- In Memoriam: John R.W.D. Jones
- Andreas Zimmermann, Finally … Or Would Rather Less Have Been More?: The Recent Amendment on the Deletion of Article 124 of the Rome Statute and the Continued Quest for the Universality of the International Criminal Court
- Richard Ashby Wilson, Propaganda and History in International Criminal Trials
- Leila Ullrich, Beyond the ‘Global–Local Divide’: Local Intermediaries, Victims and the Justice Contestations of the International Criminal Court
- Symposium: The Italian Constitutional Court Judgment 238/2014: On State Immunity and Fundamental Principles of the Constitutional Order
- Valentina Spiga, Foreword
- Riccardo Pavoni, How Broad is the Principle Upheld by the Italian Constitutional Court in Judgment No. 238?
- Micaela Frulli, ‘Time Will Tell Who Just Fell and Who’s Been Left Behind’: On the Clash between the International Court of Justice and the Italian Constitutional Court
- Massimo Iovane, The Italian Constitutional Court Judgment No. 238 and the Myth of the ‘Constitutionalization’ of International Law
- Gianluigi Palombella, German War Crimes and the Rule of International Law
- Martin Scheinin, The Italian Constitutional Court’s Judgment 238 of 2014 Is Not Another Kadi Case
- Raffaela Kunz, The Italian Constitutional Court and ‘Constructive Contestation’: A Miscarried Attempt?
- Francesco Francioni, Access to Justice and Its Pitfalls: Reparation for War Crimes and the Italian Constitutional Court
- Cases before International Courts and Tribunals
- Kevin Jon Heller, Radical Complementarity
- Janine Natalya Clark, The First Rape Conviction at the ICC: An Analysis of the Bemba Judgment
- Fergal Gaynor, Katerina I. Kappos, & Patrick Hayden, Current Developments at the International Criminal Court
Sunday, July 24, 2016
Saturday, July 23, 2016
In this study, Eman Hamdan examines the protection against refoulement under the European Convention on Human Rights and the UN Convention against Torture, with the aim to determine which of those Conventions affords better protection for international protection seekers. Hamdan explores the scope and content of the principle of non-refoulement under both Conventions and the application of the principle to the immigration control measures and the extraordinary rendition operations.
The author provides a comprehensive and comparative analysis of the case-law of both the European Court of Human Rights and the UN Committee against Torture on the procedural and substantive aspects of the principle of non-refoulement, in order to help practitioners to determine which of these human rights treaty bodies is more favorable for their specific non-refoulement case.
Thursday, July 21, 2016
Wednesday, July 20, 2016
MAX PLANCK TRIALOGUE ON THE LAW OF PEACE AND WAR
Vol. I.: Self-defence against Non-state Actors
Call for engaged listeners
deadline: 3 October 2016
4-5 November 2016
The Max Planck Trialogues, published with Cambridge University Press, are a new format of academic publishing in which three scholars co-author a book and tackle one and the same topic of the ius contra bellum, ius in bello, or ius post bellum from their distinct perspectives. The authors have been selected so as to represent different theoretical, geographical, and practical backgrounds and each of them contributes a chapter of 80 pages. The crucial idea of the Trialogues is to acknowledge the existing diversity of opinions and approaches in a field and to engage them with each other. Ultimately, the Trialogue shall lead to a book that covers the existing plurality in one field and provides, through engaging the three authors in a trialogue, the academic debate with new impulses.
The first volume deals with one of the most pressing legal issues of the ius contra bellum, namely the legality of self-defence against non-state actors. How do we have to interpret state practice – has it already implemented a broader concept of self-defence or is the traditional state centred view still good law? How can a new and broader notion of selfdefence be reconciled with the traditional international law on attribution and state responsibility? Under which specific requirements should self-defence, if at all, be regarded as lawful and how can an abuse of an extended right to self-defence be prevented? Especially the recent events in Syria make the debate on the current state of the law extraordinarily timely.
The three authors of the first volume of the Max Planck Trialogues are: Mary Ellen O’Connell (University of Notre Dame, USA), Christian Tams (University of Glasgow, UK), and Dire Tladi (University of Pretoria, South Africa).
The following commentators and discussants have confirmed their participation: Orna Ben-Naftali (College of Management Academic Studies, Israel), Theodore Christakis (University Grenoble-Alpes, France), Olivier Corten (Université Libre de Bruxelles, Belgium), Larissa van den Herik (Leiden University, The Netherlands), Claus Kreß (Universität zu Köln, Germany), Inger Österdahl (Uppsala University, Sweden), Sir Michael Wood (UN International Law Commission, UK).
The workshop will begin on 4 November 2016 1.30 p.m. and end at 5 November 2016 at 1 p.m.
If you are interested in participating in the audience (not as a speaker), send an application with a statement of motivation explaining you interest and expertise or current research interest (maximum ½ page), and your cv including a list of publications (maximum one page) to Dr. Christian Marxsen (firstname.lastname@example.org). The deadline for applications is 3 October 2016.
Anne Peters and Christian Marxsen
Territoriality is a powerful architecture of association in international law, performing significant bounding, distributive and placement functions. Yet it has always interacted with other global legal architectures of affiliation and disaffiliation, among them informational geographies. So what becomes of territoriality amid the turn to data analytics – the automated analysis of massive, distributed data sets – as a basis for international legal and policy decision, action, thinking, and prediction? This article recounts processes and practices already underway on the global plane that are effecting, on one hand, the “datafication” of territory (and the related rise of a logic of association) and, on the other, the “territorialisation” of data (and the emergence or recurrence of “data territories”) in international legal order. Through these kinds of processes, and in its variable configurations, data might yet parallel physical territory (landed and maritime) as a primary medium for the conduct of juridical global life and conflict, a prospect that raises important questions for international law and lawyers.
This chapter considers aspects of the ongoing conversation about norms of state and official immunity among domestic and international courts. Because immunity norms transect the international and domestic legal spheres, adjudicating immunity claims creates opportunities for dialogue between international and domestic courts about the content of immunity norms, and about which institutions (both domestic and international) have the authority to articulate and apply them.
Part I begins by discussing two challenges brought before international tribunals to the application of foreign state immunity by domestic courts: a challenge brought before the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) to the United Kingdom’s determination that Saudi Arabia was entitled to jurisdictional immunity from civil claims for torture (Jones v. United Kingdom), and a challenge brought before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to Italy’s determination that Germany was not entitled to jurisdictional immunity from civil claims for war crimes (Germany v. Italy). Both of these cases pitted the right of access to a judicial remedy against the norm of state immunity.
Part II examines two domestic cases that followed these international decisions. It discusses the Canadian Supreme Court’s decision in Estate of Kazemi v. Iran, which illustrates normative coalescence around a conception of immunity based on a domestic statute and reinforced by international jurisprudence. It then explores the Italian Constitutional Court’s Judgment 238/2014, which illustrates that international decisions can also provoke “legal protectionism” — the attempt to shield domestic norms and institutions from foreign or international “imports.”
Part III concludes by exploring how arguments based on the supremacy of domestic constitutional law have been used in other cases to justify non-compliance with the decisions of international bodies, even when the constitution explicitly incorporates international law into the domestic legal system. At a minimum, by conceptualizing various legal and political institutions as active interlocutors engaged in a collective process of norm articulation, we can perhaps worry somewhat less about who gets the “final word,” and focus instead on the doctrinal and normative implications of this ongoing conversation for the dignity and well-being of affected groups and individuals.
Tuesday, July 19, 2016
Conference: Religion und Völkerrecht - La religion et le droit international (DGIR/SFDI Joint Meeting)
- Lisa Grans, A Right Not to Be Left Alone – Utilising the Right to Private Life to Prevent Honour-related Violence
- David M. Ong, Public Accountability for Private International Financing of Natural Resource Development Projects: The UN Rule of Law Initiative and the Equator Principles
- Graham Butler & Martin Ratcovich, Operation Sophia in Uncharted Waters: European and International Law Challenges for the EU Naval Mission in the Mediterranean Sea
In an era riddled with critiques of the relevance of classic international law, some have loudly given up on the subject, while others have placed their hopes in alternative mechanisms of global governance. One alternative is “soft law,” and nowhere is soft law more successful than in international financial regulation (IFR). Today, almost every bank of any size across the world has to keep similar amounts of money in its emergency reserve, cannot stake its future on complex derivatives or other forbidden trades, and faces oversight that, no matter where the bank is located, will be conducted in roughly similar ways, with roughly similar tools. And yet the promulgators of these rules consistently disavow their status as binding law.
These disavowals are disingenuous, and unpacking the reasons why has useful lessons for how international governance works, whether backed by treaty and custom or not. IFR works like traditional international law in three ways. It, like international law, depends on domestic institutions for implementation, although traditional international law has often sought to ignore the importance of any institution below the level of the state. IFR reminds us that the coordination of international interests comes with winners and losers, and therefore that the “mere coordination exercise” that international governance represents should not be dismissed, though traditional international law occasionally has been critiqued for that reason. And IFR emphasizes the necessarily messy way that fundamental legal principles are arrived at in international governance of any stripe -- something I call the contestation principle. These features of both hard and soft law have been overlooked by both the traditionalists and critics of international law, but process-driven insights like them have much to tell us about both hard and soft law, which may not, in some ways, be so different after all.
Monday, July 18, 2016
- Der „Islamische Staat“
- Anton Hofreiter, Außenpolitik im Blindflug
- Norbert Röttgen, Syrien als Prisma außenpolitischer Herausforderungen: Warum das Anti-IS-Mandat ein Bekenntnis zu Europa und seiner Verantwortung im Nahen und Mittleren Osten ist
- Christian Tomuschat, The Status of the ‘Islamic State’ under International Law
- Ignaz Stegmiller, The Right of Self-Defence under Article 51 of the UN Charter against the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant
- Sebastian Lange, „Bleiben und Ausdehnen“: Ideologie, Organisation und Strategie des „Islamischen Staats“
- Sebastian Huhnholz, Heimkehr ins Kalifat? Historische Ursprünge und gegenwärtige Folgen der sakralen Geographie des Dschihadismus
- Max Hoffmann, Territorium als Faktor terroristischer Gewalt: Der „Islamische Staat“ und die Auswirkungen territorialer Kontrolle
- Jennifer Philippa Eggert, Women Fighters in the “Islamic State” and Al-Qaida in Iraq: A Comparative Analysis
Consisting of two panels featuring experts in Law of the Sea and members of the BIICL research project on the obligations of States in undelimited maritime areas, this event will analyse and discuss the obligations of States in regard to undelimited areas pending agreement on maritime boundary delimitation. In particular, the event will focus on the obligations of States under Articles 74(3) and 83(3) of UNCLOS to refrain from activities that could jeopardise or hamper the reaching of a final agreement on maritime delimitation.
The panels will present the findings of the BIICL research team and the implications of the research in practice. This will include a discussion of the impact of the decision of the ITLOS Special Chamber on provisional measures in the Dispute Concerning Delimitation of the Maritime Boundary between Ghana and Côte d'Ivoire in the Atlantic Ocean as well as relevant aspects of the Award on the Merits of the Annex VII Arbitral Tribunal in The Republic of Philippines v The People's Republic of China case (released 12 July 2016).
The UN celebrated its 70th anniversary in 2015. In the volume Reforming the UN: A Chronology by Joachim Müller an exciting story is told describing the evolution of the UN through the main change initiatives applied by each Secretary-General, characterized by political confrontations, crises of confidence and organizational constraints. Initiatives included approving the Sustainable Development Goals, strengthening peacekeeping, enlarging the Security Council, establishing mechanisms to protect human rights, improving aid efficiency, and reforming management practices. This story is completed by a Chronology of Reform Events to enhance the transparency of parallel, multi-layer reform tracks. Lessons learned highlight the main drivers of changes, the interests and constraints, and the dynamics of the reform process: valuable insight for capitalizing on future change opportunities.
- Developing Countries, Emerging Powers and the WTO
- J.P. Singh, Introduction: Emerging Powers and the WTO
- Amrita Narlikar & Diana Tussie, Breakthrough at Bali? Explanations, Aftermath, Implications
- Laura C. Mahrenbach, Emerging Powers, Domestic Politics, and WTO Dispute Settlement Reform
- Vinícius Rodrigues Vieira, Beyond the Market: The Global South and the WTO’s Normative Dimension
- J.P. Singh & Surupa Gupta, Agriculture and Its Discontents: Coalitional Politics at the WTO with Special Reference to India’s Food Security Interests
- Rorden Wilkinson, Conclusions: Emerging Powers in the WTO – Beware the Glass Ceiling
Sunday, July 17, 2016
Garcia: La Palestine : d'un Etat non membre de l'Organisation des Nations Unies à un Etat souverain ?
- Louis Balmond, Etat palestinien
- Robert Kolb, La question de la Palestine et la politique juridique
- Thierry Garcia, La Palestine au sein du système des Nations Unies
- Antonello Tancredi, Le droit à l’autodétermination du peuple palestinien
- Pierre Bodeau-Livinec, La Palestine, d’un Etat non-membre à l’ONU à un Etat souverain ? L’opposition des Etats à l’accession de la Palestine aux traités multilatéraux dans le cadre onusien
- Paolo Palchetti, La participation de la Palestine à la procédure devant la Cour internationale de Justice
- Jean-François Guilhaudis, D’un Etat non membre de l’ONU à un Etat souverain ?
- Manuel Eynard, La relation juridique entre la Palestine et le Procureur de la Cour pénale internationale
- Catherine Maia, Les positions politiques et les justifications juridiques des Etats au regard de la reconnaissance (ou non reconnaissance) de la qualité d’Etat de la Palestine
- Emilie Legris & Dimitri Walas, La reconnaissance de l’Etat de Palestine dans le cyberespace
- Jean-Christophe Martin, L’Union européenne et la reconnaissance de l’Etat palestinien
- Josiane Auvret-Finck, Le partenariat Union Européenne-Palestine
- Maurizio Arcari, Conclusions
This article probes the unique ontogenetic path of ASEAN’s regulation of foreign investment by juxtaposing global investment law and the ASEAN context. While the former delivers a powerful heuristic on isomorphism that ASEAN exhibits in its strong reflection of global investment norms, the latter sheds critical light on ideological and analytical blind spots by exploring distinct heterogeneities in ASEAN’s investment regulation. Those heterogeneities are not simply outliers but reflect important historical and cultural values inherent to ASEAN and its members. The insights uncovered in this article invite scholars and policymakers to define a new form of global investment law that is more inclusive and flexible than the strict and conventional paradigm.
Saturday, July 16, 2016
Site visits by the bench occur rarely in inter-state adjudication and arbitration. Against this backdrop, the recent site visits in Indus Waters Kishenganga Arbitration (Pakistan v India) and Bay of Bengal Maritime Boundary Arbitration (Bangladesh v India) are noteworthy and raise questions about how on-site inspections influence the decision-making process and whether site visits are an underused fact-finding tool. An analysis of these site visits, as well as past examples of site visits by arbitral tribunals and the International Court of Justice, reveal that the utility and value of site visits by the bench is difficult to ascertain, and there is little evidence that site visits have played a dispositive role. Moreover, in many disputes, other fact-finding methods may be more suitable than a site visit. But if site visits do, in fact, play a significant role in decision-making, then adjudicators should acknowledge that influence in a more transparent manner.
- Mariana Mota Prado, The past and future of law and development
- David M Trubek, Law and development: Forty years after ‘Scholars in Self-Estrangement’
- Michael Trebilcock, Between universalism and relativism: Reflections on the evolution of law and development studies
Friday, July 15, 2016
- Nadja Meisterhans, The World Health Organization in Crisis—Lessons to be Learned Beyond the Ebola Outbreak
- Michael M. Du, China’s “One Belt, One Road” Initiative: Context, Focus, Institutions, and Implications
- Yana Stoeva, The ‘Uncertainty Hypothesis’ in International Economic Law
- Katherine Tseng Hui-yi, Re-contemplating the South China Sea Issue: Sailing with the Wind of the 21st Century Maritime Silk Road
- He Tiantian, Commentary on Award on Jurisdiction and Admissibility of the Philippines-instituted Arbitration under Annex VII to the UNCLOS: A Discussion on Fact-Finding and Evidence
- Tommy Koh & Hao Duy Phan, The Asian Way to Settle Disputes
- Ian Townsend-Gault, Sustainable and Sound: First Principles for Addressing Maritime Jurisdictional Issues and Disputes
- Clive Schofield & Richard Schofield, Testing the Waters: Charting The Evolution of Claims to and From Low-Tide Elevations and Artificial Islands under the Law of the Sea
- Genevieve Quirk & Quentin Hanich, Ocean Diplomacy: The Pacific Island Countries’ Campaign to the UN for an Ocean Sustainable Development Goal
- Anastasia Telesetsky, State Law of the Sea Practice in Asian Pacific States
- Current Legal Developments
- Lowell Bautista, Philippine Arbitration against China over the South China Sea
- Dustin Kuan-hsiung Wang, Taiwan-Japan Fisheries Agreement: Light at the End of a Dark Tunnel
- David Freestone, International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, Case 21
- Richard Caddell, Dispute Resolution and Scientific Whaling in the Antarctic
- Lorenzo Schiano di Pepe, International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, Case 24, The “Enrica Lexie” Incident (Italy v. India), Provisional Measures
Drones are changing the conduct of war. Deployed at presidential discretion, they can be used in regular war zones or to kill people in such countries as Yemen and Somalia, where the United States is not officially at war. Advocates say that drones are more precise than conventional bombers, allowing warfare with minimal civilian deaths while keeping American pilots out of harm’s way. Critics say that drones are cowardly and that they often kill innocent civilians while terrorizing entire villages on the ground. In this book, Hugh Gusterson explores the significance of drone warfare from multiple perspectives, drawing on accounts by drone operators, victims of drone attacks, anti-drone activists, human rights activists, international lawyers, journalists, military thinkers, and academic experts.
Gusterson examines the way drone warfare has created commuter warriors and redefined the space of the battlefield. He looks at the paradoxical mix of closeness and distance involved in remote killing: is it easier than killing someone on the physical battlefield if you have to watch onscreen? He suggests a new way of understanding the debate over civilian casualties of drone attacks. He maps “ethical slippage” over time in the Obama administration’s targeting practices. And he contrasts Obama administration officials’ legal justification of drone attacks with arguments by international lawyers and NGOs.
Thursday, July 14, 2016
The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) was created alongside other towering achievements of the post-World War II era, including the United Nations, the World Bank, and the International Monetary Fund. GATT, the first successful agreement to generate multilateral trade liberalization, became the principal institution to administer international trade for the next six decades. In this book, Petros Mavoidis offers detailed examination of the GATT regime for international trade, discussing the negotiating record, policy background, economic rationale, and case law.
Mavroidis offers a substantive first chapter that provides a detailed historical background to GATT that stretches from the 1927 World Economic Conference through Bretton Woods and the Atlantic Charter. Each of the following chapters examines the disciplines agreed to, their negotiating record, their economic rationale, and subsequent practice. Mavroidis focuses on cases that have influenced the prevailing understanding of the norm, as well as on literature that has contributed to its interpretation, and the final outcome. In particular, he examines quantitative restrictions and tariffs; the most favored nation clause (MFN), the cornerstone of the GATT edifice; preferential trade agreements and special treatment for products originating in developing countries; domestic instruments; and exceptions to the obligations assumed under GATT.
The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) has extended its institutional arsenal since the Kennedy round in the early 1960s. The current institutional design is the outcome of the Uruguay round and agreements reached in the ongoing Doha round (begun in 2001). One of the institutional outgrowths of GATT is the World Trade Organization (WT0), created in 1995. In this book, Petros Mavroidis offers a detailed examination of WTO agreements regulating trade in goods, discussing legal context, policy background, economic rationale, and case law.
Each chapter examines a given legal norm and its subsequent practice. In particular, he discusses agreements dealing with customs clearance; “contingent protection” instruments, which allow WTO members unilaterally to add to the negotiated amount of protection when a certain contingency (for example, dumping) has occurred; TBT (Technical Barriers to Trade) and SPS (Sanitary and Phyto-sanitary Measures) agreements, both of which deal with such domestic instruments as environmental, health policy, or consumer information; the agreement on Trade Related Investment Measures (TRIM); sector-specific agreements on agriculture and textiles; plurilateral agreements (binding a subset of WTO membership) on government procurement and civil aviation; and transparency in trade relations. This book’s companion volume examines the GATT regime for international trade.
- Richard S. Mbatu, Linking the global to the national: an application of the international pathways model to examine the influence of international environmental agreements on Cameroon’s forest policy
- Cristina A. Lucier & Brian J. Gareau, Obstacles to preserving precaution and equity in global hazardous waste regulation: an analysis of contested knowledge in the Basel Convention
- Jon Birger Skjærseth, Linking EU climate and energy policies: policy-making, implementation and reform
- José Octavio Velázquez Gomar, Environmental policy integration among multilateral environmental agreements: the case of biodiversity
- David Belis & Bart Kerremans, The socialization potential of the CDM in EU–China climate relations
- Hui Zhang, Towards global green shipping: the development of international regulations on reduction of GHG emissions from ships
- Kristin Rosendal & Steinar Andresen, Realizing access and benefit sharing from use of genetic resources between diverging international regimes: the scope for leadership
- Susanne Schmeier, Andrea K. Gerlak, & Sabine Blumstein, Clearing the muddy waters of shared watercourses governance: conceptualizing international River Basin Organizations
Wednesday, July 13, 2016
- Jens David Ohlin, Introduction: the inescapable collision
- Adil Haque, Laws for war
- David Luban, Human rights thinking and the laws of war
- Marko Milanovic, Rethinking the relationship between IHL and IHRL
- Jens David Ohlin, Acting as a sovereign versus acting as a belligerent
- Jonathan Horowitz, Ending the global war: the power of human rights in a time of unrestrained armed conflict
- Naz K. Modirzadeh, Folk international law
- Kevin Jon Heller, The use and abuse of analogy in IHL
- Janina Dill, Forcible alternatives to war: legitimate violence in twenty-first-century international relations
- John Dehn, Whither international martial law?
- Brian Orend, The next Geneva Convention: filling a post-war legal gap with human rights values
Tuesday, July 12, 2016
- C. Márquez Carrasco & K. Buhmann, Editorial Introduction: The Corporate Responsibility to Respect Human Rights: The Emerging European Union Regime
- R. Chambers & A. Yilmaz-Vastardis, The New EU Rules on Non-Financial Reporting: Potential Impacts on Access to Remedy?
- O. Outhwaite & O. Martin-Ortega, Human Rights in Global Supply Chains: Corporate Social Responsibility and Public Procurement in the European Union
- M. Requejo Isidro, Business and Human Rights Abuses: Claiming Compensation under the Brussels I Recast
- M. Fasciglione, The Enforcement of Corporate Human Rights Due Diligence: From the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights to the Legal Systems of EU Countries
- M. Bordignon, State Commitment in Implementing the UNGPs and the Emerging Regime of National Action Plans: A Comparative Analysis
- T. Bloom, Cleaning Dirty Hands? Some Thoughts on Private Companies, Migration and CSR in the European Union
- J. Letnar, Towards a Holistic Approach to Business and Human Rights in the European Union
The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) will have profound implications for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) within and beyond the free trade area. SME issues get more attention in the TPP than previous FTAs. Since there is limited research on the impact of the FTAs on SMEs, it is of great significance to probe into the practical implications of the TPP for SMEs. The key question will be analyzed: what are the challenges and opportunities that the TPP hold for SMEs? It is argued that, first, the support to SMEs, tariff elimination or reduction, and the reduction of non-tariff barriers are major opportunities presented by the TPP. The key benefits to SMEs are enhanced market opening and increased predictability. However, such opportunities may have limited effects in improving market position for certain SMEs. Second, the TPP will pose major challenges such as insufficiency of the opportunities to SMEs, the complexity of rules, difficulties in rule interpretation and implementation, remained regulatory differences, disadvantaged positions of SMEs from developing TPP countries, and the impact on SMEs negatively affected by trade liberalization. There will be more challenges for SMEs from non-TPP parties. Third, if the TPP is properly managed, it should bring more opportunities than challenges to SMEs. The opportunities and challenges deriving from the TPP are intimately connected.