ULOGA OBIČAJA U MODERNOM MEĐUNARODNOM PRAVU I ZNAČAJ ZA MEĐUNARODNE INTEGRACIJE REPUBLIKE SRBIJE

Bojan M. Milisavljević

Sažetak

Predmet istraživanja u ovom radu jestu običajna pravna pravila, procedura dokazivanja običaja, instrumenti za njihovo dokazivanje, analiza nastajanja običaja. U tom pravcu je posebno analizirana praksa država, ali i rad Komisije za međunarodno pravo Ujedinjenih nacija. Kao nezaobilazni materijal za istraživanje korišćene su presude Međunarodnog suda pravde koje su praktični pokazatelj važne uloge koju običaji imaju u modernom međunarodnom pravu. Posebna pažnja usmerena je na ulogu koju običaji imaju u procesu međunarodnih integracija Republike Srbije. Jedan od osnovnih ciljeva rada jeste dokazivanje da običaji danas imaju veoma značajno mesto i igraju veliku ulogu u primeni pravnih pravila međunarodnog prava. Posebna pažnja je usmerena na utvrđivanju objektiviziranih pravila u vezi identifikacije običaja čija je svrha da se svi akteri koji primenjuju običaje upoznaju sa detektovanim pravilima. Naročita korist od pravila koje je utvrdila Komisija za međunarodno pravo mogla bi biti za rad unutrašnjih državnih organa svih država, a posebno Republike Srbije. Poštovanje opšteprihvaćenih pravila je neophodni uslov za međunarodne integracije naše države, a rad svih organa mora pratiti pozitivna pravila međunarodnog prava.

Reference

1. Bedjaoui, Mohammed, Toward a new international economic order, 1979, Holmes & Meier, 1979;
2. Brownlie, Ian, System of the Law of Nations, State Responsibility, Part I. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1983;
3. Crawford, James, Alain Pellet, and Simon Olleson, eds. The Law of International Responsibility, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010;
4. Crawford, James, State Responsibility, The General Part, Cambridge University Press, 2013, Part II;
5. Crawford, James, The ILC Articles on State Responsibility, Cambridge, 2002;
6. Friedmann, Wolfgang, The changing structure of international law, Columbia University Press, 1964;
7. Koskenniemi, Martti, From Apology to Utopia: The Structure of International Legal Argument, Cambridge University Press, 2005;
8. Malanczuk, Akehursts – Peter, Modern Introduction to International Law, 7th Revised Edition, 1997;
9. Meron, Theodor, Human Rights and Humanitarian Norms as customary law, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1989;
10. Pellet, Alain, The ILC’s Articles on State Responsibility for Internationally Wrongfull Acts and Related Texts, alainpellet.eu/…/PELLET%20-%202010%20-%20ILC’s%20Article;
11. Provost, René, ed. State Responsibility in International Law, Aldershot, UK: Ashgate, 2002;
12. Ragazzi, Maurizio, International Responsibility Today: Essays in Memory of Oscar Schachter, Leiden, The Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff, 2005;
13. Villager, Mark, Customary International law and treaties, Martinus Nijholf Publishers, 1985;
14. Крећа, Миленко, Међународно јавно право, Правни факултет Универзитета у Београду, Београд, 2014;
15. “Wimbledon Case”, 1923, P.C.I.J., Series A, No. 1;
16. Advisory Opinion, Legality of Nuclear Weapons, Dissenting Opinion of Jugde Schwebel;
17. Asylum Case, ICJ Reports, 1950;
18. Corfu Channel, Merits, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1949;
19. Factory at Chorzów, Jurisdiction, Judgment No. 8, 1927, P.C.I.J., Series A, No. 9; Merits, Judgment No. 13, 1928, P.C.I.J., Series A, No. 17;
20. Interpretation of  Peace  Treaties  with  Bulgaria,  Hungary  and  Romania,  Second Phase, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1950;
21. Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America), Merits, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1986;
22. Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua, Merits, 1986, ICJ Reports;
23. Phosphates in Morocco, Judgment, 1938, P.C.I.J., Series A/B, No. 74;
24. Reparation for Injuries Suffered in the Service of the United Nations, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1949;
25. Commission’s Articles on the Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, 2001, Part One, Chapter II,
26. Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, Resolution adopted by the General Assembly, A/RES/25/2625;
27. First report on formation and evidence of customary international law, by Michael Wood, Special Rapporteur, International Law Commission Sixty-fifth session Geneva, 2013;
28. Second report on Identification of customary international law, Michael Wood, Special Rapporteur, International Law Commission Sixty-sixth session, 2014;
29. Yearbook of the International Law Commission 1950, vol. II, 367-374, Report of the ILC for 1950;
30. Akehurst, Michael, „Custom as a source of International Law“, British Journal of International Law, br. 1, 1975;
31. Annacker, Claudia, „Part Two of the ILC’s Draft Articles on Stare Responsibility“, 37 German Yearbook of International Law, 1994;
32. Anthony D’Amato, „Trashing Customary International Law“, American Journal of International Law, Vol. 81, num. 1, 1987;
33. Aust, H.P., „Through the Prism of Diversiry: the Articles on Stare Responsibility in the Light of the ILC Fragmentation Report“49, German Yearbook of International Law, 2006;
34. Baxter, Richard R., „Multilateral Treaties as evidence of customary international law“, 41 British Yearbook of International Law, 1965 – 1966;
35. Cheng, Bin, United Nations Resolutions on Outer Space: Instant International Customary Law, Indian JIL, 1965;
36. Crawford, James, „Revising the Draft Articles on Stare Responsibility“, 10 European Journal of International Law, 1999;
37. D’Amato, Anthony, “Wanted: A Comprehensive Theory of Custom in International Law“, Texas International Law Forum 4/1968;
38. Kelly, Patrick, „The twilight of customary international law“, 40 Virginia Journal of International Law, 1999-2000;
39. Kontorovich, Eugene, „Inefficient Customs in International Law“, Wm & Mary. L. Rev., 2006 – 2007;
40. Kopelmanas, Lazare, “Custom as a Means of the Creation of International Law”, British Yearbook of International Law, 18/1937;
41. Ochoa, Christiana, „The Individual and Customary International Law Formation“, J. Int’l L., 2007 – 2008;
42. Reisman, Michael, „The Cult of Custom in the late 20th Century“, W. Int. l. L. J., 1987;
43. Roberts, Anthea Elizabeth, „Traditional and Modern Approaches to Customary International Law: A Reconciliation“, The American Journal of International Law, 95, No. 4, Oct., 2001;
44. Милисављевић, Бојан „Одговорност држава за међународне противправне акте – општи осврт“, Harmonius, Journal of Legal and Social Studies in South East Europe, број 1, 2013;
45. Милисављевић, Бојан, „Приписивост као услов одговорности државе у међународном праву“, Анали Правног факултета Универзитета у Београду, број 2 из 2012;