The commentary analyses the proceedings before the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea in the case of the Dutch ship “Arctic Sunrise”, which was arrested in the exclusive economic zone of the Russian Federation, and the Tribunal’s decision on provisional measures to release the vessel and its crew. For the first time in its history, the Russian Federation boycotted interstate proceedings in the international court. The author addresses the possible consequences of this decision.
By a decision of 20 July 2012 in the case Belgium v. Senegal the International Court of Justice has ruled on whether Senegal was in violation of its obligations to prosecute or extradite former president Habré of the Republic of Chad under the Convention Against Torture as well as under customary international law. Based on its findings that it has no jurisdiction to entertain the claims of Belgium relating to the alleged breaches by Senegal of its obligations under customary international law and that Belgium has standing as a State party to the Convention Against Torture to bring a claim to the Court, the ICJ decided the case on the merits. By implementing the obligations provided for in the Convention, in the context of achieving the object and purpose of that instrument, the ICJ has concluded that Senegal was in breach of the Convention and that it must without delay submit the case to its competent authorities for the purpose of prosecution, if it does not extradite Mr. Habré.
The article deals with the WTO dispute of Denmark (on behalf of the Faroe Islands) with the European Union concerning fishery for herring in the North-East Atlantic and the prohibition by the EU of bringing into the territory of the EU herring and mackerel caught under the control of the Faroe Islands. The author analyzes the perspectives of the claim submitted by Denmark to the WTO against the EU and explains the legal status of the Faroe Islands which has caused the unusual situation on the claimant’s part. The article also contains an analysis of the parallel proceeding initiated by Denmark (on behalf of the Faroe Islands) within the framework of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea and its possible consequences.
Nikola Gnatovsky, Olena Kucher
This commentary to the judgment by the Grand Chamber of European Court of Human Rights in the case Vinter and others v. the United Kingdom discusses the circumstances of the case and its history at the European Court of Human Rights. Primary attention is paid to the contents of the Grand Chamber judgment, pursuant to which the absence of an effective mechanism of release and possibility of review of the life sentence is a violation of Article 3 of the European Convention of Human Rights, as well as to the practical consequences of the judgment.
The case commentary analyses and subjects to criticism the judgment on 19 October 2012 of the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights in Catan and Others v Moldova and Russia. The author analyzes the judgment that there had been no violation of Article 2 of Protocol 1 (P1-2, the right to education) of the European Convention on Human Rights by Moldova, but that there had been a violation by Russia.
The article provides an analysis of the statistics on judgments of the European Court of Human Rights in 2012–2013 on applications lodged against Russia. Statistics and the main activities of the European Court of Human Rights are presented.
In order for the International Court of Justice to be able to entertain a counter-claim, the latter must come within its jurisdiction and be directly connected with the subject-matter of the principal claim. As to the possibility of different bases of jurisdiction with regard to the principal claim and the counter-claim, the character of the act which establishes the Court’s jurisdiction in relation to the principal claim is decisive. The Court’s finding of jurisdiction concerning a counter-claim has the force of res judicata. A direct connection is assessed in fact and in law in the context of the circumstances of a case. In deciding whether or not a direct connection exists, the Court has taken into account a range of factors: the geographical area and time period to which the alleged facts relate; the nature of these facts; applicable rules of international law; and the legal aims pursued by the parties. If a counter-claim meets the criteria of jurisdiction and direct connection, it becomes part of the proceedings.
The article is focused on questions of the international legal validity and practical significance of the «shared responsibility» concept, developed to solve the problem of invocation of responsibility by several subjects of international relations for concerted action in violation of international law. To this end, the article analyzes current trends of the invocation of international responsibility in the light of decisions of international judicial bodies.
The UN General Assembly’s Resolution 377(V) “Uniting for Peace” is considered to be either “the last resort” of peace maintenance in case of the UN Security Council’s impotence, or an illegal attempt to redistribute the powers between the Security Council and the General Assembly. The article examines provisions of the resolution and sums up some opinions on it in the scholarship of international law. It analyzes on this basis the attitude of the International Court of Justice towards the “Uniting for Peace” resolution, as revealed in the course of its practice.
Dmitry Skrynka, Oleksandra Brovko
The article deals with current shortcomings of traditional methods of settlement of investment disputes as compared to the advantages of the WTO dispute settlement system. The authors have identified and elaborated upon the need to reform the investment dispute settlement regime. Also, the authors point out that there are efficient alternatives to this system. Based on the analysis of procedural issues, the authors demonstrate that the idea of using WTO dispute settlement procedures for the settlement of investment disputes has solid ground.
Interview with Carl Baudenbacher.