Legal History and the Present State of Use of the Caspian Resources
This chapter does not discuss issues relating to the legal regime of the Caspian Sea, but concentrates on deliberations concerning the status of this water basin. The rules of public international law that are applicable to the Caspian’s legal status depend primarily on the legal character of this body of water. How the Caspian Sea is regulated will therefore depend on its legal classification and the accompanying body of law. If the Caspian Sea is a “sea” in legal terms, the UNCLOS would be applicable. If, on the other hand, the Caspian Sea is a “lake” in legal terms, then customary international law concerning border lakes would apply. Given the great number of often contradictory legal opinions on its status, it seems that, rather than looking for new future regulation, it would be more rational to try to assess the compatibility of every option with current international public law doctrine. As the Caspian does not appear to fall into either category, it is therefore necessary to take into consideration its historical, geophysical and legal peculiarity in deciding whether it is an international lake or an enclosed sea. The weight of the here presented arguments suggests that the Caspian Sea is not governed by a condominium regime. It also does not appear to be a sea, so the UNCLOS does not apply directly. Nor does it seem to be an international lake. So which legal concept should be applied to successfully define the legal status of the Caspian? It is clear that there are great difficulties in resolving this issue. At the current stage of interstate negotiations regarding future legal situation of the Caspian Sea, as well as in the contemporary practice of states regarding the Caspian Sea there is, however, absolutely no reference to either of the two categories mentioned above, which are today only referred to in research papers about that subject. What remains beyond dispute is that the Caspian Sea is a water basin surrounded by five sovereign states, which must determine its future legal status. After the benefits for each of these states are considered, such a decision needs to be mutual, because only a multilateral solution can guaranty legal stability of the Caspian region.
United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea 1982, A Commentary
Volume VI is the sixth substantive volume to be published in the series. It deals with the work of the First Committee at the Third UN Conference on the Law of the Sea, namely the international seabed area. The volume thus embraces the deep seabed mining regime set out in Part XI of the 1982 Convention on the Law of the Sea together with the 1994 Agreement on its implementation. Completion of this commentary was delayed first by the consultations and negotiations that commenced in 1990 and led to the 1994 Agreement and the entry into force of the Convention. It was further delayed until the Assembly of the International Seabed Authority approved the detailed mining regulations in 2000. Additional supplementary material can be found at UNCLOS 1982 Commentary: Supplementary Documents.
Nursing theory and administrative practice: Agenda for the 1990s
&NA; Despite past progress in the development of nursing theory, a theoretical nursing perspective is not yet common to the practice of nursing administration. Such a perspective could serve as a catalyst both to advance knowledge development for administrative nursing practice and to align clinical and administrative practice within a common framework. In this article assumptions, concepts, and questions common to both clinical and administrative nursing practice are identified. Select domain concepts are used to exemplify the themes shared by nurse clinicians and nurse administrators. The article concludes with a five‐item agenda as a guide for future theory development.