国际法中裁决的替代方案:联合国安理会伊黎伊斯兰国和基地组织制裁制度监察员案例研究

IF 2.7 2区社会学 Q1 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

American Journal of International Law Pub Date : 2022-11-22 DOI:10.1017/ajil.2022.81

Andrej Lang

{"title":"国际法中裁决的替代方案:联合国安理会伊黎伊斯兰国和基地组织制裁制度监察员案例研究","authors":"Andrej Lang","doi":"10.1017/ajil.2022.81","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The “temporary golden age” of international courts is likely over. States seeking to provide oversight mechanisms and individual remedies at the international level are likely to opt for less intrusive and more flexible alternatives to adjudication. This Article analyzes the phenomenon of international complaint mechanisms through a detailed case study of the Ombudsperson to the ISIL and Al-Qaida sanctions regime. The analysis reveals an in-built tension between principle and pragmatism: the Ombudsperson's institutional design falls short of the requirements that are essential for adjudication, but it nevertheless proves to be a surprisingly effective remedy for persons wrongfully listed. The Article makes the case for the establishment of such bodies, despite some of their inherent shortcomings.","PeriodicalId":47841,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of International Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Alternatives to Adjudication in International Law: A Case Study of the Ombudsperson to the ISIL and Al-Qaida Sanctions Regime of the UN Security Council\",\"authors\":\"Andrej Lang\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/ajil.2022.81\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract The “temporary golden age” of international courts is likely over. States seeking to provide oversight mechanisms and individual remedies at the international level are likely to opt for less intrusive and more flexible alternatives to adjudication. This Article analyzes the phenomenon of international complaint mechanisms through a detailed case study of the Ombudsperson to the ISIL and Al-Qaida sanctions regime. The analysis reveals an in-built tension between principle and pragmatism: the Ombudsperson's institutional design falls short of the requirements that are essential for adjudication, but it nevertheless proves to be a surprisingly effective remedy for persons wrongfully listed. The Article makes the case for the establishment of such bodies, despite some of their inherent shortcomings.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47841,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Journal of International Law\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Journal of International Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/ajil.2022.81\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of International Law","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ajil.2022.81","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

摘要

国际法院的“暂时黄金时代”可能已经结束。寻求在国际一级提供监督机制和个别补救办法的国家可能会选择侵入性较低和较灵活的办法来代替裁决。本文通过对伊黎伊斯兰国和基地组织制裁制度监察员的详细案例研究，分析了国际申诉机制现象。分析揭示了原则和实用主义之间的内在紧张关系:监察员的制度设计没有达到裁决所必需的要求，但它仍然证明是对被错误列入名单的人的一种令人惊讶的有效补救办法。该条说明了设立这类机构的理由，尽管它们有一些固有的缺点。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Alternatives to Adjudication in International Law: A Case Study of the Ombudsperson to the ISIL and Al-Qaida Sanctions Regime of the UN Security Council

Abstract The “temporary golden age” of international courts is likely over. States seeking to provide oversight mechanisms and individual remedies at the international level are likely to opt for less intrusive and more flexible alternatives to adjudication. This Article analyzes the phenomenon of international complaint mechanisms through a detailed case study of the Ombudsperson to the ISIL and Al-Qaida sanctions regime. The analysis reveals an in-built tension between principle and pragmatism: the Ombudsperson's institutional design falls short of the requirements that are essential for adjudication, but it nevertheless proves to be a surprisingly effective remedy for persons wrongfully listed. The Article makes the case for the establishment of such bodies, despite some of their inherent shortcomings.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

American Journal of International Law Multiple-

CiteScore

3.50

自引率

16.30%

发文量

期刊介绍： AJIL is a leading peer-reviewed journal, published quarterly since 1907. It features articles, essays, editorial comments, current developments, and book reviews by pre-eminent scholars and practitioners from around the world addressing developments in public and private international law and foreign relations law. The Journal also contains analyses of decisions by national and international courts and tribunals as well as a section on contemporary U.S. practice in international law. AJIL and AJIL Unbound are indispensable for all professionals working in international law, economics, trade, and foreign affairs.