{"title":"LEGAL QUALIFICATION OF LABOR CONTRACT AND CONTRACT OF MANDATE (SERVICE COTRACT) WHEN CHECKING LEGALITY OF DEFAULT JUDGEMENT","authors":"Lana Chubinidze, Ana Gogoreliani","doi":"10.52340/lm.2022.05","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.52340/lm.2022.05","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":205708,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL \"LEGAL METHODS\"","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130880650","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"THE EVIDENCE VALUE OF BALLISTIC RESEARCH RESULTS OF OBJECT, FIRED IN A SMOOTH-BORE FIREARM","authors":"Giorgi Dzindzibadze","doi":"10.52340/lm.2021.06","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.52340/lm.2021.06","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":205708,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL \"LEGAL METHODS\"","volume":"49 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130956257","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"THE SCOPE OF THE SURETY’S LIABILITY IN THE EVENT OF THE LIQUIDATION OF THE PRINCIPAL DEBTOR","authors":"G. Beridze","doi":"10.52340/lm.2022.01","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.52340/lm.2022.01","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":205708,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL \"LEGAL METHODS\"","volume":"4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127531829","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Georgia is one of the countries where firearms are removed from free civilian circulation, and the purchase of certain categories of firearms, with the right of storage or carrying, is possible only on the basis of a special permit issued by the Service Agency of the Ministry of Internal Affairs. After registering the weapon, it is possible to purchase ammunition for this weapon. According to the current version of the Criminal Code, the title of Article 236 reads as follows: Illegal purchase, storage, carrying, manufacturing, transportation, forwarding or sale of firearms (other than hunting smooth-bore firearms (shotguns)), ammunition, explosives or explosive devices, But, along with hunting smooth-bore firearms, the title of the article does not mention the ammunition intended for it, which poses some problems in terms of the legal qualification of the action. With regard to Article 236 of the Criminal Code of Georgia, the Supreme Court of Georgia has established a uniform practice in some matters, which is provides by the city and appellate courts. The Cassation Chamber of the Criminal Court of the Supreme Court of Georgia clarifies that firearms and ammunition must be suitable for their intended use. as well as what is unlawful storage, carrying, transportation, shipment, key, manufacture. Despite numerous explanations from the Supreme Court regarding Article 236 of the Criminal Code, it appears that ammunition for smooth-bore firearms remained without explanation, which led to the courts accusing convicts of illegal purchase, storage and carrying of this category of ammunition.
{"title":"LEGAL QUALIFICATION OF AMMUNITION INTENDED FOR HUNTING SMOOTH-BORE FIREARMS ACCORDING TO THE CASE LAW","authors":"Giorgi Dzindzibadze","doi":"10.52340/lm.2022.02.07","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.52340/lm.2022.02.07","url":null,"abstract":"Georgia is one of the countries where firearms are removed from free civilian circulation, and the purchase of certain categories of firearms, with the right of storage or carrying, is possible only on the basis of a special permit issued by the Service Agency of the Ministry of Internal Affairs. After registering the weapon, it is possible to purchase ammunition for this weapon. According to the current version of the Criminal Code, the title of Article 236 reads as follows: Illegal purchase, storage, carrying, manufacturing, transportation, forwarding or sale of firearms (other than hunting smooth-bore firearms (shotguns)), ammunition, explosives or explosive devices, But, along with hunting smooth-bore firearms, the title of the article does not mention the ammunition intended for it, which poses some problems in terms of the legal qualification of the action. With regard to Article 236 of the Criminal Code of Georgia, the Supreme Court of Georgia has established a uniform practice in some matters, which is provides by the city and appellate courts. The Cassation Chamber of the Criminal Court of the Supreme Court of Georgia clarifies that firearms and ammunition must be suitable for their intended use. as well as what is unlawful storage, carrying, transportation, shipment, key, manufacture. Despite numerous explanations from the Supreme Court regarding Article 236 of the Criminal Code, it appears that ammunition for smooth-bore firearms remained without explanation, which led to the courts accusing convicts of illegal purchase, storage and carrying of this category of ammunition.","PeriodicalId":205708,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL \"LEGAL METHODS\"","volume":"9 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114398836","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Islamic military law is a doctrine, which was created by Ulama, basing on Sharia and Fiqh, as right way of Islam – collection of demands and methods of just military actions that are mandatory for Muslim warriors. Foundations and first rules of Islamic military law were established in the very beginning of Hijra, soon after prophet Muhammad began creation of Islamic state in Medina. The prophet always gave different recommendations and suggestions to the warriors and those instructions became the core of the military law. Most of them were codified and abstracted by the first Khalifa Abu Bakr in the ten rules of Islamic armed forces. Muslim treaties and documents of IX century already included the rules about Islamic ethics, economical law and implementation of Islamic military law. They regulated issues concerning the relations with ambassadors, displaced people or refugees; also, rules of action in the battle fields, defense of women, children and non-warriors, process of negotiation and dispute settlement, restriction of use of poisoned weapons and prevention of destroy of enemy’s territories and etc.Islamic military law distinguishes just and unjust wars. According Holy Koran, defensive war is not only legal and legitimate, but also mandatory for Muslims.
{"title":"ISLAMIC MILITARY LAW","authors":"Nugzar Bardavelidze","doi":"10.52340/lm.2022.02.04","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.52340/lm.2022.02.04","url":null,"abstract":"Islamic military law is a doctrine, which was created by Ulama, basing on Sharia and Fiqh, as right way of Islam – collection of demands and methods of just military actions that are mandatory for Muslim warriors. Foundations and first rules of Islamic military law were established in the very beginning of Hijra, soon after prophet Muhammad began creation of Islamic state in Medina. The prophet always gave different recommendations and suggestions to the warriors and those instructions became the core of the military law. Most of them were codified and abstracted by the first Khalifa Abu Bakr in the ten rules of Islamic armed forces. Muslim treaties and documents of IX century already included the rules about Islamic ethics, economical law and implementation of Islamic military law. They regulated issues concerning the relations with ambassadors, displaced people or refugees; also, rules of action in the battle fields, defense of women, children and non-warriors, process of negotiation and dispute settlement, restriction of use of poisoned weapons and prevention of destroy of enemy’s territories and etc.Islamic military law distinguishes just and unjust wars. According Holy Koran, defensive war is not only legal and legitimate, but also mandatory for Muslims.","PeriodicalId":205708,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL \"LEGAL METHODS\"","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134284771","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In this article Selznick developed the sociological imagination as a pointedly moral imagination, a vision of social science guided by moral philosophy, what Selznick himself called humanist science. This is a philosophy informed by the perpetual entwinement of human potential with human frailty. It makes the analyst sensitive to how ends are always interlinked with means, and how cherished ideals are inflected with an often-discouraging social reality. Only a morally subtle sociology can capture the moral ambivalence of human experience, the "recalcitrance of people, practices, and institutions, the precariousness of the finest ideals, the complexity and delicacy of attempts at institutional transformation, the ease with which fine motives are refracted in unexpected directions". Our means are sometimes tyrannical, our institutional goals, often displaced. And "not only are our tools recalcitrant; so too are we ourselves". Yet Selznick's scholarship consistently betrays a humble optimism: humble on the basis of hard, empirical realism about social institutions and their human environments, yet quietly optimistic because aware of the abiding potential, in humans and their institutional creations, for social progress. Selznick think, at the level of analysis, by rejecting such determinism; and at the level of political action, with methods of taming power with power, by dividing it into factions, say, or decentralizing it. The moral point: the virtue of an organization's membership by itself is never enough for realizing normatively good outcomes; the hands even of good people need to be bound by rules.
{"title":"SOCIOLOGY OF LAW","authors":"Philip Selznick","doi":"10.52340/lm.2022.02.01","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.52340/lm.2022.02.01","url":null,"abstract":"In this article Selznick developed the sociological imagination as a pointedly moral imagination, a vision of social science guided by moral philosophy, what Selznick himself called humanist science. This is a philosophy informed by the perpetual entwinement of human potential with human frailty. It makes the analyst sensitive to how ends are always interlinked with means, and how cherished ideals are inflected with an often-discouraging social reality. Only a morally subtle sociology can capture the moral ambivalence of human experience, the \"recalcitrance of people, practices, and institutions, the precariousness of the finest ideals, the complexity and delicacy of attempts at institutional transformation, the ease with which fine motives are refracted in unexpected directions\". Our means are sometimes tyrannical, our institutional goals, often displaced. And \"not only are our tools recalcitrant; so too are we ourselves\". Yet Selznick's scholarship consistently betrays a humble optimism: humble on the basis of hard, empirical realism about social institutions and their human environments, yet quietly optimistic because aware of the abiding potential, in humans and their institutional creations, for social progress. Selznick think, at the level of analysis, by rejecting such determinism; and at the level of political action, with methods of taming power with power, by dividing it into factions, say, or decentralizing it. The moral point: the virtue of an organization's membership by itself is never enough for realizing normatively good outcomes; the hands even of good people need to be bound by rules.","PeriodicalId":205708,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL \"LEGAL METHODS\"","volume":"89 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127187747","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
“Korematsu v. United States” is one of the most important and precedential cases in the history of United States in terms of introducing new legal practices and approaches, as well as raising people's legal and cultural awareness. This is a case that is similar in content to other controversial and almost discriminatory rulings in recent U.S. jurisprudence, but differs substantially from most of them in its paradigmatic and historical significance. Korematsu v. United States has been viewed in the US history as a model of the opposition between the need to ensure national security and the individual rights of full-fledged citizen of the country. It can be said that today the decision is completely overcome in formally, however there is a big gap between the formal overcoming of the decision and the complete exhaustion of the disputed issue within the legal society (which can only be achieved by implementing new laws and moving to a new stage of legal development). The prelude to all this was the morning of December 7, 1941, when the Japanese Air Force launched an attack against the United States Pacific Fleet, based in the waters of Oahu Island, the capital of Hawaii, at Pearl Harbor. It is safe to say that out of the losses incurred in one particular operation in the history of the United States, the bombing of Pearl Harbor by Japan ended in the most tragic consequences for the United States. On February 19, 1942, President Franklin D. Roosevelt signs Executive Order N9066, initiating a controversial World War II policy with lasting consequences for Japanese Americans. The document ordered the removal of resident enemy aliens from parts of the West vaguely identified as military areas. Japanese Americans were forced to relocate to so called internment camps because they were a vulnerable group for the Japanese Intelligence Agencies, which the authorities claimed posed a potential threat to the national security. Fred Toyasaburo Korematsu was born is Oakland, California on January 30, 1919. He was a Japanese American civil rights activist, who actively resisted the execution of Order N9066 and, unlike his parents, refused to leave his place of residence and move to Internment camp, which later served as a reason for his arrest. It is still disputed whether the decision and the executive order N9066 on the relocation of Americans of Japanese descent were motivated by discrimination or the state acted simply out of a need to ensure National Security. As already mentioned, it all depends on which side we look at the overall picture from.
{"title":"KOREMATSU V. UNITED STATES: BETWEEN DISCRIMINATION AND LEGAL SECURITY","authors":"Irakli Karitchashvili","doi":"10.52340/lm.2022.02.05","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.52340/lm.2022.02.05","url":null,"abstract":"“Korematsu v. United States” is one of the most important and precedential cases in the history of United States in terms of introducing new legal practices and approaches, as well as raising people's legal and cultural awareness. This is a case that is similar in content to other controversial and almost discriminatory rulings in recent U.S. jurisprudence, but differs substantially from most of them in its paradigmatic and historical significance. Korematsu v. United States has been viewed in the US history as a model of the opposition between the need to ensure national security and the individual rights of full-fledged citizen of the country. It can be said that today the decision is completely overcome in formally, however there is a big gap between the formal overcoming of the decision and the complete exhaustion of the disputed issue within the legal society (which can only be achieved by implementing new laws and moving to a new stage of legal development). The prelude to all this was the morning of December 7, 1941, when the Japanese Air Force launched an attack against the United States Pacific Fleet, based in the waters of Oahu Island, the capital of Hawaii, at Pearl Harbor. It is safe to say that out of the losses incurred in one particular operation in the history of the United States, the bombing of Pearl Harbor by Japan ended in the most tragic consequences for the United States. On February 19, 1942, President Franklin D. Roosevelt signs Executive Order N9066, initiating a controversial World War II policy with lasting consequences for Japanese Americans. The document ordered the removal of resident enemy aliens from parts of the West vaguely identified as military areas. Japanese Americans were forced to relocate to so called internment camps because they were a vulnerable group for the Japanese Intelligence Agencies, which the authorities claimed posed a potential threat to the national security. Fred Toyasaburo Korematsu was born is Oakland, California on January 30, 1919. He was a Japanese American civil rights activist, who actively resisted the execution of Order N9066 and, unlike his parents, refused to leave his place of residence and move to Internment camp, which later served as a reason for his arrest. It is still disputed whether the decision and the executive order N9066 on the relocation of Americans of Japanese descent were motivated by discrimination or the state acted simply out of a need to ensure National Security. As already mentioned, it all depends on which side we look at the overall picture from.","PeriodicalId":205708,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL \"LEGAL METHODS\"","volume":"11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126849946","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The article by Hans Jürgen Papier discusses the institutional reforms of the Treaty of Lisbon. The author assesses whether the innovations of the Treaty are suited for restoring Union’s capacity to act. The author welcomes the changes in the organizational structure of the EU. He considers that the most far-reaching change results from the new architecture of the European Union as one of a unitary legal personality with a supranational character. From the author’s point of view, the reinforcement of the subsidiarity principle is the most valuable reform in the Treaty of Lisbon. However, the weakness of its protection is still here. The author wishes the Treaty to give a clearer picture of Europe, of both its inner and outer boundaries.
{"title":"EUROPE’S NEW REALISM: THE TREATY OF LISBON","authors":"Hans Jürgen Papier","doi":"10.52340/lm.2022.02.03","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.52340/lm.2022.02.03","url":null,"abstract":"The article by Hans Jürgen Papier discusses the institutional reforms of the Treaty of Lisbon. The author assesses whether the innovations of the Treaty are suited for restoring Union’s capacity to act. The author welcomes the changes in the organizational structure of the EU. He considers that the most far-reaching change results from the new architecture of the European Union as one of a unitary legal personality with a supranational character. From the author’s point of view, the reinforcement of the subsidiarity principle is the most valuable reform in the Treaty of Lisbon. However, the weakness of its protection is still here. The author wishes the Treaty to give a clearer picture of Europe, of both its inner and outer boundaries.","PeriodicalId":205708,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL \"LEGAL METHODS\"","volume":"61 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121916245","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In Coman and Others v. Romania case, The European Court of Justice by request of Romanian Constitutional Court was tasked to determine whether the term spouse includes Homosexual married couples for the purposes of EU free movement Directive 2004/38. In June 2018, The European Court of Justice has held that the term “Spouse” within the meaning of EU law with regard the freedom of residency of EU citizens and their family members includes Homosexual spouses. This Court ruling has been considered as great victory for homosexual couples striving to achieve equal rights in marriage. Yet celebration of illusionary marriage equality is exaggerated.
{"title":"THE ILLUSION OF THE EQUAL RIGHT TO MARRY: THE EUROPEAN UNION PROTECTING THE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS OF CITIZENS IN THE CONTEXT OF THE EU INTERNAL MARKET","authors":"Tsisia Okropiridze","doi":"10.52340/lm.2022.02.06","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.52340/lm.2022.02.06","url":null,"abstract":"In Coman and Others v. Romania case, The European Court of Justice by request of Romanian Constitutional Court was tasked to determine whether the term spouse includes Homosexual married couples for the purposes of EU free movement Directive 2004/38. In June 2018, The European Court of Justice has held that the term “Spouse” within the meaning of EU law with regard the freedom of residency of EU citizens and their family members includes Homosexual spouses. This Court ruling has been considered as great victory for homosexual couples striving to achieve equal rights in marriage. Yet celebration of illusionary marriage equality is exaggerated.","PeriodicalId":205708,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL \"LEGAL METHODS\"","volume":"26 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121013444","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article is based on the monograph (Irresolvable Norm Conflicts in International Law: The Concept of A Legal Dilemma) of Valentin Jeutner pioneering the concept of legal dilemma in the doctrine of international law. Briefly, the concept of a legal dilemma is a theory of irresolvable norm conflicts. The concept of legal dilemma serves as a normative exposition of the international legal states of affairs where the conflict between two legal norms is so fundamental that their adequate resolution through norm conflict resolution techniques of contemporary international law is impossible. In this article, the author conceptualizes legal dilemmas as an unavoidable and irresolvable conflict between norms of international law. The intrinsic nature of legal dilemmas resembles a legal state of superposition where a given conduct is both illegal and legal at the same time. That is, if one norm is favored over the other, the other is necessarily unduly impaired. Upon providing the general legal account of the concept of legal dilemma, the author responds affirmatively to their presence in contemporary international law. Subsequently, the author ventures to demonstrate that various legal devices to accommodate legal dilemmas once they have arisen are unsatisfactory. Then he establishes that judicial institutions – for a multiplicity of different legal and non-legal reasons – do not represent an appropriate forum for dealing with the various substantial problems posed by legal dilemmas. Thus, the author proposes that judicial institutions – instead of deciding the legal dilemmas themselves – must issue dilemmatic declarations when confronted with an irresolvable and unavoidable norm conflict. Dilemmatic declarations communicate that a legal dilemma exists but do not resolve a dilemma in favor of one or the other norm. However, the author warns us that the issuance of dilemmatic declarations must occur only after the most rigorous and careful application of norm conflict resolution and accommodation techniques. Importantly, dilemmatic declarations do not themselves decide the legal dilemmas but delegate the decision-making competence to the archetypal subjects of international law and the authors of the legal dilemmas themselves – the States. In the author's view, the final say over the decision of the legal dilemmas falls precisely to the States due to the inherent epistemological and/or metaphysical difficulties associated with deciding the legal dilemmas. A State’s decision of a dilemma possesses no legal precedential value and after a State has decided the legal dilemma, the judicial institutions should then enforce an unduly impaired norm. Finally, the author posits the merits of dilemmatic legal thinking in the international legal thought, one of which is to enhance the conceptual understanding of international law, transcend the binary representations of norms only as legal and illegal and to enable States to engage with and reflect constructively a
{"title":"THE CONCEPT OF A LEGAL DILEMMA","authors":"Valentin Jeutner","doi":"10.52340/lm.2022.02.02","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.52340/lm.2022.02.02","url":null,"abstract":"This article is based on the monograph (Irresolvable Norm Conflicts in International Law: The Concept of A Legal Dilemma) of Valentin Jeutner pioneering the concept of legal dilemma in the doctrine of international law. Briefly, the concept of a legal dilemma is a theory of irresolvable norm conflicts. The concept of legal dilemma serves as a normative exposition of the international legal states of affairs where the conflict between two legal norms is so fundamental that their adequate resolution through norm conflict resolution techniques of contemporary international law is impossible. In this article, the author conceptualizes legal dilemmas as an unavoidable and irresolvable conflict between norms of international law. The intrinsic nature of legal dilemmas resembles a legal state of superposition where a given conduct is both illegal and legal at the same time. That is, if one norm is favored over the other, the other is necessarily unduly impaired. Upon providing the general legal account of the concept of legal dilemma, the author responds affirmatively to their presence in contemporary international law. Subsequently, the author ventures to demonstrate that various legal devices to accommodate legal dilemmas once they have arisen are unsatisfactory. Then he establishes that judicial institutions – for a multiplicity of different legal and non-legal reasons – do not represent an appropriate forum for dealing with the various substantial problems posed by legal dilemmas. Thus, the author proposes that judicial institutions – instead of deciding the legal dilemmas themselves – must issue dilemmatic declarations when confronted with an irresolvable and unavoidable norm conflict. Dilemmatic declarations communicate that a legal dilemma exists but do not resolve a dilemma in favor of one or the other norm. However, the author warns us that the issuance of dilemmatic declarations must occur only after the most rigorous and careful application of norm conflict resolution and accommodation techniques. Importantly, dilemmatic declarations do not themselves decide the legal dilemmas but delegate the decision-making competence to the archetypal subjects of international law and the authors of the legal dilemmas themselves – the States. In the author's view, the final say over the decision of the legal dilemmas falls precisely to the States due to the inherent epistemological and/or metaphysical difficulties associated with deciding the legal dilemmas. A State’s decision of a dilemma possesses no legal precedential value and after a State has decided the legal dilemma, the judicial institutions should then enforce an unduly impaired norm. Finally, the author posits the merits of dilemmatic legal thinking in the international legal thought, one of which is to enhance the conceptual understanding of international law, transcend the binary representations of norms only as legal and illegal and to enable States to engage with and reflect constructively a","PeriodicalId":205708,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL \"LEGAL METHODS\"","volume":"9 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133894320","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：