解读AEWA与《波恩公约》各自对禁止征用豁免的复杂关系

M. Lewis
{"title":"解读AEWA与《波恩公约》各自对禁止征用豁免的复杂关系","authors":"M. Lewis","doi":"10.1080/13880292.2019.1672945","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article explores several interpretive complexities associated with Article III(2)(a) of the Agreement on the Conservation of African-Eurasian Migratory Waterbirds (AEWA). Article III(2)(a) attempts to avoid incongruity between AEWA and the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS)—specifically, in relation to the Convention’s prohibition on the taking of animals from certain species. However, an apparent misalignment between this provision and other aspects of AEWA’s legal text results in various legal uncertainties regarding the grounds of exemption that AEWA parties may invoke to allow the taking of certain protected species, as well as the potential for further developing AEWA’s exemptions regime in the future. The article investigates the interplay between relevant provisions of AEWA and the CMS, makes suggestions regarding the possible interpretations of these provisions, and identifies the practical implications of these interpretations.","PeriodicalId":52446,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Wildlife Law and Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Deciphering the Complex Relationship between AEWA's and the Bonn Convention’s Respective Exemptions to the Prohibition of Taking\",\"authors\":\"M. Lewis\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13880292.2019.1672945\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract This article explores several interpretive complexities associated with Article III(2)(a) of the Agreement on the Conservation of African-Eurasian Migratory Waterbirds (AEWA). Article III(2)(a) attempts to avoid incongruity between AEWA and the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS)—specifically, in relation to the Convention’s prohibition on the taking of animals from certain species. However, an apparent misalignment between this provision and other aspects of AEWA’s legal text results in various legal uncertainties regarding the grounds of exemption that AEWA parties may invoke to allow the taking of certain protected species, as well as the potential for further developing AEWA’s exemptions regime in the future. The article investigates the interplay between relevant provisions of AEWA and the CMS, makes suggestions regarding the possible interpretations of these provisions, and identifies the practical implications of these interpretations.\",\"PeriodicalId\":52446,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of International Wildlife Law and Policy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-07-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of International Wildlife Law and Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13880292.2019.1672945\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of International Wildlife Law and Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13880292.2019.1672945","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

摘要:本文探讨了与《非洲-欧亚迁徙水鸟保护协定》(AEWA)第III(2)(a)条相关的几个解释复杂性。第III(2)(a)条试图避免AEWA与《保护野生动物移栖物种公约》(CMS)之间的不一致,特别是与《公约》禁止从某些物种中获取动物有关。然而,这一规定与AEWA法律文本的其他方面之间的明显不一致,导致了AEWA缔约方在允许获取某些受保护物种时可能援引的豁免理由方面的各种法律不确定性,以及未来进一步发展AEWA豁免制度的可能性。本文探讨了AEWA相关条款与CMS之间的相互作用,对这些条款的可能解释提出了建议,并确定了这些解释的现实意义。
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
Deciphering the Complex Relationship between AEWA's and the Bonn Convention’s Respective Exemptions to the Prohibition of Taking
Abstract This article explores several interpretive complexities associated with Article III(2)(a) of the Agreement on the Conservation of African-Eurasian Migratory Waterbirds (AEWA). Article III(2)(a) attempts to avoid incongruity between AEWA and the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS)—specifically, in relation to the Convention’s prohibition on the taking of animals from certain species. However, an apparent misalignment between this provision and other aspects of AEWA’s legal text results in various legal uncertainties regarding the grounds of exemption that AEWA parties may invoke to allow the taking of certain protected species, as well as the potential for further developing AEWA’s exemptions regime in the future. The article investigates the interplay between relevant provisions of AEWA and the CMS, makes suggestions regarding the possible interpretations of these provisions, and identifies the practical implications of these interpretations.
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
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14
期刊介绍: Drawing upon the findings from island biogeography studies, Norman Myers estimates that we are losing between 50-200 species per day, a rate 120,000 times greater than the background rate during prehistoric times. Worse still, the rate is accelerating rapidly. By the year 2000, we may have lost over one million species, counting back from three centuries ago when this trend began. By the middle of the next century, as many as one half of all species may face extinction. Moreover, our rapid destruction of critical ecosystems, such as tropical coral reefs, wetlands, estuaries, and rainforests may seriously impair species" regeneration, a process that has taken several million years after mass extinctions in the past.
期刊最新文献
Lost in Translation? Why Outdated Notions of Normativity in International Law Explain Germany’s Failure to Give Effect to the Ramsar Convention of 1971 Wild Things: Animal Rights in EU Conservation Law Addressing Illegal Transnational Trade of Totoaba and Its Role in the Possible Extinction of the Vaquita Justice for Animals: Our Collective Responsibility Carceral Logics: Human Incarceration and Animal Captivity
×
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