Peculiarities of International Law in the age of globalization.

Today IL is more connected with politics and practical social problems. More practical legal system.

By Lukashuk – international law has its own tools to solve economic and policy issues.

Peculiarity of present day – connection with economic and financial problems.

Universalization

In 1960’s it was predictable.

Was of political character.

Was a process connected with creation of new branches.

Globalization

Globalization is not predictable.

Is in economic sphere.

The following peculiarity – subject of international law – increase of legal aspect.

The new universal consciousness is created.

In globalization – new methods, new approaches.

A global civil society is formed.

Process of fragmentation – combination of ergo omnes + treaties.

The Corfu Channel Case (uk V. Albania) – Judgment of icj, 1949.

The Corfu Channel Case (United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland v. People's Republic of Albania) was a case brought against Albania by the UK, suing for compensation after, on 22 October 1946, two British destroyers hit sea-mines in Albanian waters at the straits of Corfu, damaging them and killing naval personnel during the Corfu Channel Incident.

The International Court of Justice ordered Albania to pay the UK £843,947 in compensation. This is equivalent to £25.2 million in present-day terms.[1]

This was the first case brought before the ICJ.[2]

The Corfu Channel case established that states must meet a preponderance of the evidence standard to prevail before the ICJ.

http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/1/1647.pdf

Fragmentation of International Law.

Fragmentation - diversification and expansion of international law.

Negative – conflict between new institutions and branches of IL.

Positive – fragmentation means that IL has contiguity, mechanisms that transform itself into a new system.

http://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/draft%20articles/1_9_2006.pdf

North Sea Continental Shelf (Federal Republic of Germany/Denmark; Federal Republic of Germany/Netherlands) – Judgment of ICJ, 1969.

http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/51/5537.pdf

Humanitarian Intervention and “R 2 P” in present-day International Law.

R 2 P: responsibility to protect states must protect their nationals from genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes

Гуманитарная интервенция - не совсем, как по мне, правовое понятие. США использует. Что-то вроде оправдания для вторжения в другое государство для защиты кого-то там на территории этого другого государства

International Court of Justice advisory opinion on Kosovo's declaration of independence, 2010.

Accordance with International Law of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence In Respect of Kosovo was a request for an advisory opinion referred to the International Court of Justice by the UN General Assembly regarding the 2008 Kosovo declaration of independence. The territory of Kosovo is the subject of a dispute between Serbia and the Republic of Kosovo established by the declaration. This was the first case regarding a unilateral declaration of independence to be brought before the court.

The court delivered its advisory opinion on 22 July 2010; by a vote of 10 to 4, it declared that "the adoption of the declaration of independence of the 17 February 2008 did not violate general international law because international law contains no 'prohibition on declarations of independence'":[2] nor did the adoption of the declaration of independence violate UN Security Council Resolution 1244, since this did not describe Kosovo's final status, nor had the Security Council reserved for itself the decision on final status.[3] There were many reactions to the decision, with most countries which already recognise Kosovo hailing the decision and saying it was "unique" and does not set a precedent; while many countries which do not recognise Kosovo said they would not be doing so as the ruling could set a precedent of endorsing secession in other places.

The 2008 Kosovo declaration of independence was adopted on 17 February 2008 in a meeting of the Assembly of Kosovo.[4] It was the second declaration of independence by Kosovo's ethnic-Albanian political institutions, the first having been proclaimed on 7 September 1990.[5]

Serbia decided to seek international validation and support for its stance that the declaration of independence was illegal at the International Court of Justice.

Whether the declaration was in fact an official act of the Provisional Institutions of Self-Government was unclear; in the end, the Court determined it was issued by "representatives of the people of Kosovo" acting outside the normal Provisional Institutions of Self-Government.[6] This was significant, since the Serbian argument was that the Kosovo Provisional Institutions of Self-Government had exceeded the authority given to them by the Constitutional Framework (promulgated by UNMIK). In September 2012, international supervision ended,[7] and Kosovo became responsible for its own governance.[8]