espanolLa inteligencia artificial (IA) se ha convertido en objeto de un amplio y controvertido debate. El analisis de ese debate muestra que existe un problema conceptual, por la ausencia de acuerdo sobre la definicion de la IA, y un problema funcional derivado de la relevancia asignada en el mismo a los componentes tecnicos, eticos y juridicos. Hay una clara prevalencia de los primeros, una insistente invocacion de los segundos y una escasa atencion al discurso juridico. En principio, juridicamente, hay que distinguir dos cuestiones: por una parte, la aplicacion de la IA al estudio y la practica del derecho y, por otra, la regulacion de la IA. El modelo de regulacion de la IA se plantea desde diferentes perspectivas metodologicas que confirman la necesidad de adoptar un enfoque proactivo y abierto, no formalista, para la organizacion de su gobernanza. El estudio de la practica muestra que son muy pocos los Estados que han adoptado estrategias o planes de accion en la materia y, en el marco internacional, la mayoria de las iniciativas estan localizadas en organizaciones o foros regionales o interregionales participados por paises tecnologicamente desarrollados. El ordenamiento juridico internacional ha de activar mecanismos de respuesta de alcance universal frente a esa situacion y al desafio global que implica la gobernanza de la IA. EnglishArtificial intelligence (AI) has become the subject of a wide-ranging and controversial debate. The analysis of the debate shows two main problems: the conceptual problem arises from the absence of agreement on the definition of AI; and the functional problem derives from the different relevance given to the technical, ethical and legal components. There is a clear prevalence of the former, an insistent invocation of ethical aspects and little attention to legal discourse. From a legal standpoint, two issues must be distinguished: the application of AI to the study and practice of law and the regulation of AI. The model of AI regulation is approached from different methodological perspectives that confirm the need to adopt a proactive and open, non-formalist approach to the organisation of its governance. The study of practice shows, however, that very few States have adopted strategies or action plans in this area. In the international framework, most of the initiatives are located in organizations or forums participated by technologically developed countries. The international legal system must activate universal mechanisms, norms and procedures to respond to this situation and to the global challenge of AI governance
{"title":"La gobernanza de la inteligencia artificial: contexto y parámetros generales","authors":"M. Carrillo","doi":"10.17103/reei.39.07","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17103/reei.39.07","url":null,"abstract":"espanolLa inteligencia artificial (IA) se ha convertido en objeto de un amplio y controvertido debate. El analisis de ese debate muestra que existe un problema conceptual, por la ausencia de acuerdo sobre la definicion de la IA, y un problema funcional derivado de la relevancia asignada en el mismo a los componentes tecnicos, eticos y juridicos. Hay una clara prevalencia de los primeros, una insistente invocacion de los segundos y una escasa atencion al discurso juridico. En principio, juridicamente, hay que distinguir dos cuestiones: por una parte, la aplicacion de la IA al estudio y la practica del derecho y, por otra, la regulacion de la IA. El modelo de regulacion de la IA se plantea desde diferentes perspectivas metodologicas que confirman la necesidad de adoptar un enfoque proactivo y abierto, no formalista, para la organizacion de su gobernanza. El estudio de la practica muestra que son muy pocos los Estados que han adoptado estrategias o planes de accion en la materia y, en el marco internacional, la mayoria de las iniciativas estan localizadas en organizaciones o foros regionales o interregionales participados por paises tecnologicamente desarrollados. El ordenamiento juridico internacional ha de activar mecanismos de respuesta de alcance universal frente a esa situacion y al desafio global que implica la gobernanza de la IA. EnglishArtificial intelligence (AI) has become the subject of a wide-ranging and controversial debate. The analysis of the debate shows two main problems: the conceptual problem arises from the absence of agreement on the definition of AI; and the functional problem derives from the different relevance given to the technical, ethical and legal components. There is a clear prevalence of the former, an insistent invocation of ethical aspects and little attention to legal discourse. From a legal standpoint, two issues must be distinguished: the application of AI to the study and practice of law and the regulation of AI. The model of AI regulation is approached from different methodological perspectives that confirm the need to adopt a proactive and open, non-formalist approach to the organisation of its governance. The study of practice shows, however, that very few States have adopted strategies or action plans in this area. In the international framework, most of the initiatives are located in organizations or forums participated by technologically developed countries. The international legal system must activate universal mechanisms, norms and procedures to respond to this situation and to the global challenge of AI governance","PeriodicalId":40338,"journal":{"name":"Revista Electronica de Estudios Internacionales","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2020-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46548663","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":"Crónica de Derecho internacional privado","authors":"Santiago Álvarez González","doi":"10.17103/reei.39.18","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17103/reei.39.18","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":40338,"journal":{"name":"Revista Electronica de Estudios Internacionales","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2020-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48759225","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}
espanolEn noviembre de 2019, Gambia interpuso una demanda en la que solicitaba a la Corte internacional de justicia que declarase la violacion, por parte de Myanmar, de varias disposiciones del Convenio contra el genocidio en relacion con la poblacion rohinya, asi como la indicacion de medidas provisionales. Se trata de una diferencia cuya dimension multilateral la singulariza en relacion con cualquier otro asunto precedente. Esa dimension multilateral se proyecta en un doble ambito. De un lado, el entorno en el que se ha gestado y fraguado, que es marcadamente multilateral sin perjuicio del liderazgo gambiano. De otro lado, la naturaleza multilateral de las obligaciones cuya violacion se alega, en particular, su caracter erga omnes partes. El presente estudio analiza ambos aspectos sobre la base de los argumentos esgrimidos por las partes en relacion con la indicacion de medidas provisionales y del ulterior pronunciamiento de la Corte al respecto. Cabe decir -sin dejar de tener en cuenta su provisionalidad- que la posicion adoptada por la Corte representa un paso significativo en la linea hacia el reconocimiento de un espacio procesal adecuado para este tipo de diferencias, pero plantea el reto de la admision progresiva de la actio popularis en el Derecho internacional. EnglishIn November 2019, The Gambia filed an application requesting the International Court of Justice to declare the violation, by Myanmar, of various provisions of the Convention against genocide in relation to the Rohingya population, as well as the indication of provisional measures. It is a dispute whose multilateral dimension makes it unique in relation to any other preceding case. This multilateral dimension is projected in a double field. On the one hand, the environment in which it has developed and forged, which is markedly multilateral in spite of the Gambian leadership. On the other hand, the multilateral nature of the obligations allegedly violated, in particular, their erga omnes partes character. The present study analyzes both aspects on the basis of the arguments put forward by the parties in relation to the indication of provisional measures and the subsequent ruling of the Court in this regard. It should be said -without neglecting its provisional nature- that the position adopted by the Court represents a significant step in the line towards the recognition of a suitable procedural space for this type of disputes, but poses the challenge of the progressive admission of actio popularis in international law.
{"title":"Una controversia bilateral con dimensión multilateral: cuestiones de jurisdicción y de ius standi en el asunto Gambia c. Myanmar (medidas provisionales)","authors":"Rosario Huesa Vinaixa","doi":"10.17103/reei.39.11","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17103/reei.39.11","url":null,"abstract":"espanolEn noviembre de 2019, Gambia interpuso una demanda en la que solicitaba a la Corte internacional de justicia que declarase la violacion, por parte de Myanmar, de varias disposiciones del Convenio contra el genocidio en relacion con la poblacion rohinya, asi como la indicacion de medidas provisionales. Se trata de una diferencia cuya dimension multilateral la singulariza en relacion con cualquier otro asunto precedente. Esa dimension multilateral se proyecta en un doble ambito. De un lado, el entorno en el que se ha gestado y fraguado, que es marcadamente multilateral sin perjuicio del liderazgo gambiano. De otro lado, la naturaleza multilateral de las obligaciones cuya violacion se alega, en particular, su caracter erga omnes partes. El presente estudio analiza ambos aspectos sobre la base de los argumentos esgrimidos por las partes en relacion con la indicacion de medidas provisionales y del ulterior pronunciamiento de la Corte al respecto. Cabe decir -sin dejar de tener en cuenta su provisionalidad- que la posicion adoptada por la Corte representa un paso significativo en la linea hacia el reconocimiento de un espacio procesal adecuado para este tipo de diferencias, pero plantea el reto de la admision progresiva de la actio popularis en el Derecho internacional. EnglishIn November 2019, The Gambia filed an application requesting the International Court of Justice to declare the violation, by Myanmar, of various provisions of the Convention against genocide in relation to the Rohingya population, as well as the indication of provisional measures. It is a dispute whose multilateral dimension makes it unique in relation to any other preceding case. This multilateral dimension is projected in a double field. On the one hand, the environment in which it has developed and forged, which is markedly multilateral in spite of the Gambian leadership. On the other hand, the multilateral nature of the obligations allegedly violated, in particular, their erga omnes partes character. The present study analyzes both aspects on the basis of the arguments put forward by the parties in relation to the indication of provisional measures and the subsequent ruling of the Court in this regard. It should be said -without neglecting its provisional nature- that the position adopted by the Court represents a significant step in the line towards the recognition of a suitable procedural space for this type of disputes, but poses the challenge of the progressive admission of actio popularis in international law.","PeriodicalId":40338,"journal":{"name":"Revista Electronica de Estudios Internacionales","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2020-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48834861","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}
espanolEl articulo analiza la evolucion de los medios de soft power utilizados por Rusia desde el ano 2000. A partir del estudio de las primeras iniciativas de diplomacia publica, dirigidas a los paises del espacio postsovietico, explora los paralelismos con los objetivos estrategicos de la politica exterior rusa. Los cambios producidos en la sociedad internacional desde la guerra ruso-georgiana de 2008, primero, y las manifestaciones celebradas en Rusia a finales de 2011 y principios de 2012, provocan un cambio significativo en los objetivos y estrategias del poder blando ruso, asi como una creciente radicalizacion de las narrativas informativas. Las conclusiones resaltan cuatro elementos: la evolucion hacia operaciones de guerra informativa como estrategia de defensa frente a las iniciativas occidentales en la vecindad rusa, la creciente militarizacion de los contenidos informativos basados en estrategias de guerra informativa, el paralelismo entre las actividades propagandisticas en el interior del pais y el ambito internacional y la utilizacion de estrategias informativas de descredito hacia los paises y los medios occidentales. EnglishThis article analyzes the evolution of the means of soft power used by Russia since the year 2000. Starting at the study of the first public diplomacy initiatives, directed at countries of the post-soviet space, explores the similarities with the strategic objectives of Russian foreign policy. Firstly, the changes produced in the international society since the Russian-Georgian war of 2008, and the protests that have taken place in Russia at the end of 2011 and the beginning of 2012, result in a significant change of the objectives and strategies of the Russian soft power, and in an extreme radicalisation of informative narratives. The conclusions emphasize four elements: the evolution towards informative warfare operations as a defense strategy against Western iniciatives in the Russian neighbourhood, the growing militarization of informative content based on informative warfare strategies, the parallelism between the propaganda within the country and in the international community and the use of discrediting information strategies against Western countries and media.
{"title":"La expansión de la guerra informativa rusa (2000-2018)","authors":"María José Pozo","doi":"10.17103/reei.39.14","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17103/reei.39.14","url":null,"abstract":"espanolEl articulo analiza la evolucion de los medios de soft power utilizados por Rusia desde el ano 2000. A partir del estudio de las primeras iniciativas de diplomacia publica, dirigidas a los paises del espacio postsovietico, explora los paralelismos con los objetivos estrategicos de la politica exterior rusa. Los cambios producidos en la sociedad internacional desde la guerra ruso-georgiana de 2008, primero, y las manifestaciones celebradas en Rusia a finales de 2011 y principios de 2012, provocan un cambio significativo en los objetivos y estrategias del poder blando ruso, asi como una creciente radicalizacion de las narrativas informativas. Las conclusiones resaltan cuatro elementos: la evolucion hacia operaciones de guerra informativa como estrategia de defensa frente a las iniciativas occidentales en la vecindad rusa, la creciente militarizacion de los contenidos informativos basados en estrategias de guerra informativa, el paralelismo entre las actividades propagandisticas en el interior del pais y el ambito internacional y la utilizacion de estrategias informativas de descredito hacia los paises y los medios occidentales. EnglishThis article analyzes the evolution of the means of soft power used by Russia since the year 2000. Starting at the study of the first public diplomacy initiatives, directed at countries of the post-soviet space, explores the similarities with the strategic objectives of Russian foreign policy. Firstly, the changes produced in the international society since the Russian-Georgian war of 2008, and the protests that have taken place in Russia at the end of 2011 and the beginning of 2012, result in a significant change of the objectives and strategies of the Russian soft power, and in an extreme radicalisation of informative narratives. The conclusions emphasize four elements: the evolution towards informative warfare operations as a defense strategy against Western iniciatives in the Russian neighbourhood, the growing militarization of informative content based on informative warfare strategies, the parallelism between the propaganda within the country and in the international community and the use of discrediting information strategies against Western countries and media.","PeriodicalId":40338,"journal":{"name":"Revista Electronica de Estudios Internacionales","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2020-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46934380","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}
espanolComo respuesta a la crisis de refugiados de 2015, los Estados europeos han impulsado politicas mas estrictas de controles migratorios, entre otros, extendiendo y endureciendo la practica de detener a solicitantes de asilo. El objetivo de este estudio es evaluar como el Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos (TEDH) limita esta preocupante practica. ?Otorga a los Estados el mismo margen de apreciacion que en otras sentencias relativas a las migraciones, o adopta un papel mas activo en la proteccion del derecho a la libertad de los solicitantes de asilo? Para responder a esta pregunta, el presente trabajo analiza la jurisprudencia del TEDH despues de 2015 en esta materia y la evalua a la luz de los tratados de derechos humanos pertinentes, el Derecho de la Union Europea y la doctrina. En esta labor, el estudio trata especialmente de identificar cambios en la jurisprudencia del Tribunal que indiquen una reaccion de Estrasburgo a las tensiones politicas derivadas de la crisis de refugiados. EnglishIn the context of the 2015 refugee crisis, European States have pushed for tighter migration control policies by, inter alia, extending and toughening the practice of detaining asylum-seekers. The aim of this study is to assess how the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) constrains this worrisome practice. Does it grant States the same margin of appreciation as in other migration-related judgments, or does it adopt a more active role in protecting asylum-seekers’ right to liberty? To answer this question, this study analyses the case law of the ECtHR after 2015 on the subject and evaluates it in the light of the relevant international human rights treaties, European Union law and scholarly opinion. In doing so, it especially seeks to identify any changes in the Court´s case law that might indicate a reaction of the Strasbourg Court to the political tensions of the refugee crisis.
{"title":"The right to liberty of asylum-seekers and the European Court of Human Rights in the aftermath of the 2015 refugee crisis","authors":"Juan Ruiz Ramos","doi":"10.17103/reei.39.10","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17103/reei.39.10","url":null,"abstract":"espanolComo respuesta a la crisis de refugiados de 2015, los Estados europeos han impulsado politicas mas estrictas de controles migratorios, entre otros, extendiendo y endureciendo la practica de detener a solicitantes de asilo. El objetivo de este estudio es evaluar como el Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos (TEDH) limita esta preocupante practica. ?Otorga a los Estados el mismo margen de apreciacion que en otras sentencias relativas a las migraciones, o adopta un papel mas activo en la proteccion del derecho a la libertad de los solicitantes de asilo? Para responder a esta pregunta, el presente trabajo analiza la jurisprudencia del TEDH despues de 2015 en esta materia y la evalua a la luz de los tratados de derechos humanos pertinentes, el Derecho de la Union Europea y la doctrina. En esta labor, el estudio trata especialmente de identificar cambios en la jurisprudencia del Tribunal que indiquen una reaccion de Estrasburgo a las tensiones politicas derivadas de la crisis de refugiados. EnglishIn the context of the 2015 refugee crisis, European States have pushed for tighter migration control policies by, inter alia, extending and toughening the practice of detaining asylum-seekers. The aim of this study is to assess how the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) constrains this worrisome practice. Does it grant States the same margin of appreciation as in other migration-related judgments, or does it adopt a more active role in protecting asylum-seekers’ right to liberty? To answer this question, this study analyses the case law of the ECtHR after 2015 on the subject and evaluates it in the light of the relevant international human rights treaties, European Union law and scholarly opinion. In doing so, it especially seeks to identify any changes in the Court´s case law that might indicate a reaction of the Strasbourg Court to the political tensions of the refugee crisis.","PeriodicalId":40338,"journal":{"name":"Revista Electronica de Estudios Internacionales","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2020-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46508534","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}
espanolEste estudio constituye una primera y urgente aproximacion a algunas de las implicaciones en el Derecho Internacional de la pandemia de la COVID-19, con sus multiples consecuencias sanitarias, economicas y sociales. El estudio, despues de referirse a la salud global y a la globalizacion de la salud, se ocupa fundamentalmente del examen de la labor de las Naciones Unidas y de la Organizacion Mundial de la Salud (OMS) ante la pandemia. Este examen evalua criticamente la falta de liderazgo e impulso politico ante una crisis sanitaria de una magnitud sin precedentes. Se examinan tambien los resultados de la Asamblea Mundial de la Salud celebrada el 18 y 19 de mayo de 2020 y dedicada exclusivamente a la COVID-19, en un contexto de competencia politica y de critica a la gestion de la emergencia por la OMS y con el anuncio de la retirada de los Estados Unidos. EnglishThis study constitutes a first and urgent approach to the some of the implications of the COVID-19 pandemic in International Law, with its multiple health, economic and social consequences. The study, after referring to global health and the globalization of health, is primarily concerned with the review of the work of the United Nations and the World Health Organization (WHO) in the face of the pandemic. This review critically assesses the lack of leadership and political impetus in the face of a health crisis of unprecedented magnitude. It also reviews the outcome of the World Health Assembly held on 18-19 May 2020 and devoted exclusively to the COVID-19, in a context of political competition and criticism of WHO's management of the emergency and with the announcement of the United States withdrawal.
{"title":"La COVID-19, la salud global y el Derecho internacional: una primera aproximación de carácter institucional","authors":"Xavier Pons Rafols","doi":"10.17103/reei.39.06","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17103/reei.39.06","url":null,"abstract":"espanolEste estudio constituye una primera y urgente aproximacion a algunas de las implicaciones en el Derecho Internacional de la pandemia de la COVID-19, con sus multiples consecuencias sanitarias, economicas y sociales. El estudio, despues de referirse a la salud global y a la globalizacion de la salud, se ocupa fundamentalmente del examen de la labor de las Naciones Unidas y de la Organizacion Mundial de la Salud (OMS) ante la pandemia. Este examen evalua criticamente la falta de liderazgo e impulso politico ante una crisis sanitaria de una magnitud sin precedentes. Se examinan tambien los resultados de la Asamblea Mundial de la Salud celebrada el 18 y 19 de mayo de 2020 y dedicada exclusivamente a la COVID-19, en un contexto de competencia politica y de critica a la gestion de la emergencia por la OMS y con el anuncio de la retirada de los Estados Unidos. EnglishThis study constitutes a first and urgent approach to the some of the implications of the COVID-19 pandemic in International Law, with its multiple health, economic and social consequences. The study, after referring to global health and the globalization of health, is primarily concerned with the review of the work of the United Nations and the World Health Organization (WHO) in the face of the pandemic. This review critically assesses the lack of leadership and political impetus in the face of a health crisis of unprecedented magnitude. It also reviews the outcome of the World Health Assembly held on 18-19 May 2020 and devoted exclusively to the COVID-19, in a context of political competition and criticism of WHO's management of the emergency and with the announcement of the United States withdrawal.","PeriodicalId":40338,"journal":{"name":"Revista Electronica de Estudios Internacionales","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2020-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45574039","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":"ESPLUGUES MOTA, C.A. (ed.), GONZÁLEZ MARIMÓN, M. (secr.), Tratado de Arbitraje Comercial Interno e Internacional en Iberoamérica, Valencia, Tirant lo Blanch, 2019, 639 pp.","authors":"Federico F. Garau Sobrino","doi":"10.17103/reei.39.22","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17103/reei.39.22","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":40338,"journal":{"name":"Revista Electronica de Estudios Internacionales","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2020-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45855089","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":"TORRES CAZORLA, M.I. (coord.), Bioderecho internacional y universalización: el papel de las Organizaciones y los Tribunales internacionales, ed. Tirant lo Blanch, Valencia 2020, 154 pp.","authors":"Xavier Pons Rafols","doi":"10.17103/reei.39.31","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17103/reei.39.31","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":40338,"journal":{"name":"Revista Electronica de Estudios Internacionales","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2020-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47489783","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":"FELIPE PÉREZ, B., Las migraciones climáticas ante el ordenamiento jurídico internacional, Editorial Aranzadi, Pamplona, 2019, 249 pp.","authors":"Daniel Iglesias Márquez","doi":"10.17103/reei.39.24","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17103/reei.39.24","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":40338,"journal":{"name":"Revista Electronica de Estudios Internacionales","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2020-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45150689","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：