Search

Search Results

• Regulation of Autonomous Vehicles in Public International Law, in particular on the Subject of International Road Traffic

  37-49

  Dalma Takó

  Views:

  184

  The study examines the regulation of autonomous vehicles in public international law, more specifically the regulation related to the territory of international road traffic. Within this topic, the study defines autonomous, or in other words, self-driving vehicles, reveals the relation between these kind of vehicles and public international law, describes the results and steps made so far toward uniform regulation and analyzes the possibilities for future regulation. In connection with the latter, the study concentrates on the question of international treaties and would like to answer whether it is necessary and possible to conclude an international treaty on autonomous vehicles.   

• The International Legal Framework of Maritime Piracy

  161-177

  Imre Ágoston Pászka

  Views:

  287

  Although maritime piracy is the oldest crime committed at sea, it is still present to this day and counts as a threat: it not only endangers human lives but also causes damage to international trade. Firm actions must be taken against this international crime and those international agreements which define the definition and the elements of conduct of maritime piracy and also contain procedural provisions to suppress it count as vital elements of these actions. Currently there are two agreements which contain anti-piracy regulations and they regulate several matters appropriately but they also have many shortcomings. In this article I examine the anti-piracy regulations of these agreements.

• The Constitutional Obstacles before the Promulgation of the Rome Statute

  45-59

  Marco Pesci

  Views:

  368

  July 17, 1998, can be considered as one of the most important milestones of the international judicial structure: it is the day when the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court was adopted by 120 states out of 148. Article 86 of Statute explicitly states that „States Parties shall […] cooperate fully with the Court in its investigation and prosecution of crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court.” As in the case of every international treaty, the principle of pacta sunt servanda enshrined in Article 26 of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of the Treaties states applies, which explicitly states that “every treaty in force is binding upon the parties to it and must be performed by them in good faith.” As has been pointed out by the Permanent Court of International Justice, contracting states must make all the necessary internal measures which are required to fulfil its international obligations rising from a binding treaty. One could ask, why is this quite obvious argument important in the case of Hungary? Well, Hungary has ratified the Statute but still has not implemented it in its internal legislation. This can be considered as a serious constitutional omission, since if the Court would require the cooperation of Hungary – e.g. in the case of an arrest warrant – and it would not be able to fulfil it because of the lack of the internal legal norms, it would be considered as international legal responsibility of Hungary. In this article, I try to explore the reasons behind this omission and outline the possible solutions.

• Withdrawal from the European Union: Article 50 TEU and Brexit

  97-117

  Lilla Nóra Kiss

  Views:

  486

  The unilateral right of a member state to withdraw from the EU is an entirely new feature of EU Law introduced by the Lisbon Treaty. The practical application of the withdrawal clause was placed on the agenda as a result of the 23 June 2016 Brexit- referendum in the UK. The exit raises some non-legal and legal, theoretical and practical issues which – as we are talking about an unprecedented event – have to be elaborated on now. The paper analyzes Article 50 TEU by analytical methods, summarizing the incomplete frameworks, the main procedural rules, and those issues that require the interpretation of the Court of Justice of the European Union. The paper aims to highlight the points of the withdrawal clause that have interpretative gaps, which might not have been unintentionally left by the EU legislator.