thegoodfellas/blogset-br huggingface dataset:
Cade aquela menina boba, que adorava sorrir e dar varias risadas?! - em um silencio sussurrei: -Ela se perdeu no passado.. Boa noite. - awn awn. eu consegui 2 empregos HAHA sou top da balada. Sabado agora vou trabalhar :PE comecei um Book de fotos na agencia UNO. *O* Hoje foi o primeiro dia, usei um vestido lindo da loja 'Emme' e minha maquiagem foi perfeita e ao mesmo tempo ficou com cara de malvada. Nao gosto de usar batom e a maquiadora passou um vermelho muito Abusado! Ui- E nos olhos estava um tom escuro, com marrom e preto. fiquei bem diferente com cara de seria e malvada. UAHSUHA Adorei o ensaio e amanha de manha tem muuito mais.bom , boa sorte para mim. :D This is my Tumblr - http://recchioniloves2.tumblr.com/ This is my life Bom, ja faz uns dias que nao entro aqui; nao sei se vou dar continuidade com esse meu Blog. so queria um lugar pra escrever oque sinto, oque quero, oque gosto.. mais nao sei se aqui e o melhor lugar pra isso. -Tanta coisa ta acontecendo.. e nao ha tempo pra ficar escrevendo. :Snao quero desativar o Blog porque ficou very very beautiful. e sabia que isso ia acontecer. . . ter Blog nao e pra mim sabe, eu nem entro aqui ! tanta coiiisa ta rolando , tanta licao pra fazer! sei la Stefanie Recchioni minha linda!!!! Ja tinha recebido uma carta de alguem pelo Tumblr? Se sim quem, eu quero matar o desgracado(a). Kkkkk. Ti amo minha pessoinha que tenta parecer feliz, mas no fundo ta tristinha (eu sei de tudo... ). Ah, hoje a Ingrid falo que te acha perfeita, eu ri, tambem pensava assim antes de te conhecer, voce nao e, e isso apesar de soar um pouco estranho, e um alivio para mim, afinal pessoas perfeitas nao existem, mas acredito que anjos sim. Minha anjinha (im)perfeita! ilikeamupy Hoje acordei arrepiada, tive um pesadelo. nao quero falar detalhes mais ja sonhei com isso outras vezes .. Essas coisas estavam dentro de mim era tipo uns bichos /insetos e tenho uma pequena fobia de insetos. Entao imagina meu medo. acordei tremendo , assim que acordei vi que era so um sonho e me acalmei. fiquei la na cama ate cair no sonho novamente., e foi isso! - Estou completamente viciada nessa musica-- You - The Pretty Reckless And I want you in my life . And I need you in my life e muito perfeita, e adorei o ritmo. Alem de ser da minha banda favorita *o* Que tarde gostosa passei com minhas amigas!Eu e minha amiga IsabellaTodo mundo de boca cheia!Conhecendo os brinquedos Pausa no colinho da mamaeMais exploracao! No predio do Tio Raul tem um parquinho muuuito legal!Olha a gente aqui!Eu e o Snoopy correndo!AtentosCareta na janela Vim dividir mais alguns momentos meus!Passeando no Saara!Prestando atencao... na TV!Adoro pintar!!! Nesse domingo mamae participou de mais uma etapado Circuito Carioca de Bodyboard.Eu e Papai fomos juntos para torcer!Na praiaMamae na ondaNo podio com a mamae!O trofeu dela ja e meu! Finalmente fomos
conhecer a tal da Fazendinha! Estava doida pra ver os bichinhos de perto e aproveitar o dia com muita natureza ao meu redor - e MUITO espaco pra correr!De maos dadas com papaiOwn que coelho fofinho!Olha o tamanho desse boi!Mais um "ooowwn"... olha o carneirinho!Eu e mamae (ela tambem desceudepois de mim) no escorrega!Adorei os patinhos!Ja tava craque nesse ai... subia sozinha, caminhava pela ponte balancante e depois escorregava!Me refrescando!
of justice. The next step was the convening of a meeting in Washington, in April 1945, of a committee of jurists representing 44 States. This Committee, under the chairmanship of G. H. Hackworth (United States), was entrusted with the preparation of a draft Statute for the future international court of justice, for submission to the San Francisco Conference, which during the months of April to June 1945 was to draw up the United Nations Charter. The draft Statute prepared by the Committee was based on the Statute of the PCIJ and was thus not a completely fresh text. The Committee nevertheless felt constrained to leave a number of questions open which it felt should be decided by the Conference: should a new court be created? In what form should the courts mission as the principal judicial organ of the United Nations be stated? Should the courts jurisdiction be compulsory, and, if so, to what extent? How should the judges be elected? The final decisions on these points, and on the definitive form of the Statute, were taken at the San Francisco Conference, in which 50 States participated. The Conference decided against compulsory jurisdiction and in favour of the creation of an entirely new court, which would be a principal organ of the United Nations, on the same footing as the General Assembly, the Security Council, the Economic and Social Council, the Trusteeship Council and the Secretariat, and with the Statute annexed to and forming part of the Charter. The chief reasons that led the Conference to decide to create a new court were the following: 1) As the court was to be the principal judicial organ of the United Nations, it was felt inappropriate for this role to be filled by the Permanent Court of International Justice, which had up until then been linked to the League of Nations, then on the point of dissolution; 2) The creation of a new court was more consistent with the provision in the Charter that all Member States of the United Nations would ipso facto be parties to the courts Statute; 3) Several States that were parties to the Statute of the PCIJ were not represented at the San Francisco Conference, and, conversely, several States represented at the Conference were not parties to the Statute; 4) There was a feeling in some quarters that the PCIJ formed part of an older order, in which European States had dominated the political and legal affairs of the international community, and that the creation of a new court would make it easier for States outside Europe to play a more influential role. This has in fact happened as the membership of the United Nations grew from 51 in 1945 to 192 in 2006.The San Francisco Conference nevertheless showed some concern that all continuity with the past should not be broken, particularly as the Statute of the PCIJ had itself been drawn up on the basis of past experience, and it was felt better not to change something that had seemed to work well. The Charter therefore plainly stated
that the Statute of the International Court of Justice was based upon that of the PCIJ. At the same time, the necessary steps were taken for a transfer of the jurisdiction of the PCIJ so far as was possible to the International Court of Justice. In any event, the decision to create a new court necessarily involved the dissolution of its predecessor. The PCIJ met for the last time in October 1945 when it was decided to take all appropriate measures to ensure the transfer of its archives and effects to the new International Court of Justice, which, like its predecessor, was to have its seat in the Peace Palace. The judges of the PCIJ all resigned on 31 January 1946, and the election of the first Members of the International Court of Justice took place on 6 February 1946, at the First Session of the United Nations General Assembly and Security Council. In April 1946, the PCIJ was formally dissolved, and the International Court of Justice, meeting for the first time, elected as its President Judge Jose Gustavo Guerrero ( El Salvador), the last President of the PCIJ. The Court appointed the members of its Registry (largely from among former officials of the PCIJ) and held an inaugural public sitting, on the 18th of that month. The first case was submitted in May 1947. It concerned incidents in the Corfu Channel and was brought by the United Kingdom against Albania. (Adapted from:< http://www.icj-cij.org/ > on February 22, 2008).
arbitral justice as soon as agreement was reached respecting the selection of the judges and the constitution of the court. Although this court was never in fact to see the light of day, the draft convention that was to have given birth to it enshrined certain fundamental ideas that some years later were to serve as a source of inspiration for the drafting of the Statute of the Permanent Court of International Justice (PCIJ).Notwithstanding the fate of these proposals, the Permanent Court of Arbitration, which in 1913 took up residence in the Peace Palace that had been built for it thanks to a gift from Andrew Carnegie, has made a positive contribution to the development of international law. Among the classic cases that have been decided through recourse to its machinery, mention may be made of the Carthage and Manouba cases (1913) concerning the seizure of vessels, and of the Timor Frontiers (1914) and Sovereignty over the Island of Palmas (1928) cases. Whilst demonstrating that arbitral tribunals set up by recourse to standing machinery could decide disputes between States on a basis of law and justice and command respect for their impartiality, these cases threw into bold relief the shortcomings of the Permanent Court of Arbitration. Tribunals of differing composition could hardly be expected to develop a consistent approach to international law to the same extent as a permanently constituted tribunal. Besides, there was the entirely voluntary character of the machinery. The fact that States were parties to the 1899 and 1907 Conventions did not oblige them to submit their disputes to arbitration nor, even if they were minded so to do, were they duty-bound to have recourse to the Permanent Court of Arbitration nor to follow the rules of procedure laid down in the Conventions.The Permanent Court of Arbitration has recently sought to diversify the services that it can offer, alongside those contemplated by the Conventions. The International Bureau of the Permanent Court has inter alia acted as Registry in some important international arbitrations, including that between Eritrea and Yemen on questions of territorial sovereignty and maritime delimitation (1998 and 1999), that concerning the delimitation of the boundary between Eritrea and Ethiopia (2002), and that between Ireland and the United Kingdom under the 1992 Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic (OSPAR). Moreover, in 1993, the Permanent Court of Arbitration adopted new Optional Rules for Arbitrating Disputes between Two Parties of Which Only One Is a State and, in 2001, Optional Rules for Arbitration of Disputes Relating to Natural Resources and/or the Environment.For more information on the Permanent Court of Arbitration, please visit their website: http://www.pca-cpa.org/. (Adapted from:< http://www.icj-cij.org/ > on February 22, 2008).
SAO PAULO, 17 November 2008. The General Assembly and the Security Council of the United Nations elected on November 6, five Members of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) for a term of office of nine years, beginning on 6 February 2009. Judges Awn Shawkat Al-Khasawneh (Jordan) and Ronny Abraham (France) were re-elected as Members of the Court. Messrs. Antonio Augusto Cancado Trindade (Brazil), Christopher Greenwood (United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland), and Abdulqawi Ahmed Yusuf (Somalia) were elected as new Members of the Court. Judge Antonio Augusto Cancado Trindade was born in Belo Horizonte, Brazil, on 17 September 1947. He holds a PhD in International Law (1977), University of Cambridge, United Kingdom, with the thesis on Developments in the Rule of Exhaustion of Local Remedies in International Law; a LL.M. in International Law, University of Cambridge (1973); and a LL.B. in Law, Federal University of Minas Gerais, Brazil (First Prize in Civil Law, 1969). He is a Professor of Public International Law at the University of Brasilia (since 1978) and at the Diplomatic Academy Rio Branco of Brazil (since 1979). In February 2009 the Court as newly constituted will proceed to elect from among its Members a President and a Vice-President, who will hold office for three years. The International Court of Justice, which is the principal judicial organ of the United Nations, comprises 15 judges, who are each elected to a nine-year term of office and may be re-elected. In order to ensure a measure of continuity in the composition of the Court, one third of the membership is renewed every three years. In accordance with Article 2 of the Statute of the Court, judges are elected regardless of their nationality from among persons of high moral character, who possess the qualifications required in their respective countries for appointment to the highest judicial offices, or are jurisconsults of recognized competence in international law. Article 9 of the Statute further requires that, in the body as a whole, the representation of the main forms of civilization and of the principal legal systems of the world should be assured. This principle has been reflected in the following distribution of membership of the Court among the principal regions of the globe: three judges for Africa, two for Latin America, three for Asia, five for Western Europe and other States (including States from North America and Oceania) and two for Eastern Europe (including Russia). In addition no two Members of the Court may be of the same nationality. Election procedure Members of the Court are elected by the General Assembly and by the Security Council (where no right of veto applies for the purpose of the election). These organs vote simultaneously but separately. In order to be elected, a candidate must receive an absolute majority of the votes in both organs (that is to say, currently 97 votes in the General Assembly and eight votes in the Security Council). Submission of candidacies All States parties to the Statute of the Court (currently 192) have the right to propose candidates. However, candidates are
not nominated directly by governments but by the national groups in the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) or, in the case of States not participating in the PCA, by similarly constituted national groups. The Permanent Court of Arbitration, which is based in The Hague, was established under the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907. Each State party to those Conventions (currently 108) has its own national group, that is to say a group of up to four jurists who can be called upon to serve as members of an arbitral tribunal under the Conventions. When an election takes place to fill vacancies at the International Court of Justice, each national group can propose up to four candidates, not more than two of whom may be of its own nationality. The others may be from any other country. The names of candidates must be communicated to the Secretary-General of the United Nations. A total of nine candidates were nominated for the purpose of the election held yesterday.
of the registration fee.DEADLINE for Eligibility Inquiries. This is the last day on which individuals mayrequest the Executive Directors special permission to compete under Official Rule 2.2.2.DEADLINE Basic Materials Suggestions. This is the last day on which teams maysuggest documents to be included in the Second Batch of Basic Materials.December 2008 - Release of Second Batch of Basic Materials.12 January 2009 - DEADLINE for Submission of Memorials. Memorials must be emailed to the Regional/National Administrators and the ILSA Executive Office via email in accordancewith the Official Rules. Additional submission requirements and earlier deadlines may beimposed by a National Supplement to the Rules. It is the responsibility of teams to knowthe submission requirements of their National Rules Supplement, if any. Teams shouldcontact their National Administrator if they are unsure whether a National RulesSupplement exists.Jan Feb 2009 - REGIONAL and NATIONAL ROUNDS. Dates for Regional and NationalCompetitions will be posted on the Jessup Website as they become available.22 28 March 2009 - SHEARMAN & STERLING INTERNATIONAL ROUNDS.28 March 2009 - SHEARMAN & STERLING JESSUP CUP WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP ROUND.
The work of the two Hague Peace Conferences and the ideas they inspired in statesmen and jurists had some influence on the creation of the Central American Court of Justice, which operated from 1908 to 1918, as well as on the various plans and proposals submitted between 1911 and 1919 both by national and international bodies and by governments for the establishment of an international judicial tribunal, which culminated in the creation of the Permanent Court of International Justice (PCIJ) within the framework of the new international system set up after the end of the First World War.Article 14 of the Covenant of the League of Nations gave the Council of the League responsibility for formulating plans for the establishment of a Permanent Court of International Justice, such a court to be competent not only to hear and determine any dispute of an international character submitted to it by the parties to the dispute, but also to give an advisory opinion upon any dispute or question referred to it by the Council or by the Assembly. It remained for the League Council to take the necessary action to give effect to Article 14. At its second session early in 1920, the Council appointed an Advisory Committee of Jurists to submit a report on the establishment of the PCIJ. The committee sat in The Hague, under the chairmanship of Baron Descamps ( Belgium). In August 1920, a report containing a draft scheme was submitted to the Council, which, after examining it and making certain amendments, laid it before the First Assembly of the League of Nations, which opened at Geneva in November of that year. The Assembly instructed its Third Committee to examine the question of the Courts constitution. In December 1920, after an exhaustive study by a subcommittee, the Committee submitted a revised draft to the Assembly, which unanimously adopted it. This was the Statute of the PCIJ.The Assembly took the view that a vote alone would not be sufficient to establish the PCIJ and that each State represented in the Assembly would formally have to ratify the Statute. In a resolution of 13 December 1920, it called upon the Council to submit to the Members of the League of Nations a protocol adopting the Statute and decided that the Statute should come into force as soon as the protocol had been ratified by a majority of Member States. The protocol was opened for signature on 16 December. By the time of the next meeting of the Assembly, in September 1921, a majority of the Members of the League had signed and ratified the protocol. The Statute thus entered into force. It was to be revised only once, in 1929, the revised version coming into force in 1936. Among other things, the new Statute resolved the previously insurmountable problem of the election of the members of a permanent international tribunal by providing that the judges were to be elected concurrently but independently by the Council and the Assembly of the League, and that it should be borne in mind that those elected
should represent the main forms of civilization and the principal legal systems of the world. Simple as this solution may now seem, in 1920 it was a considerable achievement to have devised it. The first elections were held on 14 September 1921. Following approaches by the Netherlands Government in the spring of 1919, it was decided that the PCIJ should have its permanent seat in the Peace Palace in The Hague, which it would share with the Permanent Court of Arbitration. It was accordingly in the Peace Palace that on 30 January 1922 the Courts preliminary session devoted to the elaboration of the Courts Rules opened, and it was there too that its inaugural sitting was held on 15 February 1922, with the Dutch jurist Bernard C. J. Loder as President.The PCIJ was thus a working reality. The great advance it represented in the history of international legal proceedings can be appreciated by considering the following: 1) Unlike arbitral tribunals, the PCIJ was a permanently constituted body governed by its own Statute and Rules of Procedure, fixed beforehand and binding on parties having recourse to the Court; 2) It had a permanent Registry which, inter alia, served as a channel of communication with governments and international bodies; 3) Its proceedings were largely public and provision was made for the publication in due course of the pleadings, of verbatim records of the sittings and of all documentary evidence submitted to it; 4) The permanent tribunal thus established was now able to set about gradually developing a constant practice and maintaining a certain continuity in its decisions, thereby enabling it to make a greater contribution to the development of international law; 5) In principle the PCIJ was accessible to all States for the judicial settlement of their international disputes and they were able to declare beforehand that for certain classes of legal disputes they recognized the Courts jurisdiction as compulsory in relation to other States accepting the same obligation. This system of optional acceptance of the jurisdiction of the Court was the most that it was then possible to obtain; 6) The PCIJ was empowered to give advisory opinions upon any dispute or question referred to it by the League of Nations Council or Assembly; 6) The Courts Statute specifically listed the sources of law it was to apply in deciding contentious cases and giving advisory opinions, without prejudice to the power of the Court to decide a case ex aequo et bono if the parties so agreed; 8) It was more representative of the international community and of the major legal systems of the world than any other international tribunal had ever been before it.Although the Permanent Court of International Justice was brought into being through, and by, the League of Nations, it was nevertheless not a part of the League. There was a close association between the two bodies, which found expression inter alia in the fact that the League Council and Assembly periodically elected the Members of the Court and that both Council and Assembly were entitled to seek advisory opinions
from the Court, but the latter never formed an integral part of the League, just as the Statute never formed part of the Covenant. In particular, a Member State of the League of Nations was not by this fact alone automatically a party to the Courts Statute.Between 1922 and 1940 the PCIJ dealt with 29 contentious cases between States and delivered 27 advisory opinions. At the same time several hundred treaties, conventions and declarations conferred jurisdiction upon it over specified classes of disputes. Any doubts that might thus have existed as to whether a permanent international judicial tribunal could function in a practical and effective manner were thus dispelled. The Courts value to the international community was demonstrated in a number of different ways, in the first place by the development of a true judicial technique. This found expression in the Rules of Court, which the PCIJ originally drew up in 1922 and subsequently revised on three occasions, in 1926, 1931 and 1936. There was also the PCIJs Resolution concerning the Judicial Practice of the Court, adopted in 1931 and revised in 1936, which laid down the internal procedure to be applied during the Courts deliberations on each case. In addition, whilst helping to resolve some serious international disputes, many of them consequences of the First World War, the decisions of the PCIJ at the same time often clarified previously unclear areas of international law or contributed to its development.For more information on the Permanent Court of International Justice, please see the "PCIJ" pages on their website. (Adapted from:< http://www.icj-cij.org/ > on February 22, 2008).
por Tureko3D as 14:06 0 comentariosEnviar por e-mailBlogThis!Compartilhar no TwitterCompartilhar no FacebookCompartilhar no orkutMarcadores: Carros, Fiat, Taxiquarta-feira, 23 de dezembro de 2009Fiat Uno Taxi de Porto AlegrePostado por Tureko3D as 05:11 0 comentariosEnviar por e-mailBlogThis!Compartilhar no TwitterCompartilhar no FacebookCompartilhar no orkutMarcadores: Fiat, Taxi, TodosFiat Uno Taxi de Porto AlegrePostado por Tureko3D as 05:11 0 comentariosEnviar por e-mailBlogThis!Compartilhar no TwitterCompartilhar no FacebookCompartilhar no orkutMarcadores: Fiat, Taxi, TodosPostagens Mais RecentesPostagens Mais Antigas