ULUSLARARASI HUKUKTA SESSİZLİK

Yıl 2024, Cilt: 32 Sayı: 3, 1731 - 1776, 18.09.2024

Neslihan Özkerim Güner , Zeynep Erhan Bulut

https://doi.org/10.15337/suhfd.1480579

Öz

Uluslararası hukuk kuralları devletlerin iradeleri ile oluşur, ancak bu irade her zaman açıkça belirtilmeyebilir. Devletlerin belli bir duruma sessiz kalmaları zımni irade beyanı olarak yorumlanabilir. Dolayısıyla sessizlik de bazen açık irade beyanı gibi hukuki sonuçlar doğurabilir. Bu husus ulusal hukukta belli alanlarda düzenlenmiştir, ancak uluslararası hukukta sessizliğin koşulları ve sonuçlarına ilişkin açık bir düzenleme bulunmamaktadır. Dolayısıyla somut olaydaki özelliklerine göre sessizliğe anlam yüklenmektedir. Bunu özelikle uluslararası yargı kararlarında görmekteyiz. Makalede sessizliğin doğurduğu hukuki sonuçlar bakımından kabullenme, estoppel, zamanaşımı ile kazanım ve zımni andlaşma kavramları incelenmiştir. Sessizlik her somut olayda farklı anlama gelebilir, bazen sessiz kalan devlete hak doğururken bazen yükümlülük yükleyebilir. Ayrıca sessiz kalma bir hakkın kullanımından vazgeçme anlamına gelebilir. Bu yüzden sessiz kalmanın nedenleri ve kim tarafından ne amaçla sessiz kalındığının önemi de bulunmaktadır. Uluslararası örf ve adet hukuku kurallarının oluşumu ve bunlarla bağlanma durumunda da sessizliğin sonuçları bulunmaktadır. Son başlıkta özellikle evrensel, bölgesel ve özel örf ve adet hukuk kurallarında sessizliğin anlamı tartışılmış, aralarındaki farklar ortaya koyulmuştur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Kabullenme, estoppel, örf ve adet hukuku

Kaynakça

• AKSAR, Yusuf: Temel Metinler ve Davalarla Uluslararası Hu-kuk, 2. Baskı, Ankara 2021.
• AKSAR, Yusuf: Temel Metinler ve Davalarla Uluslararası Hu-kuk, 2. Baskı, Ankara 2021.
• ANTUNES, Nuno Sérgio Marques: Oxford Public International Law Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law [MPEPIL], 2006.
• ANTUNES, Nuno Sérgio Marques: Oxford Public International Law Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law [MPEPIL], 2006.
• BEDERMAN, David J.: "Acquiescence, Objection and The Death of Customary International Law", Duke J. Comp. & Int'l L., C. 21, 2010, s.31-45.
• BEDERMAN, David J.: "Acquiescence, Objection and The Death of Customary International Law", Duke J. Comp. & Int'l L., C. 21, 2010, s.31-45.
• BOUWERS, Garth J.: “Tacit Choice of Law in International Commercial Contracts– A Turkish Study”, Scientific Co-operations 2nd International Conference on Social Scien-ce, 2-3 April 2016 İstanbul, s. 169-181.
• BOUWERS, Garth J.: “Tacit Choice of Law in International Commercial Contracts– A Turkish Study”, Scientific Co-operations 2nd International Conference on Social Scien-ce, 2-3 April 2016 İstanbul, s. 169-181.
• BOWETT, D. W.: “Estoppel before International Tribunals and Its Relation to Acquiescence”, Brit. Y.B. Int'l L., C. 33, 1957, s. 176-202.
• BOWETT, D. W.: “Estoppel before International Tribunals and Its Relation to Acquiescence”, Brit. Y.B. Int'l L., C. 33, 1957, s. 176-202.
• BROWN, Christopher: “A Comparative and Critical Assessment of Estoppel in International Law”, U. Miami L. Rev., C. 50, S. 369, 1996, s. 369-412.
• BROWN, Christopher: “A Comparative and Critical Assessment of Estoppel in International Law”, U. Miami L. Rev., C. 50, S. 369, 1996, s. 369-412.
• BYERS, M.: Customs, Power and The Power of Rules Internatio-nal Relations and Customary International Law, Camb-ridge 1999.
• BYERS, M.: Customs, Power and The Power of Rules Internatio-nal Relations and Customary International Law, Camb-ridge 1999.
• CRAWFORD, James: Brownlie's Principles of Public Internatio-nal Law, 9. Basım, Oxford 2019. ÇİFTÇİ, Barış: “Bozkurt-Lotus Davası’nın Hukuki Değerlendir-mesi ve Türkiye için Önemi”, Journal of Political Admi-nistrative and Local Studies, C. 6, S. 1, 2023, s. 43-55.
• CRAWFORD, James: Brownlie's Principles of Public Internatio-nal Law, 9. Basım, Oxford 2019. ÇİFTÇİ, Barış: “Bozkurt-Lotus Davası’nın Hukuki Değerlendir-mesi ve Türkiye için Önemi”, Journal of Political Admi-nistrative and Local Studies, C. 6, S. 1, 2023, s. 43-55.
• D’AMATO, Anthony: "Trashing Customary International Law", American Journal of International Law, C. 81, S. 1, 1987, s. 101-105.
• D’AMATO, Anthony: "Trashing Customary International Law", American Journal of International Law, C. 81, S. 1, 1987, s. 101-105.
• D’ASPREMONT, Jean: “The International Court of Justice and Tacit Conventionality”, QIL, C. 18, 2015, s. 3-17.
• D’ASPREMONT, Jean: “The International Court of Justice and Tacit Conventionality”, QIL, C. 18, 2015, s. 3-17.
• ERTAŞ, Şeref: “Sürekli Borç İlişkilerinde (Dauerschuldverha-eltnisse) Zamanaşımı”, Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, C. 16, Özel Sayı 2014, s. 3093-3104.
• ERTAŞ, Şeref: “Sürekli Borç İlişkilerinde (Dauerschuldverha-eltnisse) Zamanaşımı”, Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, C. 16, Özel Sayı 2014, s. 3093-3104.
• ERTAŞ, Şeref: Eşya Hukuku, 7. Baskı, Seçkin Yayınları, 2006 An-kara.
• ERTAŞ, Şeref: Eşya Hukuku, 7. Baskı, Seçkin Yayınları, 2006 An-kara.
• GARWOOD-GOWERS, A.: “‘Israel’s Airstrike on Syria’s Al-Kibar Facility: A Test Case for the Doctrine of Pre-Emptive Self-Defence?’” Journal of Conflict and Security Law, C. 16, S. 2, 2011, s. 263-291.
• GARWOOD-GOWERS, A.: “‘Israel’s Airstrike on Syria’s Al-Kibar Facility: A Test Case for the Doctrine of Pre-Emptive Self-Defence?’” Journal of Conflict and Security Law, C. 16, S. 2, 2011, s. 263-291.
• GROTIUS, Hugo (Çeviren Meray, Seha L.): Savaş ve Barış Hu-kuku, İstanbul 2011.
• GROTIUS, Hugo (Çeviren Meray, Seha L.): Savaş ve Barış Hu-kuku, İstanbul 2011.
• GÜNEYSU, Gökhan: "Gana ve Fildişi Sahili Arasındaki Deniz Sınırına İlişkin ITLOS Kararı Bağlamında Deniz Alanla-rının Sınırlandırılmasına İlişkin Bazı Meseleler", Uyuş-mazlık Mahkemesi Dergisi, C. 13, 2019, s. 213-231.
• GÜNEYSU, Gökhan: "Gana ve Fildişi Sahili Arasındaki Deniz Sınırına İlişkin ITLOS Kararı Bağlamında Deniz Alanla-rının Sınırlandırılmasına İlişkin Bazı Meseleler", Uyuş-mazlık Mahkemesi Dergisi, C. 13, 2019, s. 213-231.
• HILLIER, T.: Sourcebook on Public International Law, 1998.
• HILLIER, T.: Sourcebook on Public International Law, 1998.
• HOLVIK, Natalie: Silence is Consent Acquiescence and Estoppel in International Law, Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Te-zi, Örebro Universitet, Örebro-İsveç 2018.
• HOLVIK, Natalie: Silence is Consent Acquiescence and Estoppel in International Law, Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Te-zi, Örebro Universitet, Örebro-İsveç 2018.
• JOHNSON, D. H. N.: "Acquisitive Prescription in International Law", British Year Book of International Law, C. 27, 1950, s. 332-354.
• JOHNSON, D. H. N.: "Acquisitive Prescription in International Law", British Year Book of International Law, C. 27, 1950, s. 332-354.
• KIRCHMAIR, Lando: “What Came First: The Obligation Or the Belief-A Renaissance of Consensus Theory to Make the Normative Foundations of Customary International Law More Tangible”, German YB Int'l L., C. 59, 2016, s. 289-320.
• KIRCHMAIR, Lando: “What Came First: The Obligation Or the Belief-A Renaissance of Consensus Theory to Make the Normative Foundations of Customary International Law More Tangible”, German YB Int'l L., C. 59, 2016, s. 289-320.
• KIRDIM, Şahin Eray, DEMİRKOL, Atahan: “Uluslararası İnsan Hakları Hukukunun Bir Kaynağı Olarak Uluslararası Örf ve Âdet Hukuku”, Ankara Hacı Bayram Veli Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, C. 25, S. 4, 2021, s. 379-434.
• KIRDIM, Şahin Eray, DEMİRKOL, Atahan: “Uluslararası İnsan Hakları Hukukunun Bir Kaynağı Olarak Uluslararası Örf ve Âdet Hukuku”, Ankara Hacı Bayram Veli Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, C. 25, S. 4, 2021, s. 379-434.
• KOPELA, Sophia: “The Legal Value of Silence as State Conduct in the Jurisprudence of International Tribunals”, Australian Year Book of International Law, C. 29, s. 87-134.
• KOPELA, Sophia: “The Legal Value of Silence as State Conduct in the Jurisprudence of International Tribunals”, Australian Year Book of International Law, C. 29, s. 87-134.
• MACGIBBON, Iain C. :“The Scope of Acquiescence in Internati-onal Law”, British Yearbook of International Law, C. 31, 1954, , s. 143- 145.
• MACGIBBON, Iain C. :“The Scope of Acquiescence in Internati-onal Law”, British Yearbook of International Law, C. 31, 1954, , s. 143- 145.
• MACGIBBON, Iain C.: "Customary International Law and Acquiescence." Brit. YB Int'l L., C. 33, 1957, s. 115- 145.
• MACGIBBON, Iain C.: "Customary International Law and Acquiescence." Brit. YB Int'l L., C. 33, 1957, s. 115- 145.
• MACGIBBON, Iain C.: “Estoppel in International Law”, Int and Comp L. Q, C. 7, 1958, s. 468-513.
• MACGIBBON, Iain C.: “Estoppel in International Law”, Int and Comp L. Q, C. 7, 1958, s. 468-513.
• MULLER, Till: "Customary Transnational Law: Attacking the Last Resort of State Sovereignty." Ind. J. Global Legal Stud., C. 15, 2008, s. 19-48.
• MULLER, Till: "Customary Transnational Law: Attacking the Last Resort of State Sovereignty." Ind. J. Global Legal Stud., C. 15, 2008, s. 19-48.
• LARSSON, Thomas: Customary International Law Develop-ments Towards A Non-Consensual Source Of İnternatio-nal Law?, Uppsala Universitet, Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Uppsala 2014.
• LARSSON, Thomas: Customary International Law Develop-ments Towards A Non-Consensual Source Of İnternatio-nal Law?, Uppsala Universitet, Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Uppsala 2014.
• OVCHAR, Alexander: "Estoppel in the Jurisprudence of the ICJ a Principle Promoting Stability Threatens to Undermine it," Bond Law Review, C. 21, S. 1, 2009, available at: http://epublications.bond.edu.au/blr/vol21/iss1/5 ÖKTEM, Emre: Uluslararası Teamül Hukuku, İstanbul 2013.
• OVCHAR, Alexander: "Estoppel in the Jurisprudence of the ICJ a Principle Promoting Stability Threatens to Undermine it," Bond Law Review, C. 21, S. 1, 2009, available at: http://epublications.bond.edu.au/blr/vol21/iss1/5 ÖKTEM, Emre: Uluslararası Teamül Hukuku, İstanbul 2013.
• PAZARCI, Hüseyin: Uluslararası Hukuk Dersleri 3. Kitap, 6. Baskı, Ankara 2019.
• PAZARCI, Hüseyin: Uluslararası Hukuk Dersleri 3. Kitap, 6. Baskı, Ankara 2019.
• PAZARCI, Hüseyin: Uluslararası Hukuk Dersleri 4. Kitap, 4. Baskı, Ankara 2020.
• PAZARCI, Hüseyin: Uluslararası Hukuk Dersleri 4. Kitap, 4. Baskı, Ankara 2020.
• PAZARCI, Hüseyin: Uluslararası Hukuk, 21. Bası, Ankara 2022.
• PAZARCI, Hüseyin: Uluslararası Hukuk, 21. Bası, Ankara 2022.
• QUANE, Helen: “Silence in International Law”, British Yearbook of International Law, C. 84, S. 1, 2014, s. 240-270.
• QUANE, Helen: “Silence in International Law”, British Yearbook of International Law, C. 84, S. 1, 2014, s. 240-270.
• RUBIN, Alfred P.: "The International Legal Effects of Unilateral Declarations." American Journal of International Law, C. 71, S. 1, 1977, s. 1-30.
• RUBIN, Alfred P.: "The International Legal Effects of Unilateral Declarations." American Journal of International Law, C. 71, S. 1, 1977, s. 1-30.
• SCHWEIGER, Elisabeth: “‘Targeted Killing’ and The Lack of Acquiescence”, Leiden Journal of International Law, C. 32, 2019, s. 741–757.
• SCHWEIGER, Elisabeth: “‘Targeted Killing’ and The Lack of Acquiescence”, Leiden Journal of International Law, C. 32, 2019, s. 741–757.
• SCHWEIGER, Elisabeth: “Listen Closely: What Silence Can Tell Us About Legal Knowledge Production”, London Review of International Law, C. 6, S. 3, 2018, s. 391–411.
• SCHWEIGER, Elisabeth: “Listen Closely: What Silence Can Tell Us About Legal Knowledge Production”, London Review of International Law, C. 6, S. 3, 2018, s. 391–411.
• SHAW, Malcolm N.: International Law, Cambridge, 6. Bası, 2008.
• SHAW, Malcolm N.: International Law, Cambridge, 6. Bası, 2008.
• SHAW, Malcolm N. (çeviri Ed. İbrahim Kaya, çeviren Yücel Acer ve Diğerleri): Uluslararası Hukuk, Ankara 2017.
• SHAW, Malcolm N. (çeviri Ed. İbrahim Kaya, çeviren Yücel Acer ve Diğerleri): Uluslararası Hukuk, Ankara 2017.
• SONG, Yan: “Acquiescence and Its Role in the Settlement of Is-land Disputes: “Silence May also Speak”, But to What Extent?”, Chinese Journal of International Law, C. 20, S. 3, 2021, s. 499–532.
• SONG, Yan: “Acquiescence and Its Role in the Settlement of Is-land Disputes: “Silence May also Speak”, But to What Extent?”, Chinese Journal of International Law, C. 20, S. 3, 2021, s. 499–532.
• STERN, Brigitte: "Custom at the Heart of International Law." Duke J. Comp. & Int'l L., C. 11, 2001, s. SUR, Melda: Uluslararası Hukukun Esasları, 15. Baskı, İstanbul 2023.
• STERN, Brigitte: "Custom at the Heart of International Law." Duke J. Comp. & Int'l L., C. 11, 2001, s. SUR, Melda: Uluslararası Hukukun Esasları, 15. Baskı, İstanbul 2023.
• TDK, https://sozluk.gov.tr/ (16.03.2024).
• TDK, https://sozluk.gov.tr/ (16.03.2024).
• THIRLWAY, Hugh: The Sources of International Law, Evans, Malcolm D., (Editör), International Law, 2. Bası, Oxford 2006.
• THIRLWAY, Hugh: The Sources of International Law, Evans, Malcolm D., (Editör), International Law, 2. Bası, Oxford 2006.
• TUNKIN, G. I.: “Remarks on the Juridical Nature of Custo-mary Norms of International Law”, Calif. L. Rev., C. 49, 1961, s. 419-430.
• TUNKIN, G. I.: “Remarks on the Juridical Nature of Custo-mary Norms of International Law”, Calif. L. Rev., C. 49, 1961, s. 419-430.
• VILLIGER, Mark Eugen: “Customary International Law and Tre-aties: A Study of Their Interactions and Interrelations, with Special Consideration of The 1969 Vienna Conven-tion on the Law of Treaties” C. 7, Brill, 1985.
• VILLIGER, Mark Eugen: “Customary International Law and Tre-aties: A Study of Their Interactions and Interrelations, with Special Consideration of The 1969 Vienna Conven-tion on the Law of Treaties” C. 7, Brill, 1985.
• WAGNER, Megan L.: "Jurisdiction by Estoppel in the Internatio-nal Court of Justice." Calif. L. Rev., C. 74, 1986, s. 1777-1804.
• WAGNER, Megan L.: "Jurisdiction by Estoppel in the Internatio-nal Court of Justice." Calif. L. Rev., C. 74, 1986, s. 1777-1804.
• WASS, Jack: “Jurisdiction by Estoppel And Acquiescence In Inter-national Courts and Tribunals” The British Yearbook of International Law, C. 86, S. 1, 2015, s. 155–195.
• WASS, Jack: “Jurisdiction by Estoppel And Acquiescence In Inter-national Courts and Tribunals” The British Yearbook of International Law, C. 86, S. 1, 2015, s. 155–195.
• WRIGHT, Quincy.: "Custom as a Basis For İnternational Law in The Post-War World." Tex. Int'l LF, C. 2, 1966, s. 147-166.
• WRIGHT, Quincy.: "Custom as a Basis For İnternational Law in The Post-War World." Tex. Int'l LF, C. 2, 1966, s. 147-166.
• Raporlar ve Sözleşmeler Convention of Defensive Alliance Between Great Britain and Turkey with Respect of the Asiatic Provinces of Turkey. Signed at Constantinople, 4th June 1878.
• Raporlar ve Sözleşmeler Convention of Defensive Alliance Between Great Britain and Turkey with Respect of the Asiatic Provinces of Turkey. Signed at Constantinople, 4th June 1878.
• ILC, ‘Third Report on identification of customary international law’ Third Report of Special Rapporteur Michael Wood, Sixty-seventh Session, A/CN.4/682, 2015.
• ILC, ‘Third Report on identification of customary international law’ Third Report of Special Rapporteur Michael Wood, Sixty-seventh Session, A/CN.4/682, 2015.
• ILC, Draft Articles on Identification of International Customary Law, 2011.
• ILC, Draft Articles on Identification of International Customary Law, 2011.
• Treaty of Arbitration between Great Britain and the United States of Venezuela Washington D.C., 2 February 1897.
• Treaty of Arbitration between Great Britain and the United States of Venezuela Washington D.C., 2 February 1897.
• Harp Zamanında Sivillerin Korunmasına İlişkin Cenevre Söz-leşmesi (Cenevre, 12 Ağustos 1949). Viyana Andlaşmalar Hukuku Sözleşmesi, 1969.
• Harp Zamanında Sivillerin Korunmasına İlişkin Cenevre Söz-leşmesi (Cenevre, 12 Ağustos 1949). Viyana Andlaşmalar Hukuku Sözleşmesi, 1969.
• Viyana Diplomatik İlişkiler Sözleşmesi, 18 Nisan 1961.
• Viyana Diplomatik İlişkiler Sözleşmesi, 18 Nisan 1961.
• Reports of International Arbitral Awards, The Chamizal Case (Mexico, United States) 15 June 1911 Volume XI. Treaty between Great Britain, Germany, Austria, France, Italy, Russia, and Turkey for the Settlement of Affairs in the East: Signed at Berlin, July 13, 1878.
• Reports of International Arbitral Awards, The Chamizal Case (Mexico, United States) 15 June 1911 Volume XI. Treaty between Great Britain, Germany, Austria, France, Italy, Russia, and Turkey for the Settlement of Affairs in the East: Signed at Berlin, July 13, 1878.
• Kararlar ICJ, Reports of International Arbitral Awards, Award regarding the Boundary between the Colony of British Guiana and the United States of Venezuela 3 October 1899 VOLUME XXVIII ss. 331-340.
• Kararlar ICJ, Reports of International Arbitral Awards, Award regarding the Boundary between the Colony of British Guiana and the United States of Venezuela 3 October 1899 VOLUME XXVIII ss. 331-340.
• ICJ, Reports of Judgments, Advisory Opinions and Orders Case Concerning Delimitation of The Maritime Boundary In The Gulf Of Maine Area (Canada/United States of Ameri-ca) Judgment of 12 October 1984 Given By The Chamber Constituted by The Order Made by The Court On 20 Ja-nuary 1982.
• ICJ, Reports of Judgments, Advisory Opinions and Orders Case Concerning Delimitation of The Maritime Boundary In The Gulf Of Maine Area (Canada/United States of Ameri-ca) Judgment of 12 October 1984 Given By The Chamber Constituted by The Order Made by The Court On 20 Ja-nuary 1982.
• ICJ, Reports of Judgments, Advisory Opinions and Or-ders Case Concerning Delimitation of The Maritime Bo-undary In The Gulf Of Maine Area (Canada/United States of America) Judgment of 12 October 1984.
• ICJ, Reports of Judgments, Advisory Opinions and Or-ders Case Concerning Delimitation of The Maritime Bo-undary In The Gulf Of Maine Area (Canada/United States of America) Judgment of 12 October 1984.
• ICJ, Case concerning the Temple of Preah Vihear (Cam-bodia v. Thailand), Merits, Judgment of 15 June 1962, I.C. J. Reports 1962, Separate Opinion of Judge Alfaro.
• ICJ, Case concerning the Temple of Preah Vihear (Cam-bodia v. Thailand), Merits, Judgment of 15 June 1962, I.C. J. Reports 1962, Separate Opinion of Judge Alfaro.
• ICJ, Colombian-Peruvian Asylum Case, Judgment of November 20th 1950, I.C. J. Reports 1950.
• ICJ, Colombian-Peruvian Asylum Case, Judgment of November 20th 1950, I.C. J. Reports 1950.
• ICJ, Delimitation of the Maritime Boundary in the Gulf of Maine Area, Judgment, 1984.
• ICJ, Delimitation of the Maritime Boundary in the Gulf of Maine Area, Judgment, 1984.
• ICJ, Fisheries case, Judgment of December 18th, I951, Dissenting Opinion of Judge J. E. Read.
• ICJ, Fisheries case, Judgment of December 18th, I951, Dissenting Opinion of Judge J. E. Read.
• ICJ, Internatıonal Court Of Justice Reports Of Judgments, Advısory Opınıons And Orders Case Concernıng Terrı-torıal And Marıtıme Dıspute Between Nicaragua And Honduras In The Carıbbean Sea (Nıcaragua V. Honduras) Judgment Of 8 October 2007.
• ICJ, Internatıonal Court Of Justice Reports Of Judgments, Advısory Opınıons And Orders Case Concernıng Terrı-torıal And Marıtıme Dıspute Between Nicaragua And Honduras In The Carıbbean Sea (Nıcaragua V. Honduras) Judgment Of 8 October 2007.
• ICJ, Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v. Italy: Greece intervening), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2012.
• ICJ, Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v. Italy: Greece intervening), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2012.
• ICJ, Land and Maritime Boundary between Cameroon and Nigeria, Preliminary Objections, Judgment, I. C. J. Reports 1998.
• ICJ, Land and Maritime Boundary between Cameroon and Nigeria, Preliminary Objections, Judgment, I. C. J. Reports 1998.
• ICJ, Land, Island and Maritime Frontier Dispute (El Sal-vador/Honduras), Application to Zntewene, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1990.
• ICJ, Land, Island and Maritime Frontier Dispute (El Sal-vador/Honduras), Application to Zntewene, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1990.
• ICJ, Maritime Delimitation in the Area between Green-land and Jan Mayen, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1993. ICJ, Maritime Delimitation in the Indian Ocean (Somalia v. Kenya), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2021.
• ICJ, Maritime Delimitation in the Area between Green-land and Jan Mayen, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1993. ICJ, Maritime Delimitation in the Indian Ocean (Somalia v. Kenya), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2021.
• ICJ, North Sea Contınental Shelf Cases (Federal Republic Of Germany / Denmark; Federal Republic of Germany / Netherlands) Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1969.
• ICJ, North Sea Contınental Shelf Cases (Federal Republic Of Germany / Denmark; Federal Republic of Germany / Netherlands) Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1969.
• ICJ, Passage Through The Great Belt (Finland v. Denmark) Coun-ter-Memorial Submitted By The Government Of The Kingdom Of Denmark Volume 1, May 1992.
• ICJ, Passage Through The Great Belt (Finland v. Denmark) Coun-ter-Memorial Submitted By The Government Of The Kingdom Of Denmark Volume 1, May 1992.
• ICJ, Reports of Judgments, Advisory Opinions and Orders Case Concerning Maritime Dispute (Peru v. Chile) Judgment of 27 January 2014.
• ICJ, Reports of Judgments, Advisory Opinions and Orders Case Concerning Maritime Dispute (Peru v. Chile) Judgment of 27 January 2014.
• ICJ, Reports Of Judgments, Advisory Opinions and Orders Case Concerning Military and Paramilitary Activities In And Against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States Of Ameri-ca) Jurisdiction Of The Court And Admissibility Of The Application Judgment Of 26 November 1984.
• ICJ, Reports Of Judgments, Advisory Opinions and Orders Case Concerning Military and Paramilitary Activities In And Against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States Of Ameri-ca) Jurisdiction Of The Court And Admissibility Of The Application Judgment Of 26 November 1984.
• ICJ, Reports of Judgments, Advisory Opinions and Orders Fishe-ries Jurisdiction Case (United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland v. Iceland) Merits Judgment of 25 July 1974. ICJ, Reports of International Arbitral Awards, Island of Palmas case (Netherlands, USA) 4 April 1928 VOLUME II ss. 829-871
• ICJ, Reports of Judgments, Advisory Opinions and Orders Fishe-ries Jurisdiction Case (United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland v. Iceland) Merits Judgment of 25 July 1974. ICJ, Reports of International Arbitral Awards, Island of Palmas case (Netherlands, USA) 4 April 1928 VOLUME II ss. 829-871
• ICJ, Rights of Passage over Indian Territory Case (Portu-gal v. India), ICJ Reports, 1960. ICJ, Sovereignty over Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh, Middle Rocks and South Ledge (Malaysia/Singapore), Merits, Judgment, Report 12, 23.05.2008.
• ICJ, Rights of Passage over Indian Territory Case (Portu-gal v. India), ICJ Reports, 1960. ICJ, Sovereignty over Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh, Middle Rocks and South Ledge (Malaysia/Singapore), Merits, Judgment, Report 12, 23.05.2008.
• ICJ, Sovereignty over Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh, Middle Rocks and South Ledge (Malaysia/Singapore), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2008.
• ICJ, Sovereignty over Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh, Middle Rocks and South Ledge (Malaysia/Singapore), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2008.
• ILC, Draft Articles on the Law of Treaties with commentaries 1966, Yearbook of the International Law Commission, 1966, Vol. II.
• ILC, Draft Articles on the Law of Treaties with commentaries 1966, Yearbook of the International Law Commission, 1966, Vol. II.
• ITLOS, Delimitation of the Maritime Boundary in the Atlantic Ocean (Ghana/Côte d’Ivoire), Judgment, ITLOS Reports 2017.
• ITLOS, Delimitation of the Maritime Boundary in the Atlantic Ocean (Ghana/Côte d’Ivoire), Judgment, ITLOS Reports 2017.
• ITLOS, Delimitation of the Maritime Boundary in the Bay of Bengal (Bangladesh/Myanmar), Judgment, ITLOS Reports 2012.
• ITLOS, Delimitation of the Maritime Boundary in the Bay of Bengal (Bangladesh/Myanmar), Judgment, ITLOS Reports 2012.
• ITLOS, Reports Of Judgments, Advisory Opinions And Orders The “Ara Libertad” Case (Argentina v. Ghana) List Of Cases: No. 20 Provisional Measures Order Of 15 December 2012 Joint Separate Opinion Of Judges Wolf-rum And Judge Cot.
• ITLOS, Reports Of Judgments, Advisory Opinions And Orders The “Ara Libertad” Case (Argentina v. Ghana) List Of Cases: No. 20 Provisional Measures Order Of 15 December 2012 Joint Separate Opinion Of Judges Wolf-rum And Judge Cot.
• ITLOS, Reports Of Judgments, Advisory Opinions And Orders The “Ara Libertad” Case (Argentina v. Ghana) List Of Cases: No. 20 Provisional Measures Order Of 15 Decem-ber 2012 Joint Separate Opinion Of Judges Wolfrum And Judge Cot.
• ITLOS, Reports Of Judgments, Advisory Opinions And Orders The “Ara Libertad” Case (Argentina v. Ghana) List Of Cases: No. 20 Provisional Measures Order Of 15 Decem-ber 2012 Joint Separate Opinion Of Judges Wolfrum And Judge Cot.
• PCIJ, Twelfth (Ordinary) Session, The Case of the S.S. Lotus, France v. Turkey Judgment, No 9, 07.09.1927. Supreme Court Cases, Boos v. Barry, 485 US 312 (1988).
• PCIJ, Twelfth (Ordinary) Session, The Case of the S.S. Lotus, France v. Turkey Judgment, No 9, 07.09.1927. Supreme Court Cases, Boos v. Barry, 485 US 312 (1988).