Embedded Files
Sean Fern教授によるTokdo-or-Takeshimaという論文
http://www.stanford.edu/group/sjeaa/journal51/japan2.pdf
における、虚偽の説明に対する、OPP氏の指摘
以下、Dokdo or TakeshimaにおけるのOpp氏の投稿を引用
opp said...
true international law by Clipperton
France declared her dominium of the clipperton at the newspaper of Hawai in 1858.
[After 40 years]
Three Americans were mining guano of the clipperton island.
Mexico hauled down a American flag on the island at 1898.
fabricated international law by Sean Fern
http://www.stanford.edu/group/sjeaa/journal51/japan2.pdf
Japan may claim that formal protests such as hoisting the Japanese flag on the island and sending ships to the area are sufficient signs of sovereignty, but a judicial body might find otherwise. In the Clipperton case, Mexico tried to substantiate its claim by raising a Mexican flag on the island and by sending a warship to defend the island from takeover. Nonetheless, the court in the case found these acts insufficient to substantiate Mexico’s claim.
conclusion
The court assumed that France had acquired the island in the 1850's without Mexico’s protest. The dominium had already been established though Mexico would protest in 40 years. Japan protested immediately against the occupation of South Korea. Therefore, there is no time of PEACEFUL effective control for South Korea. I think Sean Fern doesn't have the concept at time or is misinterpreting time.
fabricated international law by Sean Fern
http://www.stanford.edu/group/sjeaa/journal51/japan2.pdf
South Korea has an enormous advantage over Japan because it has de facto possession of the islands and has undertaken a variety of infrastructure projects and improvements. As the Palmas decision shows, international judicial bodies highlight establishing sovereignty through positive acts, especially when occupying a territory. Effective possession of the Liancourt Rocks generally entitles Korea to the claim.
True international law, PALMAS CASE
http://untreaty.un.org/cod/riaa/cases/vol_II/829-871.pdf
that the continuous and peaceful display of territorial sovereignty (peaceful in relation to other States) is as good as a title.
[….]
It cannot be sufficient to establish the title by which territorial sovereignty was validly acquired at a certain moment; it must also be shown that the territorial sovereignty has continued to exist and did exist at the moment which for the decision of the dispute must be considered as critical.
[….]
for the reason that Dutch possession of the island Palmas (or Miangas) is not proved Lo have existed at the critical date.
True international law by ICJ, Pulau Ligitan and Pulau Sipadan CASE
http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/102/7714.pdf, PP.64
The Court moreover cannot disregard the fact that at the time when these activities were carried out, neither Indonesia nor its predecessor, the Netherlands, ever expressed its disagreement or protest.
True international law by ICJ, Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh CASE
http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/130/14492.pdf
In the view of the Court, it was on 14 February 1980, the time of Singapore’s protest in response to Malaysia’s publication of the 1979 map, that the dispute as to sovereignty over Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh crystallized.
conclusion
International demands the PEACEFUL effective control without protest by other country. Japan expresses her protest and Korea also rebuttals against Japan many times. Then Korean occupation is disvalue in the international law.
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse