Wednesday, May 22, 2019

Ratner: Global Investment Rules as a Site for Moral Inquiry

Steven R. Ratner (Univ. of Michigan - Law) has posted Global Investment Rules as a Site for Moral Inquiry (Journal of Political Philosophy, Vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 107-135, March 2019). Here's the abstract:
The legal regime regulating cross-border investment gives key rights to foreign investors and places significant duties on states hosting that investment. It also raises distinctive moral questions due to its potential to constrain a state’s ability to manage its economy and protect its people. Yet international investment law remains virtually untouched as a subject of philosophical inquiry. The questions of international political morality surrounding investment rules can be mapped through the lens of two critiques of the law – that it systemically takes advantage of the global South and that it constrains the policy choices of states hosting investment. Each critique contains certain moral and empirical assumptions that deserve further attention. The distributive justice implications of international investment rules are also relevant to scholars of global distributive justice. The aim of the analysis is to develop an interdisciplinary agenda – among law, philosophy, and social science – for inquiry into the justice of investment law and reform of its unjust elements.

Lieblich: Self-Defense Against Non-State Actors and the Myth of the Innocent State

Eliav Lieblich (Tel Aviv Univ. - Law) has posted Self-Defense Against Non-State Actors and the Myth of the Innocent State (in Global Governance and Human Rights, Nehal Bhuta & Rodrigo Vallejo eds., forthcoming). Here's the abstract:

Few contemporary debates on the use of force under international law have been more contentious than the argument over the lawfulness of transnational self-defense against non-state actors. In this context, especially controversial is the claim – advanced by the US and several other states – that defensive force against non-state actors could be lawful when territorial states are “unwilling or unable” to address the threat on their own.

Of the various objections to this standard, one significant argument suggests that when a territorial state is merely unable to stop a threat, any response against a non-state actor on its territory would be unlawful. This is because that state – assuming that it has exercised due diligence to prevent the threat – is at no fault; it has therefore not violated the prohibition on the use of force; and in the absence of such a violation, there can be no self-defense on its territory.

This Chapter challenges this argument. While not defending the lawfulness of the “unwilling or unable” test per se, it rejects the view that “state innocence” should be a valid objection to it. In this context, it argues that attributing overriding importance to state innocence conjures up an old anthropomorphism in international law, in which the state is conceived as a physical person, its territory akin to a human body. On this view, a response on the territory of an "innocent state" is likened to a response against the body of an innocent human threat or shield. Yet, in any legal regime that takes individual rights seriously, it seems that rights attributed to the fictionalized body of the state cannot override those of real-life people. It follows that state innocence alone cannot be a bar to self-defense against non-state actors, at least when human life is threatened by their attacks.

Tuesday, May 21, 2019

New Issue: Revue trimestrielle des droits de l'homme

The latest issue of the Revue trimestrielle des droits de l'homme (No. 118, 2019) is out. Contents include:
  • H. Labayle, Le Pacte mondial sur les migrations : un pacte avec le diable ?
  • G. Ravarani, Quelques réflexions sur la légitimité du juge de Strasbourg
  • C. Rizcallah, Le principe de confiance mutuelle : une utopie malheureuse ?
  • S. Wattier, La reconnaissance juridique du féminicide : quel apport en matière de protection des droits des femmes ?
  • C. Katz, Le refus de la protection des groupes politiques par la Convention sur la prévention et la répression du génocide : une exclusion contestable, une finalité entamée
  • T. Hochmann, Chronique des arrêts de la Cour suprême des États-Unis en matière de droits fondamentaux (octobre 2016 – juin 2018)
  • J. Arroyo, M-L. Basilien-Gainche, S. Lavorel, D. Mardon, C. Philippe, S. Turgis, S. Gerry-Vernières, A. Peyre, & A. Ailincai, La soft law dans le domaine des droits fondamentaux (octobre 2017 – octobre 2018)
  • X. Delgrange & D. Koussens, Quelles laïcités en salle d’audience ? À propos de quelques arrêts canadiens et européens sur le port de symboles religieux dans les prétoires
  • H. Tigroudja, Ports de signes religieux, « discrimination croisée » et ingérence de l’État dans la liberté de manifester sa religion
  • G. Haarscher, Le blasphémateur sous les fourches caudines des juges de Strasbourg
  • M-A. Beernaert, Droit d’accès à un avocat et relativité toujours plus grande des garanties du droit à un procès équitable
  • E. Patsrana & R. Bustos, « Bonne formation pour de bons jugements » - Le programme HELP (formation aux droits de l’homme pour les professionnels du droit) du Conseil de l’Europe

Call for Papers: ASIL Anti-Corruption Law Interest Group Works-in-Progress Conference

The Anti-Corruption Law Interest Group of the American Society of International Law has issued a call for papers for its first works-in-progress conference. The conference is cosponsored with the Faculty of Law at Ono Academic College and is organized in close cooperation with the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. The conference will take place in Kiryat Ono, Israel, on December 16 2019. The call is here.

Monday, May 20, 2019

Call for Session Ideas: 2020 ASIL Annual Meeting

The American Society of International Law has issued a call for session ideas for its 114th Annual Meeting, which will take place April 1-4, 2020, in Washington, DC. The conference theme is: "The Promise of International Law." The deadline is July 16, 2019. Here's the call:

The Promise of International Law

In a world of increasing polarization and threats to individual and collective security, many turn to international law for guidance and protection, while others consider this body of law and the institutions that apply it ill-equipped to address evolving needs. Has international law lived up to its full potential and is it equipped to safeguard the peaceful coexistence of its subjects, to protect human rights and the environment, and to contribute to the attainment of shared prosperity?

The year 2020 will give us much to reflect upon and to reaffirm. Even as states have withdrawn or sought to withdraw from agreements such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the Paris Agreement on Climate Change, and the Treaty on European Union, the international community will commemorate other enduring institutions and commitments in 2020. For example, the United Nations will mark its 75th anniversary amidst calls for significant reforms to global governance. The year 2020 also will see the celebration of the 100th anniversary of the entry into force of the Treaty of Versailles and of the Covenant of the League of Nations, the 50th anniversary of the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States, and the 20th anniversary of UN Security Council Resolution 1325 on women, peace and security. At the same time, the year 2020 will serve as a reminder that we have but ten years left to achieve the UN Sustainable Development Goals, which envisage "a world of universal respect for human rights and human dignity, the rule of law, justice, equality and non-discrimination."

At its 114th Annual Meeting in 2020, the American Society of International Law (ASIL) invites policymakers, practitioners, academics, and students of international law to reflect upon the successes and failures of international law. Has international law held states, military forces, multinational corporations, and other actors – both public and private – to account for their international obligations? What role do regulatory bodies, international institutions, and non-governmental organizations play in actualizing the objectives of international law? Can and should international law be expected to produce just outcomes in all circumstances? The Annual Meeting presents an opportunity for the Society to take stock of the past successes and failures of international law while reaffirming the promise it holds for the future.

Thematic Tracks:

  • International Human Rights, Humanitarian Law, and Criminal Justice
  • Transnational Litigation, Arbitration, and Dispute Resolution
  • Trade, Investment, Finance, and Technology
  • Sustainable Development and Global Governance
  • Security, Foreign Relations, and Use of Force
  • Energy, Environment, Sea, and Space

Call for Session Ideas

To suggest a session to the Committee, please complete the form below by no later than July 16, 2019.

Click to Access Proposal Form

Mitchell & Mishra: Regulating Cross-Border Data Flows in a Data-Driven World: How WTO Law Can Contribute

Andrew D Mitchell (Univ. of Melbourne - Law) & Neha Mishra (Univ. of Melbourne - Law) have posted Regulating Cross-Border Data Flows in a Data-Driven World: How WTO Law Can Contribute (Journal of International Economic Law, forthcoming). Here's the abstract:
While the free cross-border movement of data is essential to many aspects of international trade, several countries have imposed restrictions on these data flows. The pre-internet rules of the World Trade Organization (‘WTO’) discipline some of these restrictions, but they are insufficient. Unfortunately, so are the electronic commerce chapters in modern preferential trade agreements. This article argues that reformed WTO rules, that take account of the policy challenges of the data-driven economy, are required. These reforms would facilitate internet openness while ensuring consumer and business trust, promote digital inclusion of developing countries and incorporate clear exceptions for legitimate domestic policies.

Yilma: The United Nations' Evolving Privacy Discourse and Corporate Human Rights Obligations

Kinfe Micheal Yilma (Addis Ababa Univ. - Law) has posted an ASIL Insight on The United Nations' Evolving Privacy Discourse and Corporate Human Rights Obligations.

SFDI: Santé et droit international : Colloque de Rennes

The Société Française pour le Droit International has published Santé et droit international : Colloque de Rennes (Pedone 2019). The table of contents is here.

New Issue: Human Rights Review

The latest issue of the Human Rights Review (Vol. 20, no. 2, June 2019) is out. Contents include:
  • Janet Elise Johnson & Xenia Marie Hestermann, How Human Rights Advocates Influence Policy at the United Nations
  • Won Geun Choi, Asian Civil Society and Reconfiguration of Refugee Protection in Asia
  • Stephen Arves & Joseph Braun, On Solid Ground: Evaluating the Effects of Foundational Arguments on Human Rights Attitudes
  • Cinthya Alberto & Mariana Chilton, Transnational Violence Against Asylum-Seeking Women and Children: Honduras and the United States-Mexico Border
  • Janne Mende, The Concept of Modern Slavery: Definition, Critique, and the Human Rights Frame

Sunday, May 19, 2019

New Issue: Transnational Legal Theory

The latest issue of Transnational Legal Theory (Vol. 10, no. 1, 2019) is out. Contents include:
  • Transnational Food Security
    • Domenico Giannino, Are we looking up or are we looking out? The transnational constitutionalism of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights: conventionality control and the fight against impunity
    • Samantha Besson, International courts and the jurisprudence of statehood
    • Paul Burgess, Deriving the international Rule of Law: an unnecessary, impractical and unhelpful exercise
    • Priya S. Gupta, The fleeting, unhappy affair of Amazon HQ2 and New York City
    • Stephen Minas, Why the ICJ’s Chagos Archipelago advisory opinion matters for global justice—and for ‘Global Britain’

Friday, May 17, 2019

New Issue: Harvard International Law Journal

The latest issue of the Harvard International Law Journal (Vol. 60, no. 1, Winter 2019) is out. Contents include:
  • Martha Minow, Do Alternative Justice Mechanisms Deserve Recognition in International Criminal Law?: Truth Commissions, Amnesties, and Complementarity at the International Criminal Court
  • Richard C. Chen, Precedent and Dialogue in Investment Treaty Arbitration
  • Ori Sharon, Tides of Climate Change: Protecting the Natural Wealth Rights of Disappearing States
  • C.J.W. Baaij, Hiding in Plain Sight: The Power of Public Governance in International Arbitration

Young: The Future of Economic and Social Rights

Katharine G. Young (Boston College - Law) has published The Future of Economic and Social Rights (Cambridge Univ. Press 2019). The table of contents is here. Here's the abstract:
The future of economic and social rights is unlikely to resemble its past. Neglected within the human rights movement, avoided by courts, and subsumed within a single-minded conception of development as economic growth, economic and social rights enjoyed an uncertain status in international human rights law and in the public laws of most countries. However, today, under conditions of immense poverty, insecurity, and political instability, the rights to education, health care, housing, social security, food, water, and sanitation are central components of the human rights agenda. The Future of Economic and Social Rights captures the significant transformations occurring in the theory and practice of economic and social rights, in constitutional and human rights law. Professor Katharine G. Young brings together a group of distinguished scholars from diverse disciplines to examine and advance the broad research field of economic and social rights that incorporates legal, political science, economic, philosophy and anthropology scholars.

Thursday, May 16, 2019

Rochow: Transnationale Nomaden im Völkerrecht

Moritz von Rochow has published Transnationale Nomaden im Völkerrecht (Duncker & Humblot 2019). Here's the abstract:
Dieses Buch untersucht, wie das Völkerrecht des 21. Jahrhunderts den Herausforderungen einer klimatisch bedingt mobilen Gesellschaft gewachsen ist und wie sich das Recht der Territorialstaaten mit dem Rule of the Clan nomadischer Völker versöhnen lässt. Noch bis zu Beginn des 20. Jahrhunderts war eine weltweite Freizügigkeit als Menschenrecht anerkannt und auch nomadische Völker hatten den Status von Völkerrechtssubjekten. Erstaunlicherweise sind mobile Völker seitdem nahezu ganz aus der völkerrechtlichen Literatur verschwunden. Diese Lücke schließt das Buch. Der Versuch, die Welt in ein Raster aus Territorialstaaten zu pressen, ist mit Blick auf jene Gemeinschaften, die auf ein unberechenbares Klima seit Jahrtausenden durch Migration reagieren, gescheitert. Dort, wo einst durch Europäer gezogene Linien postkolonial zu Staatsgrenzen erstarkt sind, geraten migrierende Menschen in Konflikt mit dem Territorialstaatsmodell, auf dem das heutige Völkerrecht aufbaut.

Voigt: International Judicial Practice on the Environment: Questions of Legitimacy

Christina Voigt (Univ. of Oslo - Law) has published International Judicial Practice on the Environment: Questions of Legitimacy (Cambridge Univ. Press 2019). The table of contents is here. Here's the abstract:
More and more environmental cases are being heard and decided by international courts and tribunals which lack special environmental competence. This situation raises fundamental questions of legitimacy of the environmental practice of international courts. This book addresses inter alia questions of who has legal standing to bring an environmental claim before an international court, on which legal norms is the case decided and whether judges have the necessary expertise to adjudicate environmental cases of often complex nature. It analyses which challenges international courts face, which possibilities they have and which advances international judicial practice has been able to make in protecting the environment. Through the prism of legitimacy important insights emerge as to whether international courts and tribunals are fit for addressing some of the most pressing global challenges of our time.

Peters: Humanisme, constitutionnalisme, universalisme : Etude de droit international et comparé

Anne Peters (Max-Planck-Institut für ausländisches öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht) has published Humanisme, constitutionnalisme, universalisme : Etude de droit international et comparé (Pedone 2019). Here's the abstract:
Le droit international et sa doctrine sont en pleine crise existentielle. C’est à leur chevet que se porte ce recueil d’articles signés par Anne Peters. Il faut repenser le droit international, écrit-elle. Pour cela, cependant, il faut repartir des fondamentaux, c’est-à-dire de l’épistémologie. Ici, les qualités et l’érudition de l’auteure comme internationaliste, constitutionnaliste et comparatiste apportent un regard original et très riche qui revisite non seulement le droit international mais également la manière dont il se pense. En particulier, l’auteure se livre à une critique des critiques faites au modernisme. S’il y a de vrais apports de la part de la critique post-moderne, elle y voit également des limites, contradictions et exagérations. Il faudrait donc tenir compte de ce mouvement pour le dépasser pour un « post-postmodernisme » qui emprunte ce qu’il y a de bon dans les divers courants de doctrine(s). Deux des directions proposées sont une nouvelle approche du constitutionnalisme mondial et une reformulation du droit international fondée sur le respect des droits de la personne humaine.

Call for Applications: Methodological Challenges in International Legal Research

The Chinese Initiative on International Law has issued a call for applications for junior scholars for a workshop on "Methodological Challenges in International Legal Research," July 11, 2019, in The Hague. The call is here.

New Issue: European Journal of International Security

The latest issue of the European Journal of International Security (Vol. 4, no. 2, June 2019) is out. Contents include:
  • Stefan Elbe & Gemma Buckland-Merrett, Entangled security: Science, co-production, and intra-active insecurity
  • Alexandria Nylen & Charli Carpenter, Questions of life and death: (De)constructing human rights norms through US public opinion surveys
  • Marc R. DeVore, Strategic satisficing: Civil-military relations and French intervention in Africa
  • Miguel Alberto N. Gomez, Sound the alarm! Updating beliefs and degradative cyber operations
  • Faye Donnelly & Brent J. Steele, Critical Security History: (De)securitisation, ontological security, and insecure memories
  • Alexander Lanoszka, Disinformation in international politics

Seibert-Fohr & Weniger: Compliance Monitoring under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights

Anja Seibert-Fohr (Universität Heidelberg - Law) & Christine Weniger (Universität Heidelberg - Law) have posted Compliance Monitoring under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Here's the abstract:
Despite their unequivocal international commitments, many States continue to neglect their human rights obligations domestically and do not give effect to human rights at the local level. The international community, once primarily concerned with the codification of human rights standards, has therefore accelerated its efforts to monitor and induce compliance over the past decades. The Human Rights Committee as a fundamental pillar of the UN Human Rights System has become a pioneer in this respect. As the main treaty body charged with monitoring the implementation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights it was the first institution to introduce a follow-up procedure to its individual complaint mechanism. It subsequently extended this mechanism to the state reporting procedure and developed a grading scheme to assess the national measures taken in response to its recommendations. This article locates the follow-up procedures within the UN system, identifies the relevant stakeholders and explains the strategies to overcome resistance. In view of the Committee’s almost three decades long follow-up experience it is time now to take stock and evaluate this procedure in order to determine whether it has contributed to the compliance by States with their international human rights commitments. Based on the experience gained in the course of the follow-up proceedings and with compliance, more generally, we offer a critical evaluation of compliance monitoring and a perspective for future developments.

New Issue: Nordic Journal of Human Rights

The latest issue of the Nordic Journal of Human Rights (Vol. 37, no. 1, 2019) is out. Contents include:
  • Jan Grue, Inclusive Marginalisation? A Critical Analysis of the Concept of Disability, Its Framings and Their Implications in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities
  • Anne Vestergaard, Frederik Schade & Michael Etter, How to Study Public Negotiation of Responsibilities: A Communicative Approach to Business and Human Rights Research
  • Eduard Jordaan, Elephants in the Room: Botswana and the United Nations Universal Period Review
  • Leyla-Denisa Obreja, Human Rights Law and Intimate Partner Violence: Towards an Intersectional Development of Due Diligence Obligations

New Issue: Asian Journal of WTO & International Health Law and Policy

The latest issue of the Asian Journal of WTO & International Health Law and Policy (Vol. 14, no. 1, 2019) is out. Contents include:
  • Raj Bhala & Nathan Deuckjoo (D.J.) Kim, The WTO’s Under-Capacity to Deal with Global Over-Capacity
  • Jaemin Lee, Trade Agreements’ New Frontier—Regulation of State-Owned Enterprises and Outstanding Systemic Challenges
  • Sofía Boza, Rodrigo Polanco & Macarena Espinoza, Nutritional Regulation and International Trade in APEC Economies: The New Chilean Food Labeling Law
  • Alice Maxwell, Plainly Justifiable? The World Trade Organization’s Ruling on the Validity of Australia’s “Plain Packaging” Under Article 20 of the TRIPS Agreement
  • Gaegoung Kim & Minjung Kim, Regulatory Development and Challenges for the Regionalization Provisions in the WTO SPS Agreement and Regional Trade Agreements
  • Hochang Roh & Jongho Kim, A Comparative Study on the Protection of Citizens’ Right to Health Focus on the Public Health Policy of Korea and the USA
  • Tsung-Ling Lee, Two Minutes to Midnight—What International Law Can Do about Genome Editing
  • Lawrence O. Gostin, Global Health Security in an Era of Explosive Pandemic Potential

Duxbury & Tan: Can ASEAN Take Human Rights Seriously?

Alison Duxbury (Univ. of Melbourne - Law) & Tan Hsien-Li (National Univ. of Singapore - Law) have published Can ASEAN Take Human Rights Seriously? (Cambridge Univ. Press 2019). Here's the abstract:
The adoption of the ASEAN Charter in 2007 represented a watershed moment in the organisation's history - for the first time the member states explicitly included principles of human rights and democracy in a binding regional agreement. Since then, developments in the region have included the creation of the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights in 2009 and the adoption of the ASEAN Human Rights Declaration in 2012. Despite these advances, many commentators ask whether ASEAN can take human rights seriously. The authors explore this question by comprehensively examining the new ASEAN human rights mechanisms in the context of existing national and international human rights institutions. This book places these regional mechanisms and commitments to human rights within the framework of the political and legal development of ASEAN and its member states and considers the way in which ASEAN could strengthen its new institutions to better promote and protect human rights.

Hathway, Strauch, Walton, & Weinberg: What is a War Crime?

Oona A. Hathaway (Yale Univ. - Law), Paul Strauch (Yale Univ. - Law), Beatrice Walton (International Court of Justice), & Zoe Weinberg (Yale Univ. - Law) have posted What is a War Crime? (Yale Journal of International Law, forthcoming). Here's the abstract:
What is a war crime? Do all violations of the international law of war qualify as war crimes? And are all war crimes violations of the law of war? Academics, international criminal tribunals, and domestic courts have struggled to adopt consistent and comprehensive answers to these questions. To date, the most common approach has been to specify an act as a war crime if it violates the law of war and has been “criminalized.” Although this approach has the appeal of simplicity, it lacks a deep underlying justification and fails to adequately guide criminal tribunals, courts, and commissions. This Article instead identifies the core features of war crimes untethered from prior criminalization. We show that, despite differences in war crimes across jurisdictions and statutes, agreement exists as to the core features of war crimes. A war crime has two key elements: (1) a breach of international humanitarian law (IHL) that is (2) “serious.” Several practical implications follow from defining war crimes in this way: First, it provides a clearer standard for domestic courts holding individuals accountable for war crimes. Second, it clarifies the reach of international legal obligations requiring States to investigate violations of the law of war. Third, it provides clearer guidance for determining whether charges lodged in military commissions are in accordance with the “law of nations,” as required by Article I of the U.S. Constitution. And fourth, it helps to clarify the extent to which combatants can be subject to war crimes prosecutions.

New Issue: Melbourne Journal of International Law

The latest issue of the Melbourne Journal of International Law (Vol. 19, no. 2, 2018) is out. Contents include:
  • Dorothea Anthony, Resolving UN Torts in US Courts: Georges v United Nations
  • Eliana Cusato, From Ecocide to Voluntary Remediation Projects: Legal Responses to ‘Environmental Warfare’ in Vietnam and the Spectre of Colonialism
  • Philipp Eschenhagen & Max Jürgens, Protective Jurisdiction in the Contiguous Zone and the Right of Hot Pursuit: Rethinking Coastal States’ Jurisdictional Rights
  • Juliette McIntyre, Put on Notice: The Role of the Dispute Requirement in Assessing Jurisdiction and Admissibility before the International Court
  • Rosemary Mwanza, Enhancing Accountability for Environmental Damage under International Law: Ecocide as a Legal Fulfilment of Ecological Integrity
  • Nanda Oudejans, Conny Rijken & Annick Pijnenburg, Protecting the EU External Borders and the Prohibition of Refoulement
  • Thea Philip, Climate Change Displacement and Migration: An Analysis of the Current International Legal Regime’s Deficiency, Proposed Solutions and a Way Forward for Australia
  • Margaretha Wewerinke-Singh & Tess Van Geelen, Protection of Climate Displaced Persons under International Law: A Case Study from Mataso Island, Vanuatu
  • Nathan Yaffe, Indigenous Consent: A Self-Determination Perspective
  • Antony Anghie, Race, Self-Determination and Australian Empire
  • Richard Garnett, Increasing Co-Operation between Australia and China in the Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments

Wednesday, May 15, 2019

Voulgaris: Allocating International Responsibility Between Member States and International Organisations

Nikolaos Voulgaris (European Law and Governance School; European Public Law Organization) has published Allocating International Responsibility Between Member States and International Organisations (Hart Publishing 2019). Here's the abstract:

The ever-growing interaction between member States and international organisations results, all too often, in situations of non-conformity with international law (eg peacekeeping operations, international economic adjustment programmes, counter-terrorism sanctions). Seven years after the finalisation of the International Law Commission's Articles on the Responsibility of International Organisations (ARIO), international law on the allocation of international responsibility between these actors still remains unsettled. The confusion around the nature and normative calibre of the relevant rules, the paucity of relevant international practice supporting them and the lack of a clear and principled framework for their elaboration impairs their application and restricts their ability to act as effective regulatory formulas.

This study aims to offer doctrinal clarity in this area of law and purports to serve as a point of reference for all those with a vested interest in the topic. For the first time since the publication of the ARIO, all international responsibility issues dealing with interactions between member States and international organisations are put together in one book under a common approach. Structured around a systematisation of the interactions between these actors, the study provides an analytical framework for the regulation of indirect responsibility scenarios. Based on the ideas of the intellectual fathers of international law, such as Scelle's 'dédoublement fonctionnel' theory and Ago's 'derivative responsibility' model, the book employs old ideas to add original argumentation to a topic that has been dealt with extensively by recent commentators.

Chaumette & Haupais: Religion et droit international

Anne-Laure Chaumette (Université Paris Nanterre - Law) & Nicolas Haupais (Université d'Orléans - Law) have published Religion et droit international (Pedone 2019). The table of contents is here. Here's the abstract:
A une époque où la question religieuse occupe une place croissante au sein du débat public, cet ouvrage s’attache à déterminer l’influence du fait religieux dans le champ du droit international. Issu d’un colloque organisé sous l’égide du Centre de Recherche Juridique Pothier de l’Université d’Orléans et du Centre de droit international de Nanterre, il vient prolonger les réflexions menées en 2014 lors d’une précédente manifestation portant sur les rapports entre le politique et le religieux dans la construction et l’évolution de l’État. Il entend vérifier si et dans quelle mesure la religion a pu être et est encore un facteur structurant du droit international (et des relations internationales). La religion a-t-elle encore, dans le champ du droit international, un rôle dans son élaboration, la formation des normes, la manière dont il est appréhendé ? La religion exerce-t-elle une quelconque influence dans la formation de l’État ? dans le règlement pacifique des différends ou le maintien de la paix ? Dans quelle mesure, les entités confessionnelles internationales et les confréries religieuses sont-elles des acteurs influents des relations internationales ? Telles sont quelques-unes des questions auxquelles les contributions, ici réunies, s’essayent de répondre.