Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Judicialisation of the Sea: An Elaboration of Our Argument and Its Merits

Judicialisation of the Sea: An Elaboration of Our Argument and Its Merits AbstractIn a previous article, we theorised that courts cast a shadow that changes the bargaining behaviour of potential litigant States. When two States prefer the same judicial forum under Article 287 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (LOSC), they have fewer maritime disputes, more peaceful negotiations, and less need for judicial dispute settlement. This article elaborates on several aspects of our argument including (i) differences in legal and social science perspectives, (ii) generalizability to other courts and regions, (iii) the clarity of judicial decisions, (iv) whether accepting the same judicial forum through Article 287 declarations matters, (v) conflict management as a process, (vi) how domestic legal traditions influence Article 287 declarations, and (vii) the possibility of selection or heterogeneous effects. Our discussion helps to address some of the criticisms raised in the AJIL Unbound (2021) forum on our article and presents avenues for future analyses. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law Brill

Judicialisation of the Sea: An Elaboration of Our Argument and Its Merits

Loading next page...
 
/lp/brill/judicialisation-of-the-sea-an-elaboration-of-our-argument-and-its-l9600IF229

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Brill
Copyright
Copyright © Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands
ISSN
0927-3522
eISSN
1571-8085
DOI
10.1163/15718085-bja10127
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

AbstractIn a previous article, we theorised that courts cast a shadow that changes the bargaining behaviour of potential litigant States. When two States prefer the same judicial forum under Article 287 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (LOSC), they have fewer maritime disputes, more peaceful negotiations, and less need for judicial dispute settlement. This article elaborates on several aspects of our argument including (i) differences in legal and social science perspectives, (ii) generalizability to other courts and regions, (iii) the clarity of judicial decisions, (iv) whether accepting the same judicial forum through Article 287 declarations matters, (v) conflict management as a process, (vi) how domestic legal traditions influence Article 287 declarations, and (vii) the possibility of selection or heterogeneous effects. Our discussion helps to address some of the criticisms raised in the AJIL Unbound (2021) forum on our article and presents avenues for future analyses.

Journal

The International Journal of Marine and Coastal LawBrill

Published: Mar 30, 2023

There are no references for this article.