法律、裁判和“国际行政实验”(1920-1946)

Philip A. Burton
{"title":"法律、裁判和“国际行政实验”(1920-1946)","authors":"Philip A. Burton","doi":"10.1163/15718034-12341488","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nThe claim that international courts are a necessary precondition for the existence of international law rests on a more general assumption that the way a legal order is institutionalised determines the character of law within that legal order. This article explores the underlying structural association between institution form and the quality of law in the context of the “experiment of international administration”: the concentration, monopolisation and transformation of international authority in the aftermath of the First World War. By examining neglected sites of legal activity, in particular the Advisory Committee on the Traffic of Women and Children and the Permanent Mandates Commission, the article argues that an interwar “administrative turn” opened up new terrain for heterogeneous forms of international legal discourse.","PeriodicalId":42613,"journal":{"name":"Law & Practice of International Courts and Tribunals","volume":"66 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Law, Adjudication, and the “Experiment of International Administration” (1920–1946)\",\"authors\":\"Philip A. Burton\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/15718034-12341488\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nThe claim that international courts are a necessary precondition for the existence of international law rests on a more general assumption that the way a legal order is institutionalised determines the character of law within that legal order. This article explores the underlying structural association between institution form and the quality of law in the context of the “experiment of international administration”: the concentration, monopolisation and transformation of international authority in the aftermath of the First World War. By examining neglected sites of legal activity, in particular the Advisory Committee on the Traffic of Women and Children and the Permanent Mandates Commission, the article argues that an interwar “administrative turn” opened up new terrain for heterogeneous forms of international legal discourse.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42613,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Law & Practice of International Courts and Tribunals\",\"volume\":\"66 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Law & Practice of International Courts and Tribunals\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/15718034-12341488\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Law & Practice of International Courts and Tribunals","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15718034-12341488","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

国际法院是国际法存在的必要先决条件的主张,是基于一个更普遍的假设,即法律秩序制度化的方式决定了该法律秩序内法律的性质。本文在“国际行政实验”的背景下探讨制度形式与法律质量之间潜在的结构性联系:第一次世界大战后国际权威的集中、垄断和转变。通过审查被忽视的法律活动场所,特别是贩运妇女和儿童问题咨询委员会和常设任务委员会,文章认为两次世界大战之间的“行政转向”为各种形式的国际法律讨论开辟了新的领域。
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
Law, Adjudication, and the “Experiment of International Administration” (1920–1946)
The claim that international courts are a necessary precondition for the existence of international law rests on a more general assumption that the way a legal order is institutionalised determines the character of law within that legal order. This article explores the underlying structural association between institution form and the quality of law in the context of the “experiment of international administration”: the concentration, monopolisation and transformation of international authority in the aftermath of the First World War. By examining neglected sites of legal activity, in particular the Advisory Committee on the Traffic of Women and Children and the Permanent Mandates Commission, the article argues that an interwar “administrative turn” opened up new terrain for heterogeneous forms of international legal discourse.
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
40.00%
发文量
25
期刊介绍: The Law and Practice of International Courts and Tribunals is firmly established as the leading journal in its field. Each issue will give you the latest developments with respect to the preparation, adoption, suspension, amendment and revision of Rules of Procedure as well as statutory and internal rules and other related matters. The Journal will also provide you with the latest practice with respect to the interpretation and application of rules of procedure and constitutional documents, which can be found in judgments, advisory opinions, written and oral pleadings as well as legal literature.
期刊最新文献
Situating “Deformalization” within the International Court of Justice: Understanding Institutionalised Informality The World Is Burning, Urgently and Irreparably – a Plea for Interim Protection against Climatic Change at the ICJ “Cross Treaty Interpretation” en bloc or How CAFTA-DR Tribunals Are Systematically Interpreting the FET Standard Based on NAFTA Case Law The Asian Turn in Foreign Investment, edited by Mahdev Mohan and Chester Brown Not Just a Participation Trophy? Advancing Public Interests through Advisory Opinions at the International Court of Justice
×
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