State Immunity, Between Past and Future

Cristina Elena Popa Tache
{"title":"State Immunity, Between Past and Future","authors":"Cristina Elena Popa Tache","doi":"10.33327/ajee-18-6.1-a000121","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: State immunity, a subject rarely encountered in the East, is being brought to light more and more often lately. In the process of being detached from customary law, it has been subject to several attempts at codification. These attempts appear to have been overtaken by developments in doctrine, which demonstrates the existence of potentially delicate situations of public international law. In this context, we recall the United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and their Property (New York, December 2004), which has not yet entered into force.1 In this context, we also note the initiatives for the establishment of the European Court of State Immunity contained in the European Convention on State Immunity of 1972 and its Additional Protocol, which has never been operational.2\nMethods: This article aims to take stock of the status quo of the doctrine of state immunity in international law as a whole by highlighting the existing normative aspects in relation to the problems of implementation.\nResults and Conclusions: The arguments and conclusions are intended to underline the importance of understanding the reality, in particular, of how this doctrine works together with its exceptions. The method of scientific introspection based on primary and secondary data from scientific journals, books, documents, expert opinions, and other publications has been used to develop this article.","PeriodicalId":40329,"journal":{"name":"Access to Justice in Eastern Europe","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Access to Justice in Eastern Europe","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33327/ajee-18-6.1-a000121","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background: State immunity, a subject rarely encountered in the East, is being brought to light more and more often lately. In the process of being detached from customary law, it has been subject to several attempts at codification. These attempts appear to have been overtaken by developments in doctrine, which demonstrates the existence of potentially delicate situations of public international law. In this context, we recall the United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and their Property (New York, December 2004), which has not yet entered into force.1 In this context, we also note the initiatives for the establishment of the European Court of State Immunity contained in the European Convention on State Immunity of 1972 and its Additional Protocol, which has never been operational.2 Methods: This article aims to take stock of the status quo of the doctrine of state immunity in international law as a whole by highlighting the existing normative aspects in relation to the problems of implementation. Results and Conclusions: The arguments and conclusions are intended to underline the importance of understanding the reality, in particular, of how this doctrine works together with its exceptions. The method of scientific introspection based on primary and secondary data from scientific journals, books, documents, expert opinions, and other publications has been used to develop this article.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
国家豁免,介于过去和未来
背景:国家豁免是一个在东方很少遇到的问题,最近越来越多地被曝光。在脱离习惯法的过程中,它受到了几次编纂的尝试。这些尝试似乎已被学说的发展所取代,这表明国际公法存在潜在的微妙情况。在这方面,我们回顾尚未生效的《联合国国家及其财产管辖豁免公约》(2004年12月,纽约),2方法:本文旨在通过强调与执行问题有关的现有规范方面,来评估国家豁免理论在整个国际法中的现状。结果和结论:这些论点和结论旨在强调理解现实的重要性,特别是理解这一学说如何与其例外一起工作的重要性。本文采用了基于科学期刊、书籍、文件、专家意见和其他出版物的主要和次要数据的科学内省方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
50.00%
发文量
62
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊最新文献
Challenges of Legal Guarantees for the Enforcement of Arbitral Awards in International Commercial Cases Advancing Sustainable Justice through AI-Based Case Law Analysis The Implementation of Consensual Tenet in Modern Civil Procedure: Comparative Analysis of Court-Connected Settlement Procedures Applied in Austria, Lithuania, and Ukraine Human Trafficking in Western Balkan: Case Study of Kosovo Towards an Effective Legal Protection for Older Persons in the 21st Century: A Comparative Study of International Human Rights Law and Arab Constitutions
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1