text:
The harsh rejection in the Brazilian doctrine
In the steps of a rejection
Argentine reservations
Abstracts: Englisch
Arno Dal Ri Jr.*
Mancini in the Platine Basin: The Reception of the Principle of Nationalities in Argentina, Uruguay and Brazil
1The objective of this work is to understand the process of appropriation of the ideas of Pasquale Stanislao Mancini1 by the legal cultures of Argentina, Uruguay and Brazil throughout the 20th century, particularly in respect to the principle of nationality2, and how the political and cultural identity of these countries influenced in the reception of his ideas. Due to the scarce circulation of his work in Latin America, his original writings in Italian were not translated in this continent. On the other hand, the translation to Portuguese took place in Brazil only in the beginning of the 21st century3. The theory elaborated by Pasquale Stanislao Mancini about the nationality principle4, therefore, reached South America in its original language, but mainly through the commentaries in French language textbooks about the subject, such as those by Robert Piédelièvre5, Alphonse Rivier6 and Paul Fauchille7.
2The reception of these ideas in the Argentinean, Uruguayan and Brazilian handbooks of public international law8, such as those written by Daniel Antokoletz and Luis Podestà Costa in Argentina, Eduardo Jimenez de Arechaga in Uruguay, and Raul Pederneiras and Hildebrando Accioly Lima in Brazil, from the beginning of the 20th century, is, therefore, the object of analysis of the present work. This choice is due mainly to the wide circulation of these scholars in their respective countries, as well as to the impact that they had in the process of academic education of jurists. Also, a further selection among the manuals of the aforementioned countries was made, focusing only on those that were written by Argentinean, Uruguayan, Brazilian or foreigners residing and active in these countries. Hence, no regard was given to public international law textbooks translated from foreign languages and published in these countries.
3Moreover, it will be an object of analysis of the present work the main differences between the Argentinean, Uruguayan and Brazilian legal cultures with respect to the subject. In Argentina, until the 1960s the Mancinian principle was still applicable to international law and fit for regulating the context of the international community. In Uruguay and Brazil, on the other hand, there was an early process of historicization of the principle, in the sense that it started to be regarded as a result of a very specific moment of the historic itinerary of international law and, therefore, was no longer applicable to the latter.
4There were variations to the process of reception/adoption of Mancini's ideas about nationalities. In Argentina and in Brazil, the textbooks started to report news on the principle of nationalities only in the first decades of the 20th century; in Uruguay, this took place a few decades later. Among the three nations, the Argentinean doctrine appears to be the most generous in this process of appropriation of ideas. Even if having some reservations, it seems to accept the principle of nationalities as existing for a longer period of time. This acceptance would only end two decades after the institution of the United Nations. The Brazilian and Uruguayan doctrines, on the other hand, always showed skepticism to the real possibility of validity of the principle, preventing, therefore, the consolidation of an actual transplant of ideas. In Brazil, in particular, during the interwar period, Mancini's premises were despised by the scholars, or regarded by them as a product of a historically delimited moment, and consequently rejected in the framework of the institutes of international law in force.
5As a part to a wider research, which involves the international legal studies of other south-American countries, the present investigation has a non-exhaustive character. The work related to it has not yet been entirely finished and the conclusions offered by this presentation are still partial.
6In Brazil, only in 1902 Lafayette Rodrigues Pereira, in the first volume of his Princípios de Direito Internacional, refers to the Italian author: 'Mancini was the inventor of the principle of nationalities in Italy, having International Law as basis and foundation. He proclaimed this theory for the first time in an opening lecture in Turin, on January 22nd, 1851. His theory was then adopted and proclaimed by a great number of Italian publicists'9. It seems that the Brazilian author did not have access to the original text of the lecture of 1851, since, in order to introduce the principle, he makes use of the French commentaries by Terenzio Mamiani10 and those by Heinrich Ahrens11, Robert Piédelièvre12 and Alphonse Rivier13, authors that in different ways and degrees adhered to aspects of the Mancini theory.
7In this occasion, Lafayette approaches to the ideas of Mancini, and welcomes part of them in his manual. But it is indeed a timid approach, considering that, on one hand, he postulates the equality of nations and accepts as their founding elements the same ones used by the Italian author; however, on the other hand, he presents the State as 'the set of bodies through which a nation manifests its political life and action, or better, it is the public power organized in all of its ramifications'14. Thus, Lafayette departs from the main postulate by Mancini, which asserted that nations where the true subjects of international law.
8In 1931, quite early if compared to the other South American doctrines, Raul Pederneiras, in his work Direito Internacional Compediado, refuted the possibility of enforcement of the principle of nationality. Despite acknowledging the originality of Mancini's work, and attributing to the Italian scholar the formulation of this principle, the Brazilian jurist asserts that 'if such doctrine succeeded, many States would fail to have an actual existence, and would be fatally absorbed by the old metropolis or by the governments that formerly dominated them as their dependents or colonies'15. According to the criticism that Paul Fauchille had made to Mancini in his Traité de droit international (1922)16, Pederneiras concludes that the consequence would be either '[…] a scanty number of enormous States with discontinuous territory or an uncountable number of tiny States, a myriad of States […]'17. The opposition between the Mancinian principle and the Brazilian history sets a strong background in the work of Pederneiras, due to the fact that this country was colonized by an European nation and had only recently achieved independence from Portugal – from which country it inherited its language, culture and religion – and was trying to establish itself as a regional power in the international scenario. In this context, accepting the effectiveness of the principle of nationalities could be interpreted as a relativization of the very idea of a Brazilian State, as independent to Portugal. As the author says, 'however, to make the nationality an essential ground to the constitution of the State it's to destroy the essence of the personality, which doesn't determinate the uniform individual pattern. If we give support to this opinion, we would have to yield to the old Lusitanian metropolis or to absorb it as a province or as dependent from our federation'18. Because of these reasons, 'the Mancini's theory deserves a historical reference'19. In the specific case of non-European States, they have distinguished themselves from the first ones due to the 'influence of new means and other activities, until the modification or adulteration of ethnical elements, as the languages, from a region to another, almost deleting, some times, the original form'20.
9Thus, according to Pederneiras, 'Mancini's theory cannot be admitted either'21, nor could it be regarded as in force since it '(…) considered the nation as a natural person of International Law and the State as an artificial institution, which can be easily refuted'22.
10Barely after the end of the Second World War, Jorge Americano, in 1945, published his O novo fundamento do direito internacional e seu esteio na conciencia universal, in an attempt to offer a different vision concerning the typical topics of other handbooks of the subject matter. There is no mention, in his book, to Mancini or to the principle of nationalities, but when the topic is brought in the chapter dedicated to the subjects of international law, the author affirms that 'it is extremely difficult to characterize what a nation is in a legal manner'23. Contesting the idea of homogeneity present in the core of Mancini's theory, he asserted: 'There are typical nations, i.e., characterized by a set of unmistakable elements – territory, people, a national conscience consolidated specially by a racial, historic, linguistic and cultural identity, a sovereign government. However, not all nations in the present world gather all of these elements'24.
11This is an approach that, although with different elements, will be the one followed by the other Brazilian jurists of the 20th century. That is the case, for instance, of Hildebrando Accioly, who, when publishing his treatise in 1956, not only mentioned Mancini and the Italian school of thought25, but also added: 'It is not possible, however, to take to extremes the application of mentioned principle'26, especially because 'one can hardly define the limits of a nationality'27. Coherently to the idea that States of an heterogeneous ethnic composition – as Brazil – would constitute a nation, Accioly did not hesitate in affirming that 'the nation is, therefore, constituted by a set of factors that do not intermingle with those constituting the State itself, nor with those of the regroupment of individuals which is named as people. Its basic element is the subjective factor, represented by the national conscience'28. Thus, the author affirms his opposition to the Mancini's theory, counteracting those that say that 'a Nation is a set of people that have the same origin, the same traditions, the same customs and common aspirations. Ordinarily, the members of a nation speak the same language, have the same religion, and live in the same territory'29. For Accioly, there are 'examples in a contrary sense'30 and the thing that connects the members of a nation is 'a tie purely moral, while in the State there is a political bond'31.
12In the basis of Accioly's criticism was the fact that, according to the author, 'we could hardly precise the limits of a nationality'32, situation that could conduct to the absurd of creating small States, absolutely without autonomous conditions of life, ingrown inside others, or dissociated from some States, that live perfectly happy with their people belonging to more than one nationality (as the case, for example, of Switzerland and Belgium)33.
13Luiz Faro, in the same year, followed the line set by Pederneiras, affirming that 'despite all definitions, there is nothing vaguer than a nationality understood in this manner. There are many elements that constitute it, and none of those, by itself, is sufficient to justify it'34. Faro goes even further than Pederneiras and Accioly, and delegitimizes Mancini's principle also from its internal perspective, showing the fragility of its premises. To the Brazilian author, in this regard, the 'identity of the race does not mean much; all civilized peoples are the result of a fusion of many races'35, and in particular the 'American countries are a mix of almost all the known races'36. The identity of the language, in turn, was 'a very important factor of a nationality, but it is far from being decisive'37 and 'the identity of a culture also is not decisive. Its importance tends to decline considering that, in a modern world, there is a common background of civilization made easier by the frequency and the speed of communications'38. Finally, 'regarding religion, it is no longer a preponderant factor'39. As it can be noticed, in Faro's work strong aspects of the Brazilian sociological constitution and its history as an independent State influence the analysis on the possibility of validity of the nationalities principle, culminating in the author's denial of this postulate.
14A year later, in 1958, Gerson de Britto Boson, in his Curso de Direito Internacional Público40, consolidated his rejection to the Italian theory in a very objective manner, by affirming that 'One cannot, however, accede to the Mancini's idea when he intends to see in the concept of nationality the premises of international Law'41. In line with his Brazilian predecessors, the author considered as fulcral point of his denial the idea of homogeneity as decisive element in the constitution of the nation, as the Italian author defended: 'It is not only due to the fact that the expression 'nationality' nowadays has a precise meaning in constitutional legal technique, but also because the very controversial concept of nation, even in the sense taken by the Italian jurist, escapes the reality of facts, as the nation is not a subject of international Law, and that there are States in which its population is formed by different nations'42. Accepting Mancini's theory and transplanting it to the Brazilian legal culture could have the effect, to Boson and the others, of delegitimizing the Brazilian's State own history and constitution.
15In 1968, Oliveiros Litrento would be the last Brazilian author to explore in a fairly detailed manner, within a textbook43, Mancini's principle of nationalities. Also in his work there is strong criticism, and, for this author, 'the principle of nationalities is insufficient to serve as basis to the organization of the international society'44. Even if it allows 'a criterion to individualizing and structuring the elements of international society'45, it cannot present 'any rule to organizing the relations between States, nor does it assure the stability and the peace in the international community'46.
16Unlike the manner in which Mancini's principle was viewed in the Argentinian doctrine,where it was an object of intense analysis by a significant number of authors – as it will be later described in this work –, in Brazil, as one can find, few theoreticians dedicated a few pages to the Italian author and his theory. In the first half of the 20th century, Clóvis Beviláqua's silence in his Direito Público Internacional47 is actually quite eloquent. By adopting a approach centered on the State that leaves no space to any reflection about the possibility of concession of legal personality to nations, Bevilaqua, in this work, in an act of near contempt, ignores the existence of the principle. A similar reaction is the one found in Curso de Direito Internacional Público48, by Celso Albuquerque de Mello, which was published for the first time in 1967 and that reached fifteen editions. In this one, no mention to Mancini or his principle of nationalities is made whatsoever, as the author adopts a concept of nation filled with sociological content, rather than one with legal value.
17The first manual of International Law published in Uruguay dates from 1864. The so-called 'Curso Elemental de Derechos das Gentes' was written by Gregorio Perez de Gomar and it was fated to serve as a theoretical framework for entire generations of jurists until the publication of the first edition of the Eduardo Jimenez de Arechaga's manual, almost a century later. Published just over a decade after the Mancini's lecture at Turin, the Perez Gomar's considerations were very close to those from the Italian jurist, but didn't mention him at any time.
18This aforementioned proximity becomes latent when Perez de Gomar says textually that the expression 'State' could not serve to indicate the subjects of the international relations. In this sense, the author initiates his presentation asseverating that the expressions 'society', 'nation' e 'State' would be used in a common way as synonyms, but in dealing with subjects of international relations there would be distinctions in a political level able to impute just to one of them that condition49. The State should only complete '[...] the society in its upper and general necessities and give to it an harmonic direction'50, and it's not essential to it '[...] the existence or conservation of external relations, once several States could reunite or confederate themselves, making common the attention to these relations[...]'51.
19After moving away the possibility of the State to constitute a subject of international relations, the Uruguayan jurist starts to discourse about an idea of Nation, assigning to it the treats of an international juridical personality:
20Since the moment in which there is in each nation a power rating that rises up enough characterized to guide its destines, despite the multiplicity of elements that compose it; the word personality expresses just the existence of an agent that acts by itself and that, even recognizing itself as subordinate to an upper precept, depends on its intelligence to discover it and on its volition to give it compliance52.
21Consecrated the juridical personality of the nations, it would be left to the jurist only to find out if they '[...] are of the same nature and if they are in the same situation, to advance our deductions'53.
22After the Perez de Gomar's course in 1961, when the Eduardo Jimenez de Arechaga's manual was published, the theme of nationalities began to be examined only in Bachelor's theses discussed in the Faculty of Law of the University of Uruguay. It's the situation, for instance, of the Juan Campisteguy's54 and Alfredo Furriol's works55, published in 1887 and 1896, respectively. The first one focuses more on technical and legal issues, while the second brings a typical perspective of the nascent French sociology of law, whose theoretical assumption was a conference given by Ernst Renan at Sorbonne, without mentioning Mancini neither the Italian school.
23The Uruguayan doctrine, on the other hand, mentioned expressly the Mancini's principle of nationalities only through the voice of Eduardo Jimenez de Arechaga, jurist that later assumed a chair as member of the International Court of Justice. In the second volume of his Curso de Derecho Internacional Público56, he presents an approach that is very similar to the one taken by Brazilian writers. In other words, it is understood that the Mancinian theory should be submitted to a well-defined time delimitation due to the political elements that stimulated its materialization. For the Uruguayan author,
24also because of political reasons, the famous Italian public law lawyer Mancini, in 1851, before starting the Italian Nation process of reconstitution, enunciated a theory according to which the true subjects of international law were not the States, but the nationalities, as the name of the discipline itself indicates, meaning with that the communities of homogeneous population, by virtue of its origin, its race, its language and its historical tradition, whose homogeneity is a result of the consciousness of its own unity.57.
25In Jimenez de Arechaga's words, it was 'a typically irredentist manifestation that ultimately aimed at the culmination of the Italian unification process'58. In this sense, he asserted to be beyond any doubts that '[…] Public International Law does not subordinate the existence of a State to the presence of this national unity'59 and, utterly contradicting the possibility of the principle, he affirmed to be proven that '[…] the political form of the State contributes to creating a nationality, as a sort of melting pot in where linguistic and ethnic elements merge and, as time goes by, the birth of a new nationality takes place'60. For the Uruguayan jurist, the thesis elaborated by Mancini has found an echo just in another ambit, different from that for what it was initially thought and 'in a field for what it was not designated: in the Public International Law it was not received, but it was totally accepted in the Private International Law, in which, mainly in Europe, the principle that is followed to determine the applicable law in a case of conflict of laws, it's the nationality criterion'61. In other words, with this assertion Jimenez de Arechaga puts the State as an entity able to set the grounds to the birth of a nation, not on the contrary, as Mancini defended.
26In the Argentinean doctrine of International Law of the 20th century, it is Estanislao Zeballos who first brings up Mancini's theory. The jurist initially does so in an indirect manner, in his article entitled Concepto cientifico de la Revolucion italiana62, in 1911. It is an apology to the process of Italian unification, indicating the theory of nationalities as opposed to the theory of divine right, because it professes the triumph of the will of peoples or of national conscience in the formation of political ideas and in the determination of its forms of government. Three years later, in the first volume of his treatise La Nationalité au point de vue de la législation comparée et du Droit Privé humain63, published in Paris in 1914, Zeballos identifies the Italian authors who sustain the ideas about nationality as influenced by the French doctrine, directly quoting Mancini and his 1851 lecture64.
27In 1938, Daniel Antokoletz, Lithuanian jurist who taught at the University of Buenos Aires, makes the first more detailed assessment of the principle. In Tratado de Derecho Internacional Publico en tempo de paz y en tempo de guerra, he departs from the assumption that the principle is an extension of the thoughts of Madame de Staël65, and inserts it in a wider, evidently Iluminist prospect. It can be noticed, thus, an apparent relativization of the ineditism of the work of the Italian jurist. This interpretation, however, does not find reflecton in the Brazilian doctrine, and it also contrasts with the most recent Italian historiography66, that defends that the origins of Mancini's thought were Italic doctrinaire tendencies present in the configuration of the jus publicum europium.
28Considering it to be still valid, Antokoletz grants a positive evaluation of the principle, affirming it to be a '[…] benefic influence on the European diplomacy'67, especially until the first world war, when the allies would have recognized '[…] a certain international personality to the Polish, Czech and Yugoslavian committees, as a nationality that was independent from that of his home States'68. Yet, some reservations to the Mancini theory emerge. They are overall related to the historic aspects of the constitution of Latin-American States. According to Antokoletz, the principle would not apply '[…] in the American continent, formed by States conceived through the free and spontaneous will of their people'69. Despite stressing his perplexities regarding the Mancinian principle, Antokoletz still presents it as related to the doctrine of self-determination of peoples, being such doctrine 'a right of the peoples, homogenous or heterogeneous, to dispose of their destinies and to elect the sovereignty to which they deserve to live'70. To the Lithuanian jurist, it would be, therefore, a 'new word that expresses an old idea'71. Without clarifying if he does so in a conscientious manner or not, Antokoletz gives the impression that the principle of self-determination of peoples would be the result of a transfiguration of the principle of nationalities, in a phenomenon that would have arisen with the deflagration of the First World War.
29Two years later, in 1940, with the release of the handbook Derecho Internacional Publico, Luís Freyre also mentions Mancini. Ignoring the previous works on the theme, Freyre presents him as '[…] the initiator of the theory of nationalities'72, which would have had the ambition of '[…] modifying the basic principles of Public International Law, by showing new paths, according to which it should be nations, not States, the factors of international conviviality'73. Instead, it would be a '[…] doctrine developed in circumstances under which the sentiment of Italian nationality, that had been buried for centuries under the flood of foreign dominations, gained importance and dealt of becoming concrete in the facts by organising Italy as a State'74. Therefore, the recognition of the Mancinian postulate remains untouched, something that had been previously refuted by Antokoletz.
30This approach implies the legitimization of the validity of the principle, even if with reservations. Among these reservations are '[…] the inadmissible contrast that results from its domination (doctrine of nationality) with the name of the science to which it intends to serve as a basis (International Law)'75; the fact that it has an eminently political nature, that is, '[…] if the State is the politically organized version of the nation, if being a national to a country means having active and passive rights in such country, it is evident that the attribution of nationality is associated to considerations of political order'76. Finally, and of particular interest to this study, another reservation was the fact that the concept of nationality derives from the '[…] concept of nation, which is not identical from the European and American points of view'77. In the American point of view, which collides with Mancini's theory, '[…] nation is the association of a set of individuals, with different historic backgrounds, inserted in various religious contexts, with differences in their languages and costumes, and that only have in common their dominating ideal of living in a territory determined according to its own legislation'78. Sensitive to the history of constitution of the Latin-American States, Freyre places it as an obstacle to the applicability of Mancini's principle.
31In 1943, Isidoro Ruiz Moreno, within the confines of his Manual de Derecho Internacional Público79, presents a very thorough view of Mancini's theory. In this sense, the author affirmed that 'the nationalities, when tending to reach a political conscience, are converted into nations'80. After presenting a long list of arguments pro and con reported by the scholars of the time, the Argentinean jurist asserted that is was '[…] beyond any doubt that, at least for a period of time not possible to determine, the theory of nationalities, which may be useful to correct errors from the past in the same way as it once was to the appearance of new States in the roots of the 1914 conflict, will not be taken as a basis to the creation of States and, even less, to adjust the map accordingly'81. It is the first assessment made by an Argentinean to put at stake the validity of the principle. Antokoletz and Freyre, previously, even with their respective reservations, had not questioned it in such an incisive manner. Ruiz Moreno, therefore, intensifies and deepens the collection of reservations which will slowly lead to the de-legitimization of the institute in the Argentinean pages of international law.
32In 1951, Ángel Modesto Paredes, in his Manual de Derecho Internacional Público, makes a different reading than that launched by Ruiz Moreno, with more intense criticism to the use of the principle made in some occasions by international praxis. However, he remains silent as to an eventual de-legitimization of its validity. He classifies it as a 'generic and abstract concept'82, inserted in a context characterized by '[…] complex practical and political applications'83. Consequently, ever since its elaboration, the principle would have been a victim of completely distorted uses, a victim of politics, that '[…] was charged with destroying and making it threatening, when it turned nationality into the banner of excessive demands and forced and arbitrary territorial incorporations'84. The reference to Mancini is made only in an indirect manner, when the author affirms that it was a '[…] work of Italian theoreticians to highlight for the first time the creational character of nationalities, compared to the artful and sometimes violent character of political formulas'85.
33In 1960, the fourth edition of the international law handbook86 by Lucio Podestá Costa brings a dense reading on the theory of Mancini when he writes about the 'Formación del Estado'. Some passages indicate it as inherent to the political moment that took place at the time in the Italian peninsula: 'The fight for the Italian unity found in Mancini's doctrine the philosophical justification of its anxieties'87. Through this reading it is possible to find a new tendency in the Argentinean doctrine on the subject. In other words, over 30 years after the Brazilian doctrine, Podestá Costa disrupts with the Argentinean tradition that saw the principle as still valid in the international legal order. In order to do so, he departs from the premise that the principle could only be understood through a process of historicization. His writing leads, therefore, to the presentation of the principle as a legal institute valid in a determined historical moment, which was functional to the interests intrinsic to that context. The consequence is a complete subtraction of any possibility of validity of such principle in the moment in which that manual was published88. The 'theory of nationalities' was the reflex of its time and environment in which it was inserted. Outside the background of the Italy of the Risorgimento, it was absolutely unexplainable to the elements cited by Mancini89, Podestá Costa affirmed in a very categorical manner. The assertion is developed in the subsequent paragraphs, together with a political, sociological and anthropological analysis. Such examination makes clear, nevertheless, the eminently historical framework in which the debate should be placed.
34In 1963, the publication of Tratado de Derecho Internacional90 by Lucio Moreno Quintana, right before he finished his term as a member to the International Court of Justice, brings out the close relation between the principle of nationalities and the principle of self-determination of peoples, as he presents the latter as a direct derivation, or better yet, a transfiguration of the former: 'A foundation to the principle of self-determination is the existence of nation that claims its independence. From this comes the formulation of a theory of nationalities according to which every psychological nation should be converted into a political nation, that is, into a State'91. On one hand, Moreno Quintana disregards the argument which puts nations as subjects of international law but, on the other hand, he adopts the elements that Mancini inserts in the core of this concept. It is not clear, however, if the author actually draws back from the possibility of validity, in that moment, of an institute historically delimited as typical from 19th-century Europe. The countless examples about the subject brought throughout the book provide little clarification to enlighten the context, and actually aggravate it as the author starts confusing the principle of self-determination of peoples, which is a theoretical elaboration typical from the 20th century, with the principle of nationalities.
35In 1966, giving scholar force to the process of historicization started by Podestá Costa, the textbook by the Diaz Cisneros refers to the principle in an emphatic manner, by stating that it would be 'of historical interest, non applicable to contemporaneity'92. This extract – which amounts to a death sentence both harsh and objective – is located in the assessment of the classification of States according to their structure made by the author, and is inserted in a context where the concept of Mancini is mentioned. Diaz Cisneros reassesses this idea in the subsequent paragraphs, and reaffirms the condemnation of the principle to the annals of history: 'The theory of nationalities by Mancini is not applicable to the nations and the States in the present time, as we have argued when studying the foundation of International Law (§2)'93. The reasons for that are exposed in a systematic way, by making use of a long list of arguments already previously used by the critics of Mancini, including 'for the most part of the modern States the unity of the territory was not held, neither of languages, of religion, nor of other elements signed by Mancini, as can be proved looking at the States of our time'94.
36The textbooks of international law published by some authors in Argentina between 1966 and 1976 rarely mention Mancini and his principle of nationality, and the limited mentions to it are restricted to the reproduction of quotes from the books by Antokoletz and Ruiz Moreno. Examples of this are the textbooks by Julian Herrero95, issued in 1968, and Eduardo Augusto Garzia96, issued in 1975. Therefore, they do not present a significant relevance to this study.
37Only in 1976 the study of the subject is resumed, with the publication of Derecho Internacional Publico97, by the Ukrainian jurist Bohdam Halajczuk, and by the Argentinean jurist Maria Teresa Moya Dominguez. Mancini and his concept are indirectly mentioned, when the authors affirm that the 'Italian school of international law denied the international personality of the States and claimed it in the name of nations'98. Halajczuk and Moya Dominguez, following the tendency that was inaugurated by Podestá Costa, depart from the historic contextualization of the principle, according to which it served a 'legal foundation to the aspirations of the Italian nation towards unification'99. The originality of the idea is also acknowledged by the authors when they affirm that 'observed by the eyes of that time, the perspective of that school seemed much more revolutionary and even extravagant that it does nowadays'100. Furthermore, the authors view the theory of Mancini as anticipating the proposals of other internationalists, such as Strissower and Verdross, regarding an aspect of international life that only much later would be proved, that is, 'that the founding element of the State is not its government but its people, the State is nothing but a form of organization of a nation, the government is nothing more than an organ to it'101. The conclusive criticism made by Halajczuk and Moya Dominguez somewhat concurs with points already made by Ruiz Moreno and Freyre, in the sense that 'this identification of the State with the nation is correct only in respect to the ethnically homogeneous states or those that have national minorities, but in no way to the dynastic states, which lack an ethnic substrate of a nation that could be regarded as authentic bearer of the rights and obligations that international law inflicts. The so-called African states also lack such a substrate'102. They take into account, thus, the form with which south-American States were historically constituted.
38In a general way, the Argentinean doctrine was more attentive to the principle of nationalities taught by Mancini in 1851. Even the authors that did not admit in any way the validity of the principle dedicated few, yet noteworthy pages to its appraisal. It is significant to note, however, that, among the reservations to it, views that bring into perspective specific elements of Latin-American history in contraposition to the European one, and that did not permit the application of the principle in the international community constituted by the former, were repetitive and continuous, yet made in distinct approaches.
39Far from constituting a solid and wide continent, the set of findings that were exposed in this work actually formed a great archipelago of unresolved questions instead. These must be assessed in a future development of this research, which, as previously said, is not complete.
40These questions relate especially to the possible causes that led to the non-acceptance of Mancini's ideas to the doctrines of the three South American countries that were studied in this work. Brazilians, Argentineans and Uruguayans present differing approaches as to the Mancinian principle. Even submerged in an ocean of reservations, the Argentinean doctrine seemed to recognize the validity of the institute for a few decades. The Uruguayan and Brazilian doctrines, ever since the first work that examined the topic, condemned it as ancient history. Among the reservations of the firsts and the open rejections of the others, it is possible to find a common ground, that is, the certainty that the ethnic, cultural, linguistic and religious homogeneity present in the theory of the Italian jurist would constitute an obstacle to its applicability in America. An eventual adhesion to these ideas by the doctrine would lead to a confrontation with the complex ethnic, linguistic and cultural constitution of the three countries – which involve indigenous communities and intense migratory flows from Europe and Asia – as well as the history of the independence of the three States from their colonial metropolises. One aspect to be considered at a later stage would be, therefore, an analysis of to what extent, in the viewpoint of the studied authors, such acceptance could represent a 'setback' or a 'march of progress' in the legal situation of the three countries.
41It should also be subject of consideration the causes that made Mancini's ideas be more discussed in the Argentinean doctrine than in the other two. The most intense flow of ideas of the Italian legal culture in Argentina may have been a significant reason for this, unlike what happened with the Brazilian legal culture, which received stronger influences from French cultural traditions. The fact that Argentinean law schools have been installed long before and in much larger number than the Uruguayan and Brazilian ones may have also been a factor to this phenomenon. It must also be taken into account the consistent acceptance of the Brazilian internationalist culture to the voluntarist positivism, in stark contrast to the cultural assumptions of the Mancinian theory, an occurrence that, in turn, is unparalleled in the Argentinean legal culture.
42Finally, the first conclusion that can be reached in this context is the lack of a true transplant of Mancini's ideas to the legal cultures that are subject of the present essay, as well as the fact that the 'principle of nationalities' has not been receptioned in the international order governing the relations between the States. These questions relate especially to the possible causes that led to the non-acceptance of Mancini's ideas to the doctrines of the three South American countries that were studied in this work. Brazilians, Argentineans and Uruguayans present differing approaches as to the Mancinian principle. Even submerged in an ocean of reservations, the Argentinean doctrine seemed to recognize the validity of the institute for a few decades. The Uruguayan and Brazilian doctrines, ever since the first work that examined the topic, condemned it as ancient history. Among the reservations of the firsts and the open rejections of the others, it is possible to find a common ground, that is, the certainty that the ethnic, cultural, linguistic and religious homogeneity present in the theory of the Italian jurist would constitute an obstacle to its applicability in America. An eventual adhesion to these ideas by the doctrine would lead to a confrontation with the complex ethnic, linguistic and cultural constitution of the three countries – which involve indigenous communities and intense migratory flows from Europe and Asia – as well as the history of the independence of the three States from their colonial metropolises. One aspect to be considered at a later stage would be, therefore, an analysis of to what extent, in the viewpoint of the studied authors, such acceptance could represent a 'setback' or a 'march of progress' in the legal situation of the three countries.
44Finally, the first conclusion that can be reached in this context is the lack of a true transplant of Mancini's ideas to the legal cultures that are subject of the present essay, as well as the fact that the 'principle of nationalities' has not been receptioned in the international order governing the relations between the States.
Hildebrando Accioly, Tratado de Direito Internacional Público. (Rio de Janeiro 1956) Vol. I.
Henri Ahrens, Cours de droit naturel ou de philosophie du droit: Compléte dans les principales matières, par des aperçus historiques et politiques (Brockhaus 1838)
Jorge Americano, O novo fundamento do direito internacional e seu esteio na conciencia universal (Renascença 1945).
Daniel Antokoletz, Tratado de Derecho Internacional Publico en tempo de paz y en tempo de guerra. (Facultad 1938) Tomo I.
Nádia de Araújo. Direito Internacional Privado: teoria e prática brasileira. (Revolução 6ed, 2016).
Eduardo Augusto García, Manual de Derecho Internacional Público (Ediciones Depalma 1975)
Wilson de Souza Campos Batalha, Tratado elementar de direito internacional privado. (Revista dos Tribunais 1961) Vol. I.
Maristela Basso, Curso de Direito Internacional Privado. (Atlas, 3ed 2013).
Clóvis Beviláqua. Direito Público Internacional.(Freitas Bastos 1939).
Clóvis Beviláqua, Princípios elementares de Direito Internacional Privado. (L. Freitas Bastos, 4ed, 1944).
Gerson de Britto Mello Boson, Curso de Direito Internacional Público. (Bernardo Alvares editora 1958).
Juan Campisteguy. Breves consideraciones sobre Nacionalidad y Ciudadania. (Gadel 1887).
Carlos Augusto de Carvalho. Direito civil brasileiro recopilado ou nova consolidação das leis civis. (L. Francisco Alves 1899).
Amilcar de Castro. Direito Internacional Privado. (Forense 1956).
Enrico Catellani. La dottrina italiana nel diritto internazionale nel secolo XIX. (Romana Editoriale 1935).
Giovanni Cazzetta. 'Prolusioni, prelezioni, discorsi. L'identità nazionale nella rettorica dei giuristi'. In: Giovanni Cazzetta (a cura di). Retoriche dei giuristi e costruzione dell'identità nazionale. (Il Mulino 2013).
Cesar Diaz Cisneros. Derecho Internacional Público. (Tipografica Editora Argentina, 2ed, 1966).
Floriana Colao. L'"idea di nazione" nei giuristi italiani tra ottocento e novecento. (Quaderni fiorentini per la storia del pensiero giuridico 2001), vol XXX.
L. A. Podestá Costa. Derecho Internacional Público. (Tipografica Editora Argentina, 4ed, 1960).
Jacob Dolinger. Direito Internacional Privado. (Forense, 10ed, 2011).
Antonio Droetto. Pasquale Stanislao Mancini e la Scuola Italiana di Diritto Internazionale del secolo XIX. (Giuffrè 1954).
Giacomo Durando. Della nazionalità italiana. Saggio politico-militare. (Bonamici 1846).
Luiz P. F. Faro Junior. Direito Público Internacional. (Haddad 1956).
Paul Fauchille. Traité de droit international. (Rousseau 1922), T. I.
Luís Freyre. Derecho Internacional Publico. (Cita Estudantil 1940).
Alfredo Furriol. Ensayo sociológico. Nuestra Nacionalidad. (El Siglo Ilustrado 1896).
Bohdan T. Halajczuk, María Teresa Del R. Moya Dominguez. Derecho Internacional Publico. (Sociedad Anónima Editora 1976).
Julian A. Herrero. Derecho Internacional Publico. (Buenos Aires, s/e, 1968).
Eduardo Jimenez De Arechaga. Curso de Derecho Internacional Público. (Centro Estudiantes de Derecho 1961), Tomo II: Los Estados y su Dominio.
Terenzio Mamiani. Des traités de 1815 et d'un nouveau droit européen. (Dentu, 1862).
Pasquale Stanislao Mancini. Direito Internacional. (Unijuí 2003).
Pasquale Stanislao Mancini. Diritto internazionale. Prelezioni. (Naples 1873).
Giuseppe Mazzini. Nazionalità. Qualche idea su una costituzione nazionale. In: Edizione nazionale degli scritti di Giuseppe Mazzini. (Galeati, 1908), Vol. VI.
Celso Albuquerque de Mello. Curso de Direito Internacional Público. (Freitas Bastos 1967).
Francisco Cavalcanti Pontes de Miranda. La conception du Droit International Privé d'après la Doctrine et la Pratique au Brésil. (Récueil des Cours de l'Académie de Droit International, 1932), Vol XXXIX.
Pontes de Miranda. Tratado de Direito Internacional Privado. (L. José Olympio 1935), Tomo II.
Isidoro Ruiz Moreno. Manual de Derecho Internacional Público. (J. Castagnola 1943).
Lúcio M. Moreno Quintana. Tratado de Derecho Internacional. (Editorial Sudamericana 1963) Tomo Primero.
Oliveiros Litrento. Manual de Direito Internacional Público. (Forense 1968).
Rodrigo Octávio. A Theoria de Mancini. In: Revista Jurídica. (1916), II.
Ángel Modesto Paredes. Manual de Derecho Internacional Público. Sus principios fundamentales en tiempo de paz. (Depalma 1951).
Raul Pederneiras. Direito internacional compendiado. (Freitas Bastos 1931).
Lafayette Rodrigues Pereira. Princípios de Direito Internacional. (Jacintho Ribeiro dos Santos Editor 1902).
Gregorio Perez De Gomar. Curso Elemental de Derecho de Gentes. (Imprenta Tipografica 1864), Tomo I.
Robert Piédelièvre. Précis de droit international public, ou, Droit des gens. (Pichon 1894).
Alphonse Rivier. Principes du droit des gens. (Rousseau 1896), Vol. I.
Gian Domenico Romagnosi. La scienza delle costituzioni. (Firenze: a spese degli editori, 1850).
Angelo Sereni. The italian Conception of International Law. (Columbia 1943).
Claudia Storti. Empirismo e scienza: Il crocevia del diritto internazionale nella prima mettà dell'Ottocento. In: Luigi Nuzzo et VEC, Miloš (Ed.s). Constructing International Law. The Birth of a Discipline. (Klostermann 2012).
Claudia Storti. L'indipendenza dell'Italia nel diritto internazionale della prima metà dell'Ottocento in Problemi giuridici dell'Unità italiana. (Giuffrè 2013).
Claudia Storti. Pasquale Stanislao Mancini. In: Italo Birochi, Ennio Cortese, Antonello Mattone et Marco Nicola Miletti (a cura di). Dizionario Biografico dei Giuristi Italiani (XII - XX secolo). (Il Mulino 2013), Vol. II.
Luigi Taparelli d'Azeglio. Della nazionalità. (Ponthenier 1847).
Oscar Tenório. Direito Internacional Privado. (F. Bastos, 8ed, 1965) Vol. I.
Haroldo Valladão. Direito Internacional Privado: em base histórica e comparativa, positiva e doutrinaria, especialmente dos Estados americanos. (F. Bastos 1973).
Gian Savino Pene Vidari. La prolusione di Pasquale Stanislao Mancini sul principio di nazionalità (1851). In: Giovanni Cazzetta (a cura di). Retoriche dei giuristi e costruzione dell'identità nazionale. (Il Mulino 2013).
Estanislao Zeballos. Concepto cientifico de la Revolucion italiana. Revista de Derecho, Historia y Letras, (1911), Vol 39.
Estanislao Zeballos. La Nationalité au point de vue de la législation comparée et du Droit Privé humain. (Sirey 1914), Tome I.
Vincenzo Pagano. Del diritto della nazionalità italiana. (Rondinella 1861).
*Department of Law, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, Brazil.
1 Pasquale Stanislao Mancini (Castelbaronia, 1817 – Naples, 1888) was a jurist, professor and politician, and has also been Minister of Education (1862), Minister of Justice (1876) and Minister of the Foreign Affairs (1881) of the Kingdom of Italy.
2 The lecture in which Mancini proposed his theory is called 'Del principio della nazionalità come fondamento del diritto delle genti', and it was given when he assumed the first Italian chair of International Law, at the University of Turin, on January 22nd, 1851. It was published later in the book 'Diritto internazionale. Prelezioni' (Naples, 1873). The elements of the concept of 'Nation' formulated at the Risorgimento, as the one proposed by Mancini, were firstly drawn in a political context in which nationalist currents of thought tried to legitimate the independency of some European territories – as Italy and Hungary – that were submitted in a complete or fragmentary ways to the sovereignty of foreign states. This phenomenon can be easily seen throughout the first half of the 19th century, mainly in the juridical and political culture from Italy and French. Among Italians, we could underline important jurists in this period, as Pellegrino Rossi, Gian Domenico Romagnosi, Giuseppe Mazzini, Luigi Taparelli D'Azeglio, Giacomo Durando e Vincenzo Pagano. Involved in the romanticism that was dominant in the literature, the idea of an Italian nation came alive and received anthropomorphic contours, since this new 'Nation' should take itself the condition of protagonist of law in the international scenario. The elements that compose the concept of 'Nation' and 'Nationality' in Mancini can be found in Gian Domenico Romagnosi. La scienza delle costituzioni. (Firenze: a spese degli editori, 1850); Giuseppe Mazzini. Nazionalità. Qualche idea su una costituzione nazionale. In: Edizione nazionale degli scritti di Giuseppe Mazzini. (Galeati, 1908), Vol. VI; Luigi Taparelli d'Azeglio. Della nazionalità. (Ponthenier 1847); Giacomo Durando. Della nazionalità italiana. Saggio politico-militare. (Bonamici 1846); Vincenzo Pagano. Del diritto della nazionalità italiana. (Rondinella 1861).
3 Pasquale Stanislao Mancini. Direito Internacional. (Unijuí 2003).
4 In the writings of Pasquale Stanislao Mancini emerges, mainly, the affirmation that the Nations, e not the States, were the true subjects of International Law. The affirmation tries to transfer the focus on the exclusive protagonism constructed by the political and juridical contractualists from the State to the Nation. In sharp contrast with the consecrated writings of Emmerich de Vattel, of Immanuel Kant and of Georg Wilhelm Hegel, the Italian jurist gives the statist paradigm up in the International Law, proposing a new model of international community based on the action and on the protagonism of national societies highly homogenized whose founder myth would not be found in contractualist fables, but in anthropological draws forged by the centuries. 'Nation', to the author, was a 'natural society of men with unity of territory, of origin, of customs and of language, configured in a common life and in a social consciousness'. Because of that reason 'the mother idea of science is not the State, but the nationality'. State and Nation have been in opposition during all the human history, whose testimony 'will answer to us that, lots of times, both nationality and State principles, instead of conciliating in a concrete, identic and common way, confront themselves'. In: Pasquale Stanislao Mancini. Diritto internazionale. Prelezioni. (Naples 1873).
5 Robert Piédelièvre. Précis de droit international public, ou, Droit des gens. (Pichon 1894).
6 Alphonse Rivier. Principes du droit des gens. (Rousseau 1896), Vol. I.
7 Paul Fauchille. Traité de droit international. (Rousseau 1922), T. I.
8 For a deeper historical review on the impact of the theory of Mancini on the science of Private Law in the Brazilian doctrine, see, particularly, Carlos Augusto de Carvalho. Direito civil brasileiro recopilado ou nova consolidação das leis civis. (L. Francisco Alves 1899); Rodrigo Octávio. A Theoria de Mancini. In: Revista Jurídica. (1916), II.; Francisco Cavalcanti Pontes de Miranda. La conception du Droit International Privé d'après la Doctrine et la Pratique au Brésil. (Récueil des Cours de l'Académie de Droit International, 1932), Vol XXXIX.; Pontes de Miranda. Tratado de Direito Internacional Privado. (L. José Olympio 1935), Tomo II; Clóvis Bevilaqua. Princípios elementares de Direito Internacional Privado. (L. Freitas Bastos, 4ed, 1944); Wilson de Souza Wilson de Souza Campos Batalha, Tratado elementar de direito internacional privado. (Revista dos Tribunais 1961) Vol. I; Amilcar de Castro. Direito Internacional Privado. (Forense 1956); Oscar Tenório. Direito Internacional Privado. (F. Bastos, 8ed, 1965) Vol. I; Haroldo Valladão. Direito Internacional Privado: em base histórica e comparativa, positiva e doutrinaria, especialmente dos Estados americanos. (F. Bastos 1973); Jacob Dolinger. Direito Internacional Privado. (Forense, 10ed, 2011); Maristela Basso, Curso de Direito Internacional Privado. (Atlas, 3ed 2013); Nádia de Araújo. Direito Internacional Privado: teoria e prática brasileira. (Revolução 6ed, 2016).
9 Lafayette Rodrigues Pereira. Princípios de Direito Internacional. (Jacintho Ribeiro dos Santos Editor 1902), p. 59.
10 Terenzio Mamiani. Des traités de 1815 et d'un nouveau droit européen. (Dentu, 1862).
11 Henri Ahrens, Cours de droit naturel ou de philosophie du droit: Compléte dans les principales matières, par des aperçus historiques et politiques (Brockhaus 1838).
12 Op. cit.
14 Lafayette Rodrigues Pereira. Princípios de Direito Internacional. (Jacintho Ribeiro dos Santos Editor 1902), p. 65.
15 Raul Pederneiras. Direito internacional compendiado. (Freitas Bastos 1931), p. 26.
16 Paul Fauchille. Traité de droit international. (Rousseau 1922), T. I, p. 11 ss.
18 Idem, p. 70.
21 Idem, ibidem.
23 Jorge Americano, O novo fundamento do direito internacional e seu esteio na conciencia universal (Renascença 1945), p. 21.
25 Hildebrando Accioly, Tratado de Direito Internacional Público. (Rio de Janeiro 1956) Vol. I., p. 111.
34 Luiz P. F. Faro Junior. Direito Público Internacional. (Haddad 1956), p. 56.
40 Gerson de Britto Mello Boson, Curso de Direito Internacional Público. (Bernardo Alvares editora 1958).
41 Idem, p. 247.
43 Oliveiros Litrento. Manual de Direito Internacional Público. (Forense 1968).
47 Clóvis Beviláqua, Direito Público Internacional. (Freitas Bastos 1939).
48 Celso Albuquerque de Mello. Curso de Direito Internacional Público. (Freitas Bastos 1967).
49 Gregorio. Perez De Gomar. Curso Elemental de Derecho de Gentes. (Imprenta Tipografica 1864), Tomo I., p. 22.
50 '[...] a la sociedad en sus necessidades superiores y generales y dándoles armónica dirección'. In: Gregorio. Perez De Gomar. Curso Elemental de Derecho de Gentes. (Imprenta Tipografica 1864), Tomo I, p. 22-23.
51 '[...] esencial en él, la existência o conservación de las relaciones externas, puesto que varios estados pueden reunirse o confederarse, haciendo común la atención de esas relaciones [...]'. In: Gregorio. Perez De Gomar. Curso Elemental de Derecho de Gentes. (Imprenta Tipografica 1864), Tomo I, p. 23.
52 'Desde que en cada Nación existe una potencia que se levanta bastante caracterizada para dirigir sus destinos, cada una es una personalidade completa, a pesar de la multiplicidad de elementos que la compone; la palabra personalidad no expresa sino la existencia de un agente que obra por sí mismo y que, aunque se reconozca subordinado a un precepto superior, depende de su inteligencia descubrirlo y de su voluntad darle cumplimiento'. In: Gregorio. Perez De Gomar. Curso Elemental de Derecho de Gentes. (Imprenta Tipografica 1864), Tomo I, p. 24.
53 '[...] son de la misma naturaleza y si se hallan en la misma situación, para poder avanzar nuestras deducciones'. In: Gregorio. Perez De Gomar. Curso Elemental de Derecho de Gentes. (Imprenta Tipografica 1864), Tomo I, p. 25.
54 Juan Campisteguy. Breves consideraciones sobre Nacionalidad y Ciudadania. (Gadel 1887).
55 Alfredo Furriol. Ensayo sociológico. Nuestra Nacionalidad. (El Siglo Ilustrado 1896).
56 Eduardo Jimenez De Arechaga. Curso de Derecho Internacional Público. (Centro Estudiantes de Derecho 1961), Tomo II: Los Estados y su Dominio.
62 Estanislao Zeballos. Concepto cientifico de la Revolucion italiana. Revista de Derecho, Historia y Letras, (1911), Vol 39, p. 144.
63 Estanislao Zeballos. La Nationalité au point de vue de la législation comparée et du Droit Privé humain. (Sirey 1914), Tome I.
64 Idem, p. 155-156.
65 Daniel Antokoletz, Tratado de Derecho Internacional Publico en tempo de paz y en tempo de guerra. (Facultad 1938) Tomo I, p. 449.
66 See, in particular, Enrico Catellani. La dottrina italiana nel diritto internazionale nel secolo XIX. (Romana Editoriale 1935), p. 14 ss.; and, after, Angelo Sereni. The italian Conception of International Law. (Columbia 1943), Antonio Droetto. Pasquale Stanislao Mancini e la Scuola Italiana di Diritto Internazionale del secolo XIX. (Giuffrè 1954); and, more recently, Giovanni Cazzetta. 'Prolusioni, prelezioni, discorsi. L'identità nazionale nella rettorica dei giuristi'. In: Giovanni Cazzetta (a cura di). Retoriche dei giuristi e costruzione dell'identità nazionale. (Il Mulino 2013), p. 11 ss.; Floriana Colao. L'"idea di nazione" nei giuristi italiani tra ottocento e novecento. (Quaderni fiorentini per la storia del pensiero giuridico 2001), vol XXX, p. 255 ss.; and, Claudia Storti. Empirismo e scienza: Il crocevia del diritto internazionale nella prima mettà dell'Ottocento. In: Luigi Nuzzo et VEC, Miloš (Ed.s). Constructing International Law. The Birth of a Discipline. (Klostermann 2012), p. 51 ss.; Claudia Storti. L'indipendenza dell'Italia nel diritto internazionale della prima metà dell'Ottocento in Problemi giuridici dell'Unità italiana. (Giuffrè 2013), pp. 33 ss.; Claudia Storti. Pasquale Stanislao Mancini. In: Italo Birochi, Ennio Cortese, Antonello Mattone et Marco Nicola Miletti (a cura di). Dizionario Biografico dei Giuristi Italiani (XII - XX secolo). (Il Mulino 2013), Vol. II, p. 1244 ss.; Gian Savino Pene Vidari. La prolusione di Pasquale Stanislao Mancini sul principio di nazionalità (1851). In: Giovanni Cazzetta (a cura di). Retoriche dei giuristi e costruzione dell'identità nazionale. (Il Mulino 2013), p. 117 ss.
67 Daniel Antokoletz. Op. cit., p. 449.
70 Idem , p. 450.
72 Luís Freyre. Derecho Internacional Publico. (Cita Estudantil 1940), p. 70.
79 Isidoro Ruiz Moreno. Manual de Derecho Internacional Público. (J. Castagnola 1943).
82 Ángel Modesto Paredes. Manual de Derecho Internacional Público. Sus principios fundamentales en tiempo de paz. (Depalma 1951), p. 9.
86 L. A. Podestá Costa. Derecho Internacional Público. (Tipografica Editora Argentina, 4ed, 1960).
90 Lúcio M. Moreno Quintana. Tratado de Derecho Internacional. (Editorial Sudamericana 1963) Tomo Primero.
92 Cesar Diaz Cisneros. Derecho Internacional Público. (Tipografica Editora Argentina, 2ed, 1966), p. 442.
95 Julian A. Herrero. Derecho Internacional Publico. (Buenos Aires, s/e, 1968).
96 Eduardo Augusto García, Manual de Derecho Internacional Público (Ediciones Depalma 1975).
97 Bohdan T. Halajczuk, María Teresa Del R. Moya Dominguez. Derecho Internacional Publico. (Sociedad Anónima Editora 1976).
100 Idem, ibidem.
102 Idem, p. 127.
Aufsatz vom 20. Dezember 2018
Zitiervorschlag Arno Dal Ri Jr., Mancini in the Platine Basin: The Reception of the Principle of Nationalities in Argentina, Uruguay and Brazil (20. Dezember 2018), in forum historiae iuris, https://forhistiur.net/2018-12-dal-ri-jr/


text:
A Retreat With A View
March 14, 2016 – by Andie Gibson
Valerie and Mike Lyons have a routine. It's more of a tradition now, really—something they do after completing the four-hour trek from their home in Northern Virginia to their lakeside retreat in Bedford County. They just can't help themselves. Regardless of how late it is when they arrive, the Lyons drop their bags at the door, cut through the living room and make a beeline to the back yard.
"I just stand on the patio and look at the water and the view," says Mike. "We just soak it all in and think: 'Take a deep breath. We're at the lake now.'"
And with a view like this, who could blame them?
Built on a point near the base of Craddock Creek, the home is nestled close to the water and offers a panorama of Smith Mountain. For the Lyons, it's a peaceful escape from the hustle and bustle of Northern Virginia.
"Whenever we have guests arrive, and we open the door, and they look straight through to the lake, their mouths drop open," Valerie says. "Then they say, 'OK, now I get why you drive four hours.'"
The couple first discovered SML about 15 years ago and instantly fell in love, purchasing a condo at Mariners Landing in 2004. While out on their boat, the Lyons would frequently admire the lot where their home now sits. They finally decided to make an offer, snagged the property and began planning their dream home.
"We thought we were going to retire, but that hasn't happened yet," jokes Mike, who works part time as a consultant in the healthcare sector. Valerie, an executive vice president at CACI International, an information solutions and services company, says she immediately purchased a number of house-plan magazines to search for inspiration.
"I would go page after page after page until I finally narrowed it down to one that worked for us," she says, noting that a big consideration was a one-level floor plan that would support the couple as they aged.
In 2009, the Lyons hired North Carolina-based Schumacher Homes to build a custom home that would suit their needs while taking full advantage of the view. The house has four bedrooms and three-and-a-half bathrooms in 3,500 square feet with all the main living areas facing the lake. It comfortably accommodates the couple, as well as their two adult children and a close circle of friends who visit frequently from Memorial Day weekend well into the fall.
Decorated throughout with a soothing palette of teals, greens, browns and creams, the home definitely has a serene vibe—not coastal or rustic but something that embraces the feel of water and mountains. Valerie did much of the decorating work herself, collaborating with long-time interior designer friend Kim Casson of Salmon-Casson Ltd in Reston, and, locally, the staffs at Interiors by Kris and Blinds & Beyond.
"We wanted it to have a relaxing B&B [bed and breakfast] feel," says Mike. "We wanted it to be very inviting."
Valerie says, "I definitely didn't want it to be a [more formal] NoVa-style house. It needed to be comfortable and casual, but it still needed to be pretty. Mike coined the term 'lake-y' – a water feel that brings the outside in."
The main living area is spacious with an open floor plan that connects a formal dining room, great room, bar area with wine cabinet and fridge, gourmet kitchen and a non-traditional breakfast area with plush, upholstered chairs.
"We don't use the breakfast area much for food. It's more for having coffee, playing games or a place to gather for cocktails," Valerie says. "In fact, that's one thing guests have commented on about the house is that there are so many different places to sit and relax."
Huge windows let abundant morning light stream into the great room, which is dominated by a massive stacked-stone fireplace. An L-shaped couch and chairs in coordinating teal-and-brown fabrics complement the "lake-y" feel of the room.
The kitchen is warm with cream-colored glazed cabinets, granite countertops and top-of-the-line appliances. The Lyons are self-proclaimed foodies, with Valerie handling the indoor cooking and Mike in charge of the outdoor grills. (Yes, plural. More on that later).
"I had to have the Wolf stove with the red knobs. And the ice machine and wine fridge in the back hallway were critical," says Valerie, pointing out how the appliances come in handy when the couple entertains, which is frequently. Also convenient is an adjacent pantry where tableware, linens and decorations for every season and entertaining style are stored along with non-perishable foods.
But as much as she enjoys spending time in the kitchen, Valerie says her favorite part of the home is the screened-in porch. Accessible through French doors just off the kitchen, the space includes comfortable seating and a floor-to-ceiling wood burning fireplace that matches the one in the living room.
"I don't care how many people we have at the lake—everyone tries to jam into the porch," says Valerie, while Mike points out it's the perfect spot to gather on cooler evenings in the spring and fall.
On one end of the home is the master retreat with a spacious bathroom and a sitting area overlooking the lake. The walls are painted a soft teal and the bed features an iron headboard and footboard softened by fabrics in colors that complement the home's palette.
The opposite side of the house is where you'll find two guest rooms separated by a shared Jack-and-Jill bathroom. One bedroom, as well as the bathroom, continues the teal/brown color scheme while the other is more of a departure with reds and blacks worked into the fabrics and artwork. Photos of family and friends decorate both spaces. In the hallway is a piece of art with one of the couple's favorite sayings: "If you're lucky enough to be at the lake, then you're lucky enough."
Overflow guests can hunker down in the finished bunk room, which occupies about half of the home's three-car garage. This room also houses what Mike refers to as the "legacy cabinet," which displays family mementos such as toys that belonged to him and to the couple's children, vintage dolls and cameras. Also on display are antique clippers and a shave brush, which belonged to Mike's dad who was a barber by trade.
In the summer, the Lyons gather frequently with family and friends by the water where there's a two-slip boat dock, boathouse, floating dock and stationary dock equipped with comfortable furniture for long days spent lounging. Nearby is a hardscaped stone firepit surrounded by Adirondack chairs.
"We really like to be down there in the evening time in the summer," Mike says.
Back up at the house is a large paver patio with multiple seating areas and an all-weather outdoor kitchen with gas grill and a Big Green Egg.
"Mike's grill capabilities needed to be recognized," jokes Valerie. "We always cook our evening meal outdoors and we usually use it for breakfast or a mid-day snack."
This is actually the home's second patio. After moving in, the Lyons had issues with cracking and decided the original patio wasn't going to cut it. They called on Mark Maslow's team at Evington-based Southern Landscape Group to design and install new hardscaping, the firepit and extensive landscaping.
"I can't say enough good things about Mark," says Valerie. "He committed to having it done by the Fourth of July, and they were here working [late on July 3] to make it happen. He committed to that, got it done and it's beautiful."
That patio also includes an endless pool where one can relax, cool off or swim against a current for exercise. Designed and installed by National Pools of Roanoke, it also doubles as a hot tub with bench seating with a view of the lake and mountain—a big hit with guests, Mike says.
The landscaping includes a variety of trees and shrubs designed to be low maintenance.
"I needed it to look beautiful throughout all four seasons but not take a lot of effort to maintain," says Valerie. "So he [Mark] helped with the design, looking at it through that lens."
Mike says there's not too much about the property—outside or in—the couple doesn't like.
"There's a sentiment about the house that makes it special. It's a great gathering place," he says. "You can relax and enjoy the beauty of the lake or you can be as active as you want."
Posted in: Features	Tagged: adirondack chairs, Blinds & Beyond, Craddock Creek, Interiors by Kris, National Pools of Roanoke, Salmon-Casson Ltd, Schumacher Homes, Showcase Home, Southern Landscape Group
Previous Post: At Home With The Barbers: Living Lake Life To The Fullest
Next Post: Water Toys: Floating Fun To Amp Up Your Waterfront Game

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


So today is the 14th January. I'm sat here at my computer thinking about the last 14 days and all the things I said I would do and yet haven't done. I have a 'To Do' list as long as my arm but this week has been a write off thanks to jet lag!
I got back from Dubai and a trip home to the UK a few days ago and I've been battling with it ever since. The first night I went to bed at 10 and was up at 1.30am! and the second night I managed to sleep until 2.30am and this morning I have graduated to 4am. I am fed up as it means my training is suffering and thus I have broken my resolutions to push in training.
"Zoe" – I hear you say – "you've only been back a week" – yes I know. I am just a bit of an perfectionist I guess!
I did manage to train for some of this week and did some weights on Weds and managed to run 9k on Thursday so not so bad, however thanks to Thursday and forgetting Australia is a bit warmer than the 9 degrees I was running in in the UK I am forcing myself to rest this weekend to recover!
I was running really well until I got to 5k and my body said 'it's hot' and I had to slow right down and concede defeat! I got home and broke the cardinal jet lag recovery sin – I fell asleep during the day and my body is still aching from the training and I am now still an insomniac.
So as of Monday it's business as usual. I am planning on running a race with the Park Runners next Saturday as a motivator. So watch this space!


text:
Q: fs register(?) in assembly code I'm disassembled my program and I'm trying to understand what is it:
MOV DWORD PTR FS:[0],ESP

What is FS? I searched in google, and I found that is use as extra register.
But when is it use? Why?

A: The FS register is aligned with the thread information block, which contains various thread-specific information.
Of particular interest when disassembling is the head of the exception handler chain at offset zero.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


This beautifully handcrafted metal incense burner is a calming and relaxing home addition to your sancutary. A great gift idea for all those into aromatherapy and or those to just enjoy the calming smells to induce complete relaxation.
Package Include:1 x Incense Burner.


Yes, it's Fluxx... with Zombies!
Zombie Fluxx introduces a new type of card: The Creeper. It's like a Keeper you don't want but must play anyway. The good news is, Zombie Fluxx also includes a bunch of Keepers you can use as weapons against the Zombie-Creepers, plus you've got Sandwiches and Coffee and a couple of Friends to help you win. The bad news is, if your Friends become Zombies, you'll have to destroy them!
Part of the Fluxx series.


text:
Murgh tikka masala
I knew at the outset of Nosey Chef that there would be a day when I made chicken tikka masala, and I also knew that when I did it, my research would drop me straight into a cauldron of claims, counterclaims, spite, vitriol and pompousness. The very first hit on Google revealed that the Scottish Government has waded into the debate on where chicken tikka masala comes from, so it is my duty to sift through this and bring some perspective to the situation.
Let's start at the beginning. Chicken tikka masala is a curry. Indians don't really call their food 'curry.' Indian people living in India eat a range of foods that are very often spiced with complex and clever blends of ingredients. In pursuit of spice, and in particular nutmeg, the British underwent a complex trade and shooting war with the Dutch. In order to secure a foothold in the spice trading regions, Britain, with its peculiar semi-governmental, part-piratical East India Trading Company, did a series of deals with ambitious Indian leaders to enable the UK to govern India by stealth. The stealth was gradually eroded, and in 1857, Queen Victoria was crowned Empress of India, and the East India Trading Company was dissolved the following year. It was not until 1947 that India regained its independence from the UK.
During that time, those British lucky enough to have been stationed in India grew to like the local food. They often asked their cooks and chefs to make up a spice mix to take back to Britain so that their cooks in London could rustle up a 'kari,' which just means 'sauce.' In many cases, this spice mix was known as 'kari powder,' or 'curry powder,' which is essentially unknown in India.
Once back in the UK, cooks and chefs started making curries according to the British tastes of the day. The essential and defining characteristic of the British curry is that it is a slightly sloppy affair, designed to go with a load of absorbent rice – rather like a gravy. This is in contrast to the drier dishes made in India, Nepal and Pakistan whereby the food it often eaten on its own, or picked up with a chapati or similar. Various amounts of chilli are added to a basic sauce to make the whole range of hot sauces from mild masala all the way to arse-burning vindaloo.
This is the genesis of British Asian cuisine, and for all the mockery levelled at it (Larousse is particularly vitriolic), it is impossible to deny that it does not have an etymology all of its own. Curry is now the de-facto national dish of the UK, and the most popular edition by far is the chicken tikka masala.
Trying to dissect where chicken tikka masala came from is like trying to separate chewing gum from wet tissue paper. If we accept that chicken tikka masala is tandoor-cooked, marinated chicken (murgh tandoor tikka) slavered in a masala sauce, then there are a bunch of claimants to its invention:
Claim 1. Rahul Vermu, writing for The Hindu, says that he ate chicken tikka masala in the Punjab in 1971. He also says that the dish is about 50 years old, and keeps changing. This claim would make chicken tikka masala an authentic Indian/Pakistani dish, with an essentially undefinable recipe.
Claim 2. Bangladeshi restaurant owners from Glasgow came up with it. Amid the Glasgow claim is a very specific (and therefore probably bullshit) story in which a bus driver coming off shift went into the Shish Mahal restaurant in the west end of Glasgow and ordered a chicken curry. He sent it back to the kitchen complaining that it was dry. At the time, the father of the chef Ali Ahmed Aslam had a stomach ulcer and was tucking into a bowl of Campbell's condensed tomato soup. Aslam put some tomato soup into the curry with some spices. He sent it back to the bus driver, who apparently loved it. He and his friends came back again and again and Aslam put the dish on the menu. This tale comes from a 2013 episode of the Hairy Bikers, and Salam said that this event occurred in 1971.
Claim 3. A 1961 book by Mrs Balbir Singh includes a recipe for shahi chicken masala, which food historians Peter and Colleen Grove describe as 'the shape of things to come,' which suggests that the Singh recipe is essentially chicken tikka masala.
In 2009, Mohammad Sarwar, the Labour MP for Glasgow Central, tabled an early day motion in the House of Commons to attempt to secure EU Protected Designation of Origin status for the chicken tikka masala as Glaswegian. The campaign was backed by Glasgow City Council. The motion was rejected, and Mr Sarwar does not really like to talk about it any more. He left the UK and is now a senior politician in the Punjab, which has a kind of irony to it. The attempt to designate chicken tikka masala was completely ridiculous – the dish uses a 5,000-year old cooking method and ingredients that do not originate anywhere near Glasgow, and the so-called 'original' was no more clever than tipping a can of soup over some chicken. As of today, there are about 50 'original' recipes for chicken tikka masala, and none of them are remotely similar. In fact, the only common ingredient in all of them is the chicken.
As to the Nosey Chef verdict on claims to the origin on chicken tikka masala, I would be inclined to say that it was invented in the Punjab in the 50's, it was written by Singh in '61, and the Glaswegians independently invented their own version using soup because they had not been to the Punjab nor read Singh's book.
The recipe here is a combination of the original murgh tikka masala invented in Peshawar, Pakistan in the 1940s by Kundan Lal Gujral, and a masala sauce adapted from Felicity Cloake with the teachings of Atul Kochhar added into it. The whole gig acknowledges that most British kitchens do not have a tandoor oven.
Cooking Time: 5h
For the chicken tikka:
680kg boneless skinless chicken, cut into 3cm chunks
1.5 tbsp fresh lime juice
1.5 tsp sea salt
1 teaspoon Kashmiri chilli powder (see notes)
6 tbsp plain yoghurt
2 tbsp ginger-garlic paste
Half a tsp ground fenugreek
2 tbsp ghee or neutral oil
1 2cm cinnamon stick
2 small onions, chopped
4 tbsp garlic ginger paste
2 small green chillies, split lengthways and deseeded
50ml double cream
Half tsp fenugreek leaves, ground
1 small handful of coriander leaves, as a garnish
Begin by making murgh tandoori tikka – this can be done in advance up to 3 days before you make the rest of the dish
Combine the lime juice and salt in a bowl large enough to hold all the chicken pieces. Add the chicken and toss to coat evenly. Cover and refrigerate for 1 hour.
Add the chilli powder, yoghurt, garlic, ginger, garam masala and fenugreek, tossing well to coat and distribute evenly. Cover and refrigerate for 3 hours.
Preheat the oven to 250˚C.
Thread the chicken pieces onto skewers, season with a little more garam masala or fenugreek if desired. Roast on the middle rack for 5 to 6 minutes. Baste with a little oil and continue roasting for 3 to 4 minutes.
Check if the chicken is done by cutting into one of the larger pieces. If it is still pink in the middle, roast for another 3 to 5 minutes and check again.
To make the sauce, heat the fat in a frying pan over a medium-high heat and add the whole spices. Toast oil the spices crack. Add the onions, and fry them until soft and golden brown, stirring regularly.
Stir the garlic ginger paste into the onions and fry for a couple of minutes, stirring, then add the powdered spices and fry for a minute or so. Add the tomatoes, tomato puree, 300ml of water and the sugar. Bring to a simmer, turn the heat down to medium and cook until reduced slightly.
Puree the sauce until smooth and pass through a sieve to remove any shards of spice. Once the chicken is done, return the pureed sauce to the pan on a medium heat. Stir any remaining marinade into the sauce, along with the chillies and cream. Add the prepared chicken and cook for about five minutes. Adjust seasoning.
Serve with chopped coriander garnish.
britishchickenIndian
23/10/2017 By Nigel Eastmond
The Lord Nelson Pomme de terre fondante
About Nigel Eastmond
Nigel is a marketing consultant who has learned to cook later in life. He does savoury well, and is learning baking.
Poulet sauté petit-duc
Poulet sauté Parmentier


text:
Quiver Full of Duggars
Family Discussion Forums
If Only the TLC Producers would....
19kac
By Free Them All,
September 12, 2014 in Quiver Full of Duggars
Free Them All
If only the TLC producers would tell us what Jeremiah or Jedidiah or Jana or Josiah or any other Duggar child is doing these days. Ask them what they are up to these days and then let them tell us. No contrived plot lines, just honest answers.
If only the TLC producers would lessen the wedding planning stuff and just show the wedding. We have seen the photos.
If only the TLC producers would quit asking Moochelle about her courtship rules. Ask her what her children are doing now. See if she knows.
If only the TLC producers would quit hiding Jim Boob's focus on Bill Gothard's rules to live by......expose him!
I would SO like to hear TLC ask JB and Michelle about the possibility of one of the kids deciding to have more liberal courtship/dating/engagement rules. What if someone wants to kiss, hug normally, and hold hands? I'd like to hear a real response from them. I'm tired of hearing how each couple decides for themselves not to kiss, hug, or hold hands. It is so obvious that is what the parents want. What if a Duggar adult child said "no thanks" to the rules? How would JB and Michelle handle that?
eh02
JB and Michelle have said many times that they'd let their kids make their own choices but then go and say they "all discuss and agree on" the standards for their courtships. And it's pretty obvious that their "instant obedience" emotional manipulation is so deeply ingrained in their kids that they would probably not even consider not following the "courtship rules." They seem totally convinced that each decision they make is truly their own when it is so obviously not. Jana is 24 years old, for Christ's sake. She's a grown ass woman and will have 10 year olds chaperoning dates with whoever she ends up with, who could very reasonably be in his late 20s or 30s. If your kids are that old and you can't trust them not to strip naked the first second they're alone with someone...you've f*cked up.
I'm sure some of them have already "messed up." I think Michelle's statement about marriage and keeping all of your problems private within your family probably says a lot about what is going on here. The kids doing the "right" things get featured and the ones who don't are just pushed into the background, and they hope no one will notice. It will probably just get worse as more of them reach adulthood.
I can't wait until one of them decides to set their own rules. I don't think it will be Jana. I'd like to think it'd be Jinger, but that might be too optimistic. Then again, Jana has been gone so much recently, and soon Jessa will be gone too...poor Jinger will LOSE IT in that house without any of the older girls. Joyanna's got plenty of sass so between the two of them, I hope they find their own way.
mebeforee
Location: OH
I think that the idea that they're choosing their own courtship rules is a bald-faced lie, actually. Not just that they are trained to obey whatever their parents want, which is also true, but that the rules are absolutely and openly (within the family) chosen by the parents. When Derick and Jill were holding hands after getting engaged, Joy exclaims that it's weird because it's 'against the rules' and Derick responds by saying that he 'asked and got permission'. That's not even a little bit like choosing your own courtship rules. I'm tired of this particular ruse on JB and Michelle's part. It's clearly a lie.
Ivycoveredtower
Michelle has basically admitted that the kids don't get to choose. In one of the question and answer episodes. she was asked what would happen if one of the kids accidentally kissed a guy. she blathered on but she did say that if it wasn't the person they were going to marry that was probably not okay so something like that which of course we all know means if they kissed someone they are in big trouble.
If only the producers would use instant replay with Dr. Phil analyzing their actions or responses.
JBsHairspray
Location: Snarkansas
Take Jinger out and get her hammered for her 21st in December then start asking her for her honest opinions on a few things.......
ButterscotchEquinox
I feel the same way about a number of TLC shows. It would be much more interesting to get a truthful glimpse into lives, not these intensely sanitized edits. But they have to keep the money flowing and I guess the editing formula works with plenty of viewers.
RosyDaisy
Location: Somewhere in the middle of nowhere.
Pronouns: she/her
If only there could be a celebrity wife swap between Michelle and June Shannon from Hony Boo Boo. June would have JB submissive to her, and would make time for the kids. Bonus if Uncle Poodle moves in too. Sugar Bear wouldn't put up with Michelle's fundie bullshit, and neither would the kids. She would be forced to do household chores without the help of a buddy system. I would pay to see that!
BrownieMomma
Location: Lost in the forest
TLC has such crap shows but they seem to be so wildly successful. I mean, we live in a world where the Kardashians are news every single day on yahoo. I glance at yahoo news almost every day and I honestly believe there has been some kind of Kardashian news every time.
I think of TLC as rubbernecking an accident. Normal doesn't sell. The Duggars aren't winning anyone to Christ with their show. Doubt they are even winning anyone to their beliefs or parenting methods.
That being said, TLC should develop a show combing the ideas of the Amish and Alaskans escaping to the Big City and have some of the Duggar kids escape to NYC.
I'd die if they did that wife swap. I LOVE Mama June. I think it says a lot about the people watching these shows that everyone quickly lumps their family into being trashy and lazy when in reality they are probably one of the most tolerant (and feminist!) families on TV. She is such a loving mom and she truly wants her kids to be happy and to feel comfortable in their own skin. I can't even imagine what the Duggar kids would come out of that swap thinking!
As a woman in her 20s with terrible (but typical) body image issues, I just have a lot of respect for how comfortable her kids are with their bodies and sense of self worth. They are told they're valuable and worthy no matter what whereas the poor Duggar kids always seem like they have to sacrifice every bit of individuality to "earn" their worth :(
ILoveJellybeans
OMG yes, drunk Duggars!
They should get all the ones of legal drinking age drunk and see if they yell at eachother and let out all of the years of rage and negative feelings hidden behind the pasted on smiles. I wonder which ones would be sat there crying and screaming at their parents/siblings who they hate or have problems getting along with. Which ones would start throwing punches? Who will reveal dark family secrets?
Maybe wait for a few years.......so Josiah can join in cause I bet he has something to say.
Man, I would pay to see Dr. Phil uncovering the truth and his response to their parenting techniques and his reaction to Michelle being so disengaged from her kids.
pega127
I'd like to see a wife swap with Kris Jenner or one of the Sister Wives!
That. And cross examine Boob on why he consistently throws Michelle's "baggage" in her face every chance he gets?
antwan
I personally wouldn't be interested in Dr. Phil's "expertise" on the Duggars, but his website does have some good (applicable) information regarding mind control. Love the line about developing a "good BS meter". :clap
drphil.com/articles/article/578
The ensuing catfight might be something to behold. Starting with Jana's resentment over the jewellery box incident. Would Jessa admit she's been "defrauding" Bin during secret trysts in the Guest-warehouse? Drunk Jinger would be on her phone booking a flight to NY - "Fuck all y'all I'm outta here"....... But then JD offers to fly her himself on "Buy Used" airlines. Josiah would be absent as I think he's earned himself permanent residency at Alert.
Hahaha yeah! I bet Jessa would be the first to throw a punch, hopefully at one of her parents.......she certainly isn't sweet. Or Jana, over the jewellery box, beware the quiet ones, she might have plenty of things to say without her shyness holding her back-but I see her being more of a crying over every little thing sort of drunk. Either that or Michelle! She seems like she is seconds away from a complete mental breakdown, and has plenty of stored up rage. I think drunk Michelle would either be telling the kids how much she hates them and doesn't regret the years she spent neglecting them, or sat in a corner, crying and rocking over the loss of her fertility. Ewwwwwwww I also bet that Michelle and Jimbob would have sex on the sofa right in front of their kids and give zero fucks who sees.
I want a breaking Duggar spin off.
Maybe that's why they off and married Jill and Derick so fast, -because they defrauded each other with that scandalous front-to-side-hug when he came home from Nepal. Michelle bobble-headed, "I'm sure they won't let that happen again."
Trynn
That, of course, is assuming alcohol will affect the Duggars that way. Everyone is different. For me personally, alcohol is the only hing that allows me to discuss certain things calmly without screaming at people.... When I'm drunk I'm super chill. Sober me would be screaming at these people about their religious insanity.
It's why I never set foot In a church while sober anymore...
I'm like 85% sure that full-frontal hug resulted in baby Dilly, which is why they had to rush the wedding.
Every time they say "full-frontal hug" I think "full-frontal nudity," because that's the only time sane people usually say "full-frontal." I'm sure the Duggars equate the two.
Derick should've dry-humped Jill at the airport in the style of Boob & J'chelle.
Upcoming Babies 24: Can't Keep Track of the Hoards 1 2 3 4 12
By Bethella, October 28, 2022 in Quiver Full of Snark
Cults-r-us
Bontragers/Bowers/Helferichs 11: Get Your Christofascism Here Folks! 1 2 3 4 11
By nelliebelle1197, July 19, 2022 in Quiver Full of Snark
bontrager family
Unmarried Fundies 11: Searching for that 90 Day Fiancé 1 2 3 4 16
By Bethella, February 27, 2022 in Quiver Full of Snark
single fundies


text:
Newspaper Issues
Latest Issue (152)
Community News, Elections
Know Your Candidates: Dearborn City Council
send on facebook
send on twitter
send on google plus
send on email
By Simon Albaugh – Yemeni American News
Dearborn, Mich. – On Aug. 3, the City of Dearborn will select 14 of its best candidates for City Council, before the general election's 7, possibly changing the entire makeup of the elected body.
18 candidates are competing for the open seats that have decided Dearborn's COVID-19 response, redefined the character of the city, and continuously guided the financial future of city operations. Nearly all of the 18 candidates are putting their full effort into competitive campaigns, making this race what could be a close contest.
In this race, Arab Americans are represented like never before, with more than half of candidates coming from Dearborn's Arab American community. Many are lifelong Dearborn residents whose years of involvement with the city has built rapport with potential voters.
Four current Dearborn City Councilmembers are running for re-election. Leslie Herrick, Erin Byrnes, Robert Abraham and Mike Sareini are all running on a promise to continue the work that took Dearborn through the COVID-19 Pandemic and other decisions made by the City Council.
All 18 Candidates for City Council are listed here. For more information on a candidate you're interested in, see below.
Houda Berri
Berri is a practicing lawyer in Dearborn, specializing in Immigration, Criminal and Family Law. A lifelong Dearborn resident and 1st generation Attorney, Berri's hope is to make a city for everyone.
"Dearborn is my city, but most importantly it is our city," Berri said. "As Council Member, it is my duty to make sure your voice is heard. Together we can make Dearborn a city for everyone."
Samraa Luqman
A Dearborn-Area activist and mother of two, Luqman worked as an advocate in the American Yemeni women's Association. Her work took on issues like education, civic issues, and environmental justice concerns.
Currently, Luqman is working on environmental justice issues in Dearborn's southend, one of the hardest-hit areas in the country, per a report by the Environmental Protection Agency.
Mustapha Hammoud
As a lifelong Dearborn resident, Hammoud is looking to focus on tax spending and public services. He decided to run based on a desire to "give back" to the city that raised him.
Hammoud works as an Engineer for Ford, handling large projects for the automotive company.
Gary Enos
(No public information available)
Lola Elzein
Having graduated from University of Michigan-Dearborn, Cooley Law School, and UofM's Ross School of Business, Elzein's educational background serves the entrepreneur's campaign well.
At the top of Elzein's list of priorities is working to ensure the best services for the city. Public Safety, Property Taxes and city services are also among her priorities.
Khodr Farhat
An area activist for those with disabilities and other causes, Farhat is a University of Michigan-Dearborn educated politician – formerly running for Dearborn's Board of Education.
"Whether it's fighting to re-establish a commission to represent those with disabilities in our city, protesting corporate polluters in the South End, or advocating for lower property taxes, my goal is to bring the community together and be a voice for reason."
Ken Paris
This 39-year law enforcement veteran is prioritizing fiscal policy, public safety, investment in development and increased efficiency for city services.
Having worked through Dearborn Police Department and University of Michigan-Dearborn's Public Safety Department, Paris believes he has "the credentials to earn your vote based on my demonstrated commitment to City affairs, experience, motivation, integrity, honesty and ability to be fair and balanced."
Saeid Alawathi
Working for ACCESS as a Business Employment Service Specialist, Alawathi is prioritizing City Services, improving public safety, and managing city spending. Drawing from his 20-year experience as an income tax preparation specialist.
Kamel Elkadri
A long-time supporter of local initiatives around Dearborn, Elkadri works as a spring baseball coach above his career serving elderly community members. He's running his campaign on the goals of equal representation and services for all Dearborn residents, as well as public safety and tax reduction.
Silvio Davis
Born and raised in Dearborn, Davis calls himself a "passionate advocate for preserving Dearborn's public pools." He works as a personal lines supervisor for an insurance company, and also serves as the vice president of Dearborn Goodfellows.
Jonathon Akkari
Akkari is a first-generation university student and the first of his family to obtain a professional degree. His priorities include comprehensive public safety, fair and affordable housing, and environmental justice for Dearborn.
"I'm running for City Council to fight for our working families and ensure we all have the chance to succeed," Akkari said.
Khalil Othman
Among the first to publicly announce his candidacy, Othman is running on 5 priorities and a number of professional degrees and certificates. His priorities are ensuring public health and safety, reducing property taxes, reducing water rates, creating youth development programs and sustaining a clean environment.
Kamal Alsawafy
Community organizer, lifelong Dearborn resident and Graduate of both University of Michigan-Dearborn and Wayne State University, Kamal Alsawafy put his candidacy on the ballot early.
"I am running for City Council to be your voice, to put in the work and to fight for Dearborn," Alsawafy said.
Ziad Abdulmalik
Leslie Herrick
One of four current councilmembers currently seeking re-election, Leslie Herrick is seeking her second term with Dearborn's City Council. She ran her last campaign on major projects like the Dearborn Homecoming Festival.
Born in Dearborn, Herrick has been working a public relations practice for many years.
Erin Byrnes
Coming through her first term as a Dearborn City Councilmember, Byrnes continues to work as a Democratic Engagement Leader for the University of Michigan Ann Arbor.
"Throughout my first term, I have been a strong advocate for equality and inclusion, and have supported public safety and public health measures to care for our residents during the COVID-19 pandemic."
Mike Sareini
Currently serving as the Dearborn City Council President Pro-Tempore, Sareini's background includes a degree from Cooley Law School and a slew of endorsements from local institutions and organizations.
Robert Abraham
Abraham is the longest-serving Dearborn City Councilmember who's seeking re-election, having first been elected in 2002.
With a long list of institutions he stays engaged with, Abraham is seeking to continue his work with a sixth term on the City Council.
Fetured news
Dearborn's Elected Officials Sworn in.
Oz Media/The Yemeni American News' January High School Student-Athlete of the Month: Robert Davis Jr.
Beloved Professor John McDonald remembered by Henry Ford College and Community
Hamtramck Board of Education elects Salah Hadwan as board president
You like also
Community News, Local, Story
Community News, Elections, Local
City of Dearborn Executive Team Announced
Community News, Local, Opinion
Interim Superintendent: 'HPS Returning to Online Learning until At Least Jan. 14'
© 2020 YemeniAmerican.com