Interstate arbitration is commonly viewed as an essentially judicial process, suitable for the resolution of legal questions but inappropriate to deal with “political” issues. This conception, however, arguably flies in the face of both the origins and historical function of interstate arbitration and the complex legal-political nature of most interstate disputes. This paper offers an alternative account of interstate arbitration, which views it as a sui generis hybrid mechanism that combines “legal” and “diplomatic” dimensions to effectively resolve all aspects of interstate disputes. The paper examines this proposed account by analyzing four complex interstate territorial disputes that were submitted to arbitration and assessing the extent to which these two dimensions were recognized and employed, and how this may have affected the resolution of the disputes. Based on this analysis, the paper offers a two-dimensional operative framework intended to guide states and arbitrators in the resolution of future complex interstate disputes.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:TORONTO/oai:tspace.library.utoronto.ca:1807/43233 |
| Date | 05 December 2013 |
| Creators | Meshel, Tamar |
| Contributors | Knop, Karen C. |
| Source Sets | University of Toronto |
| Language | en_ca |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Thesis |
Page generated in 0.0016 seconds