Discerning the constitutionality of the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement

Clicks: 1
ID: 285294
2014
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal

Ranked #2,333 of 3,757 articles by views in Malay Journal

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 3,757 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
The Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement or EDCA has been a point of contention, currently it is classified as an executive agreement in the status quo. The study aims to address whether or not the EDCA is constitutional, first by analyzing whether it should be classified as an international treaty or as an executive agreement then testing for its constitutionality based on parameters based on that. The EDCA was found to be classified as a treaty. With the conclusion that the EDCA is a treaty it was tested for constitutionality through three constitutional provisions and was found to violate them all. As an analysis of the current literature, the study has indicated that the EDCA is unconstitutional.
Reference Key
persistent_1760655189_68f1775580a3e Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Gaverza, Justine Stefan Mapple
Journal Malay Journal
Year 2014
DOI
DOI not found
URL
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.