Hui Zhang Wuhan University School of Law and Institute of International Law
Luojiashan, Wuchang District, Wuhan, Hubei Province, 430072, China
Corresponding Author: fxyzh@whu.edu.cn
ⓒ Copyright YIJUN Institute of International Law
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Abstract
The Doha Climate Gateway launched the second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol and restated the vision of a new global agreement binding all countries. To reach the goal of the new agreement and further to save the Earth, the principles regarding CBDR of UNFCCC and the Kyoto Protocol may need a reflection and re-interpretation. The common responsibility would be emphasized more than before, and the differentiated responsibility might improve the feasibility to be operated considering the principles of equity and respective capabilities. In climate change conferences, China has shown its flexibility on the issue of a new agreement. As a developing responsible power, China should contribute to addressing climate change upon the call of common responsibility, but it also needs an appropriate differentiated treatment according to its capability.
Keywords : New Global Agreement, Doha Climate Gateway, CBDR principle, Common
Responsibility, Differentiated Responsibility, Chinese Way
The Full Text is available at: http://journal.yiil.org/home/archives_v7n2_07
2019년 3월 15일 금요일
International Arbitration of Maritime Delimitation: An Alternative for East Asia?
Chao Wang Guanghua Law School, Zhejiang University
51 Zhijiang Road, 310008, Hangzhou, China
Corresponding Author: superwang@zju.edu.cn
ⓒ Copyright YIJUN Institute of International Law
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Abstract
International arbitration, as a neutral, flexible, efficient and binding legal means of dispute resolution, has been effective in settling maritime delimitation disputes, especially in recent years since the UNCLOS came into force. There are a number of reasons (i.e. advantages) for its increased popularity. Reasonable expectations thus arise as to its applicability onto similar maritime delimitation disputes of the East Asian countries whose diplomatic efforts have mostly failed to address these matters. This article examines this practical issue primarily from the legal perspective by reviewing relevant international rules including the UNCLOS provisions on compulsory dispute resolution and cases such as the ongoing Philippines-China arbitration over the South China Sea. Observations are also made from the political and cultural perspectives as well. It concludes that, though multiple dispute settlement means are still encouraged, international arbitration could be an important alternative for East Asian countries seeking a peaceful solution to their maritime delimitation disputes.
Keywords : Maritime Delimitation, Dispute Resolution, International Arbitration, UNCLOS, Compulsory Procedures, East Asia
The Full Text is available at: http://journal.yiil.org/home/archives_v7n2_06
51 Zhijiang Road, 310008, Hangzhou, China
Corresponding Author: superwang@zju.edu.cn
ⓒ Copyright YIJUN Institute of International Law
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Abstract
International arbitration, as a neutral, flexible, efficient and binding legal means of dispute resolution, has been effective in settling maritime delimitation disputes, especially in recent years since the UNCLOS came into force. There are a number of reasons (i.e. advantages) for its increased popularity. Reasonable expectations thus arise as to its applicability onto similar maritime delimitation disputes of the East Asian countries whose diplomatic efforts have mostly failed to address these matters. This article examines this practical issue primarily from the legal perspective by reviewing relevant international rules including the UNCLOS provisions on compulsory dispute resolution and cases such as the ongoing Philippines-China arbitration over the South China Sea. Observations are also made from the political and cultural perspectives as well. It concludes that, though multiple dispute settlement means are still encouraged, international arbitration could be an important alternative for East Asian countries seeking a peaceful solution to their maritime delimitation disputes.
Keywords : Maritime Delimitation, Dispute Resolution, International Arbitration, UNCLOS, Compulsory Procedures, East Asia
The Full Text is available at: http://journal.yiil.org/home/archives_v7n2_06
Interpreting the United Nations Security Council Resolutions by the Domestic Courts: The Judgment of the High Court of Singapore on the Iranian Nuclear Program
A.-H. Ranjbarian, A. Abedini & K. Rouzegari Faculty of Law & Political Science, University of Tehran
Enghelab Ave., Tehran, Iran.
Corresponding Author: s_abedini_a@ut.ac.ir
ⓒ Copyright YIJUN Institute of International Law
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Abstract
The scope of the maintenance of international peace and security has been increasingly widened by the United Nations Security Council in response to actions taken not only by the Member States but also in some cases by the individuals. In fact, a range of actions and decisions were taken by the Security Council, approximately in the late 1990s and after the so-called 9/11 attacks in the context of combating terrorism, as well as in other contexts against the member States. In consequence, the affected States and individuals had to seek redress from international or national courts on different grounds such as violations of human rights. This has led the domestic courts to develop novel jurisprudence. Thus, it is necessary to pay due attention to the jurisprudence created by these courts. This paper is devoted to analysis an interpretation by the High Court of Singapore in relation to sanctions resolutions of the Security Council against Iran.
Keywords : UNSC Resolution, Iranian Nuclear Program, High Court of Singapore, Judgment, IRISL
The Full Text is available at: http://journal.yiil.org/home/archives_v7n2_05
Enghelab Ave., Tehran, Iran.
Corresponding Author: s_abedini_a@ut.ac.ir
ⓒ Copyright YIJUN Institute of International Law
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Abstract
The scope of the maintenance of international peace and security has been increasingly widened by the United Nations Security Council in response to actions taken not only by the Member States but also in some cases by the individuals. In fact, a range of actions and decisions were taken by the Security Council, approximately in the late 1990s and after the so-called 9/11 attacks in the context of combating terrorism, as well as in other contexts against the member States. In consequence, the affected States and individuals had to seek redress from international or national courts on different grounds such as violations of human rights. This has led the domestic courts to develop novel jurisprudence. Thus, it is necessary to pay due attention to the jurisprudence created by these courts. This paper is devoted to analysis an interpretation by the High Court of Singapore in relation to sanctions resolutions of the Security Council against Iran.
Keywords : UNSC Resolution, Iranian Nuclear Program, High Court of Singapore, Judgment, IRISL
The Full Text is available at: http://journal.yiil.org/home/archives_v7n2_05
Conceptuality or Textuality? Understanding the Notion of Expropriation in the Context of Tza Yap Shum v. The Republic of Peru
Wei Shen Address: No. 1954 Huashan Road, Shanghai Jiao Tong University Law School
Shanghai 200030 China.
Corresponding Author: shenwei@sjtu.edu.cn
ⓒ Copyright YIJUN Institute of International Law
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Abstract
Although China has been an active 'treaty-maker' in the realm of international investment arbitration as evidenced by its more than 120 bilateral investment treaties, the utility of these BITs has been very limited. Substantive standards such as expropriation and compensation have never been comprehensively tested with respect to these BITs. This article scrutinizes the concept of expropriation by reference to Chinese investment treaty jurisprudence, in particular, the final award of Tza Yap Shum v. The Republic of Peru and China's free trade agreement with Peru, the only Chinese BIT-related ICSID case. This article critically examines, in a comparative context, the treaty interpretation methodologies employed by the tribunal in interpreting expropriation under the China-Peru BIT, which is one of the earlier Chinese BITs. A thorough study of this subject is of great significance to interpreting the terms of indirect expropriation and compensation in Chinese BITs, thereby offering more concrete foreign investment protections based on investment treaties.
Keywords : Chinese BITs, Expropriation, Compensation, Treaty Interpretation, Bilateral Investment Treaties
The Full Text is available at: http://journal.yiil.org/home/archives_v7n2_04
Shanghai 200030 China.
Corresponding Author: shenwei@sjtu.edu.cn
ⓒ Copyright YIJUN Institute of International Law
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Abstract
Although China has been an active 'treaty-maker' in the realm of international investment arbitration as evidenced by its more than 120 bilateral investment treaties, the utility of these BITs has been very limited. Substantive standards such as expropriation and compensation have never been comprehensively tested with respect to these BITs. This article scrutinizes the concept of expropriation by reference to Chinese investment treaty jurisprudence, in particular, the final award of Tza Yap Shum v. The Republic of Peru and China's free trade agreement with Peru, the only Chinese BIT-related ICSID case. This article critically examines, in a comparative context, the treaty interpretation methodologies employed by the tribunal in interpreting expropriation under the China-Peru BIT, which is one of the earlier Chinese BITs. A thorough study of this subject is of great significance to interpreting the terms of indirect expropriation and compensation in Chinese BITs, thereby offering more concrete foreign investment protections based on investment treaties.
Keywords : Chinese BITs, Expropriation, Compensation, Treaty Interpretation, Bilateral Investment Treaties
The Full Text is available at: http://journal.yiil.org/home/archives_v7n2_04
Harmonizing Public and Private International Law: Implications of the Apple vs. Samsung IP Litigation
Sung Pil Park Graduate School of Future Strategy, KAIST
291 Daehak-ro, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon 305-701, Korea
Corresponding Author: sppark@kaist.ac.kr
ⓒ Copyright YIJUN Institute of International Law
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Abstract
IP litigations over mobile digital devices are soaring in many jurisdictions. Based on the observation that the same or closely related infringement claims over the IP rights embedded in a single digital product have been raised in multiple jurisdictions, some literature and legislative proposals suggest that an international jurisdiction over such litigations are necessary. This article aims to explore practical roadmaps to establish public international "conflict of laws" that can serve administering IP dispute resolution among MNCs. The author will start by reviewing both public international laws on IPRs including the Paris Convention, PCT, the Geneva Convention, the TRIPs, and their private counterparts. Institutional aspects of the WTO and the WIPO administering such as public international IP laws will also be examined. Agreeing with the proposed idea of establishing 'public' private international IP laws, this article will propose a more practical roadmap to establish time and cost efficient IP dispute resolution mechanism: the IP5 Collaboration Model.
Keywords : MNCs, IP, Apple-Samsung IP Litigation, Paris Convention, Berne Convention, PCT, TRIPs, EPC, IP5 Collaboration Model
The Full Text is available at: http://journal.yiil.org/home/archives_v7n2_03
291 Daehak-ro, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon 305-701, Korea
Corresponding Author: sppark@kaist.ac.kr
ⓒ Copyright YIJUN Institute of International Law
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Abstract
IP litigations over mobile digital devices are soaring in many jurisdictions. Based on the observation that the same or closely related infringement claims over the IP rights embedded in a single digital product have been raised in multiple jurisdictions, some literature and legislative proposals suggest that an international jurisdiction over such litigations are necessary. This article aims to explore practical roadmaps to establish public international "conflict of laws" that can serve administering IP dispute resolution among MNCs. The author will start by reviewing both public international laws on IPRs including the Paris Convention, PCT, the Geneva Convention, the TRIPs, and their private counterparts. Institutional aspects of the WTO and the WIPO administering such as public international IP laws will also be examined. Agreeing with the proposed idea of establishing 'public' private international IP laws, this article will propose a more practical roadmap to establish time and cost efficient IP dispute resolution mechanism: the IP5 Collaboration Model.
Keywords : MNCs, IP, Apple-Samsung IP Litigation, Paris Convention, Berne Convention, PCT, TRIPs, EPC, IP5 Collaboration Model
The Full Text is available at: http://journal.yiil.org/home/archives_v7n2_03
International Cooperation on the Repression of Piracy and Armed Robbery at Sea under the UNCLOS
Yurika Ishii National Defense Academy of Japan (Dept. of International Relations)
1-10-20 Hashirimizu Yokosuka, Kanagawa Pref. 239-8686 Japan
Corresponding Author: eureka@nda.ac.jp
ⓒ Copyright YIJUN Institute of International Law
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Abstract
As maritime criminal activities are increasingly committed across the borders, States have come to establish mechanisms of international cooperation to be implemented in territorial seas. This article examines such mechanisms with regards to the crime of piracy and armed robbery at sea from the perspective of public international law. This article tackles the significance of the mechanisms imposed on the zonal approach, particularly paying attention to the nature of these crimes. It concludes that under the frameworks, States are allowed to pursue various objectives such as securing the safety of navigation, maintaining security, or protecting the local economy. They do not, however, fundamentally alter the nature of the zonal approach. Nonetheless, by setting up a forum of dialogue between the coastal States and the user States, it promotes maritime governance of territorial seas.
Keywords : Piracy, Armed Robbery at Sea, Law of the Sea, Maritime Security, International Cooperation
The Full Text is available at: http://journal.yiil.org/home/archives_v7n2_02
1-10-20 Hashirimizu Yokosuka, Kanagawa Pref. 239-8686 Japan
Corresponding Author: eureka@nda.ac.jp
ⓒ Copyright YIJUN Institute of International Law
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Abstract
As maritime criminal activities are increasingly committed across the borders, States have come to establish mechanisms of international cooperation to be implemented in territorial seas. This article examines such mechanisms with regards to the crime of piracy and armed robbery at sea from the perspective of public international law. This article tackles the significance of the mechanisms imposed on the zonal approach, particularly paying attention to the nature of these crimes. It concludes that under the frameworks, States are allowed to pursue various objectives such as securing the safety of navigation, maintaining security, or protecting the local economy. They do not, however, fundamentally alter the nature of the zonal approach. Nonetheless, by setting up a forum of dialogue between the coastal States and the user States, it promotes maritime governance of territorial seas.
Keywords : Piracy, Armed Robbery at Sea, Law of the Sea, Maritime Security, International Cooperation
The Full Text is available at: http://journal.yiil.org/home/archives_v7n2_02
China Being A Maritime Power under the UNCLOS: Issues and Ways Ahead
Mincai Yu Renmin University of China School of Law
59 Zhongguancun Street, Haidian District, 100872, Beijing, China
Corresponding Author: ymc685@sina.com
ⓒ Copyright YIJUN Institute of International Law
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Abstract
China has recently established a strategic goal of building herself into a maritime power. China's pursuit of this goal is interconnected with the UNCLOS. However, China faces increasingly serious challenges resulting from the application of the UNCLOS, especially the provisions in relation to the EEZ and the new continental shelf, which were strongly supported by China herself at the UNCLOS III. Drawing lessons from the participation in the UNCLOS III, this article argues that the only option for China in response to the challenges is to transform her traditional position of a coastal State into that of a maritime power by actively applying and defending the relevant UNCLOS regimes as well as taking future law-making seriously on marine biodiversity, including the marine genetic resources, beyond national jurisdiction. At the same time, China should hold an open attitude in the revision of national laws which are arguably incompatible with the UNCLOS.
Keywords : China, A Maritime Power, UNCLOS, UNCLOS III, South China Sea, Real Challenges, Possible Options, Dotted Line
The Full Text is available at: http://journal.yiil.org/home/archives_v7n2_01
59 Zhongguancun Street, Haidian District, 100872, Beijing, China
Corresponding Author: ymc685@sina.com
ⓒ Copyright YIJUN Institute of International Law
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Abstract
China has recently established a strategic goal of building herself into a maritime power. China's pursuit of this goal is interconnected with the UNCLOS. However, China faces increasingly serious challenges resulting from the application of the UNCLOS, especially the provisions in relation to the EEZ and the new continental shelf, which were strongly supported by China herself at the UNCLOS III. Drawing lessons from the participation in the UNCLOS III, this article argues that the only option for China in response to the challenges is to transform her traditional position of a coastal State into that of a maritime power by actively applying and defending the relevant UNCLOS regimes as well as taking future law-making seriously on marine biodiversity, including the marine genetic resources, beyond national jurisdiction. At the same time, China should hold an open attitude in the revision of national laws which are arguably incompatible with the UNCLOS.
Keywords : China, A Maritime Power, UNCLOS, UNCLOS III, South China Sea, Real Challenges, Possible Options, Dotted Line
The Full Text is available at: http://journal.yiil.org/home/archives_v7n2_01
피드 구독하기:
글 (Atom)