それで抗議したのかい?
投稿者: garara_nyororo7 投稿日時: 2004/04/13 11:19 投稿番号: [3944 / 18519]
>日本が韓国領である「獨島」を「無主地」として日本に「領土編入」し、「竹島」と呼ぶよう決定した事実を大韓帝国政府や韓国民が知れば、これは韓国付属領土を侵奪したのであるから、いくらソウルと韓半島が日本軍の軍事占領下にあったとしても、抗議文を出すなり、抗議の外交活動をする可能性がある。
------------------------------------ -
それで、1905年8月19日に、完成した望楼という可視物に対して日本に抗議したのかな。実効的支配をしていたのに、設置を知らなかったことはないよね?さぞや猛烈な抗議をしたんだろうね。
参考までにICJの判決要旨の一部を載せておくよ。最後の文をちゃんと読んでね。
It further invokes the fact that the authorities of the colony of North Borneo constructed a lighthouse on Sipadan in 1962 and another on Ligitan in 1963, that those lighthouses exist to this day and that they have been maintained by Malaysian authorities since its independence. The Court notes that "the activities relied upon by Malaysia . . . are modest in number but . . . they are diverse in character and include legislative, administrative and quasi-judicial acts. They cover a considerable period of time and show a pattern revealing an intention to exercise State functions in respect of the two islands in the context of the administration of a wider range of islands". The Court further states that "at the time when these activities were carried out, neither Indonesia nor its predecessor, the Netherlands, ever expressed its disagreement or protest".
------------------------------------ -
それで、1905年8月19日に、完成した望楼という可視物に対して日本に抗議したのかな。実効的支配をしていたのに、設置を知らなかったことはないよね?さぞや猛烈な抗議をしたんだろうね。
参考までにICJの判決要旨の一部を載せておくよ。最後の文をちゃんと読んでね。
It further invokes the fact that the authorities of the colony of North Borneo constructed a lighthouse on Sipadan in 1962 and another on Ligitan in 1963, that those lighthouses exist to this day and that they have been maintained by Malaysian authorities since its independence. The Court notes that "the activities relied upon by Malaysia . . . are modest in number but . . . they are diverse in character and include legislative, administrative and quasi-judicial acts. They cover a considerable period of time and show a pattern revealing an intention to exercise State functions in respect of the two islands in the context of the administration of a wider range of islands". The Court further states that "at the time when these activities were carried out, neither Indonesia nor its predecessor, the Netherlands, ever expressed its disagreement or protest".
これは メッセージ 3943 (hangetsujoh さん)への返信です.
固定リンク:https://yarchive.emmanuelc.dix.asia/1835396/cddeg_1/3944.html