• Title/Summary/Keyword: Piracy

Search Result 153, Processing Time 0.023 seconds

The Legal Status of Military Aircraft in the High Seas

  • Kim, Han Taek
    • The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
    • /
    • v.32 no.1
    • /
    • pp.201-224
    • /
    • 2017
  • The main subject of this article focused on the legal status of the military aircraft in the high seas. For this the legal status of the military aircraft, the freedom of overflight, the right of hot pursuit, the right of visit and Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) were dealt. The 1944 Chicago Convention neither explicitly nor implicitly negated the customary norms affecting the legal status of military aircraft as initially codified within the 1919 Paris Convention. So the status of military aircraft was not redefined with the Chicago Convention and remains, as stated in the 1919 Paris Convention, as a norm of customary international law. The analyses on the legal status of the military aircraft in the high seas are found as follows; According to the Article 95 of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) warships on the high seas have complete immunity from the jurisdiction of any State other than the flag State. We can suppose that the military aircraft in the high seas have also complete immunity from the jurisdiction of any State other than the flag State. According to the Article 111 (5) of the UNCLOS the right of hot pursuit may be exercised only by warships or military aircraft, or other ships or aircraft clearly marked and identifiable as being on government service and authorized to that effect. We can conclude that the right of hot pursuit may be exercised by military aircraft. According to the Article 110 of the UNCLOS a warship which encounters on the high seas a foreign ship, is not justified in boarding it unless there is reasonable ground for suspecting that: (a) the ship is engaged in piracy, (b) the ship is engaged in the slave trade, (c) the ship is engaged in an unauthorized broadcasting and the flag State of the warship has jurisdiction under article 109, (d) the ship is without nationality, or (e) though flying a foreign flag or refusing to show its flag, the ship is, in reality, of the same nationality as the warship. These provisions apply mutatis mutandis to military aircraft. As for Air Defence Identification Zone (ADIZ) it is established and declared unilaterally by the air force of a state for the national security. However, there are no articles dealing with it in the 1944 Chicago Convention and there are no international standards to recognize or prohibit the establishment of ADIZs. ADIZ is not interpreted as the expansion of territorial airspace.

  • PDF

An analysis on the possession and infringement of copyright on the contents-related contest exhibit (콘텐츠 관련 공모전의 저작권 소유와 저작권 침해 분석)

  • Park, Keong-Cheol;Jung, Sun-Mee
    • Cartoon and Animation Studies
    • /
    • s.29
    • /
    • pp.243-266
    • /
    • 2012
  • As contest exhibits have been activated, a variety of organizations are holding contest with various purposes. Analysis on the guidelines prepared by various sponsoring bodies ranging from public organizations to privately owned businesses shows that sponsoring bodies tend to possess copyrights of entries. Parts of guidelines of contest exhibit are the contract. While sponsoring body shows its opinion on copyright through guidelines, individual participant tends to consider it simply as a form to submit for contest exhibit rather than a contract. Now is the time to bring out a question in respect of the copyright on the contest exhibit. The important fact is that copyright on corporate contents is important, but copyright on individual contents is equally important and it must be protected and respected. This study aims to bring out a question on copyright by analyzing possession and infringement of copyright that stands forth in the guidelines of contest exhibit. Provisions on copyright of contest exhibit play a role as a contract. Provisions on copyright of contest exhibit shall be the ones which can be understood and accepted by both sponsoring body and winner who are the A and B of a contract. For this, change in perception of sponsoring bodies ranging from public organizations to privately owned businesses with prominent position is strongly required. For the foregoing, First, Indication of Copyright: Clear and concrete terms must be used. Second, Scope of Interpretation: Concrete and detailed indication must be made for preventing indication that allows comprehensive interpretation. Third, Cost for Author's Property Right: In case sponsoring body needs to possess or use the author's property right of prize-winning work, proper rights on use considering prize money corresponding to possession or use of author's property right must be indicated. Fourth, Term of Use: The term for using author's property right must be indicated. Fifth, Scope of Rights: The scope of author's property right that sponsoring body requires must be limited and indicated. Sixth, Mutual Respect: Items related to copyright must be indicated on the basis of the concept of bilateral contract founded on mutual consideration and respect, not on the concept of unilateral contract.

Eurasian Naval Power on Display: Sino-Russian Naval Exercises under Presidents Xi and Putin (유라시아 지역의 해군 전력 과시: 시진핑 주석과 푸틴 대통령 체제 하에 펼쳐지는 중러 해상합동훈련)

  • Richard Weitz
    • Maritime Security
    • /
    • v.5 no.1
    • /
    • pp.1-53
    • /
    • 2022
  • One manifestation of the contemporary era of renewed great power competition has been the deepening relationship between China and Russia. Their strengthening military ties, notwithstanding their lack of a formal defense alliance, have been especially striking. Since China and Russia deploy two of the world's most powerful navies, their growing maritime cooperation has been one of the most significant international security developments of recent years. The Sino-Russian naval exercises, involving varying platforms and locations, have built on years of high-level personnel exchanges, large Russian weapons sales to China, the Sino-Russia Treaty of Friendship, and other forms of cooperation. Though the joint Sino-Russian naval drills began soon after Beijing and Moscow ended their Cold War confrontation, these exercises have become much more important during the last decade, essentially becoming a core pillar of their expanding defense partnership. China and Russia now conduct more naval exercises in more places and with more types of weapons systems than ever before. In the future, Chinese and Russian maritime drills will likely encompass new locations, capabilities, and partners-including possibly the Arctic, hypersonic delivery systems, and novel African, Asian, and Middle East partners-as well as continue such recent innovations as conducting joint naval patrols and combined arms maritime drills. China and Russia pursue several objectives through their bilateral naval cooperation. The Treaty of Good-Neighborliness and Friendly Cooperation Between the People's Republic of China and the Russian Federation lacks a mutual defense clause, but does provide for consultations about common threats. The naval exercises, which rehearse non-traditional along with traditional missions (e.g., counter-piracy and humanitarian relief as well as with high-end warfighting), provide a means to enhance their response to such mutual challenges through coordinated military activities. Though the exercises may not realize substantial interoperability gains regarding combat capabilities, the drills do highlight to foreign audiences the Sino-Russian capacity to project coordinated naval power globally. This messaging is important given the reliance of China and Russia on the world's oceans for trade and the two countries' maritime territorial disputes with other countries. The exercises can also improve their national military capabilities as well as help them learn more about the tactics, techniques, and procedures of each other. The rising Chinese Navy especially benefits from working with the Russian armed forces, which have more experience conducting maritime missions, particularly in combat operations involving multiple combat arms, than the People's Liberation Army (PLA). On the negative side, these exercises, by enhancing their combat capabilities, may make Chinese and Russian policymakers more willing to employ military force or run escalatory risks in confrontations with other states. All these impacts are amplified in Northeast Asia, where the Chinese and Russian navies conduct most of their joint exercises. Northeast Asia has become an area of intensifying maritime confrontations involving China and Russia against the United States and Japan, with South Korea situated uneasily between them. The growing ties between the Chinese and Russian navies have complicated South Korean-U.S. military planning, diverted resources from concentrating against North Korea, and worsened the regional security environment. Naval planners in the United States, South Korea, and Japan will increasingly need to consider scenarios involving both the Chinese and Russian navies. For example, South Korean and U.S. policymakers need to prepare for situations in which coordinated Chinese and Russian military aggression overtaxes the Pentagon, obligating the South Korean Navy to rapidly backfill for any U.S.-allied security gaps that arise on the Korean Peninsula. Potentially reinforcing Chinese and Russian naval support to North Korea in a maritime confrontation with South Korea and its allies would present another serious challenge. Building on the commitment of Japan and South Korea to strengthen security ties, future exercises involving Japan, South Korea, and the United States should expand to consider these potential contingencies.

  • PDF