Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-pwrkn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-19T16:55:47.997Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Surrender, Occupation, and Private Property in International Law: An Evaluation of U.S. Practice in Japan. By Nisuke Ando. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1991. Pp. xvi, 208. Index. $69.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2017

Jessica Heslop  and
Joel Roberto
Jessica Heslop
Affiliation:
Harvard Law School
Joel Roberto
Affiliation:
Harvard Law School
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Book Reviews and Notes
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 87 , Issue 4 , October 1993 , pp. 684 - 686
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1993

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.)

References

1 Ando makes three broad conclusions. See infra.

2 This makes the U.S. occupational measures somewhat analogous to the takings of private property involved in Hawaii Housing Authority v. Midkiff. See 467 U.S. 229 (1984). In Midkiff, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment permits state-de creed transfer of property from one private party to another.

3 The Zaibatsu were transferred to a holding company similar to Germany’s Treuhandanstalt and subsequently sold off in pieces; however, the dissolution was intentionally a partial one (p. 26).

4 The 15 articles of the Hague Regulations of 1907 constitute an integral part of the Hague Convention with Respect to the Laws and Customs of War on Land, Oct. 18, 1907, 36 Stat. 2277, 1 Bevans 631.

5 The principle of precariousness states that enemy private property rights may be interfered with only to the extent necessary to ensure the orderly administration of the occupation (p. 78).

6 Specifically, the Potsdam Declaration and the Instrument of Surrender, which formed the legal basis of the occupation.