解构杜德裁军争端

IF 1.1 Q2 LAW

JOURNAL OF CONFLICT & SECURITY LAW Pub Date : 2021-05-13 DOI:10.1093/jcsl/kraa023

J. D. Fry, S. Nair

{"title":"解构杜德裁军争端","authors":"J. D. Fry, S. Nair","doi":"10.1093/jcsl/kraa023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This Article explores the limits of judicial settlement of nuclear-weapon disputes through a case study of the Marshall Islands’ cases against India, Pakistan and the UK before the International Court of Justice in 2016. It posits that judicial settlement is limited mainly by the quality of the arguments and evidence submitted by the disputants, not by any limitations inherent in judicial settlement with such politically sensitive disputes. The lawyers in the Marshall Islands’ cases should have taken greater care in crafting their arguments and in tying them explicitly to Article VI of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and its customary equivalent.","PeriodicalId":43908,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF CONFLICT & SECURITY LAW","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/jcsl/kraa023","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Deconstructing Dud Disarmament Disputes\",\"authors\":\"J. D. Fry, S. Nair\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/jcsl/kraa023\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n This Article explores the limits of judicial settlement of nuclear-weapon disputes through a case study of the Marshall Islands’ cases against India, Pakistan and the UK before the International Court of Justice in 2016. It posits that judicial settlement is limited mainly by the quality of the arguments and evidence submitted by the disputants, not by any limitations inherent in judicial settlement with such politically sensitive disputes. The lawyers in the Marshall Islands’ cases should have taken greater care in crafting their arguments and in tying them explicitly to Article VI of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and its customary equivalent.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43908,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JOURNAL OF CONFLICT & SECURITY LAW\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-05-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/jcsl/kraa023\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JOURNAL OF CONFLICT & SECURITY LAW\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/jcsl/kraa023\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JOURNAL OF CONFLICT & SECURITY LAW","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jcsl/kraa023","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

本文通过对2016年马绍尔群岛在国际法院针对印度、巴基斯坦和英国的案件的案例研究，探讨了司法解决核武器争端的局限性。它认为，司法解决主要受到争议方提交的论点和证据的质量的限制，而不是受到司法解决此类政治敏感争议所固有的任何限制。马绍尔群岛案件中的律师本应更加谨慎地起草他们的论点，并将其明确与《核不扩散条约》第六条及其习惯上的对等条款联系起来。

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

Deconstructing Dud Disarmament Disputes

This Article explores the limits of judicial settlement of nuclear-weapon disputes through a case study of the Marshall Islands’ cases against India, Pakistan and the UK before the International Court of Justice in 2016. It posits that judicial settlement is limited mainly by the quality of the arguments and evidence submitted by the disputants, not by any limitations inherent in judicial settlement with such politically sensitive disputes. The lawyers in the Marshall Islands’ cases should have taken greater care in crafting their arguments and in tying them explicitly to Article VI of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and its customary equivalent.

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

JOURNAL OF CONFLICT & SECURITY LAW LAW-

CiteScore

1.30

自引率

25.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： The Journal of Conflict & Security Law is a thrice yearly refereed journal aimed at academics, government officials, military lawyers and lawyers working in the area, as well as individuals interested in the areas of arms control law, the law of armed conflict (international humanitarian law) and collective security law. The Journal covers the whole spectrum of international law relating to armed conflict from the pre-conflict stage when the issues include those of arms control, disarmament, and conflict prevention and discussions of the legality of the resort to force, through to the outbreak of armed conflict when attention turns to the coverage of the conduct of military operations and the protection of non-combatants by international humanitarian law.