Pub Date : 2023-05-22DOI: 10.1017/s0922156523000249
Olivier Corten, Vaios Koutroulis
This article examines the precedential value of Russia’s ‘special military operation’ against Ukraine in February 2022 for the purpose of interpreting the rules of jus contra bellum. Following the methodology set down by the ICJ in its Nicaragua judgment, self-defence is identified as the legal basis explicitly invoked by Russia in order to justify its operation in Ukraine. The authors then examine closely the reactions by third states with respect to the legality of Russia’s military operation and establish that the legal arguments put forth by Russia – including, more specifically, an innovative reading of the right to self-defence of entities unilaterally recognized as states – have been overwhelmingly rejected by third states. On that basis, the authors conclude that this precedent does not challenge the established understanding of the prohibition to use force in international relations and of its exceptions.
{"title":"The 2022 Russian intervention in Ukraine: What is its impact on the interpretation of jus contra bellum?","authors":"Olivier Corten, Vaios Koutroulis","doi":"10.1017/s0922156523000249","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0922156523000249","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This article examines the precedential value of Russia’s ‘special military operation’ against Ukraine in February 2022 for the purpose of interpreting the rules of jus contra bellum. Following the methodology set down by the ICJ in its Nicaragua judgment, self-defence is identified as the legal basis explicitly invoked by Russia in order to justify its operation in Ukraine. The authors then examine closely the reactions by third states with respect to the legality of Russia’s military operation and establish that the legal arguments put forth by Russia – including, more specifically, an innovative reading of the right to self-defence of entities unilaterally recognized as states – have been overwhelmingly rejected by third states. On that basis, the authors conclude that this precedent does not challenge the established understanding of the prohibition to use force in international relations and of its exceptions.","PeriodicalId":46816,"journal":{"name":"Leiden Journal of International Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2023-05-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47830954","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-17DOI: 10.1017/S0922156523000213
T. Soave
Abstract The modern professional world of international adjudication bears little trace of the ‘invisible college’ theorized by Oscar Schachter 50 years go. Instead, it has become a social field marked by a fierce competition among actors possessing unequal skills and influence. Moving from these premises, this article unravels the socio-professional dynamics of the community of legal experts – judges, arbitrators, government agents, private counsel, court bureaucrats, specialized academics, etc. – dealing with the judicial settlement of international disputes on a daily basis. On the one hand, the community has developed a specific set of social structures, practices, and dispositions that distinguish it from the rest of the international legal profession and insulate its activities from outside interference. On the other, it is the site of an endless struggle among its participants, who deploy various forms of capital to consolidate their positions relative to one another. Having outlined the twofold structure of the community – externally autonomous and internally conflictive – the article reflects on how co-operation and competition affect the everyday unfolding of international judicial proceedings and the production of legal outcomes at the international level.
{"title":"The social field of international adjudication: Structures and practices of a conflictive professional universe","authors":"T. Soave","doi":"10.1017/S0922156523000213","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0922156523000213","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The modern professional world of international adjudication bears little trace of the ‘invisible college’ theorized by Oscar Schachter 50 years go. Instead, it has become a social field marked by a fierce competition among actors possessing unequal skills and influence. Moving from these premises, this article unravels the socio-professional dynamics of the community of legal experts – judges, arbitrators, government agents, private counsel, court bureaucrats, specialized academics, etc. – dealing with the judicial settlement of international disputes on a daily basis. On the one hand, the community has developed a specific set of social structures, practices, and dispositions that distinguish it from the rest of the international legal profession and insulate its activities from outside interference. On the other, it is the site of an endless struggle among its participants, who deploy various forms of capital to consolidate their positions relative to one another. Having outlined the twofold structure of the community – externally autonomous and internally conflictive – the article reflects on how co-operation and competition affect the everyday unfolding of international judicial proceedings and the production of legal outcomes at the international level.","PeriodicalId":46816,"journal":{"name":"Leiden Journal of International Law","volume":"36 1","pages":"565 - 591"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2023-05-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47253857","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-10DOI: 10.1017/S0922156523000080
A. Yusuf
On 29 May 2022, our eminent colleague Antônio Augusto Cançado Trindade passed away in Brasilia, Brazil, after an extended illness. The International Court of Justice lost a unique and singular judge who was profoundly committed to justice among nations big and small, to the protection of the dignity of human beings whatever may be their station in life, and to the safeguarding of humanity and its home planet. International law lost one of its most distinguished, most productive, and most creative scholars. I lost a dear friend whom I had known for almost 50 years, and for whom I always had a lot of affection and admiration. Antônio Augusto Cançado Trindade was born in Belo Horizonte, Brazil, in 1947. He obtained his first degree in law from the Federal University of Minas Gerais (UFMG), where he initially developed his interest in international law. He decided to pursue this interest at the University of Cambridge, UK, where he obtained a Master’s degree and a PhD in international law. His doctoral thesis on the application of the rule of exhaustion of local remedies in international law was awarded the Yorke prize. It was also a prelude to his plentiful writing on international law as the thesis consisted of two volumes and 1,700 pages. It was later published by Cambridge University Press (1983, 443 pages) and has since become a work of reference in this area.1 This was not, however, his first book. He published his Fundamentos jurídicos dos direitos humanos, which reflected his life-long passion for human rights, in 1969 in Brazil.2 He went on to publish, before his death, 78 books and more than 790 articles and other publications, thus becoming one of the most prolific writers on international law in the twentieth and early twenty-first centuries. Having completed his studies in Cambridge, UK, Cançado Trindade went back to Brazil where he was appointed professor of public international law at the University of Brasilia in 1978, and a year later at the Rio Branco diplomatic academy where he taught several generations of Brazilian lawyers and diplomats. From then onwards, he devoted his life to the study, teaching and dissemination of international law and to the promotion and protection of human rights. For him the two were intrinsically intertwined, since, in his view, the ultimate purpose of law, and of international law in particular, was the protection of human rights and the promotion of human welfare. His career was thus marked by a constant endeavour for the humanization of international law.
2022年5月29日，我们的著名同事Antônio Augusto Cançado Trindade在巴西巴西利亚久病去世。国际法院失去了一位独特的法官，他坚定地致力于大小国家之间的正义，致力于保护人的尊严，无论他们在生活中的地位如何，致力于维护人类及其家园。国际法失去了一位最杰出、最有成果、最有创造力的学者。我失去了一位认识近50年的好朋友，我一直对他充满感情和钦佩。安东尼奥·奥古斯托·坎萨多·特林达德1947年出生于巴西贝洛奥里藏特。他在米纳斯吉拉斯联邦大学（UFMG）获得了第一个法律学位，最初在那里他对国际法产生了兴趣。他决定在英国剑桥大学攻读国际法硕士学位和博士学位。他关于用尽当地补救办法规则在国际法中的适用的博士论文被授予约克奖。这也是他关于国际法的大量写作的前奏，因为这篇论文由两卷1700页组成。这本书后来由剑桥大学出版社出版（1983年，443页），后来成为这一领域的参考著作。1然而，这并不是他的第一本书。1969年，他在巴西出版了《人权基金会》，反映了他一生对人权的热情。2他在去世前出版了78本书、790多篇文章和其他出版物，从而成为二十世纪和二十一世纪初国际法最多产的作家之一。在英国剑桥完成学业后，Cançado Trindade回到巴西，1978年被任命为巴西利亚大学国际公法教授，一年后在里约布兰科外交学院教授几代巴西律师和外交官。从那时起，他毕生致力于国际法的研究、教学和传播以及促进和保护人权。对他来说，这两者本质上是相互交织的，因为在他看来，法律，特别是国际法的最终目的是保护人权和促进人类福利。因此，他的职业生涯以不断努力使国际法人性化为标志。
{"title":"Judge Antônio Augusto Cançado Trindade: An unwavering quest for international justice and for the universalization and humanization of international law","authors":"A. Yusuf","doi":"10.1017/S0922156523000080","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0922156523000080","url":null,"abstract":"On 29 May 2022, our eminent colleague Antônio Augusto Cançado Trindade passed away in Brasilia, Brazil, after an extended illness. The International Court of Justice lost a unique and singular judge who was profoundly committed to justice among nations big and small, to the protection of the dignity of human beings whatever may be their station in life, and to the safeguarding of humanity and its home planet. International law lost one of its most distinguished, most productive, and most creative scholars. I lost a dear friend whom I had known for almost 50 years, and for whom I always had a lot of affection and admiration. Antônio Augusto Cançado Trindade was born in Belo Horizonte, Brazil, in 1947. He obtained his first degree in law from the Federal University of Minas Gerais (UFMG), where he initially developed his interest in international law. He decided to pursue this interest at the University of Cambridge, UK, where he obtained a Master’s degree and a PhD in international law. His doctoral thesis on the application of the rule of exhaustion of local remedies in international law was awarded the Yorke prize. It was also a prelude to his plentiful writing on international law as the thesis consisted of two volumes and 1,700 pages. It was later published by Cambridge University Press (1983, 443 pages) and has since become a work of reference in this area.1 This was not, however, his first book. He published his Fundamentos jurídicos dos direitos humanos, which reflected his life-long passion for human rights, in 1969 in Brazil.2 He went on to publish, before his death, 78 books and more than 790 articles and other publications, thus becoming one of the most prolific writers on international law in the twentieth and early twenty-first centuries. Having completed his studies in Cambridge, UK, Cançado Trindade went back to Brazil where he was appointed professor of public international law at the University of Brasilia in 1978, and a year later at the Rio Branco diplomatic academy where he taught several generations of Brazilian lawyers and diplomats. From then onwards, he devoted his life to the study, teaching and dissemination of international law and to the promotion and protection of human rights. For him the two were intrinsically intertwined, since, in his view, the ultimate purpose of law, and of international law in particular, was the protection of human rights and the promotion of human welfare. His career was thus marked by a constant endeavour for the humanization of international law.","PeriodicalId":46816,"journal":{"name":"Leiden Journal of International Law","volume":"36 1","pages":"439 - 444"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2023-05-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46278178","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-10DOI: 10.1017/s0922156523000262
{"title":"LJL volume 36 issue 2 Cover and Front matter","authors":"","doi":"10.1017/s0922156523000262","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0922156523000262","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46816,"journal":{"name":"Leiden Journal of International Law","volume":" ","pages":"f1 - f2"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2023-05-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45116891","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-10DOI: 10.1017/s0922156523000274
{"title":"LJL volume 36 issue 2 Cover and Back matter","authors":"","doi":"10.1017/s0922156523000274","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0922156523000274","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46816,"journal":{"name":"Leiden Journal of International Law","volume":" ","pages":"b1 - b2"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2023-05-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49112688","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-08DOI: 10.1017/s0922156523000183
Jelena von Achenbach
This article examines COVAX, a public private partnership, from a public law perspective. It asks whether COVAX is a legitimate and appropriate instrument with regard to the goal of distributing COVID-19 vaccines in a globally equitable manner and enabling equal access to vaccination worldwide. By developing public-legal legitimacy standards for this purpose, the article critically distances itself from the outset from considering the use of private actors and forms of action in public functions (‘privatization’) essentially as a release of market economy rationality, which enables efficiency and effectiveness gains and relieves the public sector. With the public law perspective, the article questions precisely whether private-law, market-based action is appropriate with respect to the global distribution of vaccines in the pandemic.
{"title":"The global distribution of COVID-19 vaccines by the public-private partnership COVAX from a public-law perspective","authors":"Jelena von Achenbach","doi":"10.1017/s0922156523000183","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0922156523000183","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This article examines COVAX, a public private partnership, from a public law perspective. It asks whether COVAX is a legitimate and appropriate instrument with regard to the goal of distributing COVID-19 vaccines in a globally equitable manner and enabling equal access to vaccination worldwide. By developing public-legal legitimacy standards for this purpose, the article critically distances itself from the outset from considering the use of private actors and forms of action in public functions (‘privatization’) essentially as a release of market economy rationality, which enables efficiency and effectiveness gains and relieves the public sector. With the public law perspective, the article questions precisely whether private-law, market-based action is appropriate with respect to the global distribution of vaccines in the pandemic.","PeriodicalId":46816,"journal":{"name":"Leiden Journal of International Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2023-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45549608","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-08DOI: 10.1017/s0922156523000298
Gabriel M. Lentner
{"title":"Ian Johnstone and Steven Ratner (eds.), Talking International Law: Legal Argumentation Outside the Courtroom, Oxford University Press, 2021, 368pp, £80.00","authors":"Gabriel M. Lentner","doi":"10.1017/s0922156523000298","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0922156523000298","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46816,"journal":{"name":"Leiden Journal of International Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2023-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48211366","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-05DOI: 10.1017/s0922156523000158
C. Braumann
This article analyses the ICJ, one of the most eminent actors of the international legal regime, as an actor of the international tax regime. So far, the ICJ’s role in tax dispute resolution has been a blind spot in the literature. The descriptive part of this article first discusses the case law of the PCIJ and ICJ that considers – albeit incidentally – questions of taxation. These tax-related cases are categorized as (i) ‘wrongful taxation’ constituting the subject matter of the dispute; (ii) taxation as evidence for a ‘genuine link’ between the state and a national; or (iii) taxation as an ‘effectivité’ to prove the de facto exercise of state authority over a given territory. The second half of the descriptive analysis assesses the Court’s jurisdiction over tax disputes. Tax treaties usually lack compromissory clauses. Yet, there are a number of jurisdictional bases that vest the Court with the competence to sit over hypothetical tax treaty disputes, although certain reservations may render the Court’s jurisdiction residual to other means of tax dispute settlement. Further, Article 344 TFEU possibly precludes EU member states from initiating ICJ proceedings concerning tax treaty disputes with other EU states. The second, normative part of this article contemplates the Court as a future ‘World Tax Court’. It briefly addresses (i) possible effects of the ICJ’s hypothetical involvement in tax disputes; (ii) whether the ICJ might have a future role in tax dispute settlement in light of recent developments; and (iii) whether it is even desirable to involve the Court in tax disputes.
{"title":"The settlement of tax disputes by the International Court of Justice","authors":"C. Braumann","doi":"10.1017/s0922156523000158","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0922156523000158","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This article analyses the ICJ, one of the most eminent actors of the international legal regime, as an actor of the international tax regime. So far, the ICJ’s role in tax dispute resolution has been a blind spot in the literature.\u0000 The descriptive part of this article first discusses the case law of the PCIJ and ICJ that considers – albeit incidentally – questions of taxation. These tax-related cases are categorized as (i) ‘wrongful taxation’ constituting the subject matter of the dispute; (ii) taxation as evidence for a ‘genuine link’ between the state and a national; or (iii) taxation as an ‘effectivité’ to prove the de facto exercise of state authority over a given territory.\u0000 The second half of the descriptive analysis assesses the Court’s jurisdiction over tax disputes. Tax treaties usually lack compromissory clauses. Yet, there are a number of jurisdictional bases that vest the Court with the competence to sit over hypothetical tax treaty disputes, although certain reservations may render the Court’s jurisdiction residual to other means of tax dispute settlement. Further, Article 344 TFEU possibly precludes EU member states from initiating ICJ proceedings concerning tax treaty disputes with other EU states.\u0000 The second, normative part of this article contemplates the Court as a future ‘World Tax Court’. It briefly addresses (i) possible effects of the ICJ’s hypothetical involvement in tax disputes; (ii) whether the ICJ might have a future role in tax dispute settlement in light of recent developments; and (iii) whether it is even desirable to involve the Court in tax disputes.","PeriodicalId":46816,"journal":{"name":"Leiden Journal of International Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2023-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45777643","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-04DOI: 10.1017/s0922156523000195
Máté Csernus
The article scrutinizes some of the surprising commonalities in the reasonings of two recent decisions by two separate judicial forums: the ITLOS’s judgment in the M/V Norstar case and the award of an ad hoc arbitral tribunal in the Enrica Lexie case. One key connection between the two decisions is their heavy reliance on the Lotus judgment of the PCIJ. Another similarity between the two disputes is that both of them revolve around the concept of exclusive flag state jurisdiction under UNCLOS Article 92(1) and adjacent questions of jurisdiction on the high seas. The article is going to subject both decisions to criticism and argue that some of the more problematic positions adopted by the tribunals in both cases amount to no more than obiter dicta – thus establishing an additional parallel with Lotus, which also received heavy criticism for its controversial obiter dictum. The two tribunals’ new-found interest in Lotus also provides an opportunity to discuss the utility and legal weight of Lotus as a precedent in the face of a century of developments in treaty law and judicial practice. In this sense, this article builds on and attempts to continue the recent trend in scholarship advocating for a renewed appreciation of the Lotus case against the backdrop of decades of criticism against it. Accordingly, the article aims to facilitate a better understanding of all three disputes, the principles they applied, and the dynamics of international adjudication and international law in general.
{"title":"Might contain traces of Lotus: The limits of exclusive flag state jurisdiction in the Norstar and the Enrica Lexie cases","authors":"Máté Csernus","doi":"10.1017/s0922156523000195","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0922156523000195","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 The article scrutinizes some of the surprising commonalities in the reasonings of two recent decisions by two separate judicial forums: the ITLOS’s judgment in the M/V Norstar case and the award of an ad hoc arbitral tribunal in the Enrica Lexie case. One key connection between the two decisions is their heavy reliance on the Lotus judgment of the PCIJ. Another similarity between the two disputes is that both of them revolve around the concept of exclusive flag state jurisdiction under UNCLOS Article 92(1) and adjacent questions of jurisdiction on the high seas. The article is going to subject both decisions to criticism and argue that some of the more problematic positions adopted by the tribunals in both cases amount to no more than obiter dicta – thus establishing an additional parallel with Lotus, which also received heavy criticism for its controversial obiter dictum. The two tribunals’ new-found interest in Lotus also provides an opportunity to discuss the utility and legal weight of Lotus as a precedent in the face of a century of developments in treaty law and judicial practice. In this sense, this article builds on and attempts to continue the recent trend in scholarship advocating for a renewed appreciation of the Lotus case against the backdrop of decades of criticism against it. Accordingly, the article aims to facilitate a better understanding of all three disputes, the principles they applied, and the dynamics of international adjudication and international law in general.","PeriodicalId":46816,"journal":{"name":"Leiden Journal of International Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2023-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47745313","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-02DOI: 10.1017/s0922156523000201
M. Varaki
{"title":"Andrew Clapham, War, Oxford University Press, 2021, 624pp, £29.99 (pb)","authors":"M. Varaki","doi":"10.1017/s0922156523000201","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0922156523000201","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46816,"journal":{"name":"Leiden Journal of International Law","volume":"36 1","pages":"815 - 817"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2023-05-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42707887","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","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：