The Coördination of Inter-American Peace Agreements
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 9548808 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Charles G Fenwick (corresponding author) |
| Year | 1944 |
| Volume | 38 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 4-19 |
| Publication date | 1944-01-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | American Journal of International Law (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0002-9300 • E-ISSN: 2161-7953 |
| Publisher | Cambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.2307/2192528 |
| OpenAlex | W2335053601 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 4 |
During the course of some thirteen years, from the Fifth International Conference of American States at Santiago in 1923 to the Conference for the Maintenance of Peace at Buenos Aires in 1936, the American Republics adopted a wide variety of treaties and conventions dealing with the pacific settlement of disputes arising between them. These agreements cover all of the generally accepted procedures, except that of judicial settlement in the sense of submission to a permanent court as distinct from an arbitral tribunal. Each of the separate procedures appears to have been adopted without any plan of coordinating it with other procedures, with the result that there is duplication and overlapping of provisions and occasionally open contradiction. There is no logical progression of obligations so that a dispute could, at the initiative of a plaintiff State, go forward from one procedure to another until final settlement
Archaeology · Business · Contradiction · Plaintiff · Plan (archaeology · Political science · Settlement (finance · State (computer science · Tribunal · Variety (cybernetics · History · International Arbitration and Investment Law · International Law and Human Rights · Law
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |