INTRODUCTION. The increase in the number of interstate associations with an intrastate authority, delegated by State members is one of the main characteristics of contemporary world. In the international legal doctrine, the accepted term for such associations is supranational when the phenomenon of delegation and exercise the authority on interstate level is called supranationalism. Despite the fact that official documents and research works consist the term under consideration in the middle of 20th century, so far, the complex and generally accepted definition of supranationalism has not been formed. This situation negatively effects on correct understanding the essence and prospects for the development of integrational processes taking place in modern international relations. This article seeks to overcome this uncertainty.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. When writing the work, a number of theoretical studies of domestic and foreign international lawyers of the second half of the 20th – beginning of the 21st centuries, as well as legal sources that are important for revealing the research topic, were analyzed. During the research implementation, the authors used historical, comparative legal and some other general scientific and special legal methods.

RESEARCH RELULTS. Within the framework of the work, it was substantiated the assertion that the content of supranationality, first of all, consists in endowing the bodies of an interstate association with certain domestic powers, which determines its close relationship with such a category of international law as “integration”. Subsequently, based on comparison of two definitions, it was justified that supranationalism can be considered as one of the methods for integration in interstate associations. At the same time, given that in this case, the transfer of domestic powers to the interstate level is being carried out, and supranationality implies close interaction between international and domestic law, the system of guarantees that ensure the stable development and integration of states within such associations is of particular importance.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION. The general conclusion of the article is that supranationalism should be understood as a way of organizing and operating an interstate association, which has a certain degree of independence and is vested with intrastate authority for the purpose of international legal integration of its member states, subject to a balance of domestic and international beginnings in the process of functioning of such an association.

INTRODUCTION. Autonomy of will principle (mainly, in case of international contracts) is firmly established in modern private international law. It has become more and more widespread in international treaties unifying choice of law and national legislation of numerous states through the whole XX century. The jurisprudence elaborated a position that the first comprehensive codification of private international law (the Bustamante Code) stipulates autonomy of will principle for parties to international private relations.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. The essential technique of this research is bases on the analysis dealing not only with the text of the Bustamante Code, but more with the framework and effects of its elaboration as well as with the peculiarities of its application by member states (especially in the view of general reservations made by several states).

RESEARCH RESULTS. It is pointed out that the Bustamante Code as comprehensive codification of private international law is based on compromise solutions and has been ratified with multiple reservations including those nullifying the very idea of unification. It is proved in series that art. 3 of the Bustamante Code, outlining three categories of legal norms (including voluntary, “applied only by manifestation, interpretation or presumption of will of the parties or one of the parties”), has too broad character, and fragmentary autonomy of will mentioning in respect of contracts’ interpretation and choice-oflaw rules dealing with contracts of adhesion are not sufficient to contend that the Bustamante Code has proclaimed, stipulated or even acknowledged the autonomy of will principle in private international law.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. Two main conclusions are made: firstly, contrary to the point of view widespread in jurisprudence the grounds to contend that the Bustamante Code proclaims autonomy of will principle are absent; secondly, conclusion on legal principle stipulation by the international treaty (or by the other form of law) requires, in author’s opinion, quite definite terminology of provision or of the whole text of the corresponding document in the view of concept description and specific peculiarities of its mechanism.

INTRODUCTION. Treaty and customary rules of International Law of the Sea provide for the duty of States to protect and preserve the marine environment, using for this purpose “the best” means. States shall also cooperate in elaborating legal mechanisms for the protection and preservation of the marine environment on a universal, regional or bilateral basis. Universal treaty sources of modern international law, including the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, 1982 (UNCLOS), among other numerous rules on protection and preservation of the marine environment, provide for the adoption by the coastal states more stringent ecological laws and regulations in “clearly defined” areas. Different terms are used for designating such areas in UNCLOS and other international instruments such as Convention for the Prevention of Pollution by Ships, 1973 modified by the Protocol of 1978 (MARPOL 1973/78); Convention on Biological Diversity, 1992; the Protocols adopted by the UN Environmental Programme (UNEP); documents of International Maritime Organization (IMO). Such terms are used: “special areas”; “marine protected areas”; “marine protected territories”; “particularly sensitive areas”. Not all these terms are used in UNCLOS and none of them is defined by the rules of this convention. Convention on Biological Diversity provides for the definition of “marine protected areas”, but only for the purpose of conservation of biodiversity. This paper addresses optional approaches to interpreting rules of international law which are relevant to marine protected areas and practice of states in designating such areas, first and foremost, in the waters of Arctic and Antarctic, where the consequences of marine pollution might be irreversible.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. This paper demonstrates the evolving legal basis of international cooperation of states in establishing marine protected areas beginning from the text of the Washington convention of 1926, materials of the Committee of Experts of the League of Nations, the Convention for the Prevention of Pollution by Ships, 1973 as amended by Protocol 1978, and documents of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources. Particular attention is devoted to interpreting the rules on special areas provided in UNCLOS. The paper addresses also the relevant rules of the Convention on Biological Diversity, 1992; UNEP Protocols, beginning with the first of them – “the Protocol on Mediterranean Specially Protected Areas”, adopted in 1982; and also relevant soft-law documents such as “Guidelines for the Designation of Special Areas and the Identification of Particularly Sensitive Areas”, adopted by the Assembly IMO in 1991 and famous “Agenda for XXI”, adopted by the Rio Environmental Conference in 1992 and relevant documents of the Johannesburg Summit, 2002. The focus of the research is directed to legal materials of designating marine protected areas in the Arctic and Antarctic.

RESEARCH RESULTS. International Law is developed by more and more maturing legal mechanisms of different level, including treaty level, which relate to designating marine protected areas and to governance theirof. Different classifications of such areas are suggested in legal literature, taking into account different terms used in relevant sources of international law. It is suggested in legal literature to make accent on differentiating between the term “special areas”, as it is provided in MARPOL 1973/78 and the same term used in UNCLOS. As a result of this research it is suggested a different approach. The practice of states in pursuing environmental protection, as noted in the paper, reveals a trend not to fragment relevant legal notions, applicable to designating special protected areas at sea in defined limits and thus not to create additional confusion of legal terms but rather to consolidation, comprehensive interpretation of international law rules applicable to special areas. Within this trend it is suggested that the term “marine protected areas” as a generic term is interpreted in a wide context, not limiting it to the meaning of the term, used in a specific international agreement. According to such a wide approach rules of international law on marine protected areas in their cumulative effect provide not only duties of states to protect marine environment; not only that more stringent environmental measures in such areas are aimed at protection from pollution by oil or other pollutants; such stringent measures are aimed also at preservation of ecosystems, ecological complexes, including marine living resources. The economic activities in such areas might be restricted or even prohibited in order to achieve specific environmental purposes, including preservation of marine endemics and other rare marine living resources; including also sustainability of marine bioproductivity and monitoring the state of ecological balance in such areas. The coastal states may also adopt laws and regulations relating to special environmental governance of such areas.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. While according to MARPOL 1973/78 the legal regime of “special areas” is limited by more stringent measures for preventing pollution of the sea from vessels, the legal regime of marine protected areas is different, according to cumulative effect of relevant rules provided in UNCLOS, Conservation of Marine Biodiversity, the UNEP Protocols to regional sea conventions and other sources of international law relating to preservation and protection of the marine environment. Firstly, according to the latter sources, the legal status of marine protected areas is defined not only a broader context, but also as an on-going process, with perspectives of its development and individual framing, taking into account the oceanographical and ecological conditions of a concrete marine area which is qualified as specially protected. Secondly, almost universal recognition in legal teachings of a broad meaning of the term “marine protected areas” does not mean that designation of such areas is the most effective at the universal level. Though the first Intergovernmental Conference in September 2018 demonstrated the common intention of states to prepare at the universal level the Agreement on the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction, no one expects a speedy conclusion of such an agreement, even of framework character. In this context it is concluded in the paper that more perspective are regional and bilateral levels of interaction of states concerned for designating marine protected areas, with more detailed consideration of the relevant oceanographical and ecological conditions of a particular marine region and special character of shipping traffic in such a region. In practical terms, issues of interpretation and application of rules of international law on marine protected areas are very important for the relatively young practice of designating such areas in the Arctic, which is nevertheless very sensitive for each Arctic states as shown in the paper.

INTRODUCTION. For 74 years, Russia and Japan have both claimed legal title over the four Southern Kuril Islands, paralysed by their controversy from making a post-WWII peace treaty and realising the full potential of their bilateral relations. This entire time, the islands have been governed in all aspects of their legal, political, and economic life, by the Russian side. This entire time, Japan has made diplomatic protests contesting the legality of Russian jurisdiction. With no international authority to determine which of the countries prevails, one wonders if the effective Russian control has not or should not have, by now, overcome Japanese protests – almost the only tool international law provides for states to prevent another’s title.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. The international legal principles and doctrines at play are the overarching notions of effectiveness and stability, governing the resolution of any territorial disputes, the related doctrines of prescription and acquiescence, and the maxim ex injuria jus non oritur that aims to preclude territorial change if it originates in illegality – these are studied on the basis of contemporary works on the international law of territory and the general scientific methods of analysis, synthesis, description, and deduction.

RESEARCH RESULTS. Effectiveness and stability lie at the heart of territorial change. Their derivative doctrines of prescription and acquiescence serve as tools for legitimizing title of dubious origins through long, peaceful and effective possession of territory absent protests from the former sovereign (and subject to the self-determination of the territory’s inhabitants), and, possibly, with the help of recognition by third states. Whether the opposing notion of ex injuria jus non oritur is an international legal principle remains debatable. The international law, however, in the politically sensitive matters of territory is too meek to provide a definite answer to when these concepts clash within the reality such as that of the Southern Kuril dispute.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. In weighing the Russian effective control over the islands against Japan’s demands that the territories be returned to Japan, the key question is: does effective possession override protests, given the duration and quality of such effectiveness and such protests? It is argued here that such an answer would benefit the aim of stability sought by the international law and that in the situation at hand it should be a carefully qualified, but emphatic yes.

INTRODUCTION. The article is devoted to practical and legal aspects of floating nuclear power plants (FNPPs). The first ever FNPP “Academic Lomonosov” was built in 2019 in Russia. It is a unique transportable nuclear low-power unit intended for energy and heat supply of remote port cities, industrial enterprises, gas and oil platforms. “Lomonosov” and its successor generations will have a major impact on the global nuclear energy market. The question arises how FNPPs fit into the rules of International Law.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. The research was based on the analyses of international conventions on nuclear safety, security and civil liability, Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, IAEA documents on safeguards and standards, scholarly publications. General and special methods of legal research were used.

RESEARCH RESULTS. The authors determined that in the specific case of “Academic Lomonosov” which will operate on the Russian territory no collisions with the rules of International Law are expected. However, if future serial FNPPs go for export, it will be important to analyze their compatibility with international treaties.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. This paper concludes that FNPPs are largely compatible with the existing rules of International Law. However, there are some gaps and grey areas, especially in an export scenario. To mitigate those problems, bilateral intergovernmental agreements between the supplying and the importing states shall be concluded on their obligations in all legal and institutional issues prior to FNPP’s international shipment. Safeguards arrangement with the IAEA should be envisaged as well.

INTORDUCTION. The International Labour Organization (ILO) is a specialized Agency of the United Nations, established in 1919 on the basis of the Treaty of Versailles. The competence of this Organization, among other things, includes standard-setting activities for the development of labor standards at the international level. In 2019, the ILO celebrates 100 years since its creation. This article analyzes the current activities of the Organization to improve the existing international legal norms, as well as the prospects for the development of rulemaking planned for the upcoming years. In particular, special attention is paid to a set of measures aimed at solving urgent problems affecting profound changes in the sphere of labor at the international level. Among the tasks that the ILO plans to give priority to in the nearest future are the finalization and unification of the international legal norms adopted by the Organization, as well as the development of new conventions aimed at improving the international legal regulation of labor.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. Present study is based on the analysis of the current legal framework of the Organization, aimed at improving the international legal norms on labor. In addition, the works of Russian and foreign scientists on the chosen subject were used. General scientific and special methods of cognition, including comparative legal and formal legal, are used as a method of research.

RESEARCH RESULTS. The authors' analysis of the ILO's work on improving international legal norms on labour, showed that, at the present time clearly indicated the intention of the Organization to organize homogeneous in its content of norms regulating the issues of occupational safety, hygiene and security in the workplace. At the same time, the ILO has set itself the task of updating existing norms and abolishing those that are largely outdated and ineffective. In addition, the Organization's activities in the upcoming years will also focus on the audit of outdated standards and other regulatory issues. Also, taking into account statistical indicators, according to the authors, there is an urgent need for the adoption of a new ILO Convention aimed at combating violence and harassment in the workplace.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. In accordance with the objectives and changes in the international legal regulation of labour relations, the ILO Global Commission on the Future of Work has identified the most acute problems and challenges, the overcoming of which will open up new prospects for future generations in the field of labour, namely: the revision of existing international labour standards, the abolition of obsolete, the codification of homogeneous rules governing occupational safety, security and hygiene. Great importance is also given to the improvement and progressive development of international labour law. In this regard, the authors believe that there is a need for the ILO to develop and adopt a Convention to combat violence and harassment in the workplace. The new international legal instrument should provide mechanisms for protection against violence and harassment, which could give greater weight to the problem by covering all workers and all forms of violence and harassment, and by addressing the issue in a comprehensive and integrated manner. The drafting and adoption of an international Treaty on the subject would be extremely important, since violence and harassment were unacceptable and were the opposite of the concept of "decent work" adopted by the ILO in 1999.

INTRODUCTION. This article is devoted to analyzing the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization and World Intellectual Property Organization’s approaches to the protection of traditional cultural expressions and traditional knowledges. The study is aimed at comparison the UNESCO and WIPO’s instruments for traditional cultural expressions and traditional knowledge protection.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. Research material include Conventions and “soft-law” instruments developed and adopted under UNESCO and WIPO auspices. The main methods of research consist of comparative method, method of description and historical method.

RESEARCH RESULTS. The article describes chronological order of traditional cultural expressions and traditional knowledges including in the international agenda. In this research UNESCO and WIPO’s individual and collaborative efforts are taken into consideration. Great attention is paid to Proclamation of the masterpieces of the oral and intangible heritage of humanity program and its selection criteria. The article is illustrated by the examples of masterpieces of the Oral and Intangible Heritage of Humanity. The concept of intangible cultural heritage as defined in the Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage is a subject of a detailed analysis. This definition is compared with the WIPO concepts of traditional cultural expressions and traditional knowledge.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION. The article concluded that the intangible cultural heritage definition elaborated by the UNESCO is broad enough. It includes both traditional cultural expressions and traditional knowledge elements in terms of the World Intellectual Property Organization. The author concludes that the UNESCO promotes an integrated approach to traditional cultural expressions and traditional knowledge protection and is focusing increasingly on the its conservation while the WIPO focuses on preventing its illicit use.

INTRODUCTION. The present article is dedicated to considering the key matters of dramatic impact of intellectual property rights, especially patents, on biotechnology transfer under regime of 1992 UN Convention on biodiversity (CBD) and on access to environmentally sound biotechnologies. The research purpose is to examine the interface between states’ international-legal obligations in the area of intellectual property protection and the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity in terms of promoting technology transfer and diffusion. Besides that, the author strives to outline the complex of relevant measures aimed to reduce the restraining function of intellectual property rights with regard to biotechnology transfer to developing countries in the interests of sustainable development and achieving its goals.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. In the course of preparation of this study, writings of researches and experts in the area of international environmental law and international economic law were used. At that, author has used materials and documents of meetings of CBD Conference of Parties, documents of the WTO, as well as resolutions of the GA UN and reports of the Secretary General. This study is premised on using the general methods of cognition (systemic and structural approaches, analysis and synthesis, deduction and induction) and methods of legal research (comparative, historical and formallydogmatic methods).

RESEARCH RESULTS. Base on conducted analysis, the author has come to following research findings. International-legal regulation of biotechnology transfer under CBD is an integral part of regulation of biotechnology circulation in the interests of sustainable development and achieving its goals. Transfer of biotechnology is the element of regime of access and benefit sharing (ABS). The solution of the problem of effective implementation of art. 16 of the CBD on aiding technology transfer to developing countries is separate subject matter of conventional cooperation. Some success in realization of provisions of the art. 16 is due to convergence between the CBD regime of biodiversity and the regime of intellectual property rights protection under the TRIPS Agreement.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. The author ascertains that, at present, the stimulating impact of intellectual property rights on technology transfer in the context of harmonizing thereof with objectives of the CBD demands, especially in the connection of spreading TRIPS-plus standards, development of cooperation of states on improving available and testing new forms of technology transfer, such as patent pools. This study substantiates the conclusion that there is need to improving ABS-regime in directions of setting up the flexible balance between rights holders and technology users on basis of increasing the confidence. The latter is achieved, at first, within the framework of Clean-housing mechanisms of the CBD and the Nagoya Protocol, and, at second, due to consecutive implementation of potential of the TRIPS Agreement.

INTRODUCTION. Currently, most States have specific legislation on PPPs. However, national legislative conditions for the implementation of PPPs has similarities as well as significant differences. The transformation of PPP conception which is offered internationally in the context of achieving Sustainable Development Goals, generates new law trends in the field of PPPs as well as impacts on regulation of PPPs. With growing integration, including legal, it is crucial to ensure to ensure the optimal interaction of Russian legislation on PPPs with international PPP standards and the legal framework of PPPs of other states. This determined the purpose of the study, which consists in identifying and comparing trends and best foreign practices in the legal PPPs regulation with Russian PPPs legislation with the aim of determining ways for its further development. Research objectives: to identify the main trends in PPP regulation at the international and national levels in the context of the main shortcomings and gaps of the Russian PPP legislation; determine the conditions for a more informed choice of foreign models of legal regulation of PPPs to improve Russian legislation; summarize the best practices of legal regulation of PPPs at the international level and in comparable foreign legislation; on their basis, formulate proposals that can be considered and used when amending Russian legislation on PPPs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. The material for this study was Russian and foreign legislation on PPPs, model acts and decisions of international organizations, assessments of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development and the World Bank regarding the level of compliance with national legislation and international PPP standards, as well as Russian and foreign scientific works in the field of PPP, materials of judicial and law enforcement practice. The methodological basis of the study covers the general scientific (the method of logical and system analysis, the dialectical method, the methods of deduction and induction) and the private scientific (comparative legal, formal legal, interpretative) methods of cognition.

RESEARCH RESULTS. The study reached the following conclusions. The international trend of PPP regulation as a means of achieving the SDGs was not reflected either in Russian legislation on PPPs, or as a mechanism to achieve Russia's national development goals or an instrument for implementing national projects. The approaches to the regulation of key terms for PPP projects, including the object composition of PPPs, sources of financing and return on investment in PPP projects, the terms of PPP agreements, guarantees and measures of state support for PPPs, tools for resolving disputes in PPPs also do not coincide with international trends and the best foreign models of regulation of these relations and need optimization.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. In order to establish a favorable legal framework for PPPs in Russia, the improvement of PPP legislation should be carried out in accordance with international and foreign trends in the legal regulation of PPPs. At the same time, consideration and selection of models of legal PPP regulation should be carried out taking into account the factors that determine the mechanism of legal regulation of PPP in various states. According to the author, the factors include the type of legal system of the state, the membership of the state in international and regional organizations, the level of economic development of the state, the degree of its participation in the regulation of the economy and private sector. Assessments of the international organisations in regarding the level of compliance of foreign PPP legislation with international PPP standards is also important. Based on these findings, the article presents proposals on areas for improving Russian legislation on PPPs.

INTRODUCTION. International arbitration is traditionally located on the periphery of legal research. The only exception is investment arbitration. Recently, however, states have started to regularly resort to it. International arbitration, thus, became able to influence the development of common law. Many of arbitration cases involve maritime law issues; unlike the International Court of Justice, arbitration courts consider problems that don’t relate to Articles 74 and 83 of the 1982 Convention on the Law of the Sea, which regulate delimitation (mechanism of compulsory dispute resolution, regime of historical waters and maritime formations, right to hot pursuit, etc.). The emerging arbitration jurisprudence, however, is ambiguous.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. The present research has been conducted on the basis of arbitral awards delivered in the three most significant and controversial cases: Arctic Sunrise case, South China Sea case and Border dispute between Slovenia and Croatia; their normative basis (the 1982 Convention, arbitration agreements and customary law); scientific comments on these awards. The methodology of the research is based upon the method of critical analysis.

RESEARCH RESULTS. The author concludes that the argumentation used in these awards is unsatisfactory and inconsistent with provisions of maritime law and other branches of international law. In the Award on Arctic Sunrise case of 14 August 2015 (Netherlands and Russia), the Court indicated that the detention of a foreign vessel that violated the laws on artificial installations, is legal if the hot pursuit started when the vessel was in security zone. The pursuit of a foreign ship, however, is not a security measure, since it’s carried out after committing the violation; its goal is the implementation of responsibility. Violations of laws applicable to the artificial platforms may therefore be prosecuted throughout all the exclusive economic zone. In the Awards on South China Sea case (Philippines and China) of 29 October 2015 and 12 July 2016, the Court found that the dispute did not concern delimitation, since it does not imply the intersection of claims; its conclusions, however, are directly related to delimitation as it stated that China’s maritime areas do not extend where China suggested they would extend, but elsewhere. Also the Court did not provide convincing arguments for conclusions that the dispute does not concern “historic titles” and China does not claim sovereignty in disputed areas. Finally, it did not consider whether large-scale construction could make the island suitable for living within the meaning of Art. 121 of the 1982 Convention. In the Awards on the territorial and maritime dispute of 30 June 2016 and 29 June 2017 (Slovenia and Croatia), the Court replaced the issue of violation of the arbitration agreement by the issue of its further implementation; such an opportunity, created after the replacement of arbitrators, as well as the alleged repentance of Slovenia, however, don’t exclude the fact that Slovenia violates the provisions of the agreement, essential to the accomplishment of its object or purpose. The Court also established in favor of Slovenia an area which is not envisaged by the Convention and passes in the territorial sea of Croatia – the so-called Junction Area.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. The considered awards contain gross legal inaccuracies that impacted the outcome of the cases. They reflect the imperfection of international arbitration, manifested in selective use of evidence, absence of guarantees against procedural abuses, complexity of the mechanism enshrined in Part XV of the Convention, etc. The awards also reflect general imperfection of the institutions of the law of the sea – such as lack of clear regulation of the jurisdiction over artificial installations, serious gaps in the regimes of historical waters and sea formations, imprecision of the exemptions from the compulsory settlement mechanism, inability of the Convention to ensure a balance of interests of states in case the territorial sea is closed.