Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 5

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
EN
The vast majority of norms constituting public international law are ordinary norms (ius dispositivum), however, some of them are of a special nature, and this specificity places them at the two opposite poles of this specialty of law. These are the mandatory norms (ius cogens), from which no deviation is allowed, and the norms that are not legally binding, i.e., are only postulative (soft law). The aim of this paper is an attempt to answer the question whether those specific norms of public international law, i.e., those having a character of ius cogens as well as the norms of soft law, can be used as an instrument for the realization of the current political goals of participants in international relations.
PL
Znakomita większość norm składających się na prawo międzynarodowe publiczne to normy zwykłe (ius dispositivum), część jednak ma charakter szczególny, a owa specyfika lokuje je na dwóch przeciwstawnych biegunach tej specjalności prawa. Mowa o normach bezwzględnie obowiązujących (ius cogens), od których żadne odstępstwo nie jest dopuszczalne, oraz o normach prawnie niewiążących, czyli jedynie postulatywnych (soft law). Celem artykułu jest próba udzielenia odpowiedzi na pytanie, czy owe specyficzne normy prawa międzynarodowego publicznego, a zatem mające charakter ius cogens, a także normy o charakterze soft law mogą być wykorzystywane jako instrument realizacji bieżących celów politycznych uczestników stosunków międzynarodowych.
EN
The aim of this article is to provide an analysis of the ICJ’s advisory opinion of 25 February 2019 on the Chagos Archipelago. It will endeavour to answer the following questions: (i) is it consistent with the letter and the spirit of international law for the ICJ to issue advisory opinions in cases involving a dispute between states, which, due to the lack of consent from one of the states, cannot be brought before the ICJ and be settled by a judgment of that judicial body?; (ii) is such a ruling the right way to settle the issue of decolonization?; and (iii) did Brexit play any role in the case under discussion? The article begins by describing the background to the dispute between the UK and Mauritius. The focus of the analysis then shifts to the nature of advisory opinions and the 2019 ICJ advisory opinion on the Chagos Archipelago. Next, the authors discuss the possible impact of Brexit on the dispute between the UK and Mauritius itself, as well as on the UK’s international standing in general. The article concludes with reflections on voluntarism in international law. The authors conclude that de lege lata an authorized body or organization may ask the ICJ for an advisory opinion in situations where it believes that such an opinion would be useful for its work. However, such advisory opinions should not have the character of authoritative court statements made in pending disputes between sovereign states. As a consequence, such opinions should refer only to abstract legal problems, which means that in some cases the ICJ should refrain from issuing them.
EN
The article presents the influence of international treaties and international institutions on the observance of human rights in Ukraine. The first part discusses the issues of international legal protection of refugees and the issue of internally displaced persons. The second part presents the scale of the mentioned phenomenon in Ukraine. The third part provides relevant solutions to the problem in the Ukrainian legislation. On the basis of a holistic analysis of the work conclusions were formulated.
PL
Tekst pokazuje wpływ umów międzynarodowych i międzynarodowych instytucji na przestrzeganie praw człowieka na Ukrainie. W pierwszej części omówiono zagadnienia z zakresu międzynarodowoprawnej ochrony uchodźców oraz zarysowano problematykę uchodźców wewnętrznych. W drugiej części przedstawiono skalę wspomnianego zjawiska na Ukrainie. W trzeciej części zaprezentowano odpowiednie rozwiązania prawa ukraińskiego. Całość opracowania zwieńczono konkluzjami.
EN
The article aims to address the following question: in the case of a war in Ukraine, is public international law an obstacle to the application of combined international enforcement action within the framework of the collective security system under the auspices of the United Nations, or whether such impediments lie elsewhere? Russia’s presence in the Security Council as a permanent member, and thus endowed with the privilege of vetoing resolutions, paralyses this body. Therefore, the subject of the analysis is what other actions of the United Nations are permitted by law. It is important for assessing the status of the UN as a collective actor in international relations, the main objective of which, under Art. 1 of the UN Charter, is “to maintain international peace and security, and, to that end: to take effective collective measures for (…) the suppression of acts of aggression”. Bearing in mind the fact that international law is a consensual legal order, the article assesses its available compulsory mechanisms and instruments. The supplementary objective is to determine whether it is permissible to use the term “war” with regard to the armed conflict between Russia and Ukraine.
EN
The article focuses on the concept of sovereignty – an analytical category applicable to states. However, with the emergence of new actors in the international arena, especially new types of organisations such as the European Union, the question arises: whether it is possible to apply sovereignty to entities other than states. The authors assume that in the area of social sciences, it is possible to give the concept of the sovereignty a certain trait of universality, inter alia, to better reconcile the legal and political science approaches. The aim of this study is to identify and then to define an important feature of the EU, which may be sovereignty itself or its equivalent (autonomy, claim to sovereignty, quasi-sovereignty). The results of the study may lead to a better understanding of non-state subjects of public international law such as international organisations in genere, and organisations of integrational and supranational character in specie. The article is analytical, comparative and explanatory.
PL
Artykuł koncentruje się na pojęciu suwerenności – kategorii analitycznej znajdującej zastosowanie w przypadku państw. Natomiast wraz z pojawieniem się na arenie międzynarodowej nowych aktorów, zwłaszcza organizacji nowego typu, jaką jest Unia Europejska, nasuwa się pytanie, czy jest możliwe zastosowanie suwerenności do innych podmiotów niż państwa. Autorki wychodzą z założenia, że w obszarze nauk społecznych możliwe jest nadanie pojęciu suwerenności pewnego rysu uniwersalności, między innymi po to, by lepiej godzić podejście prawnicze z politologicznym. Celem zaprezentowanych w artykule rozważań jest wskazanie, a w dalszej kolejności nazwanie istotnej cechy UE, jaką może stanowić suwerenność lub jej odpowiednik (roszczenie do suwerenności, autonomia, quasi-suwerenność). Dokonane ustalenia mają prowadzić do lepszego zrozumienia niepaństwowych podmiotów prawa międzynarodowego publicznego, jakimi są organizacje międzynarodowe in genere, a organizacje o charakterze integracyjnym i ponadnarodowym in specie. Artykuł ma charakter analityczno-porównawczy i eksplanacyjny
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.