Dissenting opinions, separate opinions and declarations are a familiar aspect of the international jurisprudential landscape. Despite this, in comparison to domestic judicial systems, there has been comparatively little by way of attempts to rationalise the institutional and systemic implications of this practice. While there is widespread agreement that the impact of additional opinions lies in their effect upon the authority of the court or tribunal and its decisions (‘institutional judicial authority’), the nature of that impact is open to greater contestation. How should additional opinions be viewed? An unnecessary and counterproductive distraction or an important mechanism of accountability for the exercise of judicial power? By conceiving additional opinions as the expression of individual judicial authority, this thesis examines the interplay between individual judicial authority and institutional judicial authority within two paradigms of international justice. The first – comprising the ICJ and PCIJ – represents the traditional paradigm of international justice wherein the culture of expressing individual judicial authority in international law was born. The second paradigm is international criminal justice as pursued by two institutions in particular, the ICTY and the ICC. By comparing these two paradigms, and the nature and purposes of judicial authority therein, this thesis considers how individual judges through their additional opinions have contributed to the evolving international judicial culture, and how that practice affects the manner in which the institutions in question advance the project of international justice. Drawing upon Mirjan Damaška’s work demonstrating how procedural choices and practices have implications upon authority, and the relationship between procedure and the purposes for which authority is claimed, this thesis demonstrates that not only is the expression of individual judicial authority consistent with institutional authority but it is constitutive of it. The final section of the thesis turns to consider a form of judicial expression – defined as judicial dissent – that places institutional and individual authority in conflict with one another. Despite the negative implications of judicial dissent upon judicial authority (both institutional and individual) and judicial collegiality, the final section considers whether such practice can play a legitimate systemic function.

This thesis begins with the observation that a gap exists between the universal consensus among all States regarding the criminalisation of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes on the one hand, and the prevalence of impunity on the other. It then puts forward the hypothesis that this gap may be explained by the unsuitability of the approach taken by the international community to address the issue of responsibility for core international crimes. In order to test this hypothesis, this thesis critically examines the different forms of responsibility for core international crimes available in International Law. One of the important characteristics that distinguish core international crimes from other international crimes or ordinary crimes is that they are often committed with the simultaneous participation of several actors, including individual perpetrators, the State and, in some instances, non-state actors. Addressing the impunity for the commission of core international crimes cannot, therefore, be limited to the lack of consequences for individual perpetrators. This thesis challenges the focus of International Criminal Justice on individual criminal responsibility and argues for a comprehensive approach to responsibility for international crimes, including State and collective responsibility, in order to convey the collective and political features of these crimes. The issue of responsibility for genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes has been widely discussed in the scholarly literature, in particular with the development of International Criminal Law. One can observe, however, an imbalance between the amount of research dedicated to the issue of individual criminal responsibility for core international crimes and the issue of State responsibility for international crimes. This imbalance is partly due to the fact that the notion of State criminal responsibility was rejected by a large majority of States, and discussions on these issues were abandoned. The originality of this thesis comes from the broad approach it adopts to examine the issue of responsibility for core international crimes with the aim of bridging the gap between the distinct academic perspectives. It weaves together different approaches to responsibility, from individual responsibility to State responsibility, in order to identify the weaknesses of the current forms of responsibility and to highlight the complementary aspects of the main questions discussed in these different fields of law. The thesis goes beyond highlighting the complementary aspects of the different forms of responsibility for core international crimes and puts forward a concrete proposal to develop a comprehensive normative framework, based on the model of the Responsibility to Protect concept, to implement a comprehensive approach to responsibility. This framework relies on the emergence of a duty to end impunity that lies with the territorial State as well as the international community. The purpose of this comprehensive normative framework is to promote the cooperation and interactions between the different mechanisms available in International Law and designed to deal with issues of responsibility for core international crimes. The proposal is based on the assumption that including the different norms and measures which aim to end impunity within one framework would optimise their synergy to respond to core international crimes and protect the interests of humanity as a whole.

This master's thesis deals with the topic of legal regime of the seabed beyond the limits of national jurisdiction in relation to the Czech Republic. It is still a relatively new area of human interest. In the brief introduction, author suggests relevance of this topic and its attractiveness in the future. In the second chapter author describes historical development of the law of the sea, in which the legal regime of the seabed gets special attention. Author points out, especially, differences in historical development of the sea and the seabed. Next chapter deals with relevant sources of law. That goes with enumeration of the basic international treaties. Author also suggests the possibility of origin of international customary law. Author pays attention to case law and soft law of the Authority as international organization. Next chapter describes the structure of the Authority, activities in the Area, dispute resolution mechanisms and individual resources in the Area. Separate chapter is dedicated to prospecting, exploration and exploitation. Special attention is paid towards adaptation of these activities in regulations of the Authority and a future draft of mining regulation. Sixth chapter shows involvement of the Czech Republic in the whole system, which is significant considering the size...

Of the maritime boundaries yet to be delimited between Canada and the United States, the Beaufort Sea might be the more pressing one, considering its strategic location in a rapidly developing Arctic region and its vast economic potential. In accordance with the Law of the Sea Convention (UNCLOS), maritime boundaries are to be delimited by agreement on the basis of international law as referred to in Article 38 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice, in order to reach an equitable solution. When an agreement cannot be reached, parties can resort to third-party arbitration. While jurisprudence has determined that international law does not mandate a particular method of delimitation, it requires the consideration of equitable principles, also called special circumstances or factors. The notion of equity is therefore the foundation of boundary determination. But, what is equity and how is it applied? This thesis examines the various forms of equity, their origins in legal philosophy and domestic law and how they have been incorporated in international law. The main focus, however, is to analyse the differences between how international tribunals or courts have interpreted and applied equity in boundary determination and how States have applied it in negotiated agreements. While tribunals have tended to consider equitable principles as equivalent to geographical proportionality, States have considered those principles more in keeping with the notion of distributive justice and, more and more, are taking a globalised approach to boundary determination. On the basis of this analysis, this thesis evaluates the potential outcome of a third-party arbitration of the Beaufort Sea boundary dispute between Canada and the United States as well as the options for settlement negotiations between the Parties. In the Beaufort Sea area where hydrocarbon development is intrinsically linked not only to the development of the local population but also to the entire Arctic region, be it on issues related to the environment, navigation or security, the thesis concludes that a third-party adjudication would not serve the interests of the States. As delimiting boundaries nowadays is only one aspect of the management of oceans related issues, interests are best served when delimitation is understood as part of this global approach.

Mexico is home to almost 2.9 million square kilometers of land and water surface area that is affected by water pollution and environmental degradation. While geographically more prevalent to pollution threats as well as one of the most biodiverse countries in the world, it is important to coordinate the management and regulation of coastal zones effectively to safeguard these ecosystem from degradation. However, because of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, nations view the problem of living resources and their management as a national priority instead of an international cooperation initiative. Mexico's fragmented, overlapping, and sometimes corrupt domestic institutions for environmental policy yield ineffective and inadequate pollution control, a result of which is a high level of marine debris presence on the coasts, as evidenced by a recent study in Veracruz, Veracruz. This marine debris, the most abundant of which is composed of plastics, is detrimental to marine life, leading to death, starvation, debilitation, reduced quality of life and lowered reproductive performance. While several avenues are being explored to mitigate marine debris in the environment, such as decreasing knowledge gaps, increasing pollution prevention measures, and education, degradation issues have compounded globally, revealing a clear picture of inadequate international regulation and convention. A stricter Mexican national regulatory system that incorporates private and public waste management organizations to incentivize and facilitate waste cleanup is needed to improve the health of the global ocean.

1982 m. Jungtinių Tautų jūrų teisės konvencija nustato sudėtingą ginčų, susijusių su jūrų teisės klausimais, sprendimo mechanizmą, derindama įvairius ginčų sprendimo būdus bei plačią šalių pasirinkimo laisvę: nuo tradicinių diplomatinių ginčo sprendimo metodų iki privalomojo ginčų sprendimo. Be to, Konvencija įkuria naują nuolatinę teisminę instituciją Tarptautinį jūrų teisės tribunolą. Šio darbo pirmuosiuose skyriuose bendrai aptariami ginčų sprendimo mechanizmo ypatumai, privalomosios jurisdikcijos susiformavimo prielaidos bei naujo Tribunolo atsiradimą lėmusios priežastys. Toliau nagrinėjamos su šio Tribunolo jurisdikcija susijusios problemos. Pirmiausiai analizuojant Konvencijos 287 straipsnyje numatytų privalomųjų procedūrų pasirinkimo laisvę bei pagal šį straipsnį pateiktus valstybių pareiškimus, prieinama išvada, kad Tribunolo privalomoji jurisdikcija spręsti ginčus, susijusius su Konvencijos aiškinimu ar taikymu, apskritai yra ribota. Šioje vietoje atkreipiamas dėmesys į valstybių pasyvumą ir valios trūkumą. Toliau nagrinėjamas Konvencijos XV dalies 1 skyriaus nuostatų, konkrečiai 281 ir 282 straipsnių, interpretavimas aktualiuose Southern Bluefin Tuna ir Mox Plant arbitražų sprendimuose, šių sprendimų skirtingas vertinimas, taip pat Europos Teisingumo Teismo Mox Plant byloje sprendimas. Be to, darbe vertinama pareiškimų pateiktų pagal Tarptautinio Teisingumo Teismo Statuto 36 straipsnio 2 dalį įtaka. Galiausiai atkreipiamas dėmesys į Konvencijoje numatytus... [toliau žr. visą tekstą] / The 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea lays out a complex system for settlement of disputes relating to the law of the sea matters and coordinates various methods of dispute settlement: from measures traditionally known under public international law to compulsory dispute settlement. Moreover, in its dispute settlement system it establishes a new judicial institution the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. The foremost chapters of this paper discuss general features of this dispute settlement system, objectives which led to the adoption of compulsory jurisdiction and main reasons for establishing the new Tribunal. Further it examines problems concerning the jurisdiction of this Tribunal. Primarily analyzed the choice of procedure under Article 287 and States’ declarations made thereunder it appears that the Tribunal has very limited compulsory jurisdiction for the disputes concerning the interpretation or application of this Convention. This results from the policy of drift. Further this paper comments on the relevant cases concerning the interpretation of Articles 281 and 282, namely Southern Bluefin Tuna and Mox Plant arbitrations, also the judgement of European Court of Justice in Mox Plant. Moreover, it deals with the impact of the acceptance by all parties to a dispute of the International Court of Justice compulsory jurisdiction under Article 36, paragraph 2 of Court’s Statute. The second part of the paper discusses the Tribunal’s compulsory... [to full text]

Název diplomové práce: Aspekty registrace plavidel v mezinárodním právu (oblast mezinárodního práva mořského a registrace námořních plavidel) (Aspects of the registration of vessels in the International Law) Abstrakt: Along with fishing, navigation is the oldest use of the sea, and remains one of the most important. Ships are the most important means of transporting goods on such routes: ninety-five per cent, by weight, of all international trade is seaborne. On the military side is it same important battle field. While almost all costal States and some landlocked (right now without Czech Republic) ones have a merchant navy of some description, one of the remarkable features of the international shipping industry is the degree to which ships are concentrated under the flags of relatively few States. This does not necessarily indicate a similar distribution of ownership. We are talking about "flags of convenience" and it is one of the topics of this thesis. This thesis deals transformation from customary international law to current codified regulation of the registration of vessels. The ascription of nationality to ships is one of the most important means by which public order is maintained at sea. As well as indicating what rights a ship enjoys and to what obligations it is subjects, the nationality of a...

Through the Freedom of Navigation Program, established in 1979, the United States exercises diplomatic and military options for disputing maritime claims it judges to be inconsistent with customary international law and the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. Yet, despite the United States’ universal commitment to freedom of navigation and the law of the sea, it has behaved inconsistently from 1979-2013. This dissertation examines the variation and asks under what conditions the United States demonstrates its refusal to acquiesce to maritime claims—either by issuing a diplomatic protest or driving a warship through the disputed waters. This dissertation introduces a new dataset of every coastal state in the world over this 34-year period, coding each type of maritime claim made by every coastal state in the world, whether the United States disputes that particular claim, and whether the United States takes some kind of diplomatic or operational action to dispute it. The mixed-method analysis proceeds with a large-n quantitative analysis that sets up a qualitative case study on the Strait of Hormuz. The dissertation begins and concludes with a discussion of current conditions in the South China Sea and the United States activity in this disputed region. This study finds that territorial and usage claims are twice as strongly correlated with operational assertions as a response than diplomatic protests. More specifically, coastal states that require foreign ships to obtain permission prior to entering their territorial sea are most highly correlated with operational assertions. When the United States disputes a maritime claim, military powers and wealthy states are no more likely to receive Freedom of Navigation operations (FONOPS) than others. Moreover, bilateral trade relationships and polity type hardly seem to matter. Similarly, neither the number of ships nor diplomatic representation increases the likelihood of FONOPS. Rather, a coastal state’s possession of nuclear weapons significantly increases the likelihood of receiving an operational assertion—especially if that states has made a declaration upon ratification of UNCLOS.

This thesis analyses the American policy of sustaining freedom of navigation on the seas through its Freedom of Navigation Program (FON Program). It analyses Freedom of Navigation Operations (FONOPs) as a means of maintain the current system of the law of the sea as put forth by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. (UNCLOS) The thesis deals with law of the sea history, it also describes and analyses the Convention itself. Another topic discussed is the unique position of United States as a power guaranteeing the current regime of the seas, while staying out of the provision of UNCLOS. The thesis analyses the American debate about joining the Convention and analyses the consequences of American absence as a party to the treaty. The FON Program and FONOPs in the South China Sea are thoroughly analysed by the thesis. The South China Sea is a troubled region suffering from excessive maritime claims of local states. These claims are closely connected to the militarization of the region. The People's Republic of China is an important force as a rising power striving for the position of a regional hegemon. The thesis describes, how FONOPs are conducted and it observes, how they are received by the target states. The thesis is set in the South China Sea region between October 2015 and May...

No description available.