Author: Northern Jurist

I have just submitted my master’s thesis for grading. While it is fresh in my mind, I have decided to summarize some of the resources I utilized.

Before I even began to do research or even have a topic, I purchased How to Write a Thesis by Umberto Eco. I knew it would be dated since it was published in 1977, but after reading reviews, there was still excellent information in it.

Since we are in the 21^st century, index cards were out, and software was in. I checked out a few guides and YouTube videos on different applications. The first one I attempted to use was Scrivener. After going through the tutorial, I realized this had a bit of a learning curve and maybe more functionality than required.

During my classes, I started to use OneNote, which is part of MS Office. I have a Surface, which with a Surface pen, I was able to take notes in class, right onto the slides all within that particular class’s notebook. A few YouTube videos later, to see if others used it for research, too, I decided to go with OneNote. It worked like a charm. I laid out each chapter into its own section and also added ones for research and extra. Under the research section, each page was a separate source, where I listed the notes and quotations from it. I am sure there is a more efficient way, but I manually copied each note and quote to the corresponding chapter section before writing. When it came time to the actual writing, I was ready to go.

Now, onto the part of essay or writing that people hate the most, the references/citations. Along with this thesis, I have been participating in a Moot Court competition since October 2020. For the written submission, I began to use a program called Zotero. It is amazing. Now, I do not have anything to compare it to besides the manual way, but it is a timesaver. From organizing all your sources to using a browser extension to add the source automatically, it is very beneficial. I found myself adding each of my books to it through the ISBN. However, the most important function is the footnote and bibliography extension in MS Word. By selecting the Zotero tab and then clicking Add/Edit Citation, a textbox appears, allowing you to start typing your source and then it brings up a list based on what you write. From there, you choose the correct source and add a prefix/suffix or a page number, if required. Depending on the style you choose, I usually use (OSCOLA), it will make the automatic changes required, such as the (n #), where the number is the footnote the source is first used. Zotero also compiles the bibliography for you, although it must be manually sorted if you need to break it up into sections (Cases, Legislation, Books, etc.)

Some of this may not be new to you. These programs have been around for a while, but when you start using them, especially Zotero, it changes the game. I have not written of Scrivener, and if I am lucky enough to be accepted into a Ph.D. program, I will surely be spending some time to become competent with that program.

Links:

Zotero – https://www.zotero.org/

Scrivener – https://www.literatureandlatte.com/scrivener/overview

I purchased this book by Antonin Scalia and Bryan Garner out of my interest in interpretation. Since learning about various styles, or judicial philosophies, I have been very fond of the subject. The debate in the American context is coined as the right-wing textualists versus the left-wing activists. However, while this book includes many arguments for textualism or originalism, a lot of utility can be derived from the principles articulated in the book.

I’ll admit, I am a fan of Justice Scalia’s writing. Previously, I have read some of his more colourful decisions, and his use of the English language is entertaining. Even though I am not American, we get a lot of exposure to the United States Supreme Court’s decisions in Canada – even more than the Supreme Court of Canada.

I first came across Bryan Garner from another book, ‘The Winning Brief,’ which I used to improve memorial writing. Also in my collection is a copy of Garner’s ‘Black’s Law Dictionary.’ He has a lot of knowledge, relevant quotations, and excellent sources.

Now onto the book:

‘Reading Law’ lists the principles that make up the canons of construction. These canons are used to interpret the text of constitutions, statutes, treaties etc. Each principle is described through caselaw (primarily American) and provides scholarly criticisms as well. This book is not just for someone who is a fan of textualism; the principles are well established and used by judges of all philosophies.

A good deal of my thesis involves identifying arguments and categorizing them based on their type. Text-based arguments can use canons of construction. It was in this regard the book proved invaluable to my research. One important aspect of legal treatises is the sources they use. The authors provide many sources that can expand your knowledge, which I recommend checking to further your understanding.

I recommend ‘Reading Law’ to anyone interested in law. Period. Of course, there is a niche interest to those like me who enjoy reading about interpretation, but the cases discussed are very interesting. Reading about how the principles are applied, even wrongly, is a great way to show them in action and not just in theory. It is okay if you are not a Scalia fan; being informed on these principles and the criticisms assist in formulating counter-arguments. (Plus Scalia can be very humourous at times)

Tensions seem to be on the rise between Ukraine and Russia. Yesterday multiple media sources reported that Russia plans to close off parts of the Black Sea and the Kerch Strait between April 24 and October 31. The restrictions were said to apply to military vessels and other government vessels. The reports also state Ukraine’s opposition to this and that it would violate international law, specifically freedom of navigation, regarding international straits.

Today, updates to the reporting said that the Kerch Strait would not be blocked, but just parts of the Black Sea, for military exercise purposes.[1]

Background:

Ukraine’s issues regard both their rights as a coastal state and their rights as a flag state. The Kerch Strait connects the Sea of Azov to the Black Sea. The only two states in the Sea of Azov are Ukraine and Russia. Since Crimea is now part of Russia (not going to give a political stance, although most sources consider it an annexation), Russia has sole control over the strait. Both Russia and Ukraine have ratified the Law of Sea Convention. They have also signed a bilateral treaty regarding this area:

December 24^th, 2003 – Agreement on Cooperation on the use of the Sea of Azov and the Kerch Strait was signed by Russia and Ukraine.[2]

• The Sea of Azov was to be considered internal waters of both countries
• No delimitation was agreed regarding boundaries
• Foreign-flagged Russian and Ukrainian merchant vessels have freedom of navigation
• Other merchant vessels can pass the Kerch Strait if going to a port
• Military and state vessels by invitation or permission only

Most significant in this agreement is that the countries believe that the Sea of Azov is considered to be their internal waters.

Internal Waters and Straits under the Law of Sea Convention:

Internal waters are defined in the Law of Sea Convention (LOSC)[3] as:

Article 8

Internal waters

1. Except as provided in Part IV, waters on the landward side of the baseline of the territorial sea form part of the internal waters of the State.
2. Where the establishment of a straight baseline in accordance with the method set forth in article 7 has the effect of enclosing as internal waters areas which had not previously been considered as such, a right of innocent passage as provided in this Convention shall exist in those waters.

How do the rights to pass through the strait under the LOSC affect a strait that leads to internal waters?

Article 38(2) prescribes the right of transit passage through international straits when one end of the strait is an exclusive economic zone or the high seas and connects to another exclusive economic zone or high seas. Therefore, the Black Sea connecting to internal waters does not work.

Article 45 prescribes the right of innocent passage through international straits excluded from transit passage under article 38(1) or between a part of an exclusive economic zone or high seas and the territorial sea of a foreign State. These two options do not apply to the Kerch Strait. It is not one of the straits excluded from article 38(1) and does not connect to the territorial waters but rather internal waters.

If the Sea of Azov is the internal waters of both Russia and Ukraine, what passage regime should apply?

Probably the regimes agreed upon in their Cooperation Agreement. Scholars have written extensively on the issues, especially since Crimea becoming a part of Russia and Ukraine losing their side of the strait.

Russian and Ukraine have been using an arbitration tribunal to try and resolve these issues. One source writes, “Russian interference with shipping in Ukraine’s internal waters in Kerch Strait and the Sea of Azov would be a violation of customary international law, but not UNCLOS(Law of Sea Convention).”[4] Blocking the Kerch Strait would, of course, damage the Ukrainian ports that rely on the passage of commercial vessels to deliver and transport goods. But, the initial reports stated Russia would ban military and government vessels, not commercial vessels.

A recent article concludes that if the countries stick to their original agreement regarding the Kerch Strait, then the issue can be resolved under the law of the sea and general international law.[5] However, this conclusion does not answer any of the boundary disputes within the Sea of Azov.

In summary, this situation is not so clear. The legal regime covering the Kerch Strait and the Sea of Azov has been in dispute since the Crimea situation in 2014. Several issues need to be resolved between the two countries regarding this dispute (and others)—first, the question of whether the Sea of Azov is internal waters or not. A legal regime for this Sea needs to be agreed upon or decided. If it is not internal, then territorial waters and exclusive economic zones can be formed, and its classification as an international strait under the LOSC could be established. If it remains internal, then provisions on customary international law and their agreement should be honoured and the Kerch Strait shall not be closed. I recommend reviewing the articles found in footnotes 2, 4 and 5 for an examination of the history of the Strait and Sea of Azov, Russia/Ukraine relations, and other possibilities regarding the resolving of the situation.

As of now, Russia is not planning to block the Kerch Strait. Hopefully, cooler heads will prevail regarding the increase in tension in the region.

Sources:

[1] ‘Russia’s Plan to Restrict Foreign Warships near Crimea Will Keep Kerch Strait Open – RIA’ (Reuters, 16 April 2021) <https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russias-plan-restrict-foreign-warships-near-crimea-will-keep-kerch-strait-open-2021-04-16/> accessed 17 April 2021.

[2] Alexander Skaridov, ‘10 The Sea of Azov and the Kerch Straits’ in David D Caron and Nilufer Oral (eds), Navigating Straits (Brill | Nijhoff 2014) <https://brill.com/view/book/edcoll/9789004266377/B9789004266377_012.xml> accessed 17 April 2021, 222.

[3] United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (adopted 10 December 1982, entered into force 16 November 1994) 1833 U.N.T.S. 397 (LOSC).

[4] Valentin J Schatz and Dmytro Koval, ‘Russia’s Annexation of Crimea and the Passage of Ships Through Kerch Strait: A Law of the Sea Perspective’ (2019) 50 Ocean Development & International Law 275 <https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00908320.2019.1605677> accessed 17 April 2021, 284.

[5] Alexander Lott, ‘The Passage Regimes of the Kerch Strait—To Each Their Own?’ (2021) 52 Ocean Development & International Law 64 <https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00908320.2020.1869445> accessed 17 April 2021.

Image:

By: Aleksander Kaasik

Link:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kerch_Strait#/media/File:Kert%C5%A1i_v%C3%A4in.jpg

On March 22^nd, it was the 400th anniversary of Hugo Grotius’ famous escape from a castle by hiding in a book chest. It is one of the many fascinating stories in his life.

Almost all research regarding the law of the sea, especially the freedoms on the high seas, begins with an examination of Hugo Grotius.

His book, Mare Liberum (the free sea), attempted to counter the ocean monopoly that Spain and Portugal had been granted the Pope. But, it did more than that; it laid out the claim, primarily through natural law, that the ocean was the property of none.

I have read his book a few times and used it in research for my master’s thesis and recommend it and its critiques.

For further reading:

Hugo Grotius’ Wiki

Hugo Grotius’ escape from Loevestein Castle

Mare Liberum

What is a jurist?

Surprisingly, this question does come up; but it’s fair.

There are several definitions:

• Someone who has a thorough knowledge of the law; esp., a judge or eminent legal scholar – Black’s Law Dictionary
• One having a thorough knowledge of law – Merriam-webster.com
• An expert in law, especially a judge – Cambridge Dictionary
• An expert of law or someone who researches jurisprudence – Wiktionary
• An expert in or writer on law – Lexico

We often hear the term jurist used when describing a judge. Many of those definitions contain the terms ‘thorough knowledge,’ ‘expert,’ and ‘eminent.’

However, historically it has been used to refer to a lawyer, a legal writer, or a legal scientist. Its origins are found in Roman Law, with legal commentators who would write to explain and interpret the law.

What does jurist mean in your name?

Firstly, I am not a licensed or practicing lawyer. Nothing I write about should ever be considered legal advice.

But, I consider myself knowledgeable, well-read and try to be up-to-date on various legal issues. When I refer to myself as a jurist, I believe it means a legal scholar who analyses, reads, researches, studies, and writes on the law.

Now, the Northern part of the name is simply a nod to where I am from.

Ahoy there!

Welcome to the first post on my blog.

First off, who am I?

I am a former sailor with the Royal Canadian Navy, who is now completing a Master of International Law thesis. More will be revealed and added to the About page in time.

What is the blog about?

This blog is my attempt to share my research, commentary, and opinion on issues regarding the subject of law.

Yes, this will be primarily an academic blog. When researching how to research, the idea of blogging came up. Several articles and videos inspired me to start a blog for myself.

Okay, gotcha, an academic blog about law… what will it be about?

There is so much about this topic that interests me – it can be hard to narrow down. My favourite topics when it comes to international law are Law of the Sea, Maritime Law, and International Criminal Law. Regarding the sea, most of my content will probably be geared to that.

There is no limit to what I will discuss, including legal philosophy, legal history, judicial interpretation, EU law, etc.

The posts will come from a variety of sources:

• Case Discussion
• Law Discussion
• Book Review
• Movie Review
• Whatever else

I hope to tie this with my YouTube channel (which is created but without content).

On commenting…

Please be respectful, critical, and try to further the discussion. This blog is about sharing my passion for law and also a chance to keep learning.

I reserve the right to be wrong and to be able to change my stance. My goal is to be as objective as possible, especially in case discussions. Book and movie reviews will be full of my subjective opinion.

Please feel free to e-mail me through the contact form with any comments, suggestions or questions.

Thanks for reading,

Northern Jurist