The aim of this thesis is to analyse the conceptual foundations of the doctrine of humanitarian intervention and scrutinise the pertinent practice within the identified lego-philosophical framework. The present study is organised into three major sections. The first section contains the theory of humanitarian intervention and it has been subdivided into four chapters which represent the main legal theories. The pursued analysis is, thus, manifold. It proceeds with a theoretical appraisement of natural law, positivism, realism, and critical legal studies by presenting and evaluating their main dispositions, inadequacies and interrelations. Additionally, those trends in the practice of humanitarian intervention which coincide with the identified theoretical tenets are also appraised. The thrust of the pursued analysis is, we hope, to rationalise the contradiction in legal doctrine which stems from the different philosophical stances adopted by legal theorists. These contradictions could be surmised in the antithetical poles of peace/justice; human rights/sovereignty. The next section could be introduced as the praxis of humanitarian intervention and contains two chapters. Having identified the arguments and contradictions, two articles of the United Nations Charter which attempt to control the notion of humanitarian intervention by legal means are analysed; that is, Article 2(4) on the non-use of force and Article 51 on self-defence. The diversified effectuation of humanitarian intervention renders the identified contradictions and opposing theoretical trends more evident. However, our aim is not merely to deconstruct the legal and philosophical milieu relating to humanitarian intervention but also to present a new framework for analysis. Consequently, the last two chapters contain our phronesis. They deal with the assumption of human dignity which transgresses the compartmentalisation of legal doctrine and its unreflective actualisation in the praxis of humanitarian intervention. At this point, the aim of the present research is to substitute a sterile lego-philosophical dogmatism and to submit under scrutiny a vision whereby the critical parameters of any humanitarian action are evaluated and accounted for. This, we hope, consists of the innovative aspect of this research. The existing lego-philosophical approach to humanitarian intervention – negative or positive - suffers from an unreflective automation. The negative approach submits any relevant action to strictly defined criteria compliance with which is conditio sine qua non for legality. On the other hand, the positive approach encounters greater difficulties. It weighs any humanitarian action according to certain criteria but disguises its value choices within the legal context. The fear of incommensuration in legal argument invites indecisive and restrained attitudes. In contradistinction, our approach entails an explicit aim of attaining human dignity which redirects our reflective nature towards distinguishing and deconcretising the manifold aspects which humanitarian actions contain. Instead of monolithic evaluations, one should see in any humanitarian action the values which are at stake and what should be done in order to ameliorate the situation.

The purpose of this study is an inquiry into the present state of customary international law on the use of armed force by individual States. It deals with the historical evolution of the law towards the current rule of the prohibition of the use of force, the content of this prohibition and the purported exceptions to it that are invoked in the practice of States as justifications of lawful resort to force. The present author does not deal with the use of force under the authority of competent organs of the United Nations and regional organisations, as well as questions of individual criminal responsibility for resort to armed force. The present author has adopted an analytical and empirical approach towards the phenomenon of the use of armed force by States. The study is based on an examination of the practice of individual States, both within and outside the framework of United Nations organs. More specifically it concentrates on the practice of States that perpetrated the use of force, the States that were the targets of this force and the reactions of third States (in the sense of not those directly involved) to instances of use of force. Moreover, the present author considers certain resolutions adopted by the Security Council and the General Assembly as part of the practice of States and evidence of opinio juris of this practice. By this it is meant that the adoption (or not) of resolutions, especially in the Security Council, is not insulated from statements by individual members of these U. N. organs. Hence, in the case of the Security Council the lack of condemnation is not automatically considered as approval of the action that is the object of debate at the Council, beyond and apart from the attitude of individual Members. At the same time the adoption of a resolution is treated as a projection of the position advocated by individual States, while account is taken of the voting pattern and dissent or reservations expressed upon adoption. The study of State practice is compared with the ruling of the International Court of Justice in the Nicaragua Case (Merits) (the issues of use of armed force dealt with by the Court) with the aim of proving that the restrictive interpretation of the law on the use of force upheld by the Court corresponds to the actual practice of States as a component of general customary law. The position of the law of the use of force rests on a twofold basis. First, the rule of the prohibition of resort to armed force that constitutes the foundation and the starting point of the legal regulation of unilateral resort to armed force, and secondly, the purported exceptions to the rule. It is undoubtedly the case that the legal force of the rule of non-use of armed violence is not diminished. The numerous resorts to armed force by individual States have been justified either on the basis of restrictive interpretation of the content of the prohibition itself or of the purported exceptions to it. In the subsequent sections it is shown that State practice does not admit a restrictive interpretation of components of the rule and is unanimous only with regard to one of the purported exceptions to it : the right of defensive action. With regard to other exceptions, there exists extreme controversy as to their existence and scope. The content of the prohibition of the use of force, the scope of the "universally admitted" exception of defensive action, and, finally, the controversial exceptions to the rule of non-use of force constitute the three main thematic issues that are dealt with in this study. Hence the structure of the present thesis reflects this contingency. The present study considers the evolution of the law on the regulation of the use of force as marked by continuity from the period of the League of Nations to the present, and it is divided in three parts. Part One deals with the rule of the prohibition of the use of armed force by individual States. It considers the historical evolution of the rule and focuses greatly on the important developments in the practice of States during the period of the League of Nations that culminated in the total prohibition of armed force as a result of the Conclusion of the Pact of Paris (1928) and the establishment of the United Nations Organisation (Chapter 1). The remainder of Part One deals with the content of the prohibition of the threat or use of force by focusing, mainly, on the practice of States in the period 1945 - 19913. The issues that are dealt with are related to the phenomena of indirect use of force by way of armed bands (Chapter 2); armed reprisals (Chapter 3); the concepts of threat of force (Chapter 4); economic coercion (Chapter 5); anti-colonial armed struggles in relation to the rule of non-use of force (Chapter 6); and territorial integrity and political independence as the object of forcible action. Part Two examines the historical evolution (Chapter 8) and the content of the right of self-defence (Chapters 9& 10), as the only universally accepted ground for lawful unilateral resort to armed force. Chapter 9 deals with the content of individual defensive action and Chapter 10 concerns the concept of collective self-defence. Finally, in Part Three the present author considers justifications for lawful resort to armed force that are surrounded by controversy: Namely, the use of force by States for the protection of the lives and property of nationals or under the doctrine of "humanitarian intervention" (Chapter 11) and the concept of military intervention on the basis of the consent of the State on whose territory military action is taking place (Chapter 12). By way of last word it must be pointed out that in this study the term "intervention" is considered as wider than the concept of "armed force" - the latter is included in the former but not vice-versa. A study of intervention necessarily includes, in this writer's view, instances of nonforcible State activity detailed consideration of which was beyond the scope of this thesis.

Space technology is increasingly becoming part of our everyday life, businesses, governments and private entities rely heavily on satellite communications for their respective dealings and transactions. On the other hand, not all transactions or businesses can be done solely through telecommunications, we often need to get on an airplane and go somewhere else to do our respective businesses and if we are on vacation we definitely need to travel. The problem is that airplane travel, although fast, sometimes is not fast enough. Today's people want convenience and when they want something they usually want it fast, especially in business. Now, imagine yourself being able to get from Montreal to Sydney to close a business deal and be back home the same day or ordering a part from Tokyo to San Juan and have it delivered it the same day. It may seem like science fiction or something too far ahead in the future, but it is not. Currently, there are nations and private companies working on different prototypes that soon will be flying in our skies and above. These space transportation systems are the future of commercial transportation, but as every human activity, they will need regulation, in this thesis we will analyze the legal issues and aspects behind these future vehicles.

Private entities, investing billions of dollars, as a matter of reasonable commercial corporate expectations, want to be protected against undue use, exploitation and copying of their technology and inventions which they have put into their space ventures (often termed as 'theft') by any third party. States, to secure an environment friendly to such generation, use and transfer of intellectual property rights (IPRs) in outer space, have initiated applying and/or extending their national IP laws into outer space either in form of a statute or a multilateral agreement. This may have both commercial and political significance. / This thesis deals with IP issues in international perspective (with reference, however, to some leading national IP legislation when and where it is necessary) with special reference to the contemporary legal regime governing outer space. While emphasizing the existing legal regime relating to IPRs in outer space, it explores the possibility of commercial exploitation of IPRs made in space and on ground through the existing international trade system. The increasing importance of cooperation between the World Intellectual Property Organization and World Trade Organization in this regard is also examined, against the back drop of space activities and the outer space legal regime relating to IPRs. (Abstract shortened by UMI.)

International law is not insulated from all external influences: eminently political and conflicting, international relations assume a vertical vision of the relationship between law and power. Therefore, the terrorist attacks of September 11, whether fueled by the desire for a new world order or simply the pursuit of power, necessarily affected the international legal order. To identify these effects, one must consider the very foundations of international law, sovereignty and the equality of the States, as well as the emerging international trends of globalization and unilateralism and the theoretical models, which must be compared to the immediately measures taken in response to the attacks. Having defined the situation, as it existed on the 10th of September, one will observe the acceleration and expansion of the already existing phenomena. The radicalization of international law and outer space law confirms the statement of Prosper Veil, "always the same one, and always started again".

This thesis addresses the legal and policy issues relating to what may be the most exciting prospect in the history of the human civilisation: the commercial exploitation of natural resources in outer space. The thesis is based on the hypothesis that such ventures are inhibited not by physical, technological and economic factors, but by the inadequacies and uncertainties present in the current body of space law and policy. Consequently, a new international legal framework and a policy consensus are required to provide a legal environment favourable for such a valuable and necessary development. To substantiate this hypothesis, the thesis begins by establishing the economic necessity and technical feasibility of space mining today, an estimate of the financial commitments required. This is followed by a risk analysis of a typical commercial mining venture in space, identifying the economic and legal risks. This leads to the recognition that the legal risks must be minimised to enable such enormous financial commitments to be made. What then follows is a detailed analysis of the legal framework for such activities as well as identifying the inadequacies of space law for the commercial exploitation of celestial resources. This is achieved through a discussion of the general principles of international space law, particularly dealing with state responsibility and international liability, as well as some of the issues arising from space mining activities. Much detail is devoted to the analysis of the content of the “common heritage of mankind” doctrine in international law and the effect of international disagreement over its application to celestial bodies. Having established the relevant legal issues, the thesis then turns to consider the past failures in reach similar agreements and the competing policy interests that have prevented the success of such agreements. It attempts to balance such interests in creating a legal and policy compromise that may be acceptable to a majority of the international community and provide some practical proposals on the structural, procedural, administrative and judicial aspects of creating and implementing a new legal framework.

Thesis (LL.M.). / Written for the Institute of Air & Space Law. Title from title page of PDF (viewed 2008/07/28). Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (D.C.L.). / Written for the Institute of Air and Space Law. Title from title page of PDF (viewed 2008/08/04). Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (LL.M.). / Written for the Institute of Air and Space Law. Title from title page of PDF (viewed 2008/12/04). Includes bibliographical references.

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.