Thursday, August 25, 2016

Call for Submissions: Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law

The Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law has issued a call for submissions on the theme "Armed Groups" for its forthcoming volume 19 (2016). Here's the call:

Call for Papers - Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law, Vol. 19 (2016)

General theme: Armed Groups

Most of today’s armed conflicts are fought between armed groups and State forces. The term armed groups covers a huge variety of different organisations: militias, warlord factions and highly organised (terrorist) groups, such as the organisation that calls itself Islamic State. Their role challenges the traditionally state-oriented character of international law: are the rules on the use of force still adequate for dealing with the threat of violent non-state actors? Do we need a definition or criteria for determining what constitutes an armed group? How can compliance of such groups with international humanitarian law be improved? How can responsibilities of such groups, in times of conflict, be established under general public international law?

The general theme of Vol. 19 of the Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law (YIHL) will therefore look at these and other challenges arising from the participation of armed groups in contemporary armed conflicts.

In addition to this general theme, there is of course also the possibility to submit articles on international humanitarian law topics not related to this general theme.

Interested authors should send their submission, related to the above general theme, or to another international humanitarian law topic of relevance in today’s world, before 1 October 2016, to the Managing Editor of the YIHL, Dr. Christophe Paulussen ( Articles should be submitted in conformity with the YIHL guidelines. The Editorial Board aims to publish Vol. 19 (2016) at the end of the ensuing year, in December 2017 at the latest.

Conference: Liability, Immunity, and the Benefits of War: New Perspectives on the Moral Status of Civilians

On September 1-2, 2016, the European University Institute will host the Seventh Annual Conference of the Oxford Institute for Ethics, Law and Armed Conflict. The theme is: "Liability, Immunity, and the Benefits of War: New Perspectives on the Moral Status of Civilians." The program is here. Here's the idea:

A key task for revisionist just war theory has been to investigate the conditions under which individual agents can come to lose their rights against non-consensual harm. By and large, Just War Theorists recognize forfeiture arising from moral or causal responsibility for a wrongful threat as the central mechanism by which one can lose rights. Recently, however, a number of theorists have suggested that rights against harm can be lost or weakened in other ways besides forfeiture. One proposal is that agents can come to lack rights against harm in virtue of their involuntarily incurred enforceable duties. Another is that agents can have their rights against harm weakened when these rights make other non-liable agents worse off. A third attempt notes that if one is an expected beneficiary of a harmful preventive action, one might have weakened rights against collateral harm compared to other uninvolved agents. Relatedly, another proposal suggests that agents who fail to disgorge benefits derived from injustice can come to lose rights against preventive harm.

These proposals attempt to provide new justifications for inflicting non-consensual harm beyond the familiar conceptions of forfeiture and lesser evil. Further, they challenge the orthodox view that causal contribution to a wrongful threat is necessary for the loss or weakening of an agent’s rights against harm. As such, they all have potentially radical implications for the rights of bystanders (and, by extension, civilians’ moral immunity to intentional harming in war). A central aim of the conference, then, will be to assess whether and to what extent individuals can lose rights against harm through circumstances entirely beyond their control.

We will also explore the related question of whether these ways of weakening or losing one’s rights are restricted to rights against certain types of harm. For example, we might think that these justifications cannot weaken our rights against the infliction of direct physical harm, but can nevertheless weaken our rights against other sorts of harm, such as harms imposed by cyber attacks, boycotts and sanctions, and invasions of privacy through surveillance. This work thus has implications for the range of permissible means of fighting wars.

Call for Papers: Regional Human Rights Systems in Crisis

The Wisconsin International Law Journal has issued a call for papers for a symposium on "Regional Human Rights Systems in Crisis." Here's the call:

Call for Papers

Regional Human Rights Systems in Crisis

Wisconsin International Law Journal Annual Symposium

March 31, 2017, University of Wisconsin Law School

Regional human rights systems have been heralded as one of the greatest innovations of the project of global governance. However, there are a host of urgent issues — of growing importance to social justice and human well-being — that pose fundamental challenges to the more developed regional systems, even as they make it harder for newer regional systems to develop. It is unclear, for example, how well these systems grapple with questions of economic inequality, climate change, migration crises and organized non-state violence. They are challenged as well by Brexit, the turn toward nationalistic ideologies, and other criticisms of globalization. In this Symposium, we explore how and whether regional human rights systems can constructively engage in these challenging times. We include not just the developed systems of Europe, Africa, and the Americas, but also the new and less judicialized systems of Asia and the Middle East. Taken together, the conference allows us to ask anew the question of what are human rights, and where do human rights inscribed at the regional level take us in the contemporary era.

Some themes that may be addressed include:

  • Political stand-offs in the more well-developed systems: Brexit, the European Union and the Council of Europe System, the Inter-American Commission in crisis; the African Union versus the International Criminal Court
  • The challenges of constructing regional human rights in Asia and the Middle East
  • The pros and cons of the state liability model in facing issues of migration; terrorism; corporate liability; transboundary harm, internet privacy, international crimes
  • Human Rights versus Buen Vivir, Occupy, religions, and other discourses concerned with social, political, and legal justice
  • Universal (UN-based) versus regional human rights protection

Submissions & Guidelines

WILJ invites submission of abstracts of not more than 500 words from legal scholars and practitioners in the fields of regional human rights and international law. The submission deadline is September 15, 2016, and applicants will be notified by October 10, 2016. Upon selection, the complete articles (an approximate minimum of 10,000 words) shall be submitted by January 15, 2017, for final review. Authors of articles selected at the final review stage will be invited to present at the 2017 WILJ Annual Symposium on March, 31, 2017, at the University of Wisconsin Law School, and their articles will be published in our 2017 Symposium issue. By presenting at the Symposium, speakers commit to publishing their articles with WILJ, and the final drafts shall be submitted by April 30, 2017. Travel (economy class) and accommodation will be covered for accepted applicants. Submission is restricted to papers that have not yet been published.

Please submit your abstract and your CV by the deadline to:

For inquiries, please e-mail Emmeline Lee at:

Publication Timeline

September 15, 2016 — Abstract submission deadline
October 10, 2016 — Chosen applicants notified
January 15, 2017 — Completed (but not final) article submission deadline
March 31, 2017 — WILJ Symposium
April 30, 2017 — FINAL article submission deadline

Wednesday, August 24, 2016

2016 Lauterpacht Memorial Lectures

On October 25-27, 2016, Christine Chinkin (London School of Economics - Law) will deliver the 2016 Sir Hersch Lauterpacht Memorial Lectures at the University of Cambridge. The topic of the lectures is: "International Law and Women, Peace and Security."

McCorquodale & Gauci: British Influences on International Law, 1915-2015

Robert McCorquodale (British Institute of International and Comparative Law) & Jean-Pierre Gauci (British Institute of International and Comparative Law) have published British Influences on International Law, 1915-2015 (Brill | Nijhoff 2016). Contents include:
  • Robert McCorquodale & Jean-Pierre Gauci, From Grotius to Higgins: British Influences on International Law from 1915–2015
  • Antonios Tzanakapoulos, The Influence of English Courts on the Development of International Law
  • Kate Jones, Marking Foreign Policy by Justice: The Legal Advisers to the Foreign Office, 1876–1953
  • Philip Allott, Britain and Europe: Managing Revolution
  • Stephen Samuel, British Influences on the Ideals of International Lawyers
  • Kasey McCall-Smith, British influence on the law of treaties
  • Martin Clark, British Contributions to the concept of recognition during the inter-war period: Williams, Baty and Lauterpacht
  • Philippa Webb, British Contribution to the Law of State Immunity
  • David H. Anderson, British Influence on the Law of the Sea 1915–2015
  • Mario Prost & Yoriko Otomo, British influences on international environmental law: the case of wildlife conservation
  • Merris Amos, The Influence of British Courts on the Jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights
  • Nigel S. Rodley, The Contribution of British NGOs to the Development of International Law
  • Amina Higgins & Noelle Adanan, Britain’s Influence on the Regulation of the Slave Trade in the Twentieth Century
  • Nicholas Tsagourias, Contribution of British International Lawyers to the Law on the Use of Force
  • Matthew Garrod, The British Influence on the development of the laws of war and the punishment of war criminals: from the Grotius Society to the United Nations War Crimes Commission
  • Shavana Musa, The British and the Nuremburg Trials
  • James Upcher, Neutral and Beligerent Rights: the development of a British Position?
  • Anne Marie Brennan, Historical Reflections on the Criminalisation of Terrorism under International Law from the League of Nations to R v. Mohammed Gul: How Britain has Swollen the Tide of Obscurity
  • Richard Collins, The Progressive Conception of International Law: Brierly and Lauterpacht in the Interbellum Period
  • Robert Cryer, International Law and the Illusion of Novelty: Georg Schwarzenberger
  • Gerry Simpson, Juridical Intervention: Martin Wight as International Lawyer
  • Philippe Sands & Arman Sarvarian, The Contribution of the UK Bar to International Courts

New Issue: Transnational Dispute Management

The latest issue of Transnational Dispute Management (2016, no. 3) is out. This is a special issue on "Three Centuries of Arbitration for Peace." The table of contents is here.

Joyner: Iran's Nuclear Program and International Law: From Confrontation to Accord

Daniel H. Joyner (Univ. of Alabama - Law) has published Iran's Nuclear Program and International Law: From Confrontation to Accord (Oxford Univ. Press 2016). Here's the abstract:
This book provides an international legal analysis of the most important questions regarding Iran's nuclear program since 2002. Setting these legal questions in their historical and diplomatic context, this book aims to clarify how the relevant sources of international law - including primarily the 1968 Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty and IAEA treaty law - should be properly applied in the context of the Iran case. It provides an instructional case study of the application of these sources of international law, the lessons which can be applied to inform both the on-going legal and diplomatic dynamics surrounding the Iran nuclear dispute itself, as well as similar future cases. Some questions raised regard the watershed diplomatic accord reached between Iran and Western states in July, 2015, known as the Joint Comprehensive Program of Action. The answers will be of interests to diplomats and academics, as well as to anyone who is interested in understanding international law's application to this sensitive dispute in international relations.

Tuesday, August 23, 2016

New Issue: Global Environmental Politics

The latest issue of Global Environmental Politics (Vol. 16, no. 3, August 2016) is out. Contents include:
  • Special Section: The Paris Agreement on Climate Change
    • Radoslav S. Dimitrov, The Paris Agreement on Climate Change: Behind Closed Doors
    • Thomas Hale, “All Hands on Deck”: The Paris Agreement and Nonstate Climate Action
    • Shannon K. Orr, Institutional Control and Climate Change Activism at COP 21 in Paris
    • Noelle E. Selin, Teaching and Learning from Environmental Summits: COP 21 and Beyond
  • Research Articles
    • Sikina Jinnah & Abby Lindsay, Diffusion Through Issue Linkage: Environmental Norms in US Trade Agreements
    • Robert Gampfer, Minilateralism or the UNFCCC? The Political Feasibility of Climate Clubs
    • Kirsten Rodine-Hardy, Nanotechnology and Global Environmental Politics: Transatlantic Divergence
    • Alexander Ovodenko, Governing Oligopolies: Global Regimes and Market Structure
    • Stavros Afionis, Lindsay C. Stringer, Nicola Favretto, Julia Tomei, & Marcos S. Buckeridge, Unpacking Brazil’s Leadership in the Global Biofuels Arena: Brazilian Ethanol Diplomacy in Africa
  • Book Review Essay
    • Dustin Evan Garrick, The Hydropolitics of the Nile Revisited: Elites, Experts, and Everyday Practices in Egypt and Sudan

New Issue: Criminal Law Forum

The latest issue of Criminal Law Forum (Vol. 27, no. 3, September 2016) is out. Contents include:
  • Abdus Samad, The International Crimes Tribunal in Bangladesh and International Law
  • Bugalo Maripe, Contempt of Court in Facie Curiae; Problems of Justification, Application and Control with Reference to the Situation in Botswana
  • Amissi Manirabona & Eduardo Saad Diniz, Towards Efficiency in Attributing Criminal Liability to Corporations: Canadian and Brazilian Regimes Compared
  • Leanid Kazyrytski, Latvian SS-Legion: Past and Present. Some Issues Regarding the Modern Glorification of Nazism

Tourme Jouannet, Muir Watt, de Frouville, & Matringe: Droit international et reconnaissance

Emmanuelle Tourme Jouannet (Science Po Paris - Law), Horatia Muir Watt (Science Po Paris - Law), Olivier de Frouville (Université Paris II Panthéon Assas - Law), & Jean Matringe (Université Paris 1 Panthéon Sorbonne - Law) have published Droit international et reconnaissance (Pedone 2016). Contents include:
  • Emmanuelle Tourme Jouannet, Le droit international de la reconnaissance
  • Jean d’Aspremont, De la reconnaissance à l’anthropomorphisme en droit international
  • Robert Howse, “Kojevian” Recognition and Contemporary International Law
  • Charalambos Apostolidis, Le droit international de la reconnaissance comme champ de recherche. Réflexions autour de l’ouvrage d’Emmanuelle Tourme Jouannet « Qu’est-ce qu’une société internationale juste ? »
  • Olivier de Frouville, La lutte pour la reconnaissance : une nouvelle théorie explicative de l’évolution du droit international ? A propos de « Pour une société internationale juste. Entre droit du développement et reconnaissance », d’Emmanuelle Tourme Jouannet
  • Albane Geslin, De l’entre-soi à l’entre-autre(s). Enjeux et ambiguités de la reconnaissance internationale des droits des peuples autochtones
  • Carlos-Miguel Herrera, La reconnaissance par les droits (en partant des droits sociaux)
  • Emmanuel Decaux, La reconnaissance des droits culturels
  • Livia Kummer, Legal Recognition of Historic Crimes in the Present Day: Case Study of the Katyń Massacre
  • Jose Manuel Coelho, Réflexion(s) sur les crimes de l’histoire et le droit international de la reconnaissance
  • Cécile de Caunes & Juan Branco, Les reconnaissances juridiques des afro-descendants
  • Noura Kridis, Droit de la reconnaissance dans le cadre des révoltes arabes
  • Horatia Muir Watt, La reconnaissance entre philosophie politique et droit international privé : un rendez-vous manqué ?
  • Paul Lagarde, Introduction au thème de la reconnaissance des situations : rappel des points les plus discutés
  • Ivana Isailovic, La reconnaissance politique en droit transnational : les identités, les marginalisations et le droit international privé
  • Dominique Gaurier, La vision de l’autre, étranger ou non européen à travers le regard des auteurs classiques du droit international

Monday, August 22, 2016

Call for Submissions: Cambridge International Law Journal

The Cambridge International Law Journal (formerly, the Cambridge Journal of International and Comparative Law) has issued a call for submissions for its forthcoming volume. Here's the call:


The Cambridge International Law Journal (CILJ) (formerly the Cambridge Journal of International and Comparative Law) is a double-blind peer-reviewed journal run by members of the postgraduate community at the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law. The Editorial Board is pleased to invite submissions for its sixth volume.

General call for submissions – International law

The Board welcomes long articles, short articles, case notes and book reviews that engage with current themes in international law and EU law. All submissions are subject to double-blind peer review by our Editorial Board. In addition, all long articles are sent to our Academic Review Board, which consists of distinguished international law scholars and practitioners. A full list of reviewers is available at this link.

The deadline for submissions is 28th October 2016 at 11.59 p.m.

Submissions received by this date will be considered for publication in Volume 6, Issue 1, to be published in Spring 2017.

To submit, please follow this link.

Further submission information

The Journal accepts the following types of manuscript:

Long Articles between 6,000 and 10,000 words but not exceeding 12,000 words including footnotes; Short Articles not exceeding 6,000 words including footnotes; Case Notes, including substantive analysis, not exceeding 3000 words including footnotes; and Book Reviews not exceeding 2500 words including footnotes.

Please list the word count of the text and the footnotes on your manuscript.

All copies must be submitted in Word (.doc) or (.docx) format and must conform to our style guidelines, which are available at the following links:

OSCOLA Fourth edition

OSCOLA: Citing International Law Sources

Please ensure that your manuscript does not contain any reference to your personal or professional identity.

Further information is available here.

Sunday, August 21, 2016

Cassella & Delabie: Faut-il prendre le droit international au sérieux ?

Sarah Cassella (Université du Maine - Law) & Lucie Delabie (Université de Picardie Jules Verne - Law) have published Faut-il prendre le droit international au sérieux ? (Pedone 2016). Contents include:
  • Photini Pazartzis, La succession d’États comme moyen de régulation des relations internationales
  • Hélène De Pooter, Place et rôle de la France à l’UNESCO : quelques observations à la suite du rapport Janicot
  • Abdulqawi A. Yusuf, L’État, le coup d’État et l’Union africaine
  • Franck Latty, Ploutocratie et personnalité juridique internationale
  • La revanche de l’État dans l’arbitrage transnational Tullio TREVES
  • Aurélie Tardieu, Face à une théorie féministe du droit international, une objection au féminin
  • Jean Combacau, L’objection à la formation et à l’opposabilité des règles internationales – le volontarisme a-t-il encore un intérêt ?
  • Géraldine Giraudeau, Saint-Pierre-et-Miquelon : de la guerre de la morue à la bataille de l’or noir
  • Karel Wellens, Le gendarme se marie. Un conte d’amour, de jalousie et de tromperie
  • Athina Chanaki, Quis custodiet ipsos custodes ? La responsabilité des organisations internationales pour les violations des droits de l’homme
  • Fabien Lafouasse, « Le silence est d’or » : Réflexions juridiques sur l’espionnage entre États
  • Lucie Delabie, Gentlemen’s agreements et autres arrangements informels : la politique au secours du droit international ?
  • Saïda El Boudouhi, L’enseignement du droit international à l’université : quel intérêt ?
  • Sabrina Robert-Cuendet, Le bestiaire du droit international (ou la fable de l’animal voulant trouver sa place parmi les hommes et les États)
  • Vera El Khoury Lacoeuilhe, Témoignage : les droits de l’homme très confidentiels à l’UNESCO
  • Evelyne Lagrange, Le bon genre. Les organisations internationales côté femmes
  • Massimo Iovane, Quelle efficacité du jus cogens dans la protection des droits de l’homme ?
  • Sarah Cassella, Ambiguïtés de la faveur dans la construction d’un « système » normatif : les clauses de la protection la plus favorable
  • Geneviève Bastid Burdeau, Conclusions
  • Pierre Michel Eisemann, Encore Quelques Mots…

Saturday, August 20, 2016

Fabre: Cosmopolitan Peace

Cécile Fabre (Univ. of Oxford - Philosophy) has published Cosmopolitan Peace (Oxford Univ. Press 2016). Here's the abstract:
This book articulates a cosmopolitan theory of the principles which ought to regulate belligerents' conduct in the aftermath of war. Throughout, it relies on the fundamental principle that all human beings, wherever they reside, have rights to the freedoms and resources which they need to lead a flourishing life, and that national and political borders are largely irrelevant to the conferral of those rights. With that principle in hand, the book provides a normative defence of restitutive and reparative justice, the punishment of war criminals, the resort to transitional foreign administration as a means to govern war-torn territories, and the deployment of peacekeeping and occupation forces. It also outlines various reconciliatory and commemorative practices which might facilitate the emergence of trust amongst enemies and thereby improve prospects for peace.

Friday, August 19, 2016

deGuzman: Justifying Extraterritorial War Crimes Trials

Margaret M. deGuzman (Temple Univ. - Law) has posted Justifying Extraterritorial War Crimes Trials. Here's the abstract:
War crimes are increasingly being adjudicated in international courts and in national courts with no territory links to the crimes under the doctrine of universal jurisdiction. Such extraterritorial trials rely for their justification on the existence of an interest in accountability that is not based on the location of the crimes or the nationalities of the perpetrators or victims. Yet proponents of extraterritorial adjudication of war crimes rarely interrogate the nature of this justifying interest. This Article identifies three central justifying rationales for extraterritorial war crimes trials in the law and literature. It demonstrates that a tension exists among these rationales that creates confusion and dissonance in the legal doctrines and policies governing such trials. Finally, it suggests that proponents of extraterritorial war crimes trials should endorse the broadest of the rationales, which best expresses the global cosmopolitan ideal embedded in the human rights and humanitarian law regimes. At the same time, it argues for more robust principles to guide the exercise of extraterritorial jurisdiction over war crimes by balancing the global and national interests at stake.

Venzke: Cracking the Frame? On the Prospects of Change in a World of Struggle

Ingo Venzke (Univ. of Amsterdam - Law) has posted Cracking the Frame? On the Prospects of Change in a World of Struggle (European Journal of International Law, forthcoming). Here's the abstract:
Critical scholarship classically lays bare the assumptions and choices that people make when they argue. By displaying the consequences of those assumptions and choices, it seeks to instil a sense of responsibility for them. Drawing them out into the open, critical scholarship presents them for contestation, unsettles them, and opens them up for change. In his latest book, A World of Struggle, David Kennedy directs our attention to the background work of expertise – how it rules through arguments, how it shapes the global political economy and how it sustains unjust distributions of gains. Kennedy offers a warm invitation to join the struggle to imagine and remake the world differently. In the present review, I discuss this invitation’s specific appeal. More generally, I ask about the prospects of change in international law as well as the activities that might support such change. I argue, first, that carving out background assumptions and choices is not enough. What is needed is an account of transitions – something that Kennedy acknowledges but does not provide. Second, I approach the vexed question of who could effectively crack existing frames – a question that Kennedy ducks. And, third, I discuss the role of violence, rhetoric and reason in the argumentative practice of expert work – distinctions that Kennedy refutes. I am ultimately happy to accept Kennedy’s invitation. It surely comes with immense acuity, subtle side blows and not so subtle punches – always in his signature style. I conclude that, with the aim of inducing change, a core activity of scholars should be to trace changes in concrete contexts and to thereby regain a sense for the possibilities of the past.

Mazzuoli: The Law of Treaties

Valerio de Oliveira Mazzuoli (Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso - Law) has published The Law of Treaties (Forense 2016). Here's the abstract:

The extraordinary growth in the number of international treaties concluded in recent decades has awakened the interest in the study of the Law of Treaties throughout the world. Nevertheless, many of the works that have been recently published do not reach a satisfactory degree of detail, leaving the academic readership with no answer concerning most of the practical problems that the contemporary law of treaties poses.

This book, written by one of the most renowned Brazilian internationalists, deepens the study of the law of treaties by offering specific solutions to current legal problems. It provides a high-level theoretical and practical approach, touching upon all major current issues of the law of treaties. It is noteworthy that each subject-matter discussed in this work was thoroughly analyzed and supported by a rigorous methodology, including the use of the most accurate terminology and a well-reasoned explanation of each of the issues addressed in accordance with the most authoritative legal scholarly writings.

This work is also a helpful reference for governmental and diplomatic officials, legal practitioners and the legal academia at large in trying to understand how international acts are negotiated and adopted, what the rules are for the formulation of reservations and introduction of amendments to conventional texts, how a State is definitely deemed to be bound by an international act or treaty, which the effects are of a treaty that came into force and how treaties should be applied at the international level, etc.

Hurd: The Permissive Power of the Ban on War

Ian Hurd (Northwestern Univ. - Political Science) has posted The Permissive Power of the Ban on War (European Journal of International Security, forthcoming). Here's the abstract:
The ban on inter-state war in the UN Charter is widely identified as central to the modern international order–Michael Byers calls it ‘one of the twentieth century’s greatest achievements’. Even if it is only imperfectly observed, it is often seen as a constraint on state autonomy and an improvement on the pre-legal, unregulated world before 1945. In response to this conventional view, this article shows that the laws on war in the Charter are better seen as permissive rather than constraining. I make two points. First, by creating a legal category around ‘self-defence’, the laws on war authorise, and thus legitimate, wars that are motivated by the security needs of the state, while forbidding other motives for wars. Second, state practice since 1945 has expanded the scope of this authorisation, extending it in both time and space beyond the black-letter text of the Charter. The permissive effect of law on war has therefore been getting larger. These two effects suggest that international law is a resource that increases state power, at least for powerful states, and this relation between international law and power politics is missed by both realists and liberal internationalists.

New Issue: International Journal of Refugee Law

The latest issue of the International Journal of Refugee Law (Vol. 28, no. 2, June 2016) is out. Contents include:
  • Naomi Hart, Complementary Protection and Transjudicial Dialogue: Global Best Practice or Race to the Bottom?
  • Phil Orchard, The Contested Origins of Internal Displacement
  • Gregor Noll, Junk Science? Four Arguments against the Radiological Age Assessment of Unaccompanied Minors Seeking Asylum
  • Niamh Kinchin, The Implied Human Rights Obligations of UNHCR
  • Guy S Goodwin-Gill, The Mediterranean Papers: Athens, Naples, and Istanbul

Thursday, August 18, 2016

Peters: The Refinement of International Law: From Fragmentation to Regime Interaction and Politicization

Anne Peters (Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law) has posted The Refinement of International Law: From Fragmentation to Regime Interaction and Politicization. Here's the abstract:
The new posture of international courts and tribunals is the ‘spirit of systemic harmonisation’, to use the words of the European Court of Human Rights Grand Chamber in Al Dulimi. Fifteen years after then ICJ President’s Gilbert Guillaume’s ‘proliferation’-speech before the UN General Assembly and ten years after publication of the ILC ‘fragmentation’-report, it is time to bury the f-word. Along that line, this paper concentrates on the positive contribution of the new techniques which courts, tribunals and other actors have developed in order to coordinate the various subfields of international law. If these are accompanied by a proper politicization of international law and governance, they are apt to strengthen both the effectiveness and the legitimacy of international law. Ironically, the ongoing ‘harmonisation’ and ‘integration’ within international law could also be conceptualised as a form of procedural constitutionalisation.

Venzke & Thio: The Internal Effects of ASEAN External Relations

Ingo Venzke (Universiteit van Amsterdam - Law) & Li-ann Thio (National Univ. of Singapore - Law) have published The Internal Effects of ASEAN External Relations (Cambridge Univ. Press 2016). Here's the abstract:
Starting with a typology of ASEAN external agreements, the authors go on to provide an original reading of plurilateral agreements as 'joint' agreements. The book then offers both a clarification of the effects - direct or indirect - of external agreements within the legal orders of ASEAN Member States, and an explanation of the effects of external agreements within the legal regime of ASEAN. The authors conclude with a discussion of the role of ASEAN centrality and the role of the secretariat in shaping it.

New Volume: Recueil des Cours

Volume 378 of the Recueil des Cours, Collected Courses of the Hague Academy of International Law is out. Contents include:
  • Volume 378
    • Y. Iwasawa, Domestic Application of International Law
    • Javier Carrascosa González, The Internet – Privacy and Rights relating to Personality

Patel: The State Practice of India and the Development of International Law

Bimal N. Patel (Gujarat National Law Univ.) has published The State Practice of India and the Development of International Law: Dynamic Interplay between Foreign Policy and Jurisprudence (Brill | Nijhoff 2016). Here's the abstract:
The State Practice of India and the Development of International Law by Bimal N. Patel provides a critical analysis of India’s state practice and development of international law. Providing insight into the historical evolution of Indian state practice from pre-1945 period through the 21st century, the work meticulously and systematically examines the interpretation and execution of international law by national legislative executive and judicial organs individually as well as collectively. The author demonstrates India’s ambitions as a rising global power and emerging role in shaping international affairs, and convincingly argues how India will continue to resist and prevent consolidation of Euro-American centric influence of international law in areas of her political, economic and culture influence.

Wednesday, August 17, 2016

Criddle: Human Rights in Emergencies

Evan J. Criddle (William and Mary Law School) has published Human Rights in Emergencies (Cambridge Univ. Press 2016). Contents include:
  • Evan J. Criddle, Introduction: testing human rights theory during emergencies
  • Gerald L. Neuman, Constrained derogation in positive human rights regimes
  • Evan J. Criddle, Protecting human rights during emergencies: delegation, derogation, and deference
  • James W. Nickel, Two models of normative frameworks for human rights during severe emergencies
  • Emily M. Hafner-Burton, Laurence R. Helfer & Christopher J. Fariss, Emergency and escape: explaining derogations from human rights treaties
  • Fionnuala Ní Aoláin, The cloak and dagger game of emergency and war
  • Thomas Poole, The law of emergency and reason of state
  • William E. Scheuerman, Human rights lawyers v. Carl Schmitt
  • Scott Sheeran, Human rights and derogation in peacekeeping: addressing a legal vacuum within the state of exception
  • Diane A. Desierto, Austerity measures and international economic, social, and cultural rights

Tuesday, August 16, 2016

Call for Submissions: Time and Cost Issues in International Arbitration

Transnational Dispute Management has issued a call for submissions for a TDM special issue on "Time and Cost Issues in International Arbitration." Here's the call:

TDM Call for Papers: Time and Cost Issues in International Arbitration

We are pleased to announce a forthcoming TDM special issue on "Time and Cost Issues in International Arbitration."

This Special Issue will be edited by Wendy Miles QC (Boies, Schiller & Flexner) and Philippe Cavalieros (Winston & Strawn), and will focus on a subject that is central to the concerns of arbitration users, many of whom perceive arbitration proceedings as being too expensive and lengthy.

Time and cost concerns in international arbitration are not new - users have become more cost-conscious particularly since the global financial crisis. What is disheartening is that these concerns are consistently and still being identified as amongst the worst traits of arbitration, as revealed in the latest 2015 survey conducted by the School of International Arbitration at Queen Mary University (

At a time when the legitimacy and efficacy of arbitration as a system of dispute settlement is being questioned, it is all the more important to discuss time and cost issues, analyze to what extent these concerns are warranted, pinpoint the contributing factors, and identify potential solutions.

To better inform users of cost allocation practices and how they can be used to control time and costs, the ICC Task Force on Costs recently released a Report on Decisions on Costs in International Arbitration ( (pdf)), which sets out tribunals' considerations, and the different approaches to cost allocation across arbitral institutions and national laws.

In its survey, the School of International Arbitration at Queen Mary University suggested several measures aimed at saving costs, and asked respondents to rate their effectiveness. The most positively ranked suggestion was to require tribunals to "commit to and notify parties of a schedule for deliberations and delivery of final award." Other high ranked cost-saving proposals included "stronger pre-appointment scrutiny of prospective arbitrators' availability," "sanctions for dilatory conduct by parties or their counsel" and "requirement for early procedural conference." It appears that users want arbitrators to take on a more proactive approach to setting and meeting deadlines, and sanctioning dilatory tactics.

Along this vein, the International Court of Arbitration at the ICC recently introduced a policy whereby arbitrators who fail to submit draft awards within three months after the last substantive hearing, absent reasonable justification, will have their fees reduced (

Possible topics for submission to the Special Issue would include a discussion of the cost-saving measures proposed in the Queen Mary survey or a commentary on the potential impact of the ICC's newly implemented policy to reduce arbitrator fees for unjustified delays. Other ideas could include but are not limited to the following:

  • Power of arbitrators to sanction party or counsel behavior that delays or increases the cost of arbitration (e.g. power to order legal counsel to pay the opposing party's legal costs, etc.)
  • Enforceability issues that may arise from sanctions imposed by arbitrators
  • Whether guidelines and checklists help foster cost-effective behavior
  • Different types of funding options for arbitration users, whether impecunious or not
  • The effect of a party's insolvency during proceedings
  • Use of political risk insurance or arbitration award default coverage
  • Recoverability of party costs other than institutional, legal, or expert/witness fees (e.g. sums owed to third party funders, in-house costs, etc.)
  • Pressure in the legal market to prolong arbitral proceedings

We invite all those with an interest in the subject to contribute articles or notes on one of the above topics or any other relevant issue. Proposals for papers (abstracts) should be submitted to the editors by November 2016, publication is expected in 2017.

Feel free to circulate this call for papers amongst friends, colleagues and other people who you think may have an interest in this topic.

Wendy Miles QC
Boies, Schiller & Flexner
View profile

Philippe Cavalieros
Winston & Strawn
View profile

Please address all questions and proposals to both editors, contact details here.

Please CC when submitting your materials.

New Issue: Global Summitry

The latest issue of Global Summitry (Vol. 2, no. 1, June 2016) is out. Contents include:
  • Eric Helleiner, Legacies of the 2008 Crisis for Global Financial Governance
  • Henry Farrell, Globalized Green Lanternism
  • Paul Martin, Paul Martin on the G20 and China’s Hosting of the G20 Leaders’ Summit
  • M. Taylor Fravel, Explaining China’s Escalation over the Senkaku (Diaoyu) Islands
  • Oliver Stuenkel, The BRICS: Seeking Privileges by Constructing and Running Multilateral Institutions
  • Mark Beeson, Multilateralism in East Asia: Less than the Sum of Its Parts?