Customary international law, although long recognized as a primary source of international law, remains replete with enigmas, both conceptual and practical. These include how to determine the existence of opinio juris, the function of the state practice requirement, the definition of jus cogens customary norms, and the relationship between customary international law and ethics. In part because of these enigmas, the subject has generated a wide-ranging literature. However, no recent book-length work has attempted to articulate a comprehensive theory of customary international law that can effectively resolve these questions. This book sets out to accomplish this goal. Its approach is unique in a number of ways. For example, it is multidisciplinary and draws insights from fields such as legal theory, philosophy, political science, and game theory. In addition, it is anchored in a sophisticated ethical framework and explores at length the interconnections between customary international law and ethics.
Saturday, March 6, 2010
Friday, March 5, 2010
This year the Minnesota Journal of International Law will launch an online companion. It will be cited as Minn J. Int'l L. Online, with volume numbers to follow the print journal. It will retain the multidisciplinary mission of the print journal, and will keep the journal’s historical focus by highlighting scholarship related to global trade.
Minn J. Int'l L. Online is intended to be a content base of shorter and more responsive articles on topics of international law and policy; as such we request submissions from all interested authors of between 1500 and 3000 words, or approximately five to ten pages. Selected articles will be published on a rolling basis and will undergo the same rigorous cite checking process as articles selected for the print journal.
Developing issues require an informed legal response without regard to the rigid publishing schedule inherent in print journals. Articles that are truly responsive to these developments may be dated by the time a journal goes to press, yet these articles are vital to the developing field of international law. To stay on the forefront of international legal scholarship, we need analysis of issues facing the world now, not those it faced a year ago.
Minn J. Int'l L. Online is intended to reach a diverse audience of legal academics, practitioners, and students. We also anticipate participation from academics and practitioners from related fields, and expect to reach a wider audience than that of a traditional print journal. As such, we have relaxed our traditional requirement of a J.D. or comparable degree, and invite academics from other fields such as economics, science, and medicine to submit articles.
Please submit your papers to us via the ExpressO or LexOpus systems, or directly at firstname.lastname@example.org.
The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) provides for the inclusion of the crime of aggression within the Court’s jurisdiction, but the Statute needs to be amended to include a definition of aggression and conditions for the exercise of jurisdiction. The Assembly of States Parties of the ICC will have such an opportunity to review the Rome Statute at its conference in Kampala (Uganda) in 2010. The author argues in this book that the review process provides an opportunity for the establishment of a realistic criminalisation regime for the crime of aggression. However, this criminal justice response to aggression has implications for the collective security system (embodied by the United Nations). No criminal justice response to aggression can ignore the latter aspect. The book thus provides a historical and contextual account of the development of the notion of aggression. It identifies the important debates affecting the attempts to define the crime of aggression; puts the legal debates in normative and international political context; and examines the conditions necessary for the prosecution of the crime of aggression – both nationally and internationally. It is submitted that the almost universal non-criminalisation of aggression at national level (and the concomitant lack of prosecutions) must be understood in the light of multiple constitutional, doctrinal and political reasons. These aspects are analysed with reference to national case studies. With this book, the author hopes to contribute to the process to construct a realistic and effective regime for individual criminal liability for the crime of aggression. Persons interested in international (and domestic) criminal law, public international law, as well as diplomacy and international politics, will find this book useful – especially at this point in time when there seems to be a real possibility to reaffirm and concretise the legacy of Nuremberg – that is to end impunity for the ‘supreme international crime’. The book contains commentary on the most recent work of the Assembly of States Parties’ Inter-sessional Meeting on the Crime of Aggression.
- Saurabh Bhattacharjee, From Basel to Hong Kong: International Environmental Regulation of Ship-Recycling Takes One Step Forward and Two Steps Back
- Nikolaos Lavranos, The Brazilian Tyres Case: Trade Supersedes Health
- Fali S. Nariman, International Arbitration in the Twenty-First Century: Concepts, Instruments and Techniques
- Sibylle Scheipers, Introduction: Prisoners in War
- Frédéric Mégret, A Cautionary Tale from the Crusades? War and Prisoners in Conditions of Normative Incommensurability
- Peter H. Wilson, Prisoners in Early Modern European Warfare
- Stephen C. Neff, Prisoners of War in International Law: The Nineteenth Century
- Alan Kramer, Prisoners in The First World War
- Neville Wylie, The 1929 Prisoners of War Convention and the Building of the Inter-War Prisoner of War Regime
- Bob Moore, The Treatment of Prisoners of War In The Western European Theatre of War 1939-1945
- Rüdiger Overmans, The Treatment of Prisoners of War In The Eastern European Theatre of Operations 1941-1956
- Philip Towle, Japanese Culture and The Treatment of Prisoners of War In The Asian-Pacific War
- Isabel V. Hull, Prisoners in Colonial Warfare: The Imperial German Example
- Raphaëlle Branche, The French in Algeria: Can There Be Prisoners of War In A 'Domestic' Operation?
- Huw Bennett, Detention and Interrogation In Northern Ireland 1969-1975
- Bettina Renz, The Status and Treatment of Detainees in Russia's Chechen Campaigns
- Chia Lehnardt, Private Military Personnel as Prisoners Of War
- Matthew Happold, Child Prisoners in War
- John B. Bellinger III, Legal Issues Related To Armed Conflict with Non-State Groups
- Adam Roberts, Detainees: Misfits in Peace And War
- David Cole, Outsourcing Terror: Extraordinary Rendition and The Necessity For Extraterritorial Protection of Human Rights
- Alia Brahimi, Terrorist Beheadings: Politics and Reciprocity
- Sibylle Scheipers, Conclusion: Prisoners and Detainees in Current and Future Military Operations
Malcolm Shaw (Univ. of Leicester - Law) will give a talk today at the Lauterpacht Centre for International Law Friday Lunchtime Lecture Series on "Regulating the Relationship between International and Domestic Law." This will be a discussion of Professor Shaw's Hersch Lauterpacht Memorial Lectures, which he delivered earlier this week.
Thursday, March 4, 2010
This book examines recognition of new states, the practice historically employed to regulate membership in international society. The last twenty years have witnessed new or lingering demands for statehood in different areas of the world. The claims of some, like those of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Eritrea, Croatia, Georgia and East Timor, have achieved general recognition; those of others, like Kosovo, Tamil Eelam, South Ossetia, Abkhazia and Somaliland, have not. However, even as most of these claims gave rise to major conflicts and international controversies, the criteria for acknowledgment of new states have elicited little systematic scholarship. Drawing upon writings of English School theorists, this study charts the practice from the late eighteenth century until the present. Its central argument is that for the past two hundred years state recognition has been tied to the idea of self-determination of peoples. Two versions of the idea have underpinned the practice throughout most of this period - self-determination as a negative and a positive right. The negative idea, dominant from 1815 to 1950, took state recognition to be acknowledgment of an achievement of de facto statehood by a people desiring independence. Self-determination was expressed through, and externally gauged by, self-attainment. The positive idea, prevalent since the 1950s, took state recognition to be acknowledgment of an entitlement to independence in international law. The development of self-determination as a positive international right, however, has not led to a disappearance of claims of statehood that stand outside of its confines. Groups that are deeply dissatisfied with the countries in which they presently find themselves continue to make demands for independence even though they may have no positive entitlement to it. The book concludes by expressing doubt that contemporary international society can find a sustainable basis for recognizing new states other than the original standard of de facto statehood.
The Goettingen Journal of International Law (GoJIL) is pleased to announce the Call for Papers for the international conference
Resources of Conflict – Conflicts over Resources
October 7-9, 2010, Göttingen, Germany
Keynote Speaker: Judge Bruno Simma
International Court of Justice (ICJ)
The Goettingen Journal of International Law is pleased to invite scholars to engage in current debates on the multi-faceted interdependence and interaction between resources and conflicts for the upcoming conference «Resources of Conflict – Conflicts over Resources». Conflicts over resources have long sparked international disputes between states and have even become a cause of war. Armed conflicts pertain to an increasing number of different actors whose legal status is in question in current international legal debate. The protection of natural and cultural resources in times of armed conflict is also a topical issue. Resources inform the underlying agenda in international conflicts, power struggles and post-conflict situations. The question is whether the scarcity of resources leads to international cooperation or to further conflict. The assessment, access and benefit sharing of resources may be central to prevent future conflicts. In addition to the issues surrounding tangible resources, the debate about the intangible resource of knowledge has complexified the international debate. Knowledge as a resource plays an important role in fact finding missions, truth and reconciliation commissions, and as evidence in international tribunals. In what can be deemed the modern battlefield of cyberspace, knowledge is a weapon and should also be considered as a resource of conflict.
About the Conference
The conference will consist of four panels and two keynote speeches, one of which will be given by Judge Bruno Simma of the International Court of Justice. We encourage submissions with interdisciplinary approaches in the fields of international law, international politics and from adjacent disciplines. We welcome papers with a theoretical (analytical/normative), as well as an empirical focus. We anticipate the publication of a special issue of the Goettingen Journal of International Law from the papers presented at the conference. Please note that panels can still be subject to change.
Panel 1: Actors of Armed Conflicts and International Law
Panel 2: Resources Before, During and After Conflicts
Panel 3: Resources and Conflict Prevention: Access, Sharing and Regulation
Panel 4: Knowledge as a Resource: Access, Assessment and Legal Consequences
We invite emerging scholars and junior faculty to submit English abstracts of no more than 500 words by June 1, 2010. Please send your abstracts to Anne Dienelt (Anne.Dienelt@gojil.eu), who will be taking care of the submission process. Selected participants will be notified by July 1, 2010 and are expected to submit their papers by September 20, 2010 for circulation to the chairs and panelists. The length of the final papers should not exceed 7,000 words. For more information, including detailed penal descriptions, visit our website at http://conference.gojil.eu or contact us at email@example.com.
Registration and Travel Grants
Registration fee will be waived for scholars presenting a paper. Thanks to our sponsors, we will be able to provide a limited number of travel grants. Details on travel arrangements and accommodation will be provided to participants in due time.
We are looking forward to your submission.
The Conference Committee
- Jan Wouters & Dominic Coppens, An overview of the agreement on subsidies and countervailing measures – including a discussion of the agreement on agriculture
- Rob Howse, Do the world trade organization disciplines on domestic subsidies make sense? The case for legalizing some subsidies
- Joseph Francois, Subsidies and countervailing measures: determining the benefits of subsidies
- Andrew Green & Michael Trebilcock, The enduring problem of WTO export subsidies rules
- Piet Jan Slot, The Boeing–Airbus dispute: a case for the application of the EC state aid rules?
- Terence P. Stewart & Amy S. Dwyer, Antidumping: overview of the agreement
- William Kovacic, Price differentiation in antitrust and trade instruments
- Edwin Vermulst, Non-preferential origin rules in anti-dumping law and practice
- Claudio Dordi, The Apellate body interpretation of 'sunset reviews' provisions of AD and CVM agreements: a critical analysis
- Jasper M. Wauters, The safeguards agreement – an overview
- Meredith Crowley, Why are safeguards needed in a trade agreement?
Federal courts faced with Alien Tort Statute cases have applied customary international law to some issues and federal common law to others. This binary approach is analogous in certain respects to a Bivens action, with federal common law creating the cause of action and international law providing the conduct regulating norms. A better approach, advanced and defended in this symposium article, is to view federal common law as applying to virtually all aspects of Alien Tort Statute litigation, although for some issues federal common law is tightly linked to the content of customary international law. This article defends a federal common law approach on descriptive, doctrinal, and normative grounds. It also applies this approach to aiding and abetting and corporate liability, and briefly addresses prescriptive jurisdiction issues that arise in Alien Tort Statute litigation. It concludes that the Alien Tort Statute is best understood to extend liability to corporations, based on both congressional intent and the unsettled state of international law, that a knowledge rather than purpose standard should be applied to aiding and abetting claims, in part because international has frequently delegated the mens rea issue to domestic law or to development by courts. On both questions, however, some deference to the executive branch is appropriate. Finally, prescriptive jurisdiction limitations apply in ATS cases, and limit the types of claims that can go forward.
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
The assumption is growing that legal impediments to the exercise of jurisdiction are invalid in the face of the imperative to prosecute international crimes. This analysis of seven principal impediments comparatively analyses each from the perspective of their historical origins, the policy contexts justifying them and the legal arguments used by courts and commentators to either uphold the barrier to prosecution or to reject its application so that prosecution remains unhindered. The seven impediments are: (1) Amnesties, (2) Pardons, (3) Statutes of Limitation, (4) Abuse of Process, (5) Immunities, (6) Ne bis in idem (double jeopardy), and (7) Male captus bene detentus (wrongly captured, properly detained). Each chapter contains a theoretical evaluation of each impediment, as well as a discussion of relevant case-law from world-wide domestic and international jurisdictions.
British Institute of International and Comparative Law
Annual Conference 2010
Energy Security and its Impacts on the International Legal System
CALL FOR PAPERS
The 2010 Annual Conference of the British Institute of International and Comparative Law will be held on Friday 11 June 2009 in London. The theme of the conference will be: ‘Energy Security and Its Impacts on The International Legal System’.
This Call for Papers is for new scholars to submit a proposal for a paper to be delivered at the Conference. It is designed to encourage new academics, doctoral and masters students, and new legal professionals. A list of panels and a brief summary of the issues to be addressed by them is set out below, though this is not the final programme. Papers on national and comparative approaches to energy security or on subjects within these themes, or more generally on the topic of energy security and international law are sought.
Interested persons should submit a synopsis (350-600 words) of their proposed presentation no later than Wednesday 24 March 2009 at 5.00 pm GMT. The synopsis should provide an outline of the proposed paper and should identify the argument to be advanced, and the major issues to be addressed. Proposal submissions should be accompanied by a short CV (no more than 2 pages). The submission should indicate the author’s name, institutional affiliation and contact details.
All papers should be sent in the first instance by email to Ms Orsolya Deák at firstname.lastname@example.org. The proposals will then be considered by members of the Conference Steering Group. The outcome of the review will be announced in early April 2010. Unfortunately, the British Institute of International and Comparative Law will not be able to cover travel expenses for successful applicants.
Protecting Energy Investments in a Changing Legal Regime
The regime governing investment in the energy sector is undergoing great change. There are impacts on energy investments in many ways; their structure, the obligations on the investors including environmental and possibly returns. This panel will discuss these changes as well as consider the withdrawal of Russia from the Energy Charter Process in October 2009.
Energy Security: Territorial Limits and Nuclear Power
The desire by states for energy security has transboundary consequences. This includes negotiations over use of and access to resources and territorial boundaries. The use of some energy sources can have potential impacts internationally, especially the gaining and use of nuclear power. This panel will discuss these and related issues of public international law.
Energy, Human Rights and Indigenous Peoples
The nature of many of the activities associated with energy production, such as its exploration, facilities, transport, waste products and general development, can have impacts on those living nearby. In many instances, these are indigenous peoples, with cultures and practices that may operate in a fragile environment. This panel will explore some of the relevant issues in this area, including the responses of those involved in the energy sectors to human rights and sustainable development concerns.
Energy Production, Transport and Supply: Cross Border Private Law Issues
In the chain from production to supply of energy, multiple private law issues arise concerning contracting, joint activities, ownership of pipelines, transport fee claims, changes of supplier or adjustment clauses in contracts of supply. Several of these questions can have cross-border dimensions. This panel will shed light on how the various actors in the energy sector, including consumers, can avoid the pitfalls of private law in an international context.
Competition Law and Access and Security of Energy
The energy sector has undergone detailed scrutiny by competition authorities throughout Europe, with dawn raids, sector enquiries and threats of further regulation or market investigations. This panel will consider questions such as: How has the sector coped with these various demands?; How do regulators and counsel respond, whether through innovative access remedies in merger and other cases, detailed compliance programmes, environmental initiatives and the over-riding concern to ensure security of supply and fair pricing to all?; and how will possible changes to the regulatory regime itself affect competition, regulation and the constant need for innovation?
- Gerry Simpson, 'Satires of circumstance': some notes on war crimes trials and irony
- Alette Smeulers & Wouter Werner, The banality of evil on trial
- Harmen van der Wilt, Why international criminal lawyers should read Mirjan Damaška
- Tamás Hoffmann, The gentle humanizer of humanitarian law - Antonio Cassese and the creation of the customary law of non-international armed conflict
- Christoph Burchard, The international criminal legal process: towards a realistic model of international criminal law in action
- Darryl Robinson, The two liberalisms of international criminal law
- Kai Ambos, International criminal law at the crossroads: from ad hoc imposition to a treaty-based universal system
- Frédéric Mégret, In search of the 'vertical': towards an institutional theory of international criminal justice's core
- Kevin Jon Heller, Situational gravity under the Rome Statute
- Mark Osiel, When law 'expresses' more than it cares to admit: comments on Heller
- Dawn Sedman, Should the prosecution of ordinary crimes in domestic jurisdictions satisfy the complementarity principle?
- Marta Valiñas, Interpreting complementarity and interests of justice in the presence of restorative-based alternative forms of justice
- Elizabeth Santalla, Universal jurisdiction and the prosecution of excluded asylum seekers
- Scott Doucet, The Inter-American Court of Human Rights and the aggravated state responsibility operationalizing the concept of state crime
- Larissa van den Herik, Corporations as future subjects of the International Criminal Court: an exploration of the counterarguments and consequences
- Dan Kuwali, Gray war zone? The question of contractual control of the privatization of warfare and the civilianization of the military
- Materneau Crispin, Holding private military companies accountable for their crimes: the applicability of the commander/superior responsibility doctrine
- Astrid Reisinger, Defining the crime of aggression
- Nicolaos Strapatsas, Complementarity and aggression: a ticking time bomb?
- Michael E. Kurth, The recruitment and use of child soldiers: some reflections on the prosecution of a new war crime
- Gideon Boas, The difficulty with individual criminal responsibility in international criminal law
- Héctor Olásolo, Current trends on modes of liability for genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes
- Athanasios Chouliaras, From 'conspiracy' to 'joint criminal enterprise': in search of the organizational parameter
- Göran Sluiter, Trends in the development of a unified law of international criminal procedure
- Alexander Zahar, Witness memory and the manufacture of evidence at the international criminal tribunals
- Liesbeth Zegveld, Remedies for war victims
- Nino Tsereteli, Victim participation in ICC proceedings
- Carsten Stahn, Arrest and surrender under the ICC Statute: a contextual reading
Sandy Sivakumaran (Univ. of Nottingham - Law) will give a talk today at the UCL Faculty of Laws and International Law Association (British Branch) International Law Seminar on "Sources of Law, Non-State Armed Groups, and Internal Armed Conflict."
Joseph Weiler (New York Univ. - Law) will give a talk today at the New York University School of Law Institute for International Law and Justice International Legal Theory Colloquium on "On the Distinction between Values and Virtues in the Process of European Integration."
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
This book is about amnesties for grave international crimes that are adopted by states in moments of transition or social unrest. The subject is naturally controversial, especially in the age of the International Criminal Court. The goal of this book is to reframe and revitalize the global debate on the subject, and to offer an original framework for resolving amnesty dilemmas when they arise. Most existing literature and jurisprudence on amnesties deal with only a small subset of state practice and sidestep the ambiguity of amnesty’s position under international law. This book addresses the ambiguity head on and argues that amnesties of the broadest scope are sometimes defensible when adopted as a last recourse in contexts of mass violence. Drawing on an extensive amnesty database, the book offers detailed guidance on how to ensure that amnesties extend the minimum leniency possible, while imposing the maximum accountability on the beneficiaries.
This article explores an unusual interpretive disconnect in the discourse on complementarity, and shows how that disconnect is obscuring the most important questions about the relationship between the International Criminal Court (ICC) and national systems.
Several Chambers of the ICC have held that, in the absence of national proceedings, a case is admissible before the ICC. Many commentators regard this position as a ‘gloss’, an ‘invented’ prong, and a departure from the Statute. Interestingly, such critiques are rooted in a sincere, firmly-held and widely-shared belief that Article 17 contains a one-step test requiring either ‘unwillingness’ or ‘inability’. This article demonstrates that, contrary to the popular simplification of the complementarity test, Article 17 expressly provides not a one-step test, but a two-step test, the first explicit question of which is whether a State is investigating or prosecuting the case or has done so. Thus, admissibility-due-to-inaction is not a creative inference or an imaginative gloss; it arises from the literal, unambiguous text of Article 17.
Yet, the complementarity discourse is curiously inverted so that text is decried as 'gloss' and gloss is exalted as 'text'. The popular simplification of complementarity exercises such a powerful grip on the interpretive community that when Court applies the actual Article 17, the Court is accused of ‘departing’ from the Statute and ‘inventing’ new requirements. For some reason, the 55 words of Article 17 that explicitly require a national investigation or prosecution persistently fall into a shared blind spot. While many commentators find it a mystery that the Court believes that a case is admissible in the absence of proceedings, the real mystery is why this proposition is controversial.
Once the interpretive disconnect is exposed and misplaced recriminations about Statute violations are set aside, we discover rich ground for a much more exciting debate about the role of the Court vis-à-vis national systems. For example, how can the risk of States shirking prosecutions be managed? What are the appropriate limits on ‘burden sharing’ arrangements? Such questions are not determined by the Statute text and are as important as any questions resolved in the Rome Statute. It is hoped that this paper will help bring about and contribute to that debate.
- Jean-Marc Coicaud, Introduction: fault lines of international legitimacy
- Jean-Marc Coicaud, The structure of legitimacy in contemporary international politics
- Jean-Marc Coicaud, Deconstructing international legitimacy
- Jean-Marc Coicaud, The evolution of international order and fault lines of international legitimacy
- Nathaniel Berman, Intervention in a 'divided world': axes of legitimacy
- Vasuki Nesiah, From Berlin to Bonn to Baghdad: a space for infinite justice
- Ian Johnstone, Legal deliberation and argumentation in international decision-making
- Nishkala Suntharalingam, The United Nations Security Council, regional arrangements and peace operations
- Dianne Otto, The Security Council's alliance of gender legitimacy: the symbolic capital of resolution 1325
- Lorraine Elliott, Cosmopolitan militaries and cosmopolitan force
- B. S. Chimni, Sovereignty, rights and armed intervention: a dialectical perspective
- Ralph Wilde, Setting the terms of the debate on the legitimacy of intervention: a case study of depictions of international territorial administration missions
- Jun Matsukuma, The legitimacy of economic sanctions: an analysis of humanitarian exemptions of sanctions and the right to minimum sustenance
- Hilary Charlesworth, Conclusion: the legitimacies of international law
- Kees Wouters & Maarten Den Heijer, The Marine I Case: a Comment
- Kristin Bergtora Sandvik, A Legal History: the Emergence of the African Resettlement Candidate in International Refugee Management
- Ekaterina Yahyaoui Krivenko, Muslim Women's Claims to Refugee Status Within the Context of Child Custody Upon Divorce Under Islamic Law
- James C. Simeon, A Comparative Analysis of the Response of the UNHCR and Industrialized States to Rapidly Fluctuating Refugee Status and Asylum Applications: Lessons and Best Practices for RSD Systems Design and Administration
Gerry Simpson (LSE - Law) will give a talk today at the Oxford Institute for Ethics, Law and Armed Conflict on "War Crimes Trials, Solemnity and the Problem of Evil."
Monday, March 1, 2010
- Agora: Military Activities in the EEZ
- Sienho Yee, Sketching the Debate on Military Activities in the EEZ: An Editorial Comment
- Raul (Pete) Pedrozo, Preserving Navigational Rights and Freedoms: The Right to Conduct Military Activities in China's Exclusive Economic Zone
- Zhang Haiwen, Is It Safeguarding the Freedom of Navigation or Maritime Hegemony of the United States?—Comments on Raul (Pete) Pedrozo's Article on Military Activities in the EEZ
- Kenneth J. Keith, International Court of Justice: Reflections on the Electoral Process
- Bing Bing Jia, The Relations between Treaties and Custom
- Andreas Buss, The Preah Vihear Case and Regional Customary Law
- Comments, Essays and Notes
- Barry Sautman, Tibet's Putative Statehood and International Law
- Gao Jianjun, The Okinawa Trough Issue in the Continental Shelf Delimitation Disputes within the East China Sea
- Development and History
- The AALCO Secretariat, Report on the Forty-eighth Annual Session of the Asian-African Legal Consultative Organization
- Wang Zonglai & Hu Bin, China's Reform and Opening-up and International Law
- Rima Tkatova, Central Asian States and International Law: Between Post-Soviet Culture and Eurasian Civilization
- Michal S. Gal, Antitrust in a Globalized Economy: The Unique Enforcement Challenges Faced by Small and Developing Jurisdictions
- Chris Jenks, Notice Otherwise Given: Will in Absentia Trials at the Special Tribunal for Lebanon Violate Human Rights?
- Jordan C. Kahn, Striking NAFTA Gold: Glamis Advances Investor-State Arbitration
- Dimitry Kociwnov, On Options of Citizens and Moral Choices of States: Gays and European Federalism
IGLP: The Workshop is an intensive ten day residential program designed for doctoral and post-doctoral scholars. The Workshop aims to promote innovative ideas and alternative approaches to issues of global law, economic policy and social justice in the aftermath of the economic crisis. The initiative will bring young scholars and faculty from around the world together with leading faculty working on issues of global law and economic policy for serious research collaboration and debate. Hosted by Harvard Law School, The Workshop aims to bring together specialists from across the arts and sciences as well as the professional schools who are interested in the intersections between law, economics and global policy.
University of Exeter School of Law and ILA (British Branch) Current Issues in International Law Seminar Series
- March 5: Craig Barker (Univ. of Sussex), Immunities from Jurisdiction in International Law: Relic or Requirement?
- March 12: Douglas Guilfoyle (UCL), Piracy off Somalia: The Emerging Legal Framework
- March 15: Susan Breau (Univ. of Surrey), The Gaza Report: Implications for International Law
- March 23: Louise Arimatsu (LSE), The Chilcot Inquiry: International Laws Post-Mortem?
This book chapter surveys existing conflicts among national ethical rules in international arbitration, analyzes recent developments in legal ethics and proposes innovations for the international arbitration community to manage and resolve these conflicts in a manner that will both alleviate the practical problems that arise in the absence of shared ethical principles, and strengthen the system as it works to develop and enforce internally its own international legal ethics. It is one chapter in a larger volume edited by Doak Bishop, which provides analysis about the inner workings of the international arbitration system and advice for counsel operating in that system.
Five years after its acceptance by the 2005 World Summit, it is time to consider the contribution that the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) has made and could make to the prevention of mass atrocities.
The consensus among the Member States of the United Nations, as reflected in the General Assembly debate in the summer of 2009 is broad but not necessarily deep. While there is considerable general support for R2P along the three pillars suggested by the UN Secretary-General (responsibility of states to protect their own populations, assistance and capacity building and timely responses), fundamental questions remain. For instance: what does R2P add to the already existing obligations of states and to the substantial arsenal of instruments at the possession of the international community to prevent and respond to mass atrocities? Does R2P entail a risk of opening the door to external intervention? And how can R2P be operationalised and implemented in concrete circumstances?
Knowledge of the impact of the principle is limited. Recent practice shows both instances of where the international community succeeded (Kenya) and failed (Darfur) to prevent mass atrocities, but in neither of these cases it is obvious that success or failure could be attributed directly to the use, or lack of use, of the concept of R2P.
Sunday, February 28, 2010
Symposium: International Justice in the 21st Century: The Law and Politics of the International Criminal Court
Governed by the Rome Statute, the ICC is the first permanent, treaty based, international criminal court established to help end impunity for the perpetrators of the most serious crimes of concern to the international community. At this time, the United States is not a party to this regime. As such, the traditional role of the United States as a leader of international standards for law and justice is in peril.
This symposium will examine the impact of the ICC, the crossroads between the law and politics of international prosecutions, and re-engagement of US leadership. The symposium comes at a crucial time, as the first review conference of the ICC will be held in the summer of 2010 in Uganda, where nations of the world will gather to consider amendments to the Court's statute.