国际法院对尼加拉瓜诉哥伦比亚案(2022年)的判决:适用既定管辖权标准还是有问题的发明?

IF 0.9 3区 社会学 Q2 LAW Journal of International Dispute Settlement Pub Date : 2023-05-16 DOI:10.1093/jnlids/idad009
Pranav Ganesan, Laia Roxane Guardiola
{"title":"国际法院对尼加拉瓜诉哥伦比亚案(2022年)的判决:适用既定管辖权标准还是有问题的发明?","authors":"Pranav Ganesan, Laia Roxane Guardiola","doi":"10.1093/jnlids/idad009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n In April 2022, the ICJ pronounced its judgments on the merits in Alleged Violations of Sovereign Rights and Maritime Spaces in the Caribbean Sea (Nicaragua v Colombia). While the judgment makes interesting contributions to the law of the sea jurisprudence, the Court’s problematic finding on jurisdiction ratione temporis is the subject of this paper. Applying what it refers to as ‘continuity’ and ‘connexity’ criteria, it found that Colombia’s withdrawal from the Pact of Bogotá would not prevent it from considering facts submitted by Nicaragua which arose after the Pact ceased to be in force for Colombia. An in-depth analysis of the jurisprudence the judgment referred to reveals that the Court was building on convoluted cases, some of which have conflated questions of jurisdiction and admissibility. Based on the Court’s jurisprudence, this paper argues for a more systematic approach to dealing with preliminary issues arising from new claims and submissions.","PeriodicalId":44660,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Dispute Settlement","volume":"22 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The ICJ judgment on Nicaragua v Colombia (2022): applying an established jurisdictional test or a problematic invention?\",\"authors\":\"Pranav Ganesan, Laia Roxane Guardiola\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/jnlids/idad009\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n In April 2022, the ICJ pronounced its judgments on the merits in Alleged Violations of Sovereign Rights and Maritime Spaces in the Caribbean Sea (Nicaragua v Colombia). While the judgment makes interesting contributions to the law of the sea jurisprudence, the Court’s problematic finding on jurisdiction ratione temporis is the subject of this paper. Applying what it refers to as ‘continuity’ and ‘connexity’ criteria, it found that Colombia’s withdrawal from the Pact of Bogotá would not prevent it from considering facts submitted by Nicaragua which arose after the Pact ceased to be in force for Colombia. An in-depth analysis of the jurisprudence the judgment referred to reveals that the Court was building on convoluted cases, some of which have conflated questions of jurisdiction and admissibility. Based on the Court’s jurisprudence, this paper argues for a more systematic approach to dealing with preliminary issues arising from new claims and submissions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44660,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of International Dispute Settlement\",\"volume\":\"22 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of International Dispute Settlement\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/jnlids/idad009\",\"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":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jnlids/idad009","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

2022年4月,国际法院就“涉嫌侵犯加勒比海主权权利和海洋空间”(尼加拉瓜诉哥伦比亚)案的案情作出判决。虽然该判决对海洋法法理学做出了有趣的贡献,但法院关于属时管辖权的有问题的裁决是本文的主题。根据它所称的“连续性”和“连接性”标准,它认为哥伦比亚退出《波哥大公约》并不妨碍它审议尼加拉瓜在《公约》对哥伦比亚不再生效后提出的事实。对判决书所提到的法理学的深入分析表明,法院是根据复杂的案件建立的,其中一些案件将管辖权和可受理性问题混为一谈。根据法院的判例,本文主张采用一种更系统的方法来处理由新索赔和提交的文件引起的初步问题。
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
The ICJ judgment on Nicaragua v Colombia (2022): applying an established jurisdictional test or a problematic invention?
In April 2022, the ICJ pronounced its judgments on the merits in Alleged Violations of Sovereign Rights and Maritime Spaces in the Caribbean Sea (Nicaragua v Colombia). While the judgment makes interesting contributions to the law of the sea jurisprudence, the Court’s problematic finding on jurisdiction ratione temporis is the subject of this paper. Applying what it refers to as ‘continuity’ and ‘connexity’ criteria, it found that Colombia’s withdrawal from the Pact of Bogotá would not prevent it from considering facts submitted by Nicaragua which arose after the Pact ceased to be in force for Colombia. An in-depth analysis of the jurisprudence the judgment referred to reveals that the Court was building on convoluted cases, some of which have conflated questions of jurisdiction and admissibility. Based on the Court’s jurisprudence, this paper argues for a more systematic approach to dealing with preliminary issues arising from new claims and submissions.
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