竹島

PRINCIPLES OF PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW by Ian Brownlieの続き。
(f)Renunciation or relinquishment
It is not uncommon for states to renounce title over territory in circumstances in which the subject-matter does not thereby become terra nullius (territory belonging to no state). This distinguishes renunciation from abandonment. Furthermore, there is no element of reciprocity, and no contract to transfer, as in the case of treaty of cession. Renunciation may be a recognition that another state now has title*1 or recognition of, or agreement to confer, a power of disposition to be exercised by another state or group of states.*2
A series of unilateral acts may constitute evidence of an implicit voluntary relinquishment of rights. Renunciation is to be distinguished from reversion, i.e. recognition by an aggressor that territory seized is rightfully under the sovereignty of the victim. Here, there is no title to renounce. Since the procedure of renunciation involves title alone, it may happen that the state losing title retains power of administration by delegation.

*1: For example see the treaty of St German-en-Laye of 10 Sept.1919
*2: See the treaty of St German, Arts. …….; and Art.2 of the Japanese Peace Treaty of 8 Sept. 1951;….
ーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーー
SF条約を「既に他国が権原を有することを認めた」条約には分類せずに「処分権を他国に与える」条約に分類していることがミソですね。