possessors of positive traits worth protecting, and the hunters as immoral villains. The graphic imagery of animal death appeals to pathos to stir strong bodily and emotional responses such as sadness, and disgust in order to mobilize audience support for cause. Lastly, these films appeal to logos through the use of culturally authoritative discourses such as those of biology, western conventional medicine, and the legal system. This thesis essentially argues that these texts work rhetorically and discursively to persuade audiences to feel a connection with and sympathy towards the animals; to be supportive of the activists; and to prompt antipathy towards the hunters and industry spokespeople.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--UCLA, 2008. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 384-427).

Thesis (doctoral), Universität, Düsseldorf, 2006. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 245-257).

In the case of LaGrand (Germany v United States), the International Court of Justice held that the United States (US) had violated its international obligation to Germany under the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations when it executed two German nationals without first informing them of their consular rights. The case came before the court after the United States had disregarded a preliminary ruling passed by the IC], which directed the US not to execute the German nationals pending the outcome of the ICJ case. The decision raised the issue of the effect of ICJ decisions in domestic proceedings and the effectiveness of ICJ enforcement mechanisms. This thesis considers the possibility of a role for national courts as active enforcers of ICJ decisions. It is argued that whilst evidence shows that there is no legal obligation on courts to enforce ICJ decisions, there is certainly room in international law to facilitate this development. In support of this argument, the thesis demonstrates how basic presuppositions about international law have shifted over the last few decades. This shift has been both the impetus and the result of globalisation. The case of LaGrand alongside similar cases is used to show how national courts may play an increased role in the enforcement of ICJ decisions.