No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
The Ninth Year of the Permanent Court of International Justice1
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 12 April 2017
Extract
The year 1930 has been marked by the eighteenth (ordinary) session of the Permanent Court of International Justice, which began on June 16,1930, and continued until August 26, 1930, and by the nineteenth (extraordinary) session, which began on October 22, 1930, and ended on December 6, 1930; by the rendering of Advisory Opinion No. 17, on the question of the Greco-Bulgarian “ Communities” ; by the rendering of Advisory Opinion No. 18, on the question relating to the Free City of Danzig and the International Labor Organization; and by the rendering of an important order in the Franco-Swiss Zones case. During this year, also, Judge Frank B. Kellogg was elected to fill the vacancy caused by the resignation of Charles Evans Hughes, i.e., to serve from September 17, 1930, to December 31, 1930; and nineteen members of the Court were elected for the new term of nine years, beginning on January 1, 1931. The Protocol for the Revision of the Statute of the Court failed to come into force, as anticipated, on September 1, 1930, and the court continues, at any rate for the time being, under the unamended statute.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © American Society of International Law 1931
Footnotes
1
Continuing the series of annual articles begun in this Journal , Vol. 17, No. 1, January, 1923.
References
2 League of Nations Official Journal, 1930, p. 109.
3 Publications of the Court, Series B, No. 17.
4 League of Nations Treaty Series, pp. 67, 305.
5 An excellent account of the work of the commission is that by Wurfbain, André , L’Echange Gréco-Bulgare des minoriés ethniques , Paris: Payot, 1930, pp. 217 Google Scholar.
6 League of Nations Official Journal, 1930, p. 540
7 Publications of the Court, Series B, No. 18.
8 The Treaty of Paris is published in 6 League of Nations Treaty Series, p. 189.
9 Judge Loder also dissented
10 The full text of the compromis is published in Series C, No. 17-1, p. 490. See Burckhardt, W., “ L’Affaire de Zones Franehes de la Hauie-Savoie et du Pays de Gex, ” 11 Révue de Droit International et de Législation Comparée (3d ser., 1930), p. 90.Google Scholar
11 Series A, No. 22. See also this Journal, Vol. 24, p. 29.
12 Series A, No. 24.
13 For the text, see Publications of the Court, Series C, No. 17-1, p. 940.
14 Most of the quotations are not from the official documents relating to the establishment of the court. The instructions given by Secretary of State Root to the American delegates to the Second Hague Conference in 1907, may or may not reflect the views of Mr. Elihu Root when he sat as a member of the Committee of Jurists in 1920, and it would seem that happier illustrations of Judge Kellogg's point might have been selected.
15 See editorial comment in this Journal, infra, p. 114
16 Several studies of the Optional Clause have recently been published in England: in addition to the official British memorandum, published on December 9, 1929, Misc. No. 12 (1929), Cmd. 3452, see A. Pearce Higgins, British Acceptance of Compulsory Arbitration under the “ Optional Clause” and Its Implications, Cambridge: Heffer & Sons, 1929; Lauterpacht, H., “ The British Reservations to the Optional Clause,”; Economica (June, 1930), p. 137;Google Scholar Sir Williams, John Fischer , “The Optional Clause”, 11 British Year Book of International Law (1930), p. 63.Google Scholar
17 95 League of Nations Treaty Series, p. 183.
18 League of Nations Document, C. 351.M.145.1930.V. (Several printer's errors occur in this text.) See the writer's comment in this Journal , Vol. 24, p. 462.
19 In 11 Révume de Droit International et de Legislation Comparée (3d ser., 1930), p. 272.
20 See also the writer's study of this subject, published in 9 Foreign Affairs (1930), p. 341.
21 For the text, see League of Nations Document, C.492.M.156.1929.V.
22 League of Nations Official Journal, 1930, p. 505.
23 The objections of Cuba were shared by two other states, the Dominican Republic and Guatemala. Both of these states are signatoriesto the protocol of December 16, 1920, but as neither has ratified that instrument, their objections did not have to be considered by the Council.
24 Journal of the Eleventh Assembly, p. 269.
25 The provision in paragraph 4 of the protocol is the only reference to its coming into force, and the condition there set has not been fulfilled.
26 League of Nations Document, C.166.M.66.1929.V., p. 8.
27 League of Nations Document, C.492.M.156.1929.V.
28 See Publications of the Court, Series E, No. 3, p. 177; No. 4, p. 270.
29 League of Nations Official Journal, Special Supplement No. 75, p. 117.
30 During its first nine years, the duration of the court's sessions averaged 143.7 days a year.
31 Sir Levinson, Mr. Salmon 0. , in an article entitled “ The A B C of the World Court” published in Unity, January 6, 1930, seems to think that Article 68 would be in some sense mandatory on the court.Google Scholar His emphasis on “ consent of the parties” seems to be grounded on a misconception of the office to be served by advisory opinions. See also, George Wharton Pepper, In the Senate (1930), p. 114.
32 Publications of the Court, Series D, No. 1, addendum. See also John Bassett Moore, Some Current Illusions and International Law, p. 115.
33 League of Nations Document, C.L.194(a).1930.V.
34 It is therefore somewhat surprising that Mr. Fachiri, Alexander P. should describe the provision in the protocol as “ a revolution in the history of international agreements.” 11 British Year Book of International Law (1930), p. 98.Google Scholar
35 League of Nations Document, C.510.1930.V.
36 League of Nations Document, C. 60th Session, P.V.3(1).
37 League of Nations Official Journal, Special Supplement, No. 83, p. 10.
38 It can hardly be argued that since the deputy-judges were elected for a period ofnine years, they would have just ground to complain if their offices were abolished during that period; the League of Nations Administrative Tribunal is not open for this purpose.
39 Journal of the Eleventh Assembly, p. 270.
40 League of Nations Document, A.7.1930.V. The procedure of resignation followed by Judge Hughes differed from that adopted by Judge Moore in 1928. See this Journal , Vol. 23, p. 23.
41 League of Nations Official Journal, 1930, p. 499.
42 Mr. Kellogg's, acceptance was announced to the Assembly on September 20, 1930.Google Scholar
43 Article 1 of the Rules of Court.
44 League of Nations Document, A.31.1930.V.
45 Idem, A.31(a).1930.V., dated Sept. 9, 1930. These nominations were received after the list had been closed on Sept. 8, 1930.
46 See Hudson, Manley O. , “ The Election of Members of the Permanent Court of International Justice,” this Journal , Vol. 24, p. 718.Google Scholar
47 The record of the election is given in the Journal of the Eleventh Assembly, pp. 271274
48 See this Journal , Vol. 24, p. 42
49 League of Nations Document, C.338.M.138.1930.V.
50 League of Nations Official Journal, Special Supplement No. 83, p. 12.
51 See the writer's articles on each year of the court, in this Journal , Vol. 17, p. 15; Vol.18, p. 1; Vol. 19, p. 48; Vol. 20, p. 1; Vol. 21, p. 26; Vol. 22, p. 1; Vol. 23, p. 1; Vol. 24, p. 20.
52 The numbering of the sessions does not include the preliminary session of 1922; therefore, the “ nineteenth” session was the last held in 1930.
53 Not including the session of the Chamber for Summary Procedure
54 The number is probably larger.