Treaty Interpretation: Theory and Reality

The inconsistencies, and conflicting theories of treaty interpretation, constitute the foundation for the present inquiry. The thesis defended is that neither the judicial praxis nor international legislation, individually or together, have provided a realistic solution to the fundamental challenge facing the International Court of Justice of finding the right balance between stability and progressive development of international law. This fundamental thesis reemerges at several key portions of the text, when the author attempts to prove that existing standards of treaty interpretation are inadequate, on the ground they do not lead toward that degree of predictability and certainty, which he feels is required by governments in this nuclear age. Accordingly, the norms of treaty interpretation must be reexamined, but with a definite goal in mind, namely, the new international law of \u27social\u27 interdependence \u27 will prevail over positivistic, classical law

The Legal Regime of Enclosed or Semi-Enclosed Seas: The Particular Case of the Mediterranean

The 1982 United Nations Law of the Sea Convention has not only codified the relatively scant corpus of international law relating to the rubrics of enclosed semi-enclosed seas, but it has also given some guidance toward the future evolution of this unique body of sea law. Accordingly the underlying thesis advanced by a number of distinguished authors at a conference - convened by the Inter-University Center in Dubrovnik - is that the Law of the Sea Convention does not represent a definitive or complete corpus of law; rather the general articles will acquire substance from state practice, bilateral agreements between border and adjacent states, and multilateral conventions that apply to such areas as the Mediterranean Sea, the Black Sea, the Aegean Sea, the Adriatic Sea, Ionian Sea, the Bosporus, the Sea of Marmara and the Dardanelles. Precise rules of law are emerging from such general concepts as the continental shelf, the exclusive economic zone, and conservation of natural resources, along with the rights of bordering states to exploit their off-shore areas without damaging the delicate ecosystems. In reality, the attempt is made to detect rules of law that are evolving from the convention\u27s general-type articles that seek future cooperation. Hence, it is valid to conceive of this large volume as a search for emerging law within the scope of semi-enclosed seas. Within this context, the contributors are especially conscious of continental shelf regions, because of the delicate chain of life and the fishery resources they support against competing interests, primarily oil and gas drilling. Thus, it is accurate to conclude that all of the authors are dedicated to the preservation of the environment within the semi-enclosed seas around the Mediterranean Basin. As such, a number of unique, though closely related, legal problems confront these bordering states. Because of the limited areas of enclosed seas, it is impossible for states to adopt a complete two hundred mile exclusive economic zone or to claim the full extent of a continental shelf, which involves the rights of adjacent states

ADR-based Workplace Conflict Management Systems: A Case of American Exceptionalism

[Excerpt] The diffusion of ADR-based conflict management systems is a development increasingly highlighted in the literature. Organizations are seen as putting in place multiple procedures and practices so that different varieties of workplace conflict can be effectively addressed. Just why organizations are electing to introduce these integrated bundles of innovative conflict management practices is a matter of debate, but many view the development as transforming the manner in which workplace problems are managed in modern organizations, with some even pronouncing that it amounts to the rewriting of the social contract at work (Lipsky and Seeber 2006). This paper argues that to the extent to which conflict management systems are being diffused, it is occurring mainly in the USA became the institutional context for the management of the employment relationship creates considerable incentives for the adoption of ADR-inspired conflict management innovations. Other Anglo-American countries, where it might be thought reasonable to expect a similar pattern of ADR innovation at the workplace to emerge, are not experiencing any discernible shift towards conflict management systems inside organizations. It is suggested that in the absence of institutional incentives to adopt workplace management systems, organizations are unlikely to opt for radical conflict management innovations. At the same time, drawing on research in the Irish context, it is argued that tried-and-tested conflict management practices do change over time, with an incremental and evolutionary approach adopted by some organizations to upgrade practices considered the most interesting development. The paper is organized as follows. The first section assesses why the emergence of integrated conflict management systems in organizations is considered to be a significant new development in the USA. The next section evaluates evidence and suggests that a similar pattern of workplace conflict management innovation is not occurring in other Anglo-American countries. After this evaluation, it is suggested that the institutional context in the USA creates uniquely strong incentives for organizations to adopt integrated bundles of ADR practices at the workplace - causing the emergence of conflict management systems to be a case of ‘American exceptionalism’. The following section argues that in the absence of strong institutional incentives to do so, organizations are unlikely to move radically away from established conflict management systems. The penultimate section explains that even in the presence of organizational inertia, conflict management practices seldom stay the same and uses research in the Irish context to suggest that organizations sometimes use an evolutionary approach to upgrade conflict management practices in an incremental yet continuous manner. The final section presents a number of case studies of this evolutionary approach to conflict management innovation. The conclusions bring together the arguments of the paper

Book Review

Reviewing Ruth C. Lawson, International Regional Organizations: Constitutional Foundations, Praeger & Co., 196