Judicialisation of the Sea: An Elaboration of Our Argument and Its Merits
In: The International Journal of Marine and Coastal LawSearch for other papers by Sara McLaughlin Mitchell in
Current site
Google Scholar
Search for other papers by Andrew P. Owsiak in
Current site
Google Scholar
Abstract
In a previous article, we theorised that courts cast a shadow that changes the bargaining behaviour of potential litigant States. When two States prefer the same judicial forum under Article 287 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (LOSC), they have fewer maritime disputes, more peaceful negotiations, and less need for judicial dispute settlement. This article elaborates on several aspects of our argument including (i) differences in legal and social science perspectives, (ii) generalizability to other courts and regions, (iii) the clarity of judicial decisions, (iv) whether accepting the same judicial forum through Article 287 declarations matters, (v) conflict management as a process, (vi) how domestic legal traditions influence Article 287 declarations, and (vii) the possibility of selection or heterogeneous effects. Our discussion helps to address some of the criticisms raised in the AJIL Unbound (2021) forum on our article and presents avenues for future analyses.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
| All Time | Past Year | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 194 | 113 | 9 |
| Full Text Views | 164 | 28 | 0 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 339 | 64 | 1 |
Judicialisation of the Sea: An Elaboration of Our Argument and Its Merits
In: The International Journal of Marine and Coastal LawSearch for other papers by Sara McLaughlin Mitchell in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Andrew P. Owsiak in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Abstract
In a previous article, we theorised that courts cast a shadow that changes the bargaining behaviour of potential litigant States. When two States prefer the same judicial forum under Article 287 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (LOSC), they have fewer maritime disputes, more peaceful negotiations, and less need for judicial dispute settlement. This article elaborates on several aspects of our argument including (i) differences in legal and social science perspectives, (ii) generalizability to other courts and regions, (iii) the clarity of judicial decisions, (iv) whether accepting the same judicial forum through Article 287 declarations matters, (v) conflict management as a process, (vi) how domestic legal traditions influence Article 287 declarations, and (vii) the possibility of selection or heterogeneous effects. Our discussion helps to address some of the criticisms raised in the AJIL Unbound (2021) forum on our article and presents avenues for future analyses.
| All Time | Past Year | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 194 | 113 | 9 |
| Full Text Views | 164 | 28 | 0 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 339 | 64 | 1 |