Abstract Guided by the observations and recommendations of the UN Special Procedures, this contribution aims to shed light on certain aspects of the current human rights situation in the Republic of Korea and Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, as well as the prospects for achieving comprehensive peace and human rights fulfillment in the future. After a brief overview of the nature and functioning of the Special Procedures of the United Nations—in particular, of the Working Group on Enforced and Involuntary Disappearance and of the Special Rapporteur for the promotion of truth, justice, reparation and guarantees of non-recurrence—it examines how these bodies have addressed issues related to transitional justice and enforced disappearances in the peninsula. It concludes by suggesting a series of measures to better protect human rights in this context.
Abstract Resolution 2397(2017) unanimously adopted by the UN Security Council on 22 December 2017 significantly tightened the sanctions imposed against North Korea including by severely restricting fuel imports and other trade. To counter Pyongyang’s evasion tactics, the Resolution authorized Member States to seize, inspect and impound vessels in their ports or in their territorial sea reasonably suspected of violating Resolution 2397(2017) and other UNSC resolutions. The Security Council called on all Member States to redouble their efforts to fully implement the new measures adopted in Resolution 2397(2017) as well as those imposed by earlier resolutions. In light of this important obligation weighing on all UN Member States, this article will consider how Canada contributes to the enforcement of Resolution 2397(2017) and other UNSC resolutions, specifically through maritime interdiction, at the international and domestic levels.
Abstract Beyond simply promoting e-commerce, digital trade now defines the rules of data governance, security, and new technologies. As Korea and Mongolia negotiate the Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA), a significant difference emerges in how to design digital norms in a situation where digital maturity between the two partners is significantly different. This paper explores ways to optimize and integrate digital trade provisions in the Korea-Mongolia EPA. We use a comparative analysis focusing on specific regulatory issues found in the Mongolia-Japan EPA, the Korea-Ecuador SECA, and the Korea-UAE CEPA. It argues that a full transplant of high-standard norms is not desirable given Mongolia’s current institutional environment. Instead, we propose a ‘step-by-step hybrid framework’. This model combines binding basic norms with conditional obligations for sensitive areas and emphasizes institutional cooperation. Ultimately, this approach balances bilateral cooperation with regulatory autonomy, offering a practical roadmap for asymmetric digital trade negotiations.
Abstract This paper critically examines China’s State practice of the implementation of UN sanctions against the DPRK, highlighting the urgent need for improvement on domestic legal framework and international cooperation. Based on an analysis on domestic legal frameworks, the paper finds that although China has established a comprehensive anti-smuggling framework, it still shows deficiencies. The intensified international tensions lead to the paralysis of supervisory mechanisms, bringing more challenges to enforcement. Noting the necessity of better cooperative implementation of UN sanctions, the paper calls for China to further improve its law framework both at home and in matters involving foreign parties and deepen international law enforcement cooperation. As to international law, the paper also advocates a more refined implementation framework combining both substantive and procedural elements, and enhanced efforts within other frameworks like IMO to advance maritime monitoring.
Abstract Title and effectivités constitute key benchmarks in the jurisdiction of territorial sovereignty disputes. By prioritizing title as the principal criterion and relegating effectivités to a subsidiary role, this framework helps regulate sovereignty acquisition and preserve the stability of the international legal order. Post-2010 jurisprudence has defined the relationship between title and effectivités by reinforcing the primacy of valid title and imposing more stringent criteria for effectivités . The incorporation of jus cogens , such as self-determination, further contributes to a more robust legal framework for title. Territorial dispute settlement has significantly helped advance the construction of a peaceful and stable international order. Yet, the advent of a new era and the emergence of novel crises pose fresh challenges. In the future, international judicial bodies should continue to perform their judicial function by providing case law to address these gaps while States should also actively promote a clearer and more coherent legal framework.
Abstract This article examines the United States’ multifaceted approach to enforcing maritime sanctions against North Korea in response to its violations of UN Security Council resolutions. The U.S. efforts leverage legislative authorities like the North Korea Sanctions and Policy Enhancement Act, executive actions through the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act and other statutes, and judicial assertions of jurisdiction over stateless vessels consistent with the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). The United States targets illicit shipping activities linked to North Korea, including ship-to-ship oil transfers, AIS spoofing, false vessel identification, and forged documentation. These evasion tactics enable the DPRK’s prohibited trade in coal, petroleum, and weapons materials, often through “shadow fleets.” The analysis highlights U.S. legal measures with collaborative international efforts to enforce North Korean sanctions. This article underscores the interplay between domestic law and international norms in countering the DPRK’s sanctions violations.
Abstract In this article, the cooperation between the World Bank and the EBRD in those fields where the mandates of the two institutions overlap is examined, and the question of whether such cooperation reflects the development of the principle of comity in international institutional law is answered. The principle of comity is well established in the context of inter-State relations and inter-institutional relations of the judiciary. However, its relevance to the relations between international institutions is still an under-explored issue. The cooperation of the World Bank and the EBRD in the Western Balkans, the Caucasus, Central Asia, and more recently in Ukraine is examined. It is submitted that, while no principle of comity binding upon international institutions has yet developed, the practice of cooperation between the World Bank and the EBRD reflects the beginning of the development of a functional principle of comity based upon necessity.
With East Asia becoming highly digitalized, the security of submarine cables is increasingly essential to the stability of regional prosperity as well as national security. While East Asia is highly vulnerable to natural disasters such as earthquakes and volcanic activity, submarine cable security is also threatened by the region’s unique geopolitical situation, including the Taiwan Strait crisis, maritime disputes, and the intense U.S.–China rivalry in the region. Securing submarine cables against intentional damage or interference in the region is becoming more of a concern. In order to ensure the security of submarine cables, regional countries need to approach this issue in the spirit of protecting a commonly held good.
This paper reviews five selected major decisions by domestic courts from the second half of 2024 to the First Half of 2025 by taking a closer look at the changing legal practices and attitudes of the Korean judiciary in applying international law in domestic cases.
The historic rights doctrine occupies an ambiguous yet enduring position. Traditionally grounded in customary law, it has been invoked to justify sovereignty claims over bays and straits, preserve traditional fishing practices, and assert jurisdictional entitlements. The adoption of UNCLOS codified maritime zones entitlements, offering only limited reference to “historic bays” and “historic title,” leaving the doctrine’s status uncertain. Recent jurisprudence has provided clarity. The South China Sea Arbitration (2016) confirmed that historic rights incompatible with UNCLOS – particularly those extending beyond the EEZ or continental shelf – are superseded by the treaty. Conversely, cases like Chagos (2015), Nicaragua v. Colombia (2012, 2022), and Eritrea v. Yemen (1998–1999) demonstrate that historic rights persist in limited contexts, e.g., traditional fishing, servitudes, and historically recognised bays. This article situates historic rights within the UNCLOS framework and recent jurisprudence, arguing that they remain a living doctrine: clarified in law, narrowed in scope, but rhetorically and politically resilient.
On April 2, 2025, President Trump implemented a new global tariff regime, including a 10% universal tariff and higher reciprocal tariffs based on trade surpluses. This article analyzes the implications of these measures under international law, particularly challenging their justification under the WTO ’s national security exception ( GATT Article XXI ). While the U.S. invokes its International Emergency Economic Powers Act ( IEEPA ), this article argues that the scale and rationale of the tariffs likely fail to meet objective and good faith standards established by WTO panels. It highlights the U.S. approach of paralyzing WTO dispute settlement and promoting more flexible national security clauses in bilateral FTA s to legitimize unilateral actions. Ultimately, the article concludes that despite their effectiveness in prompting trade negotiations, these tariffs lack full immunity under international law, underscoring the ongoing challenge to preserve the rule-based order amidst a growing reliance on “national security” as a justification for trade unilateralism.
The Actoz Soft case is the first landmark case to deal with the governing law applicable to the succession of copyright by a split-off. In Actoz Soft case, the succession of economic rights by a split-off was held to be governed by lex loci protectionis under the former Article (24) of the Korean Act on Private International Law because it was not covered by Article 5(2) of the Berne Convention. The Actoz Soft Court held that the succession of economic rights by the split-off was governed by the law of the State where the defendant was incorporated. The Court observed the possibility that the defendant could succeed to the economic rights within the China of the company C. However, if the successibility of economic rights by the split-off is characterized as the transferability of copyright, the applicable law would be Chinese Company Law under lex loci protectionis .
This article provides a comprehensive analysis of Korea’s AI Framework Act, which constitutes the first national legislation dedicated to the regulation of artificial intelligence and the second such framework worldwide, following the EU AI Act. The Korea’s Act establishes a dual approach, aiming to foster AI innovation while instituting regulatory safeguards, particularly for high-impact and generative AI systems. It establishes key obligations for transparency, risk management, and accountability, enforced by moderate administrative fines and oversight by the Minister of Science and ICT . The article discusses the Act’s broad scope, including extraterritorial application and its integration of promotional and regulatory measures. Implementation challenges are examined, such as coordination with existing digital governance. The paper concludes that, while the Act marks significant progress toward responsible AI governance, its long-term effectiveness will depend on the development of detailed regulations and continued regulatory adaptation.
The practice of dark fleet can be a direct threat to the safety of navigation and the marine environment. In particular, sip-to-ship ( STS ) oil transfer operations by the dark fleet can not only poses a serious risk of marine pollution but also undermine the sanctions imposed by Western countries with a view to restricting the revenue streams used by Russia to finance its aggression against Ukraine. The question that arises in this context is whether a coastal State can exercise its jurisdiction to regulate STS operations in its exclusive economic zone ( EEZ ) in positive international law. This article addresses this question, by examining the legal status of STS operations in the EEZ and possible legal basis for exercising the coastal State jurisdiction to regulate the STS operations in the EEZ in international law.
This paper critically examines Japan’s Fukushima radioactive wastewater discharge, highlighting its transboundary implications and the urgent need for multilateral cooperation. While Japan claims compliance with UNCLOS and the London Protocol, neighboring states dispute this due to unproven safety, unilateralism, and procedural lapses. The analysis reveals legal challenges in holding Japan substantively accountable, given existing framework gaps in the London Protocol and UNCLOS ’ limited regulatory power. Litigation in fora such as ITLOS face hurdles, with Japan likely facing only procedural rather than substantive violations. Noting diminishing international attention to the matter, the paper calls for new international standards for marine radioactive wastewater discharge that balance nuclear energy development with environmental protection. These should encompass stricter discharge limits, regulated discharge methods to close loopholes, robust international monitoring, and mandatory transparency and public participation. The paper proposes advancing such standards through bilateral cooperation, UN resolutions, and the “reverse leadership” of Pacific Island States.
This paper reviews five selected major decisions by domestic courts from the second half of 2024 to the First Half of 2025 by taking a closer look at the changing legal practices and attitudes of the Korean judiciary in applying international law in domestic cases.
This paper reviews four major decisions by domestic courts in the second half of 2024 by closely examining the changing legal practices and attitudes of the Korean judiciary in applying international law in domestic cases.
This paper examines the burden and standard of proof in international courts and tribunals, particularly the International Court of Justice, noting a historical emphasis on law over facts and the adoption of a flexible approach to evidence. While the burden allocates the duty to prove, the standard defines the required evidentiary level and is complicated by civil-common law differences leading to varied ICJ application. Given the ICJ ’s increasingly fact-heavy jurisprudence, the paper argues for a clearer formulation of burden-of-proof rules emphasizing certainty, underpinned by the presumption of state compliance. It advocates for distinguishing between formulation (certainty) and application (flexibility using tools like presumptions for fairness). Promoting predictability and consistency is crucial for the legitimacy of international adjudication.
The International Criminal Court ( ICC ) is the first permanent international tribunal established to prosecute serious crimes, including genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. In 2023, the ICC issued arrest warrants for several heads of state. States Parties typically enact domestic laws to implement the Rome Statute, ensuring compliance with their obligations to the ICC . The Republic of Korea is a State Party to the Rome Statute and is therefore obligated to cooperate with the ICC in its investigations and prosecutions. The Korean ICC Act includes provisions for cooperation with the ICC by applying existing extradition and mutual assistance laws. However, the Korean ICC Act includes only two articles regarding cooperation with the ICC , which simply stipulate that the Extradition Act and the Act on International Judicial Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters shall apply mutatis mutandis .
To draw conclusions and implications for territorial issues, this study presents the findings and research of Korean scholars on the principles of territorial title examined in ICJ cases. They analyze the hierarchy among treaties, uti possidetis juris , and effectivités in addressing territorial matters, with a particular focus on how these principles operate in practice. The research on territorial issues in Korea tends to focus on identifying international legal principles to resolve territorial issues in the absence or uncertainty of existing treaties. There is a particular emphasis on studying how the principle of uti possidetis juris and effectivités apply. The research also clarifies that the critical date is not a fundamental element in territorial matters and does not always serve as an absolute standard. Furthermore, the study of territorial title is not limited to substantive law but extends to procedural aspects, particularly regarding the probative value of evidence in legal proceedings.
