Juris Gentium Law Review

Where is the Energy: Object and Purpose of the ECT under the Sunset Clause Scrutiny

Salma Mawa Kamila — Sun, 01 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0700

This article aims to find the equilibrium between the compatibility of the object and purpose of the Energy Charter Treaty (“ECT”) and the plan of reduction of the 20-year protection of the sunset clause which becomes the hindrance of States to fully commit with their environmental obligations in the face of climate change. In so doing, a qualitative, normative, and doctrinal approach will be employed to elaborate, dissect, and analyse the issues. In producing the analysis of the issue, this article assembles primary sources (original legal texts) and secondary sources (cases, books, commentaries, preparatory work, newspaper articles, online sources) to meaningfully find the object and purpose of the ECT and its interpretation and implementation. The finding shows that the object and purpose is to enhance energy co-operation through protection of investment and safeguard towards the environment. Thus, the sunset clause reduction plan is compatible with the ECT’s object and purpose.

Binding or Not? Determining the Legal Status in International Law of UN Security Council Resolutions

José María Olvera Amado — Wed, 11 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0700

The resolutions of the United Nations Security Council, when binding on states, constitute a source of international obligations. However, when these resolutions are ambiguous, doubt arises as to whether they are indeed binding on states. In the case of Namibia, the International Court of Justice established a test to interpret a Security Council resolution and determine its binding nature. This test is controversial because not every organization has the authority to interpret such resolutions, and moreover, the test itself lacks clarity. Therefore, this article analyzes the nature of Security Council resolutions and seeks to explain when a resolution is binding on the states of the international community. The analysis focuses on elucidating the characteristics and language used in the resolutions, as well as the context and circumstances under which they are adopted, to provide a more precise guide on their binding nature.

Comparative Analysis of Death Penalty Practices Socio-Political Influences in India and Indonesia

Dravin Mahajan — Wed, 18 Sep 2024 01:52:32 +0700

The paper compares the multi-dimensional issue regarding capital punishment in India and Indonesia from legal, socio-political, and human rights perspectives. It will further probe how, in these two countries, the death penalty evolved along the lines of ancient practices, colonial inheritance, and modern developments relating to its legal frameworks. It interprets constitutional provisions, landmark judicial decisions, and recent legal reforms, providing insight into the comparative legal interpretations and procedural methods of execution. The research examines in detail statistical analyses, demographic patterns, and regional trends that bring out these variations in the practice of the death penalty. It investigates what socio-political dynamics bring about capital punishment practices, such as public opinion, media, political parties, and NGOs. Wrongful convictions and human rights abuses are assessed against ethical debates and compliance with international human rights treaties. This research attempts to highlight some of the main similarities and differences in cultural, religious, and socio-political factors influencing the death penalty in India and Indonesia. The policy recommendations and future directions are addressed at the end, with the purpose of enlightening legal and policy reforms that uphold human rights and principles of justice, to add to global discourse on capital punishment.

Should Singapore Constitutionalize the Right to Environment? A Comparative Analysis of Approaches to the Right to a Clean and Healthy Environment Elsewhere

Raelee Toh Hsuan Hui — Thu, 26 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0700

In 2022, the United Nations General Assembly introduced a resolution recognizing the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment with a recorded vote of 161 in favor and zero against. This right has also been introduced in the constitutions of 156 States. However, Singapore has yet to constitutionalize or recognize the existence of such a right in its judicial decisions; this thus raises the question of whether Singapore should do so to be in step with developments abroad. To answer this question, this paper conducts a comparative analysis across countries that have either expressly or implied recognized the right to environment, and those that have yet to (with a specific focus on South Africa, India, and Japan), and concludes that there is no need for Singapore to constitutionalize the right to environment. Instead, it considers that the effectiveness of a country’s environmental management system ultimately depends on the willpower of the government to implement environmental policies, rather than the existence of a right to environment in a country’s constitution.