LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Castellino, Joshua (2008)
Publisher: Brooklyn Law School
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects:
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • * Professor of Law and Head of Law Department, Middlesex University, London, England. Ph.D., International Law, University of Hull, England (1999); M.A., International Law and Politics, University of Hull, England (1996); B. Comm., Bombay University, India (1995).
    • 1. See BRAD R. ROTH, GOVERNMENTAL ILLEGITIMACY IN INTERNATIONAL LAW 2 (2001) (examining the process through which this “legitimacy” is validated in international law). See also JAMES L. BRIERLY, THE BASIS OF OBLIGATION IN INTERNATIONAL LAW AND OTHER PAPERS 47 (Hersch Lauterpacht & C.H.M. Waldock eds., 1958) (explaining the nexus between the individual and the state, defined on the basis of a fixed “territorial compartment”).
    • 2. See HEDLEY BULL, THE ANARCHICAL SOCIETY: A STUDY OF ORDER IN WORLD POLITICS 74-94 (2d ed. 1995).
    • 3. See Vernon Van Dyke, The Individual, the State and Ethnic Communities in Political Theory, in WILL KYMLICKA, THE RIGHTS OF MINORITY CULTURES 31 (1st ed. 1995); Vernon Van Dyke, Human Rights and the Rights of Groups, 18 AM. J. POL. SCI. 725 (1974). See, e.g., Cindy L. Holder & Jeff J. Corntassel, Indigenous Peoples and Multicultural Citizenship: Bridging Collective and Individual Rights, 24 HUM. RTS. Q. 126 (2002).
    • 4. Thomas M. Franck, The Emerging Right to Democratic Governance, 86 AM. J. INT'L L. 46 (1992).
    • 5. See generally Lea Brilmayer, Secession and Self-Determination: A Territorial Interpretation, 16 YALE J. INT'L L. 177 (1991) (explaining the importance of the territorial state, especially the clash between self-determination and territorial integrity).
    • 23. Shaw, supra note 22, at 97.
    • 24. See generally ORDER & JUSTICE IN INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS (Rosemary Foot, John Lewis Gaddis & Andrew Hurrell eds., 2003) (discussing the importance of order).
    • 25. See BENYAMIN NEUBERGER, NATIONAL SELF-DETERMINATION IN POSTCOLONIAL AFRICA 4 (1986); Rosalyn Higgins, Grotius and the Development of International Law in the United Nations Period, in HUGO GROTIUS AND INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS 267 (Hedley Bull, Benedict Kingsbury & Adam Roberts eds., 1992).
    • 26. See generally JAMES MUIRHEAD, HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION TO THE PRIVATE LAW OF ROME 89-212 (Henry Goudy & Alexander Grant eds., 3d ed. 1916); JOLOWICZ & NICOLAS, supra note 20, at 259-63 (discussing the possessory interdicts).
    • 27. Joshua Castellino & Steve Allen, The Doctrine of Uti Possidetis: Crystallization of Modern Post-Colonial Identity, 43 GERMAN Y.B. INT'L L. 205, 205 (2000).
    • 28. John Bassett Moore, Memorandum on Uti Possidetis: Costa Rica-Panama Arbitration 1911, in THE COLLECTED WORKS OF JOHN BASSETT MOORE 328, 328 (1944).
    • 29. In the late Republic, the Praetor Urbanus was responsible for the administration of jus civile and the Praetor Peregrinus held the same position with regard to jus gentium. See MUIRHEAD, supra note 26, at 219.
    • 30. See W.W. BUCKLAND, A TEXT-BOOK OF ROMAN LAW FROM AUGUSTUS TO JUSTINIAN 205-08 (3d ed. 1963). This passage also discusses the extent to which res nullius can come under private ownership through occupatio, or occupation. See id.
    • 31. See JOSHUA CASTELLINO & STEVE ALLEN, TITLE TO TERRITORY IN INTERNATIONAL LAW: A TEMPORAL ANALYSIS 5 (2003).
    • 32. See JOLOWICZ & NICOLAS, supra note 20, at 259 n.2; MUIRHEAD, supra note 26, at 315-39.
    • 86. OPPENHEIM'S INTERNATIONAL LAW, PEACE, supra note 74, at 687 (internal citations omitted).
    • 87. Western Sahara, Advisory Opinion, 1975 I.C.J. 12, 39 (Oct. 16).
    • 88. See id. at 83-102 (separate opinion of Judge Ammoun).
    • 89. OPPENHEIM'S INTERNATIONAL LAW, PEACE, supra note 74, at 688-89.
    • 90. Id. at 689. This notion itself derives directly from the Roman law governing private property. See generally W.W. BUCKLAND & A. MCNAIR, ROMAN LAW AND COMMON LAW: A COMPARISON OUTLINE 70 (2d ed. 1952).
    • 91. OPPENHEIM'S INTERNATIONAL LAW, PEACE, supra note 74, at 689.
    • 92. See id.
    • 93. See KORMAN, supra note 54, at 41-66 (discussing the rights of so-called European states and “barbarian” political communities.). Robert Jackson has advanced a similar point in a more contemporary context, suggesting that many states in Africa could be Determination: The Stratification of the Western Saharan “Self,” supra note 145, at 135 (discussing the Court's examination of a diverse set of documents and practices).
    • 244. See CASTELLINO & ALLEN, TITLE TO TERRITORY IN INTERNATIONAL LAW: A TEMPORAL ANALYSIS, supra note 31, at 151-52.
    • 245. See HODGES, supra note 202, at 210-11. See, e.g., Territorial Dispute (Libya/Chad), 1994 I.C.J. 6, 16 (Feb. 3); Frontier Dispute (Burk. Faso v. Mali), 1986 I.C.J. at 620-24.
    • 246. Western Sahara, 1975 I.C.J. 12.
    • 247. See id. at 14.
    • 248. See id. at 40.
    • 249. See id. at 41.
    • 250. See id. The ICJ's ruling would be especially important in the event Mauritania dropped its claim, especially with a backdrop of secret negotiations between the parties in a bid to dismember the Western Sahara. See JARAT CHOPRA, UNITED NATIONS DETERMINATION OF THE WESTERN SAHARAN SELF (1994). See generally JOHN DAMIS, CONFLICT IN NORTHWEST AFRICA: THE WESTERN SAHARA DISPUTE (1983).
    • 251. See Franck, The Stealing of the Sahara, supra note 197, at 713-14.
    • 252. Frontier Dispute (Burk. Faso v. Mali), 1986 I.C.J. 554 (Dec. 22).
    • 253. Id. at 586.
    • 269. See Arbitral Award Made by the King of Spain on 23 December 1906 (Hond. v. Nicar.), 1960 I.C.J. 192, 199-200 (Nov. 18) (quoting an English translation of the Gámez-Bonilla Treaty of 1894). Pursuant to article III of the Gámez-Bonilla Treaty, the dispute between Honduras and Nicaragua was submitted for arbitration to King Alfonso XIII of Spain as sole arbitrator. See id. at 200. After the award was handed down on December 23, 1906, Nicaragua challenged its validity in 1912. See id. at 203. After concerted boundary incidents with the Organization of American States mediating, the parties agreed to submit the dispute to the ICJ in 1957. See id.
    • 270. See Territorial and Maritime Dispute between Nicaragua and Honduras in the Caribbean Sea (Nicar. v. Hond.), para. 150 (Oct. 8, 2007), available at http://www.icjcij.org/docket/files/120/14075.pdf (last visited Feb. 5, 2008).
    • 271. See id.
    • 272. See id. para. 151.
    • 273. See id. para. 156.
    • 274. See id. para. 158.
    • 275. See id. para. 157.
    • 276. See Territorial and Maritime Dispute between Nicaragua and Honduras in the Caribbean Sea (Nicar. v. Hond.), para. 157 (Oct. 8, 2007), available at http://www.icjcij.org/docket/files/120/14075.pdf (last visited Feb. 5, 2008) (internal citation omitted).
    • 290. Id.
    • 291. Frontier Dispute (Benin/Niger), 2005 I.C.J. 90, 94-103 (July 12).
    • 292. Id. at 108.
    • 293. See id. at 108-09.
    • 294. See id. at 110.
    • 295. See generally DOV RONEN, DAHOMEY: BETWEEN TRADITION AND MODERNITY (1975) (concerning the declaration of the independence of Dahomey, which subsequently became Benin); WILLIAM F.S. MILES, HAUSALAND DIVIDED: COLONIALISM AND INDEPENDENCE IN NIGERIA AND NIGER (1994) (concerning the independence of Niger and the division between Nigeria and Niger based on colonial linguistics).
    • 296. See id. at 108-11.
    • 297. See id. at 141-42. See generally Fabio Spadi, The International Court of Justice Judgment in the Benin-Niger Border Dispute: The Interplay of Titles and “Effectivités” Under the Uti Possidetis Juris Principle, 18 LEIDEN J. INT'L L. 777 (2005).
    • 298. See generally Kingsbury, supra note 13, at 216-34.
    • 299. See generally SUREDA, supra note 123, at 95-101 (discussing the analysis for determining entitlements to self-determination). See also Frederic L. Kirgis, Jr., The Degrees of Self-Determination in the UN Era, 88 AM. J. INT'L L. 304 (1994).
    • 300. See ALEXANDRA XANTHAKI, INDIGENOUS RIGHTS AND UNITED NATIONS STANDARDS 131-76 (2007).
    • 301. See JÉRÉMIE GILBERT, INDIGENOUS PEOPLES' LAND RIGHTS UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW: FROM VICTIMS TO ACTORS (2006).
    • 302. See, e.g., Albert Barume, Indigenous Battling for Land Rights: The Case of the Ogiek of Kenya, in INTERNATIONAL LAW AND INDIGENOUS PEOPLES 365 (Joshua Castellino & Niamh Walsh eds., 2005).
    • 303. See Bradford, supra note 44.
    • 304. See ICESCR, supra note 62, art. 1 (“All peoples have the right of selfdetermination.”); ICCPR, supra note 62, art. 1 (sharing a common article 1). It would be difficult to construct an objective standard to measure “colonial” treatment in the modern tary-General Annan in a 2005 report. See The Secretary General, In Larger Freedom: Towards Development, Security and Human Rights for All: Report of the SecretaryGeneral, ¶ 135, U.N. Doc. A/59/2005 (Mar. 21, 2005).
    • 331. See generally GERTRUDE EZORSKY, RACISM & JUSTICE: THE CASE FOR AFFIRMATIVE ACTION (1991) (providing a discussion of affirmative action and its interesting legal challenges); MICHAEL BANTON, INTERNATIONAL ACTION AGAINST RACIAL DISCRIMINATION 87-88 (1996) (addressing the value of affirmative action for international human rights law); THE AFFIRMATIVE ACTION DEBATE (Steven M. Cahn ed., 2d ed. 2002) (providing a more current offering on the affirmative action debate, especially as played out in the United States).
    • 332. See Gilbert, Autonomy and Minority Groups: A Right in International Law?, supra note 219, at 307 (“[S]elf-determination is increasingly recognized as having an internal aspect that requires full and effective participation by all groups in society.”).
    • 333. See generally TIMO MAKKONEN, IDENTITY, DIFFERENCE AND OTHERNESS: THE CONCEPTS OF “PEOPLE,” “INDIGENOUS PEOPLE” AND “MINORITY” IN INTERNATIONAL LAW (2000).
    • 334. See Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, G.A. Res. 61/295, U.N. Doc. A/RES/61/295 (Sept. 13, 2007). The Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples was adopted by a vote of 143 (in favor) to 4 (against) with 11 abstentions. See Press Release, U.N., General Assembly Adopts Declaration On Rights Of Indigenous Peoples; “Major Step Forward” Towards Human Rights For All, Says President (Sept. 13, 2007), available at http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2007/ga10612.doc.htm. See
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article