| |
given period the solution of a
particular question is by international law deemed to be solely within the
control or jurisdiction of one state, gives frail assurance that it will always
be so regarded."¹
"The family of nations is not unconcerned with
the life and experience of the private individual in his relationships with the
state of which he is a national. Evidence of concern has become increasingly
abundant since World War I, and is reflected in treaties through which that
conflict was brought to a close, particularly in provisions designed to
safeguard the racial, linguistic and religious minorities inhabiting the
territories of certain states, and in the terms of part XIII of the Treaty of
Versailles, of June 28, 1919, in respect to labour, as well as in article XXIII
of that treaty embraced in the Covenant of the League of Nations."²
"The nature and extent of the latitude accorded a state in the
treatment of its own nationals has been observed elsewhere. It has been seen
that certain forms or degrees of harsh treatment of such individuals may be
deemed to attain an international significance because of their direct and
adverse effect upon the rights and interests of the outside world. For that
reason it would be unscientific to declare at this day that tyrannical conduct,
or massacres, or religious persecutions are wholly unrelated to the foreign
relations of the territorial sovereign which is guilty of them. If it can be
shown that such acts are immediately and necessarily injurious to the nationals
of a particular foreign state, grounds for interference by it may be
acknowledged. Again, the society of nations, acting collectively, may not
unreasonably maintain that a state yielding to such excesses renders itself
unfit to perform its international obligations, especially in so far as they
pertain to the protection of foreign life and property within its domain.* The
property of interference obviously demands in every case a convincing showing
that there is in fact a causal connection between the harsh treatment
complained of, and the outside state that essays to thwart it.
*
"Since the World War of 1914-1918, there has developed in many quarters
evidence of what might be called an international interest and concern in
relation to what was previously regarded as belonging exclusively to the
domestic affairs of the individual state; and with that interest there has been
manifest also an increasing readiness to seek and find a connection between
domestic abuses and the maintenance of the general peace. See article XI of the
Covenant of the League of Nations, United States Treaty, volume III, 3339."
(Hyde, "International Law," 2d rev. ed., vol. I, pages 249-250.)
|
| |
__________ ¹ Ibid., volume I, pages
7 and 8. ² Ibid., p. 38.
980 |