Coordination of Fragmentation within the International Air Law

 
 
 
  • Abstract
  • Keywords
  • References
  • PDF
  • Abstract


    The purpose of the study is to analyze the development and branching of the directions for codification and institutionalization of international air law in the context of discussions involving fragmentation of international law. The main task of the work was to determine, on the example of international air law, the nature of the formation and codification of unified international standards in this area and their subsequent distribution of the areas of regulation and levels of specification by specialized subjects of delegated rule-making. There have been used methods of comparativistics and hermeneutics on which, first of all, the comparison and interpretation of the texts of the Paris and Chicago Conventions and their annexes have been made. It is shown that international public law has a tendency of movement from national acts through the level of bilateral agreements to the formation of agreements and regulations of the regional and global levels. This tendency is also quite clearly expressed in the history of the development of international air law. It is also determined, as a fundamental historical trend, the preservation of the dynamic inverse association between the indicated levels in the complication and branching of the directions of codification and institutionalization of international air law. This indicates the need to take into account a non-linear nature of developmental processes of any legal field, including in its characteristics complications, with the support of constant feedback between different levels of legal personality; connection of the subject area of regulation with the specific volume of competence of institutions responsible for one or another level of delegated rule-making, etc. Considering these and other aspects is important to harmonize the problems of fragmentation and to ensure the effectiveness of international law in general and international air law in particular. The connection of the fragmentation of international law is largely due to the uncertainty of the status of individual levels of delegated legal personality and inconsistency of their correlation at the level of international agreements. The problems of fragmentation, which are certainly inadmissible from the point of view of positivist legal thinking, are a source of uncertainty in many important issues that require clear coherence, regardless of conceptual approaches. From the standpoint of postpositivist concepts, it should be sought not so much in substantive codified rules, but in the effectiveness of procedural norms and the activities of the institutions responsible for reconciling the conflict of interests. However, substantive rules must be also involved in new pluralistic approaches to the law, which is not identified with the will of the state.

     

     


  • Keywords


    International Public Law, Flight Rules, Multilevelness of the Legal System, International Air Law, Harmonization of Law

  • References


      [1] Plotnikov OV (2013), Fragmentation of International Law: Methodological Aspect. Current Issues of the State and Law. 2013; 67.2: 200-207. Ukrainian.

      [2] Herdegen M (2008), European Law. Kyiv: K.I.S.; 2008. 528 p. Ukrainian.

      [3] Pysmenna VO (2013), Dual Functionality as a Solidarity Understanding of International Law by George Scelle. Scientific reporter of the International Humanitarian University. 2013; 5:339-342. Ukrainian.

      [4] Scelle J (2008), Precise law of people: principles and systematic. Paris: Sirey, 1932-34; Dalloz, 2008. Available from:https://www.editions-dalloz.fr/precis-de-droit-des-gens-principes-et-systematique.html. French.

      [5] Fragmentation of International Law: Difficulties Arising from the Diversification and Expansion of International Law. United Nations. Report of the International Law Commission: 57th session. Geneva, May 1 – June 9 and July 3 – August 11, 2006. Available from: http://legal.un.org/docs/?symbol=A/CN.4/L.682

      [6] Bordunov VD (2006), International Air Law. Moscow: Aviabiznes, Nauchnaiakniha; 2006. 464 p.Russian.

      [7] Convention Relating to the Regulation of Aerial Navigation. Paris, October 13, 1919. Available from: http://www.spacelaw.olemiss.edu/library/aviation/IntAgr/multilateral/1919_Paris_conevention.pdf

      [8] Neradko AK. The 70th anniversary of the Chicago Convention. Aviation EXplorer, December 5, 2014. Available from: www.aex.ru/docs/3/2014/12/5/2158. Russian.

      [9] Convention on International Civil Aviation of 1944. [Internet]. Convention on International Civil Aviation, Chicago, December 7, 1944. Ninth Edition, 2006. Available from: https://www.icao.int/publications/Documents/7300_9ed.pdf

      [10] ICAO European and North Atlantic regional office celebrates 70 years of assisting states. ICAO. July 12, 2016. [Internet]. Available from: https://www.icao.int/Newsroom/Pages/RU/ICAO-European-and-North-Atlantic-Regional-Office-Celebrates-70-Years-of-Assisting-States.aspx

      [11] Global Aviation Safety Plan. Highlights. ICAO, 216b. Available from: https://www.icao.int/safety/SafetyManagement/Documents/Global%20Aviation%20Safety%20Plan%20Highlights_en.pdf

      [12] Rules of the Air. Annex 2 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation. February 25, 1946. 10th Edition, July 2005. ICAO. Available from: http://cockpitdata.com/Gallery/download/45

      [13] State/Civil Aircraft Definition and its Impact on Aviation. LC/36-Wp/2-6. Montreal. November 30 – December 3, 2015. Available from: https://www.icao.int/Meetings/LC36/Working%20Papers/LC%2036%20-%20WP%202-6.en.pdf

      [14] Card Index of International Standards. [Internet]. Tehexpert: Russia; 2018. Available from: http://docs.cntd.ru/search/internationalstandards. Russian.

      [15] Annex on Air Transport Services to the General Agreement on Trade in Services, April 15, 1994. Available from: https://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/26-gats.pdf

      [16] Agreement on Trade in Civil Aircraft, Geneva, April 12, 1979 (BISD 26S/162).Available from: https://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/air-79_e.htm

      [17] Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules for International Carriage by Air. Montreal, May 28, 1999. Available from: https://www.jus.uio.no/lm/air.carriage.unification.convention.montreal.1999/

      [18] Challenges and Opportunities of Liberalization, World wide Air Transport Conference. Montreal, March 24-29, 2003. Available from: https://www.icao.int/Meetings/ATConf5/Documents/ATConf5_wp002_en.pdf

      [19] Declaration of Global Principles for the Liberalization of International Air Transport. Montreal, 24 to 29 March 2003. Available from:https://www.icao.int/Meetings/ATConf5/Documents/ATConf5_wp019_en.pdf

      [20] Leathley C (2007), An institutional hierarchy to combat fragmentation of international law: has the ILC missed an opportunity? New York University Journal of International Law and Politics. 2007; 40: 259-306.

      [21] Radzivill OA (2017), The Law of Nations from the Neolithic to the New Time. Kyiv: NAU; 2017. 2(1) 460 p. Ukrainian.


 

View

Download

Article ID: 18260
 
DOI: 10.14419/ijet.v7i3.30.18260




Copyright © 2012-2015 Science Publishing Corporation Inc. All rights reserved.