Public Law Researsh

Abstract With the emergence of the Robust peacekeeping operations in the years after the Cold War, the scope of the use of force in peacekeeping operations expanded. This issue most often occurs in areas that are involved in armed conflicts. Considering the nature of peacekeepers, who must act impartially, this raises questions about the applicability of international humanitarian law: are peacekeeping forces considered military under international humanitarian law, like the parties to the conflict, and may they be legitimate military targets? This article seeks to address these questions using a descriptive - analytical approach and library data. This article argues that in order for peacekeeping forces to become parties to the conflict, they must participate directly or indirectly in an armed conflict, whether international or non-international. Therefore, the mere presence of peacekeeping forces in an area that is involved in armed conflicts nor does the mere use of force make them parties to the conflict.

Abstract Creation of Marine Protected Areas on the High Seas is one of the United Nations goals in new executive agreement that its dimensions are subject of this study. Main question is that the UN's ahead Challenges in the creation and management of Marine Protected Areas on the High Seas? Findings of this study indicate that the achievement of this goal requires the prediction of effective enforcement mechanisms and the obligation of all governments and the International Maritime Organization, Regional Fisheries Management Organizations and the International Seabed Authority to identify, implement and adhere to constraints governing of Marine Protected Areas on the High Seas. However, the requirement and coordination between different parts of the law of the seas faces challenges that are rooted in dispersed, different, and inconsistent mechanisms. Establishing a consensus and balance between ahead capacities and covering it in High Seas requires a present missing’ serious will and consensus.

Abstract Managers and Decision-Makers of All Organizations should understand that they will be Responsible for their decisions. Internal Tribunals of the United Nations are statutory institutions created by the UN General Assembly in response to the need for an independent, transparent, effective, efficient judicial system that would ensure managerial accountability. By these Tribunals, the employees are sure that they can object to unfair and wrong decisions, and demand their rights that are foreseen for them under the rules and statute of the organization. The internal justice regime of the United Nations has changed a lot up to now. The first Administrative Tribunal of the UN was created in 1949, and it looked after the disputes between employees and the organization until the beginning of 21st century. Naturally in these long years its weaknesses were found and tries were made to fix them. Eventually in 2007, the foundation of the new internal justice regime of the UN that was composed of two Tribunals named United Nations dispute Tribunal and United Nations Appeals Tribunal was made. Analysis of Weaknesses and strength of the first and the old internal justice regime, and their comparison is this paper's goal.

Abstract According to UN Charter Article 7, one of the most important of this this World Organization is Secretariat. This Organ represents the most dynamic institution in the United Nations Structure. Since 1990s, we could observe a conflict between Secretary-General's functions and the famous "domestic jurisdiction" matters. Nowadays, matters like social and cultural development, economic progress, fighting against terrorism, environmental issues and Human Rights problems constitute an usual item in UN Secretary-General agenda. These extensions in UNSG's functions have aroused some concerns. These concerns are based on an "unbridle extension" and an UN inference in State internal affairs. Current state general practice, according to the present article, would be confirmation of a double trend: Support of the UN extension jurisdictions and at the same time, respect of cultural & political national identities

Abstract On numerous occasions over the past decades, the United Nations
peacekeepers have been charged with various offences against the
civilian populations they are commissioned to serve. To render criminal
justice, exercising jurisdiction over the accused is a requirement.
Agreements between States and the UN prescribe that the peacekeeping
personnel shall exclusively be subject to jurisdiction of the home States.
further , the contributing States shall retain exclusive jurisdiction over
violation of International Humanitarian Law by peacekeeping forces. The
present article examines the criminal jurisdiction of national courts and
the obligation of home States to prosecute such offences, and it further
attempts to discuss, inter alia, ICC role in this issue