- Michael M. Karayanni, Choice of Law Under Occupation: How Israeli Law Came to Serve Palestinian Plaintiffs
- Louise Merrett, Choice of Law in Insurance Contracts Under The Rome I Regulation
- Rob Merkin, The Rome I Regulation and Reinsurance
- Francisco J. Garcimartin Alferez, The Rome I Regulation: Exceptions to the Rule on Consumer Contracts and Financial Instruments
- Nicholas Pengelley, Alberta Says Nyet! Limitation Act Declares Russian Arbitral Award Doa: Supreme Court to Give Kiss of Life? Yugraneft Corporation v Rexx Management Corporation
- Paul Beaumont, Hague Choice of Court Agreements Convention 2005: Background, Negotiations, Analysis and Current Status
- Richard Garnett, The Hague Choice of Court Convention: Magnum Opus or Much Ado About Nothing?
Saturday, April 25, 2009
Friday, April 24, 2009
Katja S. Ziegler (Univ. of Oxford - Law) will give a talk today at the University of Nottingham Seminar Series on "Strengthening the Rule of Law or Undermining International Law? Indirect Judicial Review of U.N. Anti-Terrorism Measures in the European Court of Justice."
Thursday, April 23, 2009
In October 2009, the European Society of International Law will convene its Third Research Forum, co-organised with the American Society of International Law. The Interest Groups on International Legal Theory of the two societies will host a special workshop in Helsinki on occasion of the conference. Accordingly, we invite the submission of abstracts from scholars interested in participating in this workshop.
1. The Workshop
Prospective participants have a wide remit to present papers which reflect on the scholarly enterprise of international legal theory. We hope to bring together people from a range of theoretical orientations to engage in a conversation about what it means, and could mean to ‘do’ theory in the context of international law. Examples of the sort of questions participants might wish to reflect upon include:
- In your experience, which methods have proved helpful, can or ought to be used in constructing theories of international law?
- What is the relationship between politics and international legal theory (ILT)?
- Is ILT a national(ist) enterprise? Do divergent (legal-)cultural backgrounds influence theories? Can or should we trace ‘lineages’ of theoretical approaches to certain countries or groups of countries?
- Is ILT always influenced by national concepts of legal theory or is there a truly ‘international’ theory?
- Whose inheritance do contemporary international legal theorists claim; what might that mean?
- Is ILT capable of generating an international ‘prudence’ or ethics?
- Is there such a thing as (necessary or dialectic) progress in theory? Are earlier theories obsolete? Are theoretical arguments a-temporal?
- Can we find a common language in which to talk about ILT? Should we be trying to?
- In light of the many divergent approaches is it still possible to speak of a unified ILT?
- What is (are) the future(s) of ILT or international legal theorising?
- What is the point of ILT? Why do we do it?
The workshop panel will consist of four participants and a chairperson. It will be held in connection with the main programme of the conference, with a time and venue to be announced, but most likely before the main conference opens.
2. The Application Process
We invite submissions of abstracts of no more than 400 words from all international law scholars (only one per person) with an overt interest in theory.
Selection will be based on scholarly merit, and with regard to producing an engaging workshop, but without prejudice to gender, seniority, language or geographical location. Speakers at the main conference will generally not be selected for the special workshop.
Each submission should include the following:
- the author’s name, institutional affiliation, contact information and e-mail address;
- an abstract of no more than 400 words;
- the intended language of presentation.
All applications should be submitted to firstname.lastname@example.org.
The deadline for submission of proposals is Monday, 25 May 2009.
The outcome of the selection process results will be notified to all applicants by Tuesday, 2 June 2009.
Presenters will be expected to produce by Sunday, 13 September 2009 a draft paper of 3000–5000 words for circulation among the workshop participants.
Please note that the conference registration fee as well as transport and accommodation costs for selected participants can unfortunately not be covered by the conference organisers.
Further information about the ESIL Interest Group can be accessed here.
We would like to warmly invite each and every one of you to participate.
The ASIL and ESIL Interest Groups on International Legal Theory
The book offers a unique study of the law of command or superior responsibility under international law. Born in the aftermath of the Second World War, the doctrine of superior responsibility provides that a military commander, a civilian leader or the leader of a terrorist, paramilitary or rebel group could be held criminally responsible in relation to crimes committed by subordinates even where he has taken no direct or personal part in the commission of these crimes. The basis of this type of liability lies in a grave and culpable failure on the part of the superior to fulfill his duties to prevent or punish crimes of subordinates.
The idea that a superior could be held criminally responsible in relation to crimes of subordinates is central to the ability of international law to ensure compliance with standards of humanitarian law and it remains a most important legal instrument in the fight against impunity. Though it first developed in the international arena, the doctrine of superior responsibility has now spread into many domestic jurisdictions thus offering judicial and prosecutorial authorities a ready-made instrument to hold to account the leaders of men who knew of the crimes of their subordinates and failed to adequately respond to prevent or punish those crimes.
This volume provides a comprehensive and insightful dissection of the doctrine of superior responsibility, the scope of its application, its elements as well as the evidential difficulties involved in establishing the criminal responsibility of a superior in the context of a criminal prosecution.
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
The Faculty of Law of Maastricht University is seeking a
University Lecturer in International Law
The Department of International and European Law of the Faculty of Law of Maastricht University wishes to appoint a fulltime university lecturer (universitair docent) in Public International Law as of 1 September 2009. Applicants should have demonstrable expertise in general international law with a specialisation in international human rights law.
- To teach courses at bachelor and master level;
- To conduct research within the framework of the Globalisation and Human Rights program of the Maastricht Centre for Human Rights;
- To prepare research proposals;
- To fulfil administrative duties.
- PhD degree in International Law;
- Excellent research and teaching capabilities;
- Good organisational skills;
- Excellent English language skills (written and spoken);
- Knowledge of Dutch an advantage.
The appointment as university lecturer will be for an initial period of three years, with the possibility, after a positive evaluation, of an appointment for an indefinite period of time (tenure). The salary is dependent on academic qualifications and experience. It will be set in scale 10, 11 or 12 of the CAO Nederlandse Universiteiten (minimum € 2.379,00 and maximum € 4.970,00).
The Faculty of Law of Maastricht University offers the possibility of teaching and interacting with high-level graduate students and a pleasant, international working environment.
More information on the terms of employment of the university can be found on: http://www.unimaas.nl/, select employees.
More information on this vacancy can be obtained from Prof. Menno Kamminga, (email@example.com, phone: +3143 3884881).Written applications with letter of motivation, curriculum vitae, transcript of grades and list of publications must be received no later than Monday 11 May 2009 at: firstname.lastname@example.org. Interviews will be held on Wednesday 10 June 2009.
- M. Patrick Cottrell, Legitimacy and Institutional Replacement: The Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons and the Emergence of the Mine Ban Treaty
- Séverine Autesserre, Hobbes and the Congo: Frames, Local Violence, and International Intervention
- Michèle B. Bättig & Thomas Bernauer, National Institutions and Global Public Goods: Are Democracies More Cooperative in Climate Change Policy?
- Bruce Bueno de Mesquita & Alastair Smith, A Political Economy of Aid
- Joseph M. Grieco, Christopher F. Gelpi, & T. Camber Warren, When Preferences and Commitments Collide: The Effect of Relative Partisan Shifts on International Treaty Compliance
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
- Juscelino F. Colares, A Theory of WTO Adjudication: From Empirical Analysis to Biased Rule Development
- David A. Sadoff, Striking a Sensible Balance on the Legality of Defensive First Strikes
- Kenneth W. Abbott & Duncan Snidal, Strengthening International Regulation Through Transnational New Governance: Overcoming the Orchestration Deficit
Monday, April 20, 2009
- Peter Rowe, Military Misconduct during International Armed Operations: ‘Bad Apples’ or Systemic Failure?
- Carlo Focarelli, The Responsibility to Protect Doctrine and Humanitarian Intervention: Too Many Ambiguities for a Working Doctrine
- Malcolm Patterson, A Corporate Alternative to United Nations ad hoc Military Deployments
- Tom Ruys, The ‘Protection of Nationals’ Doctrine Revisited
- Faustin Z. Ntoubandi, Reflections on the USA–India Atomic Energy Cooperation
Sunday, April 19, 2009
- Kent Jones, The political economy of WTO accession: the unfinished business of universal membership
- Bryan Mercurio, Why compensation cannot replace trade retaliation in the WTO Dispute Settlement Understanding
- Lorand Bartels, ‘Interim agreements’ under Article XXIV GATT