Military Activities or Law Enforcement Activities? Reflections on the Dispute Concerning the Detention of Ukrainian Naval Vessels and Servicemen

Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review

Standard

Military Activities or Law Enforcement Activities? Reflections on the Dispute Concerning the Detention of Ukrainian Naval Vessels and Servicemen. / Tanaka, Yoshifumi.

In: Korean Journal of International and Comparative Law, Vol. 11, No. 1, 2023, p. 1-26.

Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review

Harvard

Tanaka, Y 2023, 'Military Activities or Law Enforcement Activities? Reflections on the Dispute Concerning the Detention of Ukrainian Naval Vessels and Servicemen', Korean Journal of International and Comparative Law, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1163/22134484-12340172

APA

Tanaka, Y. (2023). Military Activities or Law Enforcement Activities? Reflections on the Dispute Concerning the Detention of Ukrainian Naval Vessels and Servicemen. Korean Journal of International and Comparative Law, 11(1), 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1163/22134484-12340172

Vancouver

Tanaka Y. Military Activities or Law Enforcement Activities? Reflections on the Dispute Concerning the Detention of Ukrainian Naval Vessels and Servicemen. Korean Journal of International and Comparative Law. 2023;11(1):1-26. https://doi.org/10.1163/22134484-12340172

Author

Tanaka, Yoshifumi. / Military Activities or Law Enforcement Activities? Reflections on the Dispute Concerning the Detention of Ukrainian Naval Vessels and Servicemen. In: Korean Journal of International and Comparative Law. 2023 ; Vol. 11, No. 1. pp. 1-26.

Bibtex

@article{1e583f8365c94e599a7ad152d34c3f63,
title = "Military Activities or Law Enforcement Activities?: Reflections on the Dispute Concerning the Detention of Ukrainian Naval Vessels and Servicemen",
abstract = "The interpretation of “disputes concerning military activities” under Article 298(1)(b) of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) rests on a sensitive balance between the protection of strategic interests of States and the need for peaceful settlement of international disputes. There, an essential issue arises how an adjudicative body acting under Part XV UNCLOS should assess the nature of conducts of State for the purposes of Article 298(1)(b). This issue was vividly raised in the dispute between Ukraine and the Russian Federation with regard to the detention of Ukrainian naval vessels and servicemen. In this regard, both the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) and the arbitral tribunal set out in accordance with Annex VII UNCLOS wrestled with this issue. This article examines the manner of the interpretation of the concept of the military activities for the purposes of Article 298(1)(b) by comparing the approaches taken by ITLOS and the Annex VII arbitral tribunal.",
author = "Yoshifumi Tanaka",
year = "2023",
doi = "10.1163/22134484-12340172",
language = "English",
volume = "11",
pages = "1--26",
journal = "Korean Journal of International and Comparative Law",
issn = "2213-4476",
publisher = "Brill",
number = "1",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Military Activities or Law Enforcement Activities?

T2 - Reflections on the Dispute Concerning the Detention of Ukrainian Naval Vessels and Servicemen

AU - Tanaka, Yoshifumi

PY - 2023

Y1 - 2023

N2 - The interpretation of “disputes concerning military activities” under Article 298(1)(b) of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) rests on a sensitive balance between the protection of strategic interests of States and the need for peaceful settlement of international disputes. There, an essential issue arises how an adjudicative body acting under Part XV UNCLOS should assess the nature of conducts of State for the purposes of Article 298(1)(b). This issue was vividly raised in the dispute between Ukraine and the Russian Federation with regard to the detention of Ukrainian naval vessels and servicemen. In this regard, both the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) and the arbitral tribunal set out in accordance with Annex VII UNCLOS wrestled with this issue. This article examines the manner of the interpretation of the concept of the military activities for the purposes of Article 298(1)(b) by comparing the approaches taken by ITLOS and the Annex VII arbitral tribunal.

AB - The interpretation of “disputes concerning military activities” under Article 298(1)(b) of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) rests on a sensitive balance between the protection of strategic interests of States and the need for peaceful settlement of international disputes. There, an essential issue arises how an adjudicative body acting under Part XV UNCLOS should assess the nature of conducts of State for the purposes of Article 298(1)(b). This issue was vividly raised in the dispute between Ukraine and the Russian Federation with regard to the detention of Ukrainian naval vessels and servicemen. In this regard, both the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) and the arbitral tribunal set out in accordance with Annex VII UNCLOS wrestled with this issue. This article examines the manner of the interpretation of the concept of the military activities for the purposes of Article 298(1)(b) by comparing the approaches taken by ITLOS and the Annex VII arbitral tribunal.

U2 - 10.1163/22134484-12340172

DO - 10.1163/22134484-12340172

M3 - Journal article

VL - 11

SP - 1

EP - 26

JO - Korean Journal of International and Comparative Law

JF - Korean Journal of International and Comparative Law

SN - 2213-4476

IS - 1

ER -

ID: 347637024