| Revision as of 01:35, 14 April 2008 editJayjg (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators134,922 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 01:36, 14 April 2008 edit undoAmoruso (talk | contribs)13,357 editsm →Long discussion of whether resolution is binding or notNext edit → | ||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
| ::I have a concern about making any sort of assertion that it's non-binding when the International Court of Justice says that it is binding. ] (]) 01:31, 14 April 2008 (UTC) | ::I have a concern about making any sort of assertion that it's non-binding when the International Court of Justice says that it is binding. ] (]) 01:31, 14 April 2008 (UTC) | ||
| :::Non-notable people? You must be joking. Erika De Wet ''literally'' wrote the book on Chapter VII resolutions. The book, unsurprisingly, is ''The Chapter VII Powers of the United Nations Security Council''. As for the ICJ, it did make one ruling asserting that - rather unsurprisingly, there was dissent from justices on that Court, and customary international law has ignored that empty assertion. ]<sup><small><font color="DarkGreen">]</font></small></sup> 01:35, 14 April 2008 (UTC) | :::Non-notable people? You must be joking. Erika De Wet ''literally'' wrote the book on Chapter VII resolutions. The book, unsurprisingly, is ''The Chapter VII Powers of the United Nations Security Council''. As for the ICJ, it did make one ruling asserting that - rather unsurprisingly, there was dissent from justices on that Court, and customary international law has ignored that empty assertion. ]<sup><small><font color="DarkGreen">]</font></small></sup> 01:35, 14 April 2008 (UTC) | ||
| The ICJ has no authority to deviate from what the UN Charter says. The ICJ opinion itself was non binding. Any international law jurist will tell you this, that Chapter VII is the only binding chapter. The ICJ's message is that it's appropriate by courtesy of nations to accept all international sayings etc. This is not the same thing. By definition, it's not binding, simply because international law as a concept is not binding - it's always down to consent. Chapter VII is a rare exception together with jus cogens laws. Basic International Law I for every J.D or LL.B in the world. Find me one serious international law scholar who says that Chapter VI is binding. ] (]) 01:36, 14 April 2008 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 01:36, 14 April 2008
Long discussion of whether resolution is binding or not
I fail to see why we need to put in individual opinions from non-notable people into this article as to whether this resolution is binding or not. Pocopocopocopoco (talk) 01:12, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
- we don't. it's enough to say that it's non binding. it's not under chapter 7. not complicated. Amoruso (talk) 01:21, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
- I have a concern about making any sort of assertion that it's non-binding when the International Court of Justice says that it is binding. Pocopocopocopoco (talk) 01:31, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
- Non-notable people? You must be joking. Erika De Wet literally wrote the book on Chapter VII resolutions. The book, unsurprisingly, is The Chapter VII Powers of the United Nations Security Council. As for the ICJ, it did make one ruling asserting that - rather unsurprisingly, there was dissent from justices on that Court, and customary international law has ignored that empty assertion. Jayjg 01:35, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
- I have a concern about making any sort of assertion that it's non-binding when the International Court of Justice says that it is binding. Pocopocopocopoco (talk) 01:31, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
The ICJ has no authority to deviate from what the UN Charter says. The ICJ opinion itself was non binding. Any international law jurist will tell you this, that Chapter VII is the only binding chapter. The ICJ's message is that it's appropriate by courtesy of nations to accept all international sayings etc. This is not the same thing. By definition, it's not binding, simply because international law as a concept is not binding - it's always down to consent. Chapter VII is a rare exception together with jus cogens laws. Basic International Law I for every J.D or LL.B in the world. Find me one serious international law scholar who says that Chapter VI is binding. Amoruso (talk) 01:36, 14 April 2008 (UTC)