Search results

You are looking at 1 - 2 of 2 items for :

  • "special relationship" x
  • Manchester International Law x
  • Refine by access: All content x
Clear All
Mirror or looking-glass?
Luíza Leão Soares Pereira

determination’ of international law, but part of the complex system whereby custom develops. 3 Why the Commission did not go further As explained above, the Commission did not go far enough in assessing its role in the development of custom. Although it accepted that its output ‘may have particular value’, it attached this value to its ‘special relationship to states’, which is only part of the story. It also only addressed its role in the commentary, not in the conclusions themselves. This is in contrast with ‘Teachings’ and ‘Decisions of courts and tribunals

in International organisations, non-State actors, and the formation of customary international law
Abstract only
Convention 169
Patrick Thornberry

ownership and possession, a common substratum, is what is indicated. Such a functional concept would respect the exigencies of indigenous activity, in line with the recognition of their special relationship with land in Article 13. It would incorporate, through the prism of local terminology, the legal empowerments that underpin ownership/possession.103 There is a distinction in Article 14 between the ownership and possession rights in the lands of traditional occupation (first sentence), and the rights of use to lands not exclusively occupied (second sentence): the latter

in Indigenous peoples and human rights