{"created":"2023-05-15T14:24:34.551427+00:00","id":6826,"links":{},"metadata":{"_buckets":{"deposit":"9a9ed73f-6709-4e3a-9677-64ce8fb4185b"},"_deposit":{"created_by":19,"id":"6826","owners":[19],"pid":{"revision_id":0,"type":"depid","value":"6826"},"status":"published"},"_oai":{"id":"oai:bunkyo.repo.nii.ac.jp:00006826","sets":["1:27:782"]},"author_link":["8387"],"item_5_biblio_info_13":{"attribute_name":"書誌情報","attribute_value_mlt":[{"bibliographicIssueDates":{"bibliographicIssueDate":"2018-01-31"},"bibliographicIssueNumber":"2","bibliographicPageEnd":"37","bibliographicPageStart":"21","bibliographicVolumeNumber":"28","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":"International courts such as the International Court of Justice, the Inter-American Court of\nHuman Rights, the European Court of Human Rights, and the African Court of Human Rights have\ncontentious and advisory jurisdiction. With these jurisdictions, courts are given a legal basis to\ninterpret the Conventions, to order and recommend actions in accordance with international law.\nHowever, the states have a strong tendency not to accept contentious jurisdiction of international\ncourts. Due to this trend, international courts are unable to adjudicate many cases of litigation.\nMeanwhile, the advisory jurisdiction is a system in which the court can issue legal opinions without\ndirect disputes between the parties. The judgment of the court has binding power, but the advisory\nopinion is not binding. Therefore, the states tend to seek advisory opinion rather than the appeal to\ncontentious jurisdiction. Advisory opinions have become an important means of international courts.\nA court having advisory jurisdiction can hear many cases rather than a court having only contentious\njurisdiction can. Even parties who can not submit a case under the contentious jurisdiction can submit\nit under advisory jurisdiction.\nThe existence of advisory jurisdiction in a court specializing in human rights such as the Inter-\nAmerican Court of Human Rights is aimed at clarifying applicable laws before a human rights\nviolation dispute occurs between the state and individuals or groups in the human rights court\nit can. Therefore, it is possible to prevent disputes and to fulfill important law creative functions\nThe advisory opinion provided by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights also has the significance\nof developing international human rights law as described above, but some problems are pointed\nout on the other hand. The problems pointed out are, firstly, whether the advisory jurisdiction is a\ndisguised contentious jurisdiction, especially, whether advisory opinions are substantial adjudication\nfor countries that do not accept the contentious jurisdiction of the Inter-American Court of Human\nRights, and secondly, whether the court can choose the option not to issue an advisory opinion in\nresponse to a request for an advisory opinion.\nChapter 1 describes the differences in the advisory jurisdiction in international courts and\nChapter 2 discusses the issues raised by ICJ’s advisory opinion in the “Legal Consequences of the\nConstruction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory”. Chapter 3 deals with cases in which the\nadvisory jurisdiction of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights became an issue as a disguised\ncontentious jurisdiction and its problems. At last, we will evaluate the advisory opinion of the court.","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":"BKSK280203"}]},"item_5_text_7":{"attribute_name":"Author","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_text_value":"SAITO, Yoshitaka"}]},"item_5_text_8":{"attribute_name":"所属機関","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_text_value":"文教大学国際学部"}]},"item_5_text_9":{"attribute_name":"Institution","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_text_value":"The Faculty of International Studies, Bunkyo University"}]},"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":[{"creatorNames":[{"creatorName":"齊藤, 功高"}],"nameIdentifiers":[{}]}]},"item_files":{"attribute_name":"ファイル情報","attribute_type":"file","attribute_value_mlt":[{"accessrole":"open_date","date":[{"dateType":"Available","dateValue":"2018-05-01"}],"displaytype":"detail","filename":"BKSK280203.pdf","filesize":[{"value":"613.6 kB"}],"format":"application/pdf","licensetype":"license_note","mimetype":"application/pdf","url":{"label":"BKSK280203","url":"https://bunkyo.repo.nii.ac.jp/record/6826/files/BKSK280203.pdf"},"version_id":"407223b6-00a1-4098-95ef-13c13cb76041"}]},"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":"米州人権裁判所の勧告的意見に見る課題","item_titles":{"attribute_name":"タイトル","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_title":"米州人権裁判所の勧告的意見に見る課題"},{"subitem_title":"Some Issues in the Advisory Opinion of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights"}]},"item_type_id":"5","owner":"19","path":["782"],"pubdate":{"attribute_name":"公開日","attribute_value":"2018-05-01"},"publish_date":"2018-05-01","publish_status":"0","recid":"6826","relation_version_is_last":true,"title":["米州人権裁判所の勧告的意見に見る課題"],"weko_creator_id":"19","weko_shared_id":-1},"updated":"2023-05-15T15:28:12.722926+00:00"}