Treaties and Tribunals, Research Paper Example

This research paper posits to identify the importance among two or more countries; the cultural and political differences that exist between nations affect a tribunal, what happens if there are not tribunals, the significance of tribunals among nations and the demerits of tribunals. A tribunal in a wide perspective implies to a general sense is any person or even an institution that is empowered with some sort of  authority to make judgments, adjudicate on, or determines some important  claims as well as disputes. The common elements appear include tribunal, independent, impartial, as well as established by law.

The importance of “an independent in addition to impartial tribunal which has been established by law” is important an parameter guiding a fair trial. Therefore it plays a pivotal role towards protecting the constitutional as well as human rights. The reason behind this assertion is based on the guarantee which makes certain that human as well as constitutional rights in dispute are deliberated through neutral authority. This consequently is a sure guarantee for “a competent, independent as well as impartial tribunal” which in turn is trusted to be a potential foundation to rule of law. Indeed, the absence of an independent coupled with impartial judiciary, then the law lacks a coherent meaning (Dupont & Guy-Oliver, 1991).

Basically, the implication of independence is the “freedom from any sort of influence”. This commonplace denotation is in most cases underscored in the context of legal definition applied in judicial independence, namely “the absence of subordination to an alternative organ in the nation, in particular to executive”. In more specific terms, the independence has the implication that judges authors of their individual decisions, and also they are empowered to be free from any form of ‘inappropriate’ influence (Carnevale & Dong-Won, 2000).

Why are tribunals very important among two or more countries?

Tribunals have been used as instruments of diplomacy this has come to be more important in situations where global warfare is considered by \many nations as an evil strategy for achieving diplomacy and calm. Culture has been seen to have considerable impact on the negotiation just as other variables have, but vulture is the only variable that has a lot of impact on the final decision in any negotiation process,(Yakovlev, & Zhuravskaya, 2008),.

How can the cultural and political differences that exist between nations affect a tribunal?

The Soviet Union: in a whole new dimension to negotiations:

Visaria,(2006) argues that sometimes conflicts of values arises in which, different parties hold different opinions , principles or ideologies and each party tries to make its own opinion to prevail. The most common types of cultural; and political differences that have been noted amongst the nations that have has cases to handle at the tribunal are: Most values are rarely negotiable, however, most parties involve tribunal s tio assist in negotiating for a common ground between two or more warring parties: while US is composed of a system that is inherently based ion elections, institutional politics and bureaucracy, the Soviet Union on the other hand is a system of Marxist-Leninist ideology in addition to military security considering the past differences between capitalism and communism. The differences in the power and politics in these two establishments this makes negotiations very difficult for the two parties (Faure  & Jeffrey, 1993).

Status, culture and negotiation

Cohen (1997) argues that Status in this case means the position of the negotiator in the social structure in which a party belongs, this concepts influences the process of negotiations due to prestige and power. For example India usually believes that the other nations are always looking down upon them while on the due to their low political and economic profile

Sovereignty, culture and negotiation

Most countries fear any kind of tribunal or negotiation with other nations due to their sovereignty, for example the sees of Egypt and America when America warned to establish its military base in Egypt, Egypt refused as this was seen as a move that could have been misconstrued as an abuse to the country’s sovereignty.

The then Prime Minister Nasser stated that this was not acceptable because:

Their history was having abundance of complexes in Egypt concerning some words: – especially those implying that we have been tied to another state. Words of the nature of ‘joint command’, ‘joint pact’, as well as ‘training missions’ are not adored in our nation because of the suffering they have caused…I think your men who deal with this field should comprehend the psychology that is associated with the area. You have the option to send military aid, but if a nation sends ten officers along with it, nobody will thank you for your aid but instead will turn it against you. (Cohen, 55)

Gender, culture, and negotiation

Its is also imperative to note that any kind of negotiations involving different genders is viewed with suspicion, for example, it has bee reported that some elements may be considered as masculine in one culture while the same element is considered feminine in another culture. Some countries fai to consider gender equality making it difficult for some countries to appoint or send a woman as an ambassador to another country like Baghdad (Dupont &Faure, 1991).

If there were no negotiations

Yakovlev & Zhuravskaya, (2008). states that in the absence of negotiations, most countries or nations would be at war with one another, meaning those countries with strong military composition would be fighting the weaker countries, Exploitation of the mineral in the territories of the most established countries will be the norm and slavery (neo-slavery) would still be the order of the day in some nations (Yakovlev & Zhuravskaya, 2008).

Demerits of tribunals among nations:

Tribunals may be the only instrument of diplomacy that can be used to solve differences between two or more parties or nations; however, this instrument has lot of gaps r that need to be filled for it to be more effective:

Cultural differences is one are where tribunals fail, most countries are foes who can not let another go down the grain in the process of negotiations, so a lot of forces are at play whenever a country in the western block is having differences with another country in the eastern block, these blocks gang to gather for the benefits of their kin

Political favoritism

Most countries are always in demand for political relationship with other countries, so they are wont a to support their potential supporters in order to get economic and political favors from these people

The defendant nations are not likely to win in this case. The element of infringement of the Border regulations rights is clearly reflected in the manner in which the defendant nations and the publisher reproduced nations work. By deliberately reproducing a closely related book knowing very well that a similar book was already existing, the defendant nations assumed some risk (Visaria, 2006).

The defendant nations and his publisher ought to understand that the law grants border regulations immense monopolies in nation’s expressive works. Therefore, it can be reasonably argued that the defendant nations had it well within his knowledge that they could not afford the windfall damages to be incurred following the publication of the sort of work for which they were accused of infringing the border regulations.

References

Carnevale, P. J. & Dong-Won, C., (2000). ‘Culture in the Mediation of International Disputes’,  International Journal of Psychology, 35(2), 105-110.

Dupont, C. & Guy-Oliver, F., (1991). ‘The Negotiation Process’ in International Negotiation San Francisco: Jossy-Bass Publishers.

Cohen, R., (1997) Negotiating across Cultures: international communication in an interdependent world. Washington: U S Institute of Peace Press.

Faure, G. & Jeffrey Z. R., (1993). Culture &Negotiation. California: SAGE Publications.

Visaria, S. (2006). ‘Legal Reform & Loan Repayment: The Microeconomic Impact of Debt Recovery Tribunals in India’, American Economic Journal: Applied Economics.

Yakovlev, W. & Zhuravskaya, V., (2008). ‘Reforms in Business Regulation: Evidence from Russia’, New Economic School.