<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Hearings in the Georgia v. Russia Case Fixed for 8-10 September</title>
	<atom:link href="http://internationallawobserver.eu/2008/08/19/hearings-in-the-georgia-v-russia-case-fixed-for-8-10-september/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://internationallawobserver.eu/2008/08/19/hearings-in-the-georgia-v-russia-case-fixed-for-8-10-september/</link>
	<description>A Blog dedicated to reports, commentary and the discussion of topical issues of Public International Law as well as EC/EU-Law.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 12 May 2012 19:34:48 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: daniel khabo</title>
		<link>http://internationallawobserver.eu/2008/08/19/hearings-in-the-georgia-v-russia-case-fixed-for-8-10-september/#comment-1602</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[daniel khabo]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Sep 2008 17:02:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://internationallawobserver.wordpress.com/?p=314#comment-1602</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[We all know that the ICJ is an international organ. It is given a mandate of settling international disputes by the UN Charter. Disputes must be brought to the court by states. the Caucus conflict falls in that category if one may say. However, it is worth noting that the court makes its decisions upon evidence brought to it by the parties. it means therefore that a party may bring a claim to the ICJ and lack evidence to prove its claim then it will automatically be quashed. International law has its restriction also. So lets have some trust in the court and it will deliver,whether an opinion or a judgment with all fairness and practicability as possible.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We all know that the ICJ is an international organ. It is given a mandate of settling international disputes by the UN Charter. Disputes must be brought to the court by states. the Caucus conflict falls in that category if one may say. However, it is worth noting that the court makes its decisions upon evidence brought to it by the parties. it means therefore that a party may bring a claim to the ICJ and lack evidence to prove its claim then it will automatically be quashed. International law has its restriction also. So lets have some trust in the court and it will deliver,whether an opinion or a judgment with all fairness and practicability as possible.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Prasad Subramanyan</title>
		<link>http://internationallawobserver.eu/2008/08/19/hearings-in-the-georgia-v-russia-case-fixed-for-8-10-september/#comment-1513</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Prasad Subramanyan]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Sep 2008 13:32:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://internationallawobserver.wordpress.com/?p=314#comment-1513</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#039;m curious as to whether the recognition by the Russian Federation of the Ossetian and Abkhazian regions as independent, amounts to a direct violation of the President&#039;s communication? Is there a legal aspect to this? 

More importantly, I think it&#039;s easy to make out that there will be no use of settling this matter in front of the ICJ. It will clearly be the same situation as that of the NATO-Yugoslavia case. Even if a judgment is passed, how useful will that be? The SC can hardly budge an inch.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m curious as to whether the recognition by the Russian Federation of the Ossetian and Abkhazian regions as independent, amounts to a direct violation of the President&#8217;s communication? Is there a legal aspect to this? </p>
<p>More importantly, I think it&#8217;s easy to make out that there will be no use of settling this matter in front of the ICJ. It will clearly be the same situation as that of the NATO-Yugoslavia case. Even if a judgment is passed, how useful will that be? The SC can hardly budge an inch.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anne-Marie Slaughter on the Caucasus crises and the future of international law &#171; International Law Observer</title>
		<link>http://internationallawobserver.eu/2008/08/19/hearings-in-the-georgia-v-russia-case-fixed-for-8-10-september/#comment-1502</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Anne-Marie Slaughter on the Caucasus crises and the future of international law &#171; International Law Observer]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 31 Aug 2008 10:32:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://internationallawobserver.wordpress.com/?p=314#comment-1502</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] Hearings in the Georgia v. Russia Case Fixed for 8-10 September [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Hearings in the Georgia v. Russia Case Fixed for 8-10 September [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

