The Concept of Obligations Erga Omnes in International Law
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35246/jols.v36i0.424Keywords:
Erga Omnes Oligations, Objective Regimes, Enforcement of International law, Ratio Decidendi, Obiter Dictum, Barcelona Traction CaseAbstract
The International Court of Justice, as the main judicial organ of the United Nations in its ruling on the Barcelona Traction case, raised the concept of obligations Erga Omnes in international law, but this Latin term Erga Omnes has been used with different meanings and connotations. Through the extrapolation of the jurisprudence of the International Court of Justice, we note that it used the term In the context of its traditional meaning of expressing issues related to protest and legal interest at times, and the issue of international law enforcement at other times, it also used the same term to justify the application of the effects of some international treaties on states that are not party to it, or the application of United Nations decisions to non-member states. In addition to its employment of the same concept for the purpose of imposing its jurisdiction over some disputes that come out of its jurisdiction and expanding the scope of states that are bound by their decisions.
Downloads
References
1. عز الديـن الطيـب آدم، اختصاص محكمة العدل الدولية في النزاعات الدولية ومشكلة الرقابة على قرارات مجلس الأمن الدولي ، أطروحة دكتوراه ، كلية القانون ، جامعة بغداد ، 2003.
ثانياً: المصادر الأجنبية
I. Bruno Simma, Does the UN Charter Provide an Adequate Legal Basis for Individual or Collective Responses to Violations of Obligations Erga Omnes?, The Future of International Law Enforcement - New Scenarios – New Law, Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 1993.
II. Carlos Fernández de Casadevante Romani, Objective Regime, Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law, 2010.
III. Christian J. Tams, Enforcing Obligations Erga Omnes in International Law, New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005.
IV. Hugh Thirlway, The Law and Procedure of the International Court of Justice – Part One, British Yearbook of International Law, Vol. 72, No. 1, 1989.
V. Ian Brownlie, Principles of Public International Law, New York: Oxford University Press, 1990.
VI. Ian D. Seiderman, Hierarchy in International Law: The Human Rights Dimension, Antwerpen: Intersentia, 2001.
VII. International Court of Justice Reports, Case of Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro), Judgment of 11 July 1996.
VIII. International Court of Justice Reports, Case of Barcelona Traction, Light and Power Company, Limited (Belgium v. Spain), Judgment of 5 February 1970.
IX. International Court of Justice Reports, Case of Nuclear Tests (Australia v. France), Judgment of 20 December 1974.
X. Jan Anne Vos, The Function of Public International Law, Netherlands: Asser Press, 2013.
XI. Maurizio Ragazzi, The Concept of International Obligations Erga Omnes , New York: Oxford university press, 1997.
XII. Mommaerts Victoria, Obligations incombant aux Etats tiers du fait de la violation des règles impératives et des obligations erga omnes du droit international. Faculté de droit et de criminologie, Université catholique de Louvain, 2015.
XIII. Permanent Court of International Justice Publications, The Case Concerning of the Factory at Chorzow, 13 September 1928, series A - No. 17.
XIV. Tuomas Palosaari, More than Just Wishful Thinking? Existence and Identification of Environmental Obligations Erga Omnes , Master’s Thesis, Law School, University of Eastern Finland, 2018.
XV. Vaughan Lowe and Malgosia Fitzmaurice, Fifty Years of the International Court of Justice, New York: Cambridge University Press, 1996.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright and Licensing:
For all articles published in Journal of Legal Sciences, copyright is retained by the authors. Articles are licensed under an open access Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 license, meaning that anyone may download and read the paper for free. In addition, the article may be reused and quoted provided that the original published version is cited. These conditions allow for maximum use and exposure of the work.
Reproducing Published Material from other Publishers: It is absolutely essential that authors obtain permission to reproduce any published material (figures, schemes, tables or any extract of a text) which does not fall into the public domain, or for which they do not hold the copyright. Permission should be requested by the authors from the copyrightholder (usually the Publisher, please refer to the imprint of the individual publications to identify the copyrightholder).
Permission is required for: Your own works published by other Publishers and for which you did not retain copyright.
Substantial extracts from anyones' works or a series of works.
Use of Tables, Graphs, Charts, Schemes and Artworks if they are unaltered or slightly modified.
Photographs for which you do not hold copyright.
Permission is not required for: Reconstruction of your own table with data already published elsewhere. Please notice that in this case you must cite the source of the data in the form of either "Data from..." or "Adapted from...".
Reasonably short quotes are considered fair use and therefore do not require permission.
Graphs, Charts, Schemes and Artworks that are completely redrawn by the authors and significantly changed beyond recognition do not require permission.
Obtaining Permission
In order to avoid unnecessary delays in the publication process, you should start obtaining permissions as early as possible. If in any doubt about the copyright, apply for permission. Journal of Legal Sciences cannot publish material from other publications without permission.
The copyright holder may give you instructions on the form of acknowledgement to be followed; otherwise follow the style: "Reproduced with permission from [author], [book/journal title]; published by [publisher], [year].' at the end of the caption of the Table, Figure or Scheme.
