{"created":"2023-05-15T14:24:32.628386+00:00","id":6780,"links":{},"metadata":{"_buckets":{"deposit":"7df8536a-21d4-49e8-9e5c-fd029b600cef"},"_deposit":{"created_by":19,"id":"6780","owners":[19],"pid":{"revision_id":0,"type":"depid","value":"6780"},"status":"published"},"_oai":{"id":"oai:bunkyo.repo.nii.ac.jp:00006780","sets":["1:27:522"]},"author_link":["16"],"item_5_biblio_info_13":{"attribute_name":"書誌情報","attribute_value_mlt":[{"bibliographicIssueDates":{"bibliographicIssueDate":"2017-01-31"},"bibliographicIssueNumber":"2","bibliographicPageEnd":"87","bibliographicPageStart":"67","bibliographicVolumeNumber":"27","bibliographic_titles":[{"bibliographic_title":"文教大学国際学部紀要"},{"bibliographic_title":"Journal of the Faculty of International Studies Bunkyo University"}]}]},"item_5_description_12":{"attribute_name":"抄録","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_description":"On 5 October 2016, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) delivered its Judgments in the cases\nregarding Obligations concerning Negotiations relating to Cessation of the Nuclear Arms Race\nand to Nuclear Disarmament, instituted by the Republic of the Marshall Islands (RMI) against nine\nNuclear Powers in 2014. Defendants in those cases are three powers, India, Pakistan and the United\nKingdom all of whom accepted the jurisdiction of the ICJ through their declarations under Article 36\n(2) of the ICJ statue. The Plaintiff, the RMI based its claim mainly on Article 6 of the Nuclear Non-\nProliferation Treaty (NPT) and its corresponding customary rule, alleging a failure to fulfil obligations\nconcerning negotiations relating to the cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to\nnuclear disarmament.\nThis article exams those Judgements, considering its implications on realizing process of\nobligations to negotiate nuclear disarmament, and the role of the ICJ in nuclear disarmament. The\nICJ has dealt with some issues regarding nuclear weapons so far like nuclear tests and legality of the\nthreat or use of nuclear weapons. In its 1996 Advisory Opinion the Court unanimously declared that\n“[t]here exists an obligation to pursue in good faith and bring to a conclusion negotiations leading to\nnuclear disarmament in all its aspects under strict and effective international control”.\nIn the 2016 Judgments, however, the Court upholds the objection to jurisdiction raised by the\nDefendants, based on the absence of a dispute between the Parties, rejecting the complaint of\nthe RMI. In doing so, it adopted the “awareness” test which would decrease in disputes rising but\nincrease in new applications coming. Judges opposing to the decisions by the ICJ criticize strongly\nthis point based on the judicial economy and the sound administration of justice. Through those\njudgments, the Court showed self-restraining attitude to its role in realizing process of obligations to\nnegotiate nuclear disarmament.","subitem_description_type":"Abstract"}]},"item_5_description_38":{"attribute_name":"フォーマット","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_description":"application/pdf","subitem_description_type":"Other"}]},"item_5_source_id_19":{"attribute_name":"ISSN","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_source_identifier":"09173072"}]},"item_5_text_39":{"attribute_name":"本文言語","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_text_value":"日本語"}]},"item_5_text_42":{"attribute_name":"ID","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_text_value":"BKSK270206"}]},"item_5_text_7":{"attribute_name":"Author","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_text_value":"Yamada, Toshinori"}]},"item_5_text_8":{"attribute_name":"所属機関","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_text_value":"文教大学国際学部非常勤"}]},"item_5_version_type_35":{"attribute_name":"著者版フラグ","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_version_type":"VoR"}]},"item_creator":{"attribute_name":"著者","attribute_type":"creator","attribute_value_mlt":[{"creatorAffiliations":[{"affiliationNameIdentifiers":[{"affiliationNameIdentifier":""}],"affiliationNames":[{"affiliationName":""}]}],"creatorNames":[{"creatorName":"山田, 寿則"},{"creatorName":"ヤマダ, トシノリ"},{"creatorName":"Yamada, Toshinori"}],"familyNames":[{},{},{}],"givenNames":[{},{},{}],"nameIdentifiers":[{}]}]},"item_files":{"attribute_name":"ファイル情報","attribute_type":"file","attribute_value_mlt":[{"accessrole":"open_date","date":[{"dateType":"Available","dateValue":"2018-04-02"}],"displaytype":"detail","filename":"BKSK270206.pdf","filesize":[{"value":"628.1 kB"}],"format":"application/pdf","licensetype":"license_note","mimetype":"application/pdf","url":{"label":"BKSK270206","url":"https://bunkyo.repo.nii.ac.jp/record/6780/files/BKSK270206.pdf"},"version_id":"5e967419-cf59-4df7-9451-dabbbfcf75a5"}]},"item_language":{"attribute_name":"言語","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_language":"jpn"}]},"item_resource_type":{"attribute_name":"資源タイプ","attribute_value_mlt":[{"resourcetype":"departmental bulletin paper","resourceuri":"http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501"}]},"item_title":"核軍縮交渉義務事件（マーシャル諸島共和国対英国）判決（先決的抗弁）の検討 : 核軍縮交渉義務の実現過程と国際司法裁判所の役割の視点から","item_titles":{"attribute_name":"タイトル","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_title":"核軍縮交渉義務事件（マーシャル諸島共和国対英国）判決（先決的抗弁）の検討 : 核軍縮交渉義務の実現過程と国際司法裁判所の役割の視点から"},{"subitem_title":"Examination of Judgements in the Cases Regarding Obligations Concerning Negotiations Relating to Cessation of the Nuclear Arms Race and to Nuclear Disarmament: From a Viewpoint of Realizing Process of Obligations to Negotiate Nuclear Disarmament and Role of the International Court of Justice"}]},"item_type_id":"5","owner":"19","path":["522"],"pubdate":{"attribute_name":"公開日","attribute_value":"2018-04-02"},"publish_date":"2018-04-02","publish_status":"0","recid":"6780","relation_version_is_last":true,"title":["核軍縮交渉義務事件（マーシャル諸島共和国対英国）判決（先決的抗弁）の検討 : 核軍縮交渉義務の実現過程と国際司法裁判所の役割の視点から"],"weko_creator_id":"19","weko_shared_id":-1},"updated":"2024-03-07T06:03:55.377073+00:00"}