如何把一个简单的案件复杂化:印度洋海域划界是非曲直的判断(索马里诉肯尼亚)

IF 1.3 3区社会学 Q1 LAW

International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law Pub Date : 2022-04-22 DOI:10.1163/15718085-bja10094

Massimo Lando, Jessica Joly Hébert

{"title":"如何把一个简单的案件复杂化:印度洋海域划界是非曲直的判断(索马里诉肯尼亚)","authors":"Massimo Lando, Jessica Joly Hébert","doi":"10.1163/15718085-bja10094","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nOn 12 October 2021, the International Court of Justice (ICJ or Court) issued its judgment on the merits in Maritime Delimitation in the Indian Ocean (Somalia v. Kenya). The judgment raises questions of significance in respect of two issues upon which this comment elaborates. First, the Court failed to distinguish adequately between the notions of acquiescence and tacit agreement, which were at the basis of Kenya’s claim for an agreed boundary running along a parallel of latitude. Second, in drawing the boundary as requested by Somalia, the Court departed from its usual approach concerning the adjustment of the provisional equidistance line established in the first stage of its three-stage delimitation process.","PeriodicalId":45173,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How to Complicate a Simple Case: The Judgment on the Merits in Maritime Delimitation in the Indian Ocean (Somalia v. Kenya)\",\"authors\":\"Massimo Lando, Jessica Joly Hébert\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/15718085-bja10094\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nOn 12 October 2021, the International Court of Justice (ICJ or Court) issued its judgment on the merits in Maritime Delimitation in the Indian Ocean (Somalia v. Kenya). The judgment raises questions of significance in respect of two issues upon which this comment elaborates. First, the Court failed to distinguish adequately between the notions of acquiescence and tacit agreement, which were at the basis of Kenya’s claim for an agreed boundary running along a parallel of latitude. Second, in drawing the boundary as requested by Somalia, the Court departed from its usual approach concerning the adjustment of the provisional equidistance line established in the first stage of its three-stage delimitation process.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45173,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/15718085-bja10094\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15718085-bja10094","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

2021年10月12日，国际法院就印度洋海洋划界案(索马里诉肯尼亚)的是非曲直作出判决。该判决就本评论所阐述的两个问题提出了重要的问题。第一，法院未能充分区分默许和默契的概念，这是肯尼亚要求沿纬度平行线划定商定边界的基础。第二，在按照索马里的要求划定边界时，法院在调整其三阶段划界过程第一阶段所确定的临时等距线方面，偏离了其通常的做法。

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

How to Complicate a Simple Case: The Judgment on the Merits in Maritime Delimitation in the Indian Ocean (Somalia v. Kenya)

On 12 October 2021, the International Court of Justice (ICJ or Court) issued its judgment on the merits in Maritime Delimitation in the Indian Ocean (Somalia v. Kenya). The judgment raises questions of significance in respect of two issues upon which this comment elaborates. First, the Court failed to distinguish adequately between the notions of acquiescence and tacit agreement, which were at the basis of Kenya’s claim for an agreed boundary running along a parallel of latitude. Second, in drawing the boundary as requested by Somalia, the Court departed from its usual approach concerning the adjustment of the provisional equidistance line established in the first stage of its three-stage delimitation process.

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

International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law LAW-

CiteScore

2.20

自引率

15.40%

发文量

期刊介绍： The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law addresses all aspects of marine and coastal law. In addition to normal in-depth scholarly articles, the Journal contains a distinctive feature: a vigorous ‘Current Legal Developments’ section which provides notes and commentary on international treaties and case law, national statute law, national court decisions, and other aspects of state practice; includes the relevant original documentation where appropriate; and monitors developments in relevant international organizations at a global and regional level. The format also includes a book review section.