Saturday, November 1, 2008
Friday, October 31, 2008
The evolution of international criminal justice and, in particular, its institutionalization, has not been without controversy and dissent. Six years after the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court entered into force, there is considerable debate over the efficacy of international criminal justice and the ICC, once described as the ‘most important advance in international law since the establishment of the UN’. Are International Criminal Tribunals key factors in restoring peace and justice in conflict zones by contributing to the fight against impunity and the reign of ‘judicial deterrence’? How should we appreciate the transatlantic position regarding these institutions? Are the United States and the European Union still in disagreement over the role of the ICC? What is the current status of international criminal justice? The goal [of the symposium] is to foster fruitful and multidisciplinary debate among prominent specialists in the field, thus contributing to an assessment of international criminal justice and to the global debates surrounding it.
And here's the call:
The world of the 21st century is likely to become more multi-polar and multi-civilizational than it was in the 20th century. China and India are expected to become superpowers, rivaling the US. Such a multi-polarization of power will mean that there is a greater mix of cultures and religions in the international society. The legal regimes led by the West in the 20th century, with democracy, human rights and capitalism at their core will remain, but the voices of Asia and the Islamic world will be stronger. Western values with regard to issues such as the protection of the global environment and the relationship between human rights and religions will no longer necessarily dominate. The increasing diversification of the global community in the 21st century is a development that should be welcomed.
How will the international legal order transform itself amidst such a shift of power and values in the global community? This is an important challenge facing humankind in the 21st century. It is an urgent issue requiring serious deliberation, especially for the Asian people, who are expected to play an important role in the diversification of power and values. What should we do to bring about a desirable transformation of international law? In the past, the international legal order was led by the West. The Asian nations and peoples were limited to taking a reactive stance, merely utilizing the given systems of international law and criticizing the points with which they were dissatisfied. Such a reactive stance is not appropriate for an Asia which equals the West economically and makes arguments on an equal footing with the West. Asia needs to make its own proposals regarding the manner in which international law can support the world of the 21st century and realize the common interests of humankind. Asia must share fair and equitable responsibility for the international legal order, its ideas and systems.
The Asian Society of International Law, upon hosting its Second Biennial General Conference in Tokyo, will take up this important issue of Asia’s relationship with the international legal order under the main theme of “International Law in a Multi-polar and Multi-civilizational World – Asian Perspectives, Challenges and Contributions.” At the Conference, learned, experienced, aspiring international law scholars and practitioners from around the world will learn from each other, exchange views critically, and disseminate the results all over the world. We sincerely hope to see many people participate in the Conference so that it can be an opportunity to understand the law and reality of the global community, challenge its dominant premises and understandings, and make constructive proposals for the international legal order in a multi-polar and multi-civilizational world.
The Second Biennial General Conference of the Asian Society of International Law (AsianSIL) will be held on 1-2 August 2009 at the University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan. The theme of the Conference is: "International Law in a Multi-polar and Multi-civilizational World: Asian Perspectives, Challenges and Contributions".
The Call for Papers for this Conference concerns four different types of Papers: Plenary Session 1, three Agora Panels (A1-A3), three Panels of Session A (A4-A6) and three Panels of Session B and C. [Click on the links for specific proposal requirements for each panel. Reference should also be made to the conference tentative program.]
The Organizing Committee seeks to encourage the participation in the Conference of all international lawyers, whether young professionals or established scholars, academics or practitioners, by inviting submissions of papers or proposals for speakers or discussants in all sessions and panels.
To truly represent the spirit of "Multi-polar and Multi-civilizational" perspectives, speakers and discussants will be selected through a competitive process without any prejudice to factors such as race, gender, language, religious background and geographical location. Papers of the discussants in Plenary Session I, and the panelists of Panel Sessions A1, A2, A3, A4, A5 and A6 will be selected by the Selection Committee, which will work independently of the Organizing Committee. The panelists of Panel Sessions B1, B2 and C3 will be selected by the organizers of these panels.
Note should be taken that presentation shall be made only in English because of the limited time of the Sessions of the Conference. However, respecting the multitude of different cultures and languages in the region, the paper may be written in any language on the condition that English translation should be attached to the paper and the responsibilities for the English translation, including the quality of the translation and the accompanying cost of the translation, should be assumed by the applicant. The selection of the paper should be made only on the basis of the English paper, whether it is written originally in English or translated into English.
An applicant can submit his or her papers for up to two panels, though he or she will not be selected for more than one panel. Any such applicant must indicate in each paper that he or she is applying for two panels, and must provide details of the second paper being submitted, including the title of the paper and the panel.
The Conference Organizers have been making every effort to obtain funds to be used to subsidize the travel expenses of panelists and discussants. At the time of issuing the Call for Papers, we are still not in a position to guarantee this support. Efforts will continue and a further announcement will be made on this in due course.
All speakers at the Conference must be members of the Society. A non-member may respond to the Call for Papers but if selected, will be expected to join promptly. Their position on the programme will not be confirmed until this has been done.
Nessuno avrebbe immaginato, alla fine degli anni ottanta, con la caduta del Muro di Berlino, che l’Europa avrebbe conosciuto di nuovo il dramma della guerra civile e del genocidio. Di lì a poco, invece, la dissoluzione della ex repubblica federale jugoslava avrebbe scatenato i peggiori miasmi nazionalistici in una serie di conflitti che avrebbero insanguinato tutti gli anni novanta. Eccetto la Slovenia, in rapida sequenza Croazia, Serbia, Bosnia-Erzegovina e Kosovo avrebbero acceso una guerra civile che nel corso degli anni avrebbe toccato punte di intensità drammatica, come per certi versi testimonia la strage di Srebenica ai danni di settemila bosniaci musulmani. Anche in Africa, nella regione dei Grandi laghi, nel 1994 si accende una drammatica guerra civile, un vero e proprio genocidio pianificato a tavolino, che vede in azione due etnie: tutsi e hutu.Una vera e propria carneficina avvenuta nel silenzio complice delle potenze occidentali e anche dell’Onu.Per giudicare i criminali di guerra, l’Onu nel maggio 1993 decide di istituire, all’Aja, un vero e proprio tribunale. Si tratta della prima corte istituita in Europa a partire dalla fine della Seconda guerra mondiale. L’incarico di pubblico ministero viene affidato a Carla Del Ponte. Il suo lavoro presso i tribunali delle Nazioni Unite ha permesso l’arresto e la conduzione in giudizio di decine di persone accusate di genocidio e altri crimini di guerra. Tra questi Slobodan Milošević, presidente della Serbia, Théoneste Bagosora, capo militare degli hutu accusato di aver programmato il genocidio ruandese, e di istruire prove contro due tra i ricercati più importanti al mondo, Radovan Karadžić e il generale Ratko Mladić, accusato del massacro di Srebenica.
Thursday, October 30, 2008
WTO Appellate Body Report: India - Additional and Extra-Additional Duties on Imports from the United States
- Jeffrey A. Redding, Slicing the American Pie: Federalism and Personal Law
- David S. Koller, The Faith of the International Criminal Lawyer
- Fleur Johns & Wouter G. Werner, The Risks of International Law
- René Urueña, Risk and Randomness in International Legal Argumentation
- Alexia Herwig, Whither Science in WTO Dispute Settlement?
- Louise Amoore, Risk before Justice: When the Law Contests Its Own Suspension
- Olivier Kessler, Is Risk Changing the Politics of Legal Argumentation?
- Nikolas Rajković, On ‘Bad Law’ and ‘Good Politics’: The Politics of the ICJ Genocide Case and Its Interpretation
- Kai Ambos, ‘Witness Proofing’ before the International Criminal Court: A Reply to Karemaker, Taylor, and Pittman
- Ruben Karemaker, B. Don Taylor, & Thomas Wayde Pittman, Witness Proofing in International Criminal Tribunals: Response to Ambos
- Darryl Robinson, The Identity Crisis of International Criminal Law
- Jan Klabbers, Reflections on Compliance
- K.J. Keither, The International Court of Justice: Primus Inter Pares?
- Marten Zwanenburg, UN Peace Operations Between Independence and Accountability
- Nicolas Hachez, The Relations Between the United Nations and Civil Society: Past, Present, and Future
- Eleni Micha, The Fight Against Corruption Within Peace Support Operations: In Search of the Responsibility of International Organizations
- Treasa Dunworth, Towards a Culture of Legality in International Organizations: The Case of the OPCW
- Niels Blokker, Introduction - The Floor is to the Authors: Perspectives on the Law of International Organizations as a Separate Field of Study
- C.F. Amerashinghe, International Institutional Law - A Point of View
- Jan Klabbers, The Paradox of International Institutional Law
- Nigel D. White, Separate but Connected: Inter-Governmental Organizations and International Law
- Niels Blokker, Comparing Apples and Oranges? Reinventing the Wheel? Schermers' Book and Challenges for the Future of International Institutional Law
- Pierre Klein & Philippe Sands, (Re)Writing a Handbook on the Law of International Organizations: Options and Challenges
- Yolanda Gamarra & Alejandra Vicente, United Nations Member States' Obligations Towards the ICTY: Arresting and Transferring Lukic, Gotovina, and Zelenovic
- Vimalen J. Reddi, The ICC and the Crime of Aggression: A Need to Reconcile the Prerogatives of the SC, the ICC and the ICJ
- C.R.G. Murray, Law in Times of Crisis: Emergency Powers in Theory and in Practice
The United Nations Audiovisual Library of International Law was first proposed by the Codification Division of the Office of Legal Affairs and approved by the General Assembly as an activity under the Programme of Assistance in the Teaching, Study, Dissemination and Wider Appreciation of International Law in 1997 (resolution 52/152). The Audiovisual Library was initially created to serve as a lending library of audio and video cassette tapes for educational and government institutions in developing countries. The Audiovisual Library, as originally conceived, encountered insurmountable practical difficulties. In response to the dramatic increase in requests for international law training beginning in the late twentieth century, the Codification Division proposed and the General Assembly approved the creation of a newly revitalized United Nations Audiovisual Library of International Law via the Internet which avoids the practical difficulties of its predecessor and brings the resources of the library to individuals and institutions around the world (resolution 62/62).
The Audiovisual Library is a unique, multimedia resource which provides the United Nations with the unprecedented capacity to provide high quality international law training and research materials to an unlimited number of recipients on a global level. The Audiovisual Library consists of three pillars: (1) the Historic Archives containing documents and audiovisual materials relating to the negotiation and adoption of significant legal instruments under the auspices of the United Nations and related agencies since 1945; (2) the Lecture Series featuring a permanent collection of lectures on virtually every subject of international law given by leading international law scholars and practitioners from different countries and legal systems; and (3) the Research Library providing an on-line international law library with links to treaties, jurisprudence, publications and documents, scholarly writings and research guides. The Audiovisual Library is available to all individuals and institutions around the world for free via the Internet.
Alan Sykes (Stanford Univ. - Law) will give a talk today at the University of California, Berkeley School of Law International Law and International Relations Workshop on "Currency Manipulation and World Trade."
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
The Oxford History of the United States is the most respected multi-volume history of our nation in print. The series includes three Pulitzer Prize-winners, a New York Times bestseller, and winners of prestigious Bancroft and Parkman Prizes. From Colony to Superpower is the only thematic volume commissioned for the series. Here George C. Herring uses foreign relations as the lens through which to tell the story of America's dramatic rise from thirteen disparate colonies huddled along the Atlantic coast to the world's greatest superpower.
A sweeping account of United States' foreign relations and diplomacy, this magisterial volume documents America's interaction with other peoples and nations of the world. Herring tells a story of stunning successes and sometimes tragic failures, captured in a fast-paced narrative that illuminates the central importance of foreign relations to the existence and survival of the nation, and highlights its ongoing impact on the lives of ordinary citizens. He shows how policymakers defined American interests broadly to include territorial expansion, access to growing markets, and the spread of an "American way" of life. And Herring does all this in a story rich in human drama and filled with epic events. Statesmen such as Benjamin Franklin and Woodrow Wilson and Harry Truman and Dean Acheson played key roles in America's rise to world power. But America's expansion as a nation also owes much to the adventurers and explorers, the sea captains, merchants and captains of industry, the missionaries and diplomats, who discovered or charted new lands, developed new avenues of commerce, and established and defended the nation's interests in foreign lands.
From the American Revolution to the fifty-year struggle with communism and conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq, From Colony to Superpower tells the dramatic story of America's emergence as superpower - its birth in revolution, its troubled present, and its uncertain future.
Invoking memories and imagery from the Holocaust and other German atrocities during World War II, many contemporary commentators and politicians believe that the international community has an affirmative obligation to deter and incapacitate perpetrators of humanitarian atrocities. Today, the received wisdom is that a legalistic approach, which combines humanitarian interventions with international criminal prosecutions targeting perpetrators, will help realize the post-World War II vision of making atrocities a crime of the past. This Article argues, in contrast, that humanitarian interventions are often likely to create unintended, and sometimes perverse, incentives among both the victims and perpetrators of atrocities. The problem is that when the international community intervenes in the civil wars or insurrections where most humanitarian atrocities take place, its decision is partially endogenous or interdependent with that of the combatants; humanitarian interventions both influence and are influenced by the decisions of the victims and perpetrators of atrocities. Herein lies the paradox: because humanitarian interventions tend to increase the chance that rebel or victim group leaders are going to achieve their preferred political objectives, such leaders might have an incentive to engage in the kinds of provocative actions that make atrocities against their followers more likely in the first place. More specifically, the prospect of humanitarian intervention often increases the level of uncertainty about the distribution of costs and resolve between the combatants. In turn, such uncertainty amplifies the possibility of divergent expectations between the dominant and rebel group regarding the outcome of a civil war. At bottom, the prospect of humanitarian intervention might sometimes increase the risks of genocidal violence. This Article turns to insights from the domestic framework of torts and criminal law to elaborate upon the theoretical framework that motivates this perverse dynamic, provides some contemporary illustrations from civil wars in Africa and the Balkans, and recommends improvements to the current regime to mitigate some of its unintended effects. This Article concludes that the optimal regime of humanitarian intervention would incorporate comparative fault principles that take into account the failure of victim (or rebel) leaders to take adequate precautions against the risks of humanitarian atrocities.
John Witt (Columbia Univ. - Law) will give a talk today at the Harvard Law School International Law Workshop on "The Law of War in America - A Preliminary History."
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
- Petros C. Mavroidis, No Outsourcing of Law? WTO Law as Practiced by WTO Courts
- Steven R. Ratner, Regulatory Takings in International Context: Beyond the Fear of Fragmented International Law
- Agora: Medellín
- David J. Bederman, Medellín's New Paradigm for Treaty Interpretation
- Curtis A. Bradley, Intent, Presumptions, and Non-Self-Executing Treaties
- Steve Charnovitz, Revitalizing the U.S. Compliance Power
- Carlos Manuel Vázquez, Less than Zero?
Sanela Trzin (Legal Adviser, Special Court for Sierra Leone) will give a talk today at the Oxford Brookes University Human Rights Research Group Seminar Series on "Defending Charles Taylor."
Monday, October 27, 2008
- Daniel Naymark, Violations of Rights of the Accused at International Criminal Tribunals: The Problem of Remedy
- Jessica F. Green, Delegation and Accountability in the Clean Development Mechanism: The New Authority of Non-State Actors
- Eugene C. Lim, A Long 'TRIP' Home: Intellectual Property Rights, International Law and the Constructivist Challenge
- Shirley V. Scott, The Problem of Unequal Treaties in Contemporary International Law: How the Powerful have Reneged on the Political Compacts within which Five Cornerstone Treaties of Global Governance are Situated
- Laura Hebert, 'Go Back and Give Him What He Wants' : The Limits of a Legal Rights Approach to Gendered Human Rights Violations
- Safia Swimelar, The Making of Minority Rights Norms in the Context of EU Enlargement: The Czech Republic and the Roma
- Joel Quirk, Ending Slavery in all its Forms: Legal Abolition and Effective Emancipation in Historical Perspective
- Pilar Villanueva Sainz-Pardo, Is Child Recruitment as a War Crime Part of Customary International Law?
- Noha Ibrahim, The Sudanese Bill of Rights
- Dominic S. Depersis & Alfred Lewis, The Development of American Prisons and Punishment
Tomer Broude (Hebrew Univ. - Law) will give a talk today at the Brooklyn Law School International Economic Law Forum on "Principles of Normative Integration and the Allocation of International Authority: The WTO, the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, and the Rio Declaration."
Sunday, October 26, 2008
- Amos N. Guiora, Anticipatory Self-Defence and International Law—A Re-Evaluation
- Tarcisio Gazzini, A Response to Amos Guiora: Pre-Emptive Self-Defence Against Non-State Actors?
- Muge Kinacioglu, A Response to Amos Guiora: Reassessing the Parameters of Use of Force in the Age of Terrorism
- Patricia Jimenez, Maritime Law Enforcement and the Use of Force: Reflections on the Categorisation of Forcible Action at Sea in the Light of the Guyana/Suriname Award
- Philip Sutter, The Continuing Role for Belligerent Reprisals
- Emma McClean, The Responsibility to Protect: The Role of International Human Rights Law