走向明晰:“可能受到影响”的要求和国际法院的非当事方干预

IF 0.9 3区 社会学 Q2 LAW Journal of International Dispute Settlement Pub Date : 2023-01-11 DOI:10.1093/jnlids/idac029
Gracious Avayiwoe
{"title":"走向明晰:“可能受到影响”的要求和国际法院的非当事方干预","authors":"Gracious Avayiwoe","doi":"10.1093/jnlids/idac029","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Intervention at the International Court of Justice (the Court) has re-emerged as a trending topic amid the Application of the Genocide Convention (The Gambia v Myanmar) and Allegations of Genocide under the Genocide Convention (Ukraine v Russian Federation). This article advances an approach to straightening the indeterminacy regarding the threshold of proof of the ‘which may be affected by the decision in the case’ expression under Article 62 of the Court’s Statute for non-party intervention. The Court deems the wording a second and substantive condition of the provision, the assessment of which remains controversial. Notwithstanding the permissiveness of the latest Order, Jurisdictional Immunities of the State(Germany v Italy), the complication lingers. The said Order did not refer to the requirement. It fell outside the purview of maritime boundary, to which all previous and inconsistent orders of the Court on non-party intervention relate.","PeriodicalId":44660,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Dispute Settlement","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Towards clarity: the ‘may be affected’ requirement and non-party intervention at the International Court of Justice\",\"authors\":\"Gracious Avayiwoe\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/jnlids/idac029\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Intervention at the International Court of Justice (the Court) has re-emerged as a trending topic amid the Application of the Genocide Convention (The Gambia v Myanmar) and Allegations of Genocide under the Genocide Convention (Ukraine v Russian Federation). This article advances an approach to straightening the indeterminacy regarding the threshold of proof of the ‘which may be affected by the decision in the case’ expression under Article 62 of the Court’s Statute for non-party intervention. The Court deems the wording a second and substantive condition of the provision, the assessment of which remains controversial. Notwithstanding the permissiveness of the latest Order, Jurisdictional Immunities of the State(Germany v Italy), the complication lingers. The said Order did not refer to the requirement. It fell outside the purview of maritime boundary, to which all previous and inconsistent orders of the Court on non-party intervention relate.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44660,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of International Dispute Settlement\",\"volume\":\"10 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of International Dispute Settlement\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/jnlids/idac029\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of International Dispute Settlement","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jnlids/idac029","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在适用《灭绝种族罪公约》(冈比亚诉缅甸案)和《灭绝种族罪公约》下的灭绝种族指控(乌克兰诉俄罗斯联邦案)中,国际法院的干预再次成为热门话题。本文提出了一种方法,以纠正法院《非当事方干预规约》第62条中关于“可能受案件决定影响”的表述的证据门槛的不确定性。本院认为该措辞是该条款的第二个实质性条件,对其评价仍有争议。尽管最新的命令“国家管辖豁免”(德国诉意大利)是允许的,但复杂的情况仍然存在。上述命令没有提到这一要求。它不属于海洋边界的范围,而海洋边界是法院以前关于非当事方干预的所有不一致的命令所涉及的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Towards clarity: the ‘may be affected’ requirement and non-party intervention at the International Court of Justice
Abstract Intervention at the International Court of Justice (the Court) has re-emerged as a trending topic amid the Application of the Genocide Convention (The Gambia v Myanmar) and Allegations of Genocide under the Genocide Convention (Ukraine v Russian Federation). This article advances an approach to straightening the indeterminacy regarding the threshold of proof of the ‘which may be affected by the decision in the case’ expression under Article 62 of the Court’s Statute for non-party intervention. The Court deems the wording a second and substantive condition of the provision, the assessment of which remains controversial. Notwithstanding the permissiveness of the latest Order, Jurisdictional Immunities of the State(Germany v Italy), the complication lingers. The said Order did not refer to the requirement. It fell outside the purview of maritime boundary, to which all previous and inconsistent orders of the Court on non-party intervention relate.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
12.50%
发文量
24
期刊最新文献
Unveiling the ‘author’ of international law — The ‘legal effect’ of ICJ’s advisory opinions Continental shelf delimitation beyond 200 nautical miles: Mauritius/Maldives and the forking paths in the jurisprudence The legitimation of international adjudication Reflecting on the rule of law contestations narratives in the world trading system When the Dragon comes Home to Roost: Chinese Investments in the EU, National Security, and Investor–State Arbitration
×
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