This dissertation analyzes whether or not the principle of systemic integration - as expounded in Article 31(3)(c) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties - contributes to attainment of a coherent international legal system. For this purpose, the book considers three general ideas: the "unity" of the international legal system and fragmentation; the general rule on treaty interpretation and the principle of systemic integration; and the role of systemic integration in the achievement of coherence. Each one involves specific issues and considerations which ultimately assist in addressing the main question as to the usefulness of the principle in the curtailment of fragmentation in the international legal system. Dissertation. (Series: Cologne Studies in International and European Law / Kolner Schriften zum internationalen und europaischen Recht - Vol. 24)
The expectation of reciprocity continues to be an important factor when states' consider their legal obligations in armed conflicts. In this monograph, Peeler looks at the text and negotiations around the 1949 Geneva Conventions and the Protocols Additional to the Geneva Conventions from 1977 to demonstrate the many places where international humanitarian law maintains expectations of reciprocity. This complements an examination of US policy regarding its Prisoner of War obligations in both the Vietnam War and the Global War on Terror, demonstrating how states make use of the expectation of reciprocity found in international humanitarian law to respond to continued non-compliance by an enemy.
This is the first comprehensive account of the modern international law of treaty interpretation expressed in 1969 Vienna Convention, Articles 31-33. As stated by the anonymous referee, it is the most theoretically advanced and analytically refined work yet accomplished on this topic. The style of writing is clear and concise, and the organisation of the book meets the demands of scholars and practitioners alike.
Small Powers at Sea presents an analysis of the marine policies of Denmark, Norway and Sweden from the First UN Conference on the Law of the Sea in 1958 until the conclusion of the Third UN Conference on the Law of the Sea in 1982. The main substantive chapters cover security aspects, continental shelf policies, fisheries, shipping and marine environment as well as deep seabed mining. The study is comparative and conducted from a political science perspective, discussing how to explain the rather divergent Scandinavian marine policies. A state-centric rational actor model can explain much of the variance, but other factors, including cognitive ones and the role of domestic politics, must be included to obtain a fuller understanding of Scandinavian policies over time and across issue areas.