M. Bothe and T. Dorschel argue that “reference to officials in article 105 (2) UN Charter or the Convention on Privileges and Immunities could be construed broadly in line with its object and purpose, namely the ability of the organization to function independently . They contend that this could be extended to encompass UN military contingents given that they form part of a subsidiary organ of the United Nations and on grounds of functional necessity ”. And indeed, despite the SOFAs that confer the power of prosecution to troop-contributing country, the UN Peacekeepers act directly under the orders of United Nations. Therefore, they should be treated as its workers/staff
Whenever a state has agreed upon the law, the power that a state owns will be positioned under the international law. To be qualified under the definition of international law, there is a condition that state has to comply. The condition is that the state has to have its own sovereignty which can be seen by the existence of a defined territory, a permanent population, a government who will run and administer the state itself, and the last is this state has the ability to be in a relationship with other foreign states. However, states within a state, its province or cantons are not recognized as the subjects of international law which can make them experiencing the rightful authority and responsibilities since they have less sovereignty than the mother state itself [
This paper will try to asses that question in particular. Theoretical Framework The concept of International Law International law, also called public international law or law of nations, is the body of legal rules, norms, and standards that apply between sovereign states and other entities that are legally recognized as international actors . The concept of Power Politics Political action characterized by the exercise or pursuit of power as a means of coercion. International diplomacy based on the use or threatened use of military, political or economic power. Power politics is the core of realism, as realism assumes that states merely do something based on their national interest, and through whatever means necessary, including the means above.
The legal personality of international organizations is objective and non-members are required to recognize it as a legal person. The involvement of international organizations in treaty making has eroded the traditional dominance of states in this regard. Specifically, it has given access rights to non-governmental organizations and other non-state actors to participate in the formation of treaties as well as giving greater influence to smaller states, with the balance of power tilting away from more powerful states thus democratizing the process. Furthermore, while most international organizations cannot adopt binding decisions on member states, the rules contained in non-binding decisions, for example General Assembly resolutions, may assist in the formation of new customary international law. Conclusion While the Lotus dicta remains valid in the respect that states remain the chief lawmakers and subjects in international law, the predominance of states is being slowly eroded with the involvement of international organizations in law making.
Introduction While it is certainly true that the EU´s foreign policy has embraced the domain of human rights in many ways, the question of whether the human rights principles play an essential role in the EU´s foreign policy, and therefore shape this domain of external action is way more complex. Starting point to undergo this analysis is the question of which kind of power Europe represents. It is clearly notable that Bull’s notion of military power is not sufficient to justify the promotion of human rights in EU foreign policy, neither in an essential nor in an auxiliary manner. Even Duchene´s and later on Twichett and Maull’s notion of civilian power, point in the direction of economic power rather than military but still in the context
These are: international conventions, international customs, general principles of law and equity and fairness. Hence, these are the principles which make international law. While deciding on any principle’s legality it has to stand against the test of these well laid principles. Hence, while deciding the legality of responsibility to protect it is important to see if it is in consonance with international conventions, international customs, and general principles of law and incorporates equity and fairness. While deciding about the legality of the principle of responsibility to protect the Preamble of the UN Charter can help us.
State is also obliged to protect its region from external disturbance, include creating and implementing law and regulations. It called Territorial Sovereignty . Territorial Jurisdiction is divided into two different part; a) Objective Territorial Objective territoriality principle is used in a country when the crime is committed outside the border of the targeted country, but the impact goes to the targeted country . Objective territoriality was created to fill the empty gap in subjective territorial jurisdiction. In accordance to Objective territorial jurisdiction, a state has the right to enact its domestic laws towards criminal acts, as a consequence for the crime perpetrator for bringing such harmful impact within the state’s territory although the criminal act was done in different state (i.e.
National sovereignty versus legislative powers of the EU What is also noteworthy is that national and cultural sovereignty with the contracting country prevails for the importance of protecting human rights. Obviously, countries do not appreciate that pressure to comply with these clauses is coming through external relations. In other words, that such a dominant figure like the EU, is making itself capable of putting pressure on domestic authorities to revise its legal order or change it. And with that said, it is obvious that the EU is in need of a stricter policy which will lead to more compliance and fluentness. In connection with the notion of national and cultural sovereignty, legislative powers of the EU are closely related.
It is for this reason that a lawyer who solely adheres to the standard conception cannot always be said to be acting ethical. The opposing theory therefore is to affirm a level of moral activism onto the lawyer’s role; the lawyer owes a duty not only to the client but also a fidelity to the
This principle has a dual legal nature: on the one hand, it is implemented as an obligation of UN member states (Art. 33), on the other - as a set of certain major powers of the UN defined by statutory provisions, aimed at maintaining the status of international peace and security (chapters VI, VII, VIII, XIV). SC plays a major role in implementing the relevant authority as a carrier of primary responsibility for maintaining international peace and security, as each member of the United Nations may bring notes to SC or GA only about any situations that directly threaten the peace and security (Art. 34, 35). In practice, it shows that principal organs of the United Nations cannot intervene in resolving disputes or situations and confirms the thesis of a special (functional) SC personality in the maintenance of international peace and security.