Lin Zhang Room 207, School of Law, Fujian Normal University Qishan Campus, Minhou County, Fuzhou, Fujian Province, P.R. China.
Corresponding Author: zlin1981@qq.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
The Chinese toxic milk scandal raised tremendous global concerns about food safety in China. To repair the tarnished reputation of domestic food production, Chinese authorities focused on compulsory food safety liability insurance. Unfortunately, the introduction of compulsory food safety liability insurance in the Food Safety Law of the PRC has been delayed by the disagreements of Chinese legal scholars. Chinese legal scholars have examined the legitimacy of compulsory food safety liability insurance in China mainly from the standpoint of domestic laws. The valuable insight of international laws has been ignored by them. This article attempts to fill this research gap by scrutinizing the Chinese endeavor of launching compulsory food safety liability insurance through the joint perspective of public and private international law. It further demonstrates that the ideology of human rights of public international law has already penetrated into the body of broadly-interpreted private international law.
Keywords : Compulsory Food Safety Liability Insurance, China, Public International Law, Broadly-Interpreted Private International Law
The Full Text is available at: http://journal.yiil.org/home/archives_v9n2_02
2019년 3월 15일 금요일
The Coordinating Role of Public International Law: Observations in the Field of Intellectual Property
Sung Pil Park Graduate School of Future Strategy, KAIST, 291 Daehak-ro, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon 34141 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
The recent surge of multijurisdictional IP disputes and increase in non-binding soft laws have made scholars cast doubt on the sustainability of public international law and the validity of the current IP legal system. Private lawyers may now think that they do not have to pay keen attention to public international law any longer when providing legal advice to their clients, particularly MNCs. This study makes a concise description of today's legal environment in the field of IP, focusing on the emerging legal norms of transnational law, particularly in the context of its interplay with public international law. With respect to this, the ongoing and even heightened roles of public international law will be discussed. Finally, a typology is suggested using exponents to express intensity of State sovereignty to facilitate understanding on the relationship between public international law and other categories of law.
Keywords : Intellectual Property, Multijurisdictional IP Disputes, Public International Law, Private Lawyers, MNCs, Transnational Law
The Full Text is available at: http://journal.yiil.org/home/archives_v9n2_01
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
The recent surge of multijurisdictional IP disputes and increase in non-binding soft laws have made scholars cast doubt on the sustainability of public international law and the validity of the current IP legal system. Private lawyers may now think that they do not have to pay keen attention to public international law any longer when providing legal advice to their clients, particularly MNCs. This study makes a concise description of today's legal environment in the field of IP, focusing on the emerging legal norms of transnational law, particularly in the context of its interplay with public international law. With respect to this, the ongoing and even heightened roles of public international law will be discussed. Finally, a typology is suggested using exponents to express intensity of State sovereignty to facilitate understanding on the relationship between public international law and other categories of law.
Keywords : Intellectual Property, Multijurisdictional IP Disputes, Public International Law, Private Lawyers, MNCs, Transnational Law
The Full Text is available at: http://journal.yiil.org/home/archives_v9n2_01
Scenarios of the China’s ADIZs above the South China Sea
Le Duy Tran No. 181, Doi Can Str., Ward/Commune: Ba Dinh Dist., Ha Noi, Viet Nam
Corresponding Author: duytranle86@gmail.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
Even though no international legal instrument explicitly provides the right for States to establish ADIZs, such zones have been unilaterally declared since the 1950s. China’s ADIZ above the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands - a disputed area in the East China Sea and her recent activities in disputed maritime features in the South China Sea have given rise to concerns about other ADIZs that Beijing may possibly establish above this area. In that context, this paper ventures to draw some potential ADIZs, which may be established by China above the South China Sea, and predicts diplomatic and legal reactions from other States.
Keywords : SCS ADIZ, South China Sea, Paracel, Spratly, Nine-dash Line, UNCLOS, EEZ
The Full Text is available at: http://journal.yiil.org/home/archives_v9n1_12
Corresponding Author: duytranle86@gmail.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
Even though no international legal instrument explicitly provides the right for States to establish ADIZs, such zones have been unilaterally declared since the 1950s. China’s ADIZ above the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands - a disputed area in the East China Sea and her recent activities in disputed maritime features in the South China Sea have given rise to concerns about other ADIZs that Beijing may possibly establish above this area. In that context, this paper ventures to draw some potential ADIZs, which may be established by China above the South China Sea, and predicts diplomatic and legal reactions from other States.
Keywords : SCS ADIZ, South China Sea, Paracel, Spratly, Nine-dash Line, UNCLOS, EEZ
The Full Text is available at: http://journal.yiil.org/home/archives_v9n1_12
Can the SC Resolution 2270 Stop North Korea’s Nuclear Dilemma? From the Geneva Agreed Framework to the Washington Communiqué
Eric Yong Joong Lee 562 Gwangnaruro, Kwangjin-gu #201, Seoul 05033 Korea.
Corresponding Author: grotian@hotmail.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
The UN Security Council adopted Resolution 2270 against North Korea’s fourth nuclear test on January 6, 2016, and its subsequent rocket launch. This resolution contains tougher sanction measures than any others adopted in the past, but is not expected to effectively stop North Korea’s nuclear weapons program. This essay analyzes the critical loophole of the rule of law in global society regarding nuclear proliferation systems as well as regional governance. It further suggests legal and policy options to resolve this nuclear dilemma. The parties concerned are asked to alter the status quo of hostile co-existence and instead revert to the spirit of the Geneva Agreed Framework.
Keywords : North Korea, Nuclear Test, Resolution 2270, NPT, Six-Party Talks, Two-Track Approach, NEA-NWFZ, Kim Jong Un
The Full Text is available at: http://journal.yiil.org/home/archives_v9n1_11
Corresponding Author: grotian@hotmail.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
The UN Security Council adopted Resolution 2270 against North Korea’s fourth nuclear test on January 6, 2016, and its subsequent rocket launch. This resolution contains tougher sanction measures than any others adopted in the past, but is not expected to effectively stop North Korea’s nuclear weapons program. This essay analyzes the critical loophole of the rule of law in global society regarding nuclear proliferation systems as well as regional governance. It further suggests legal and policy options to resolve this nuclear dilemma. The parties concerned are asked to alter the status quo of hostile co-existence and instead revert to the spirit of the Geneva Agreed Framework.
Keywords : North Korea, Nuclear Test, Resolution 2270, NPT, Six-Party Talks, Two-Track Approach, NEA-NWFZ, Kim Jong Un
The Full Text is available at: http://journal.yiil.org/home/archives_v9n1_11
Japanese 'War Legislation': International and Domestic Threat Assessment
Brendan Howe 1102 International Education Building, Ewha Womans University, 52 Ewhayeodae-gil, Seodaemu-gu, Seoul 03760 Korea.
Corresponding Author: bmg.howe@gmail.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
The two Japanese security laws which came into force on March 29, 2016, have faced severe domestic and international criticism. They are seen as representing a dramatic policy change in violation of due process and international norms, and representing a threat to international peace and security. This paper finds that while the direct implications of the "war" legislation are neither threatening nor without precedent, what the legislative process says about the nature of governance under Abe is deeply troubling. The disdain shown by the Abe administration to due process and constitutional procedures is what threatens domestic and international governance stability.
Keywords : Japan, Security Legislation, Threat, Legality, Governance, Peace, Article 9
The Full Text is available at: http://journal.yiil.org/home/archives_v9n1_10
Corresponding Author: bmg.howe@gmail.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
The two Japanese security laws which came into force on March 29, 2016, have faced severe domestic and international criticism. They are seen as representing a dramatic policy change in violation of due process and international norms, and representing a threat to international peace and security. This paper finds that while the direct implications of the "war" legislation are neither threatening nor without precedent, what the legislative process says about the nature of governance under Abe is deeply troubling. The disdain shown by the Abe administration to due process and constitutional procedures is what threatens domestic and international governance stability.
Keywords : Japan, Security Legislation, Threat, Legality, Governance, Peace, Article 9
The Full Text is available at: http://journal.yiil.org/home/archives_v9n1_10
Investor-State Dispute between Lone Star and Korea: Legal and Policy Analysis
Joel K. Browning 1044 University Village Salt Lake City, Utah 84108 USA
Corresponding Author: joel.browning@law.utah.edu
ⓒ 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
This paper examines critical issues in the current dispute between Lone Star and South Korea regarding Lone Star's investment in the Korea Exchange Bank that has culminated in an investor-State dispute claim against Korea before an International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes arbitration panel. It further evaluates the merits and potential outcomes of each issue through careful analogy to preexisting international investor-State dispute awards, textual analysis of the bilateral tax and investment treaties between South Korea and Belgium, and publically available information regarding events during the course of Lone Star's investments in Korea. In particular, it will address well-covered topics in international investment law such as nationality of corporations, fair and equitable treatment, and discriminatory treatment. It will also investigate burgeoning topics on breach of domestic law by third parties, breach of domestic law in the course of an investment, and the rights of an investor to raise tax-based investment claims.
Keywords : ISD, Korea, Lone Star, KEB, ICSID, BIT, BTT, FET
The Full Text is available at: http://journal.yiil.org/home/archives_v9n1_09
Corresponding Author: joel.browning@law.utah.edu
ⓒ 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
This paper examines critical issues in the current dispute between Lone Star and South Korea regarding Lone Star's investment in the Korea Exchange Bank that has culminated in an investor-State dispute claim against Korea before an International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes arbitration panel. It further evaluates the merits and potential outcomes of each issue through careful analogy to preexisting international investor-State dispute awards, textual analysis of the bilateral tax and investment treaties between South Korea and Belgium, and publically available information regarding events during the course of Lone Star's investments in Korea. In particular, it will address well-covered topics in international investment law such as nationality of corporations, fair and equitable treatment, and discriminatory treatment. It will also investigate burgeoning topics on breach of domestic law by third parties, breach of domestic law in the course of an investment, and the rights of an investor to raise tax-based investment claims.
Keywords : ISD, Korea, Lone Star, KEB, ICSID, BIT, BTT, FET
The Full Text is available at: http://journal.yiil.org/home/archives_v9n1_09
The Latest Developments of the US Freedom of Navigation Programs in the South China Sea: Deregulation or Re-balance?
Xinjun Zhang School of Law, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, P.R China.
Corresponding Author: zxinjun@mail.tsinghua.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
Regarding warships, customary rules on innocent passage and freedom of navigation codified in the UNCLOS are far from being settled among State Parties. FONOPs impose the US understanding of rules on passage and navigation in each and every sea area, forcefully implementing deregulation in order for the US to create a navy-friendly environment for its worldwide mission. By implementing another agenda of carrying out the new US policy of "Pivot to Asia," the FONOPs in the South China Sea challenge the very heart of China's sovereignty, and may bring about adverse effect to the process of peaceful settlement of territorial issues and maritime disputes in the South China Sea region. China believes the US FONOPs in the South China Sea are offensive to its sovereignty. Moreover, their adverse effect to the process of peaceful settlement of territorial issues and maritime disputes in the South China Sea region cannot be ignored.
Keywords : FONOP, South China Sea, UNCLOS, Passage and Navigation, Low Tide Elevation, Artificial Island
The Full Text is available at: http://journal.yiil.org/home/archives_v9n1_08
Corresponding Author: zxinjun@mail.tsinghua.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
Regarding warships, customary rules on innocent passage and freedom of navigation codified in the UNCLOS are far from being settled among State Parties. FONOPs impose the US understanding of rules on passage and navigation in each and every sea area, forcefully implementing deregulation in order for the US to create a navy-friendly environment for its worldwide mission. By implementing another agenda of carrying out the new US policy of "Pivot to Asia," the FONOPs in the South China Sea challenge the very heart of China's sovereignty, and may bring about adverse effect to the process of peaceful settlement of territorial issues and maritime disputes in the South China Sea region. China believes the US FONOPs in the South China Sea are offensive to its sovereignty. Moreover, their adverse effect to the process of peaceful settlement of territorial issues and maritime disputes in the South China Sea region cannot be ignored.
Keywords : FONOP, South China Sea, UNCLOS, Passage and Navigation, Low Tide Elevation, Artificial Island
The Full Text is available at: http://journal.yiil.org/home/archives_v9n1_08
피드 구독하기:
글 (Atom)