As shown by the trials of Slobodan Milosevic, Charles Taylor and Saddam Hussein, the large-scale and systematic commission of international crimes is usually planned and set in motion by senior political and military leaders. Nevertheless, the application of traditional forms of criminal liability leads to the conclusion that they are mere accessories to such crimes. This does not reflect their central role and often results in a punishment which is inappropriately low in view of the impact of their actions and omissions. For these reasons, international criminal law has placed special emphasis on the development of concepts, such as control of the crime and joint criminal enterprise (also known as the common purpose doctrine), which aim at reflecting better the central role played by senior political and military leaders in campaigns of large scale and systematic commission of international crimes. The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court and the case law of the ICTY and the ICTR have, in recent years, played a unique role in the achievement of this goal.
Saturday, July 4, 2009
Olásolo: The Criminal Responsibility of Senior Political and Military Leaders as Principals to International Crimes
Friday, July 3, 2009
International crimes, such as crimes against humanity, genocide and war crimes, are committed by individuals. However, individuals rarely commit such crimes for their own profit. Instead, such crimes are often caused by collective entities. Notable examples include the ‘dirty war’ in Argentina in the 1970s and 1980s, the atrocities committed during the Balkan Wars in the early 1990s and the crimes committed during the ongoing armed conflicts in the Darfur area in Sudan. Referring to Darfur, the Prosecutor of the ICC noted in 2008 that, although he had indicted a few individuals, ‘the information gathered points to an ongoing pattern of crimes committed with the mobilisation of the whole state apparatus’. This book reviews the main legal avenues that are available within the international legal order to address the increasingly important problem of system criminality and identifies possible improvements.Contents include:
- A. Nollkaemper, Introduction
- H. C. Kelman, The policy context of international crimes
- M. Punch, Why organizations kill – and get away with it: the failure of law to cope with crime in organizations
- G. Simpson, Men and abstract entities: individual responsibility and collective guilt in international criminal law
- A. Gattini, A historical perspective: from collective to individual responsibility and back
- K. Ambos, Command responsibility and organisationsherrschaft: ways of attributing international crimes to the 'most responsible'
- H. van der Wilt, Joint criminal enterprise and functional perpetration
- E. van Sliedrecht, System criminality at the ICTY
- N. Jørgensen, Criminality of organisations under international law
- A. Eser, Criminality of organisations: lessons from domestic law – a comparative perspective
- J. Kleffner, The collective accountability of organized armed groups for system crimes
- I. Scobbie, Assumptions and presuppositions: state responsibility for system crimes
- A. Zimmermann & M. Teichmann, State responsibility for international crimes
- N. White, Responses of political organs to crimes by states
- A. Nollkaemper & H. van der Wilt, Conclusions and outlook
- Alberto Portugal-Perez & John S. Wilson, Why trade facilitation matters to Africa
- Jaime Tijmes-Lhl, Consensus and majority voting in the WTO
- Panagiotis Delimatsis, Financial innovation and climate change: the case of renewable energy certificates and the role of the GATS
Bowett's Law of International Institutions is the leading introduction to this complex, important and growing area of international law, with increasing significance for developments at the national level. Covering all the major global, regional and judicial institutions and all international organisations that regulate aspects of development and providing an introductory overview of the law of international organisations, including international courts and tribunals as a whole.
The book offers a basic framework, insights into some of the more essential issues, and indications of where to find more detail. Bowett's is essential reading for students of international law and international relations and will also be of considerable interest to lawyers practising in the area.
Thursday, July 2, 2009
The World Bank and other multilateral development banks (MDBs) carry out their mission to alleviate poverty and promote economic growth based on the advice of professional economists. But as Sarah Babb argues in Behind the Development Banks, these organizations have also been indelibly shaped by Washington politics—particularly by the legislative branch and its power of the purse.
Tracing American influence on MDBs over three decades, this volume assesses increased congressional activism and the perpetual “selling” of banks to Congress by the executive branch. Babb contends that congressional reluctance to fund the MDBs has enhanced the influence of the United States on them by making credible America’s threat to abandon the banks if its policy preferences are not followed. At a time when the United States’ role in world affairs is being closely scrutinized, Behind the Development Banks will be necessary reading for anyone interested in how American politics helps determine the fate of developing countries.
- Steven C. Roach, Introduction: Global Governance in Context
- Charles A. Smith & Heather M. Smith, Embedded Realpolitik? Re-evaluating United States' Opposition to the International Criminal Court
- Eric K. Leonard & Steven C. Roach, From Realism to Legalization: A Rationalist Assessment of the International Criminal Court and its Role in the Democratic Republic of Congo
- Caroline Fehl, Explaining the International Criminal Court: A Practice Test for Rationalist and Constructivist Approaches
- Michael J. Struett, The Politics of Discursive Legitimacy: Understanding the Implications of Prosecutorial Discretion at the ICC
- Jason G. Ralph, Anarchy is What Criminal Lawyers and other Actors Make of it: International Criminal Justice as an Institution of International and World society
- Patrick Hayden, Political Evil, Cosmopolitan Realism, and the Normative Ambivalence of the International Criminal Court
- Antonio Franceschet, Four Cosmopolitan Projects: the International Criminal Court in Context
- Amy E. Eckert, The Cosmopolitan Test: Universal Morality and the Challenge of the Darfur Genocide
- Steven C. Roach, Justice of the Peace? Future Challenges and Prospects for a Cosmopolitan Court
- Bruno Simma, Universality of International Law from the Perspective of a Practitioner
- Symposium: The Use of Force
- Dino Kritsiotis, Close Encounters of a Sovereign Kind
- Kenneth Anderson, The Rise of International Criminal Law: Intended and Unintended Consequences
- Christian J. Tams, The Use of Force against Terrorists
- Tullio Treves, Piracy, Law of the Sea, and Use of Force: Developments off the Coast of Somalia
- Critical Review of Jurisprudence: An Occasional Series
- Janine Natalya Clark, Plea Bargaining at the ICTY: Guilty Pleas and Reconciliation
- EJIL: Debate!
- Roda Mushkat, Incomplete Internalization and Compliance with Human Rights Law: A Reply to Ryan Goodman and Derek Jinks
- Ryan Goodman & Derek Jinks, Incomplete Internalization and Compliance with Human Rights Law: A Rejoinder to Roda Mushkat
How does one get the Taliban in Afghanistan, the FARC in Colombia, Russian troops in Georgia, and Blackwater contractors in Iraq, to improve their dismal record of compliance with international humanitarian law? The recipe, inasmuch as one can be surmised, will involve a complex mix of carrot and stick, normative and political, humanitarian and strategic. One basic question is the degree to which reciprocity is a toxic factor in the normative dynamics of international humanitarian law, importing conditionality and offering excuses to match any violation committed by the other side, or whether there lies in reciprocity a force that can be successfully marshalled to improve the protection of the victims of war. A second related question is the extent to which an armed conflict has to involved symmetrical forces in order for reciprocity to operate at all. Should we agree with Marco Sassoli that “reciprocity . . . does not work in asymmetrical conflicts”? The paper attempts to show that even in asymmetrical conflicts so unreceptive to humanitarian ideals as the ones listed above, reciprocity offers such potential that it should not be discounted as merely another hurdle to overcome in the application of the laws of war, but rather that one of the bases on which legitimate norms can be established to link participants variously positioned in a regime like international humanitarian law.
- Ben Chigara, The Unfinished Business of Human Rights Protection and the Increasing Threat of International Terrorism
- Special Feature: Selected Papers, International Symposium of the Asian Society of International Law, 7-8 April 2007
- Jean d'Aspremont, International law in Asia: The Limits to the Western Constitutionalist and Liberal Doctrines
- H. Harry L. Roque, Jr, Export of War: Issues of Individual Criminal and State Responsibility
- Sakai Hironobu, "As if" Acting under Chapter VII of the UN Charter?: Rigidity of the Threshold Between Chapter VII and non-Chapter VII
- Mary George, The Role of IMO Resolutions in Ocean Law and Policy in the Asia-Pacific
Wednesday, July 1, 2009
Pollack & Shaffer: When Cooperation Fails: The International Law and Politics of Genetically Modified Foods
The transatlantic dispute over genetically modified organisms (GMOs) has brought into conflict the United States and the European Union, two long-time allies and economically interdependent democracies with a long record of successful cooperation. Yet the dispute - pitting a largely acceptant US against an EU deeply suspicious of GMOs - has developed into one of the most bitter and intractable transatlantic and global conflicts, resisting efforts at negotiated resolution and resulting in a bitterly contested legal battle before the World Trade Organization.
Professors Pollack and Shaffer investigate the obstacles to reconciling regulatory differences among nations through international cooperation, through the lens of the GMO dispute. The book addresses the dynamic interactions of domestic law and politics, transnational networks, international regimes, and global markets, through a theoretically grounded and empirically comprehensive analysis of the governance of GM foods and crops. They demonstrate that the deeply politicized, entrenched and path-dependent nature of the regulation of GMOs in the US and the EU has fundamentally shaped negotiations and decision-making at the international level, limiting the prospects for deliberation and providing incentives for both sides to engage in hard bargaining and to shop for favorable international forums. They then assess the impacts, and the limits, of international pressures on domestic US and European law, politics and business practice, which have remained strikingly resistant to change.
International cooperation in areas like GMO regulation, the authors conclude, must overcome multiple obstacles, legal and political, domestic and international. Any effective response to this persistent dispute, they argue, must recognize both the obstacles to successful cooperation, and the options that remain for each side when cooperation fails.
Within societies, on a national level, self-defence may be used as a defence against the use of force in order to prevent crime against oneself, a fellow human being or even property. Between societies on the international level, self-defence was traditionally linked to the concept of armed attack. However, in today’s world, new forms of aggression, the concept of collective security, and an increasing interaction between national and international law necessitate a reassessment of the concept of self-defence. The first session of the Hague Colloquium on the Fundamental Principles of Law, on the topic of self-defence and honouring Shabtai Rosenne, the first Laureate of the Hague Prize for International Law, brought together experts from both academic and professional circles to debate the notion of self-defence in the world of today. Both the Colloquium and this subsequent publication make a valuable contribution to the development of the law by recognising the sources of the principle of self-defence, and the theories underlying it, by following its path of evolution and by reassessing its current status. The essays are accompanied by a remarkably full and useful bibliography and by documentary materials, many of which are difficult to obtain elsewhere.
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
In today’s world of globalisation the position of the highest national courts is changing. Traditionally, the highest courts have the task of safeguarding the coherency of law within the territory of their jurisdiction. Being at the top of the hierarchy of courts in their country, there was no other authority above them. This picture is being thoroughly disturbed by the internationalisation of law, which has brought the domestic legal systems into close contact with each other and which has created hierarchies among the highest national courts.
This book is an important tool for national judges, judges and staff of international courts, civil servants at ministries of justice, and others studying or practising law on the dividing line between the national and international level. It contains a reflection of the exchange of views that took place during a session of the Hague Colloquium on the Fundamental Principles of Law, which sought to identify the challenges which emerge for the highest national courts in an internationalising world.
Territorial sovereignty has in large part defined both international relations and international law since the 1648 Treaty of Westphalia. The primary exception to this principle is the international commons. In these areas, which include the deep international seabed, the Arctic, Antarctica, and outer space, concerns over free passage outweighed the great Western powers’ territorial ambitions and Grotius’s mare liberum triumphed. As a result, these regions were gradually regulated to a greater or lesser extent by the Common Heritage of Mankind (CHM) principle, in which theoretically all of humanity became the sovereign over the international commons. Yet there remains no commonly agreed-to definition of the CHM amongst legal scholars or policymakers. Developing and developed nations disagree over the extent of international regulation required to equitably manage commons resources. These disagreements have played out in the diverse legal regimes of the Antarctic, deep seabed, Arctic, and outer space, each with its own version of the CHM principle. Although no universal definition exists, most conceptions of the CHM share five primary points. First, there can be no private or public appropriation of the commons. Second, representatives from all nations must manage resources since a commons area is considered to belong to everyone. Third, all nations must actively share in the benefits acquired from exploitation of the resources from the common heritage region. Fourth, there can be no weaponry or military installations established in commons areas. Fifth, the commons should be preserved for the benefit of future generations. But now even these basic preconditions are in flux, with states claiming large tracts of the Arctic; the United States, Russia, and China pursuing space weaponry; and oil companies drilling further out into the deep seabed. As resource competition intensifies at the extremes of human civilization, 'special sovereignty areas' (SSAs) and in particular the communal property principle of the CHM are under pressure with the need for greater private economic development. With resources becoming increasingly scarce and technology advancing to meet surging demand, longstanding principles of communal property in the international commons will either be reinterpreted or rewritten outright. The only question is whether this redrafting will occur proactively with the international community laying out a multilateral legal regime to govern these areas, or retroactively, formalizing a sub-optimal status quo. A historical examination of sovereignty coupled with case studies of new territorial claims on the deep Arctic seabed and the re-conception of space law to favor private property rights will demonstrate this process. By exploring the development and interconnected nature of these branches of international law, we can understand how the regulatory frameworks and theoretical justifications for these areas are evolving and in turn impacting the commons. Existing comparative case studies on commons territories focus on the similarities and differences of commons regimes while neglecting the co-evolution and converging fate of the CHM regions, specifically that all components of the international commons are either now being challenged or already shrinking. The international commons must thus evolve to survive. This fact necessitates a review analyzing how the CHM principle has developed both theoretically and in practice. My analysis will show how CHM development has informed the optimal regime going forward to meet the demands of resource scarcity while at the same time respecting the characteristics of multilateral international cooperation, peaceful use, and communal ownership that have long defined the commons. This article develops a framework for property rights over natural resources in the international commons by first building a foundation for discussion. Part I analyzes the historical evolution of sovereignty over the commons from Westphalia to such modern notions as popular sovereignty. This analysis demonstrates that a combination of factors drove this evolution, but foremost among them was technological progress. Part II examines property rights in international law, including how the international law of the sea has developed over time to allow greater private economic development. Part III focuses on how proprietary rights already exist in the commons, and illustrates how these rights can be employed to avoid the tragedy of the commons scenario. In the future, the CHM regime will be further modified by capital exporting nations with advanced extractive industries, as has already occurred in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), to allow for private exploitation demonstrating the extent to which technological progress impacts sovereignty over the commons. In conclusion, I argue that a modified leasehold system somewhat reminiscent of the Homestead Act could maintain the pillars of the CHM principle while allowing for limited property rights and sustainable economic development in the commons.
- Anne Peters & Klaus Armingeon, Introduction - Global Constitutionalism from an Interdisciplinary Perspective
- Anne Peters, The Merits of Global Constitutionalism
- Karolina Milewicz, Emerging Patterns of Global Constitutionalization: Toward a Conceptual Framework
- Beth Simmons, Civil Rights in International Law: Compliance with Aspects of the "International Bill of Rights"
- Anne van Aaken, Defragmentation of Public International Law Through Interpretation: A Methodological Proposal
- Ernst-Ulrich Petersmann, International Rule of Law and Constitutional Justice in International Investment Law and Arbitration
- André Nollkaemper, Constitutionalization and the Unity of the Law of International Responsibility
- Daniel Bodansky, Is There an International Environmental Constitution?
- Andreas Føllesdal, When Common Interests Are Not Common: Why the Global Basic Structure Should Be Democratic
- Petra Dobner, On the Constitutionability of Global Public Policy Networks
- Alec Stone Sweet, Constitutionalism, Legal Pluralism, and International Regimes
- Thomas Cottier, Multilayered Governance, Pluralism, and Moral Conflict
With the exception of the ICC, which is intended to be a permanent institution, all of the past or present international criminal tribunals have either completed their work or are scheduled to complete their work in the relatively near future. In some cases, such as the Nuremberg Military Tribunal, the Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) was intimately involved in planning the final phase of the tribunal’s existence. In others, such as the Special Panels for Serious Crimes in Timor-Leste, the OTP played little or no role in the decision-making process. In every case, though, the decision to close a tribunal has had a significant impact on the OTP’s ability to fulfill its mandate, however defined.
This essay - my contribution to a book on the history of the prosecutor in international criminal law, which will be published by Oxford in 2010 - explores that impact. Section 1 describes the various strategies that the tribunals have pursued to complete their work. Section 2 provides a comprehensive analysis of the ways in which those strategies have threatened, and continue to threaten, the legitimacy, independence, and effectiveness of the OTP. Finally, Section 3 discusses the lessons that current and future tribunals can learn from those completion strategies - a kind of “best practices” guide, albeit one that recognizes that it is impossible to construct a one-size-fits-all completion strategy.
Sixty years ago, the International Court of Justice handed down its first judgment in the Corfu Channel Case. Many of the issues dealt with by the Court in 1949 remain central questions of international law today, including: due diligence, forcible intervention and self-help, maritime operations, navigation in international straits and the concept of elementary considerations of humanity. The Court’s decision has been cited on numerous occasions both in the literature and in international litigation. Indeed, the relevance of this judgment goes far beyond the subject matter dealt with by the Court in 1949, extending to pressing problems such as trans-boundary pollution, terrorism or piracy. In short, it was and remains a thoroughly modern decision—a landmark for international law; and one which today needs to be revisited.
- Philippe Weckel, Point de vue - "La justice internationale et le soixantième anniversaire de la Déclaration universelle des droits de l'homme"
- Karine Parrot-Gibert, La jurisprudence interne, "source" de droit international conventionnel? A propos de l'application des conventions portant "loi uniforme"
- Julien Cazala, L'O.M.C. à la carte? Les aménagements conventionnels aux obligations des Membres permis par le droit conventionnel de l'Organisation Mondiale du commerce
- Christian J. Tams & Christelle Bouguillon, La deuxième conférence de La Haye et la règlement pacifique des différends
- Anne-Shopie Millet-Devalle, A propos de la position commune de l'Union européenne relative aux règles communes régissant le contrôle des exportations de technologie et d'équipements militaires du 8 décembre 2008
- Louis Balmond, Observations sur le document de Montreux relatif aux obligations juridiques internationales pertinentes et aux bonnes pratiques pour les Etats concernant les activités des sociétés militaires privées
- Raphaël van Steenberghe, Le Pacte de non-agression et de défense commune de l'Union africaine: entre unilatéralisme et responsabilité collective
- Claire Vedrine, Ressources en Arctique et revendications étatiques de souveraineté
Symposium: The UNCITRAL Convention on Contracts for the International Carriage of Goods Wholly or Partly by Sea
- Mary Helen Carlson, U.S. Participation in Private International Law Negotiations: Why the UNCITRAL Convention on Contracts for the International Carriage of Goods Wholly or Partly by Sea Is Important to the United States
- Jose Angelo Estrella Faria, Uniform Law for International Transport at UNICTRAL: New Times, New Players, and New Rules
- Johan Schelin, The UNCITRAL Convention on Carriage of Goods by Sea: Harmonization or De-Harmonization
- Alexander von Ziegler, The Liability of the Contracting Carrier
- Tomotaka Fujita, The Comprehensive Coverage of the New Convention: Performing Parties and the Multimodal Implications
- Gertjan van der Ziel, Chapter 10 of the Rotterdam Rules: Control of Goods in Transit
- Manuel Alba, Electronic Commerce Provisions in the UNCITRAL Convention on Contracts for the International Carriage of Goods Wholly or Partly by Sea
- Chester D. Hooper, Forum Selection and Arbitration in the Draft Convention on Contracts for the International Carriage of Goods Wholly or Partly by Sea, or the Definition of Fora Conveniens Set Forth in the Rotterdam Rules
- Michael E. Sturley, Modernizing and Reforming U.S. Maritime Law: The Impact of the Rotterdam Rules in the United States
Monday, June 29, 2009
- Gregory S. Gordon, An African Marshall Plan: Changing U.S. Policy to Promote the Rule of Law and Prevent Mass Atrocity in the Democratic Republic of the Congo
- Margaret M. deGuzman, Gravity and the Legitimacy of the International Criminal Court
- Asif Efrat, A Theory of Internationally Regulated Goods
- Nicolai N. Petro, The Legal Case for Russian Intervention in Georgia
- Jason Webb Yackee, Pacta Sunt Servanda and State Promises to Foreign Investors Before Bilateral Investment Treaties: Myth and Reality
- Olivier Corten, Déclarations unilatérales d'indépendance et reconnaissances prématurées du Kosovo à l'Ossétie du sud et à l'Abkhazie
- Carlo Focarelli, Immunité des Etats et jus cogens. La dynamique du droit international et la fonction du jus cogens dans le processus de changement de la règle sur l'immunité juridictionnelle des Etats étrangers
- Andrea Saccucci, Fond du litige et indication de mesures conservatoires. Réflexions en marge des ordonnances de la C.I.J. dans l'affaire des usines de pâte à papier
- Rafaâ Ben Achour, La nouvelle Charte de l'Organisation de la Conférence islamique (OCI)
- Jean d'Aspremont, La doctrine du droit international face à la tentation de la "juridicisation" sans limites
Mbengue: Essai sur une théorie du risque en droit international public: l'anticipation du risque environnemental et sanitaire
Les progrès techniques et technologiques sont à l'origine de bon nombre de catastrophes naturelles, de dégradations irrémédiables de l'environnement ainsi que de dommages à la santé humaine. Afin d'éviter que de tels dommages se produisent, le droit international est de plus en plus interpellé dans la régulation et la gestion des risques environnementaux et sanitaires. Les risques, qu'ils soient liés aux changements climatiques, à la raréfaction des ressources en eau, aux organismes génétiquement modifiés (OGM), à la perte de la diversité biologique ou encore aux épidémies internationales (grippe aviaire ou Syndrome respiratoire aigu sévère (SRAS), suscitent la nécessité d'élaborer des outils juridiques aptes à mieux les contrôler. C'est dans cet élan qu'émerge progressivement en droit international une approche d'anticipation des risques environnementaux et sanitaires. Ce mouvement impulse un changement de paradigmes : le droit rompt avec la certitude scientifique et met en lumière la relativité de la connaissance scientifique quant aux processus et mécanismes qui régissent les phénomènes environnementaux et sanitaires. L'incertitude scientifique acquiert un droit de cité. Au sein du tissu normatif international, la précaution devient la clef de voûte du développement durable.
Combinant théorie du droit, philosophie, droit international de l'environnement, droit international de la santé et droit du commerce international, le présent ouvrage met en lumière les différents aspects de l'anticipation. L'ouvrage propose, en outre, de nouveaux modèles d'analyse des divers principes et règles afférents à l'anticipation des risques environnementaux et sanitaires. Il dresse, par ailleurs, une typologie des mécanismes d'anticipation tout en mettant l'accent sur les obstacles que rencontrent Etats, organisations internationales et juridictions internationales dans le traitement des risques environnementaux et sanitaires. L'ouvrage se propose d'être un outil de réflexion et de recherche pour les universitaires, les praticiens et institutions spécialisés ou non dans les questions environnementales et sanitaires.
- Stephen M. Schwebel, Is Mediation of Foreign Investment Disputes Plausible?
- Jan Paulsson & Georgics Petrochilos, Neer-ly Misled?
- Tillmann Rudolf Braun & Pascal Schonard, The New Germany-China Bilateral Investment Treaty
- Brigitte Stern, Civil Society's Voice in the Settlement of International Economic Disputes
- Eloïse Obadia, Extension of Proceedings Beyond the Original Parties: Non-Disputing Party Participation in Investment Arbitration
- Florian Grisel & Jorge E. Vinuales, L’amicus curiae dans l'arbitrage d'investissement
Sunday, June 28, 2009
- International Litigation and Arbitration
- Gary Born, The Principle of Judicial Non-Interference in International Arbitral Proceedings
- Catherine A. Rogers, Lawyers Without Borders
- David J. McLean, Toward a New International Dispute Resolution Paradigm: Assessing the Congruent Evolution of Globalization and International Arbitration
- Jonathan C. Hamilton, Three Decades of Latin American Commercial Arbitration
- Private International Law
- David P. Stewart, Private International Law: A Dynamic and Developing Field
- International Economic Law
- Rachel Brewster, Shadow Unilateralism: Enforcing International Trade Law at the WTO
- Luca Enriques, Regulators' Response to the Current Crisis and the Upcoming Reregulation of Financial Markets: One Reluctant Regulator's View
- International Human Rights
- Juan E. Méndez, The 60th Anniversary of the UDHR
- Sarah H. Paoletti, Transnational Responses to Transnational Exploitation: A Proposal for Bi-National Migrant Rights Clinics
- Jennifer Trahan, Reflections on the Difficulties of Enforcing International Justice
- Christina M. Cerna, Reflections on the Normative Status of the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man
- International Criminal Law
- Eric H. Blinderman, The Conviction of Saddam Hussein for the Crime Against Humanity of "Other Inhumane Acts"
- David M. Crane, A Wrong on Humanity: Prevention of Crimes Against Humanity
- David Tolbert, International Criminal Law: Past and Future
- Use of Force
- Michael Bahar, Power through Clarity: How Clarifying the Old State-Based Laws Can Reveal the Strategic Power of Law
- Amos N. Guiora, International Law: Where Have We Been; Where Are We Going?
- David Glazier, Missing in Action? United States Leadership in the Law of War
- Geoffrey S. Corn, Back to the Future: de facto Hostilities, Transnational Terrorism, and the Purpose of the Law of Armed Conflict
- Glenn Sulmasy, Executive Power: The Last Thirty Years
- Dan E. Stigall, Christopher L. Blakesley, & Chris Jenks, Human Rights and Military Decisions: Counterinsurgency and Trends in the Law of International Armed Conflict