Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-11T01:36:48.696Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The World Court Interprets Another International Agreement

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 April 2017

Charles Cheney Hyde
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. As you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Editorial Comment
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 29 , Issue 3 , July 1935 , pp. 479 - 482
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1935

References

1 Publications, Permanent Court of International Justice, Series A/B, No. 64.

2 The opinion, according to the dissenting judges, “involves to some extent a departure from the principles hitherto adopted by this Court in the interpretation of international instruments, that in presence of a clause which is reasonably clear the Court is bound to apply it as it stands without considering whether other provisions might with advantage have been added to it or substituted for it, and this even if the results following from it may in some particular hypothesis seem unsatisfactory.” (Id., 25-26.)

3 According to Article 5 of the Declaration: “Albanian nationals who belong to racial, religious or linguistic minorities will enjoy the same treatment and security in law and in fact as other Albanian nationals. In particular they shall have an equal right to maintain, manage and control at their own expense or to establish in the future, charitable, religious and social institutions, schools and other educational establishments, with the right to use their own language and to exercise their religion freely therein. “Within six months from the date of the present Declaration, detailed information will be presented to the Council of the League of Nations with regard to the legal status of the religious communities, Churches, Convents, schools, voluntary establishments, and associations of racial, religious and linguistic minorities. The Albanian Government will take into consideration any advice it might receive from the League of Nations with regard to this question.” (Id., 5.)

4 The complete text of the Declaration is contained in Annex III, id., 35-36.

5 Id., 5.

6 Publications, Permanent Court of International Justice, Series A/B, No. 64, 15.

7 Id.

8 Id., 16. Compare the Greek contentions concerning this point. Id.

9 Id., 17. The French text assumes a happier form than the English translation. The former makes reference to “des moyens appropriés pour la conservation des caractères ethniques, des traditions et de la physionomie nationales.“

10 The court said in this connection: “The right provided by the Declaration is in fact the minimum necessary to guarantee effective and genuine equality as between the majority and the minority.” (Id., 20.)

11 The language quoted is taken from the minority opinion, id., 25. ,

12 Id., 19.

13 The language quoted is taken from the minority opinion, id., 24 and 32.

14 Id., 25-26, and 32.

15 The minority said, in this connection: “This interpretation takes no sufficient account of the events leading up to the preparation of the text of the Declaration, in particular of the fact that the Greek Government asked for the insertion of a provision which would have conferred an unconditional right and made this request upon the ground that it was necessary in the case of Albania to go beyond the usual provisions of a minority treaty, and of the fact that the Council, instead of inserting the Greek proposal, used a wording on the same lines as that adopted in other minority treaties.” (Id., 32.)

16 Publications, Permanent Court of International Justice, Series A, No. 1.

17 See Advisory Opinion of Nov. 15, 1932, concerning the interpretation of the Convention of 1919 concerning the Employment of Women during the Night, Publications, Permanent Court of International Justice, Series A/B, No. 50, 365, 378. See, also, the Advisory Opinion No. 2 concerning the question whether agricultural labor was embraced within the competence of the International Labor Organization, id., Series B, No. 2, p. 41; Case of the S.S.Lotus, id., Series A, No. 10, pp. 16-17; Advisory Opinion No. 14 concerning the jurisdiction of the European Commission of the Danube between Galatz and Bra?la, id., Series B, No. 14, pp. 28 and 31; Advisory Opinion interpretative of the Statute of the Memel Territory (Preliminary Objection), June 24, 1932, id., Series A/B, No. 47, p. 249.

18 Publications, Permanent Court of International Justice, Series A/B, No. 50, 383.

19 See Judgment in the Lighthouses Case between France and Greece, March 17, 1934, Publications, Permanent Court of International Justice, Series A/B, No. 62, 13.