Teks
Status and extent of adjacent waters: a historical orientation
previously by Western publicists. But on the whole the authors approach to the subject and his handling of original and secondary source materials leaves much to be desired. While it may be true, for example, that doc trine often is irrelevant to state practice, the question remains as to what role it serves in the U.S.S.R. One such purpose is to be a conceptual and linguistic medium for debating issues of legal policy confronting Soviet jurists, and on numerous occasions doctrinal views have been in spired expressly by or related directly to governmental attitudes as to what the content should be of a particular legal norm. The relationship between doctrine and practice is a dynamic one which should not be so easily cast aside. It is justly insisted in the preface that attention must be given to those aspects of international relations, such as technological change and the interests of individual Powers, which determine the shape of the interna tional community. Yet in the present volume this approach is generally restricted to an appraisal of state practice within the context of Soviet domestic and foreign policies. As a result, the reader is left with the im pression that Soviet practice in the normal course of events has departed markedly from that of other countries, whereas more often than not Soviet views of “the state of the law” are shared by non-Socialist Powers or are founded upon a narrow construction of customary or conventional norms. Doctrinal views of what the law should be are, of course, another matter. There are curious lapses in documentation of the volume as well. The continental shelf is discussed without any reference to Soviet writings, views in the International Law Commission, or legislation, and only one of the bilateral treaties delimiting the Soviet shelf is cited. The 1929 Soviet Merchant Shipping Code is mentioned throughout, rather than its very different successor of 1968 (although the 1968 occupation of Czecho slovakia receives critical comment). In the chapter on diplomatic and consular law, data on state practice is drawn from the first eight volumes of Dokumenty vneshnei politiki SSSR, which cover the period 1917-25, but the succeeding seven volumes for 1926-32 are wholly and unaccount ably overlooked. The treatment of the post-1925 era is based mostly upon summary descriptions of Soviet legislation and press clippings of diplomatic incidents, with very little attention paid to the legal issues involved. None of Ginsburgs’ writings on Soviet citizenship, including those published in this J o u r n a l , are recognized in the bibliography or footnotes, and a wide range of other important secondary materials also could have been consulted profitably.
Tersedia | SJN00006332 | 910.3 OUD s | Perpustakaan Amir Machmud |
Tidak tersedia versi lain