Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-06T05:27:11.942Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Eighteenth Year of the Permanent Court of International Justice*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 April 2017

Manley O. Hudson
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Though the eighteenth year of the Permanent Court of International Justice has been the most critical year in its history, the Court has carried on its work in a regular way and some notable additions to its jurisprudence have been made during the year.

In the early months of the year, the Court held two series of meetings, from January 19 to April 4, and from May 15 to June 15; later in the year a series of meetings was held from November 28 to December 5. The Court was in actual session during the year for a total of 116 days; this was considerably less than the average of 144 days for each of the previous seventeen years, though it exceeded the number of 69 days of actual session during the year 1938.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 34 , Issue 1 , January 1940 , pp. 1 - 22
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1940

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

This is the eighteenth in the writers series of annual articles on the Permanent Court of International Justice, the publication of which was begun in this Journal, Vol. 17 (1923), p. 15.

References

1 Series A/B, No. 75, p. 56. See this Journal, Vol. 33 (1939), p. 5.

2 Series A/B, No. 76.

3 11 League of Nations Treaty Series, p. 29.

4 148 League of Nations Treaty Series, p. 337.

5 See Series C, No. 86, p. 117.

6 137 League of Nations Treaty Series, p. 191.

7 3 Décisions des Tribunaux Arbitraux Mixtes, p. 308.

8 5 idem, p. 759.

9 Series A/B, No. 77.

10 Records of Ninth Assembly, Plenary, p. 502.

11 Series A/B, No. 74.

12 The order was published on Dec. 6, 1939. For the text, see Series A/B, No. 79.

13 113 League of Nations Treaty Series, p. 117.

14 Series A/B, No. 78.

15 Series C, No. 87, pp. 36, 44.

16 45 League of Nations Treaty Series, p. 403.

17 Series E, No. 15, p. 213.

18 Series E, No. 15, p. 216.

19 League of Nations Document C. L. 105. 1939. V.

20 Document C. L. 140. 1939. V.

21 See this Journal, Vol. 33 (1939), pp. 9-10.

22 League of Nations Official Journal, 1939, p. 235. See also, Fachiri, Alexander P., “Repudiation of the Optional Clause,” 20 British Year Book of International Law (1939), p. 52 Google Scholar.

23 League of Nations Official Journal, 1939, p. 408. The British Government had previously notified the Secretary-General of the existence of a state of war. Document C. 257. M. 175. 1939. VII.

24 This memorandum was published as British Parliamentary Paper, Miscellaneous, No. 12, 1929 (Cmd. 3452). The considerations which led the British Government to the signature of the Optional Clause are summed up in paragraph 24 of the memorandum as follows:

  1. “(1)

    “(1) The policy of His Majesty’s Government is based on a determination to fulfill their obligations under the Covenant of the League and the Peace Pact.

  2. “(2)

    “(2) If those obligations are fulfilled, we cannot be involved in war in circumstances in which any Member of the League could claim the rights of a neutral; only Members of the League which have signed the Optional Clause can bring us before the Permanent Court under its terms, and, therefore, no dispute arising out of neutral complaints of our naval action could come before the Court. Arguments based on the state of affairs created by the old law of belligerency and neutrality are therefore irrelevant.

  3. “(3)

    “(3) If any dispute should, nevertheless, arise with another Member of the League as to the legitimacy of particular action which we have taken, it is probable that such a dispute would be more suitable for settlement by the Council than by the Court, and we have the right to bring it before the Council if we wish to do so.

  4. “(4)

    “(4) If the system erected by the Covenant and the Peace Pact breaks down, this catastrophe would sweep away the Optional Clause as well.”

25 League of Nations Official Journal, 1939, p. 408.

26 Ibid., p. 410.

27 Ibid., p. 407.

28 Ibid., p. 409.

29 Ibid.

30 League of Nations Official Journal, 1939, p. 411.

31 93 League of Nations Treaty Series, p. 343; 4 Hudson, International Legislation, p. 2529.

32 Series E, No. 15, p. 232.

33 Series E, No. 15, p. 231.

34 Document C. L. 30. 1939. V.

35 Doc. C. L. 31. 1939. V.

36 Doc. C. L. 61. 1939. V.

37 League of Nations Official Journal, 1939, p. 412.

38 See the writer’s study of the elections, published in this Journal, Vol. 24 (1930), pp. 718-727.

39 A list of the candidates nominated was published in Document A. 27. 1939. V.

40 Document A. 30. 1939. V.

41 Doc. A. 1(a). 1939.

42 Doc. A. 1(c). 1939.

43 Doc. A. 1(d). 1939.

44 Document A. 1(e). 1939.

44 Doc. A. 1(f). 1939.

46 Journal of the Twentieth Assembly, No. 2, p. 6.

47 The French version of this text is perhaps clearer: “Ils restent en fonction jusqu’à leur remplacement.”

48 League of Nations Official Journal, 1939, p. 272.

49 Document C. 204. M. 139. 1939. X.

50 Document A. 5(c). 1939. X.