| Summary: | This thesis is concerned to interrogate the Standing of the so~called 'odious debt doctrine' in international law and its relevance for states of the South wishing to disclaim odious-type debt. To this end, the history of the doctrine and its definition is e."{amined, as is its relevance to wee cases of sovereign-debe contention (South Africa/Zimbabwe, Iraq and Ecuador) where the doctrine's applicability has been considered. The conclusion reached, and the argument made in this thesis, is that the doctrine has yet to crystallize into a legal norm and that its starus in interoationallaw remains (and is likely to remain) contentious. However, in spite of the doctrine's W1certain standing, and the reluctance of states to fonnally invoke it in legal proceedings, the thesis argues that the concept may nevertheless have its uses as a political tool to justify debt-cancellation or debt-reduction. Paradoxically, in fact, the doctrine's apparent status as a norm of internacional law has helped strengthened its use in this context.
|
|---|
