- Gerald Goldstein & Horatia Muir Watt, La méthode de la reconnaissance à la lueur de la Convention de Munich du 5 septembre 2007 sur la reconnaissance des partenariats enregistrés
- Séverine Menétrey, La participation "amicale" de la Commission européenne dans les arbitrages liés aux investissements intracommunautaires
- Jean-Grégoire Mahinga, La délimitation de la frontière maritime entre la Roumanie et l'Ukraine dans la mer Noire
- Renan Le Mestre, Une nécessaire manifestation institutionnelle de respect et d'estime de soi : la cour caribéenne de justice
Saturday, December 11, 2010
Friday, December 10, 2010
- Jaya Ramji-Nogales, Designing Bespoke Transitional Justice: A Pluralist Process Approach
- Daniel Benoliel & Ronen Perry, Israel, Palestine, and the ICC
- Paul D. Carrington, Enforcing International Corrupt Practices Law
- Robin Churchill, Dispute Settlement under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea: Survey for 2009
- Julian Roberts, Aldo Chircop, & Siân Prior, Area-based Management on the High Seas: Possible Application of the IMO's Particularly Sensitive Sea Area Concept
- Seline Trevisanut, Search and Rescue Operations in the Mediterranean: Factor of Cooperation or Conflict?
- Erik Franckx, The International Seabed Authority and the Common Heritage of Mankind: The Need for States to Establish the Outer Limits of their Continental Shelf
- Efthymios Papastavridis, Enforcement Jurisdiction in the Mediterranean Sea: Illicit Activities and the Rule of Law on the High Seas
The European Convention on Human Rights was drafted in the wake of World War II. The dark shadows of war have never fully receded from Europe however. Armed conflict has resurged time and again, from Northern Ireland to Cyprus and Turkey, and from the former Yugoslavia to the Caucasus. This book focuses on the margins of conflict: human rights aspects of transitions from peace to armed conflict and vice versa. Firstly, it seeks to explore what limits human rights put on European societies which are on the brink of armed conflict. Secondly, it surveys the consequences of human rights violations committed during the armed conflict by looking at the aftermath of war. In a stimulating way, experts in their field offer food for thought on a broad range of material and especially procedural issues such as the territorial scope of the Convention, states of emergency, freedom of expression and conflict escalation, obligations relating to enforced disappearances, interim measures, and pilot judgments. Taken together, they reflect both the potential and limitations of human rights in the run-up to conflicts and their aftermath.
- Ori Aronson, Out of Many: Military Commissions, Religious Tribunals, and the Democratic Virtues of Court Specialization
- David J. Bederman, Law of the Land, Law of the Sea: The Lost Link Between Customary International Law and the General Maritime Law
- Julian G. Ku, The Curious Case of Corporate Liability Under the Alien Tort Statute: A Flawed System of Judicial Lawmaking
- Jason Webb Yackee, Do Bilateral Investment Treaties Promote Foreign Direct Investment? Some Hints from Alternative Evidence
Thursday, December 9, 2010
- Natsuko H. Nicholls, Paul K. Huth & Benjamin J. Appel, When Is Domestic Political Unrest Related to International Conflict? Diversionary Theory and Japanese Foreign Policy, 1890–1941
- Hunjoon Kim & Kathryn Sikkink, Explaining the Deterrence Effect of Human Rights Prosecutions for Transitional Countries
- Joe Clare, Ideological Fractionalization and the International Conflict Behavior of Parliamentary Democracies
- Jacob D. Kathman, Civil War Contagion and Neighboring Interventions
- Sean D. Ehrlich, The Fair Trade Challenge to Embedded Liberalism
- Kathleen Gallagher Cunningham & Nils B. Weidmann, Shared Space: Ethnic Groups, State Accommodation, and Localized Conflict
- Faten Ghosn, Getting to the Table and Getting to Yes: An Analysis of International Negotiations
- David Lektzian, Brandon C. Prins & Mark Souva, Territory, River, and Maritime Claims in the Western Hemisphere: Regime Type, Rivalry, and MIDs from 1901 to 2000
- Johannes Urpelainen, Regulation under Economic Globalization
- Megan Shannon, Daniel Morey &Frederick J. Boehmke, The Influence of International Organizations on Militarized Dispute Initiation and Duration
- Arman Grigoryan, Third-Party Intervention and the Escalation of State-Minority Conflicts
- Patrick Bernhagen & Neil J. Mitchell, The Private Provision of Public Goods: Corporate Commitments and the United Nations Global Compact
- Lorenz Langer, Panacea or Pathetic Fallacy? The Swiss Ban on Minarets
- David J. Doorey, In Defense of Transnational Domestic Labor Relations
- Susan W. Brenner & Leo L. Clarke, Civilians in Cyberwarfare: Conscripts
- Caroline Cavaleri Rudaz, Did Trinko Really Kill Antitrust Price Squeeze Claims? A Critical Approach to the Linkline Decision Through a Comparison of E.U. and U.S. Case Law
- Sociology and Human Rights: New Engagements
- Patricia Hynes, Michele Lamb, Damien Short, & Matthew Waites, Sociology and human rights: confrontations, evasions and new engagements
- Damien Short, Cultural genocide and indigenous peoples: a sociological approach
- Victoria Canning, Who's human? Developing sociological understandings of the rights of women raped in conflict
- Joanna Ferrie, Sociology and human rights: what have they got to say about care and dignity?
- Eunna Lee-Gong, Contestations over rights: from establishment to implementation of the National Basic Livelihood Security System in South Korea
- Michele Grigolo, Human rights and cities: the Barcelona Office for Non-Discrimination and its work for migrants
- Hannah Miller, From ‘rights-based’ to ‘rights-framed’ approaches: a social constructionist view of human rights practice
- Jennifer Melvin, Reconstructing Rwanda: balancing human rights and the promotion of national reconciliation
- Patricia Hynes, Global points of ‘vulnerability’: understanding processes of the trafficking of children and young people into, within and out of the UK
- Matthew Waites, Human rights, sexual orientation and the generation of childhoods: analysing the partial decriminalisation of ‘unnatural offences’ in India
- Michele Lamb, Loyalty and human rights: liminality and social action in a divided society
In a world dominated by considerations of material and security threats, Japan provides a fascinating case for why, and under what conditions, a state would choose to adopt international norms and laws that are seemingly in direct conflict with its domestic norms. Approaching compliance from within a constructivist framework, author Petrice R. Flowers analyzes three treaties—addressing refugee policy, women's employment, and the use of land mines—that Japan has adopted. Refugees, Women, and Weapons probes how international relations and domestic politics both play a role in constructing state identity, and how state identity in turn influences compliance.
Flowers argues that, although state desire for legitimacy is a key factor in norm adoption, to achieve anything other than a low level of compliance requires strong domestic advocacy. She offers a comprehensive theoretical model that tests the explanatory power of two understudied factors: the strength of nonstate actors and the degree to which international and domestic norms conflict. Flowers evaluates how these factors, typically studied and analyzed individually, interact and affect one another.
- David Collins, Enviromental Impact Statements and Public Participation in International Investment Law
- Robert W McGee, Ethical Issues in Transfer Pricing
- Chotika Wittayawarakul, Institutional Aspects of International Trade and Investment Dispute Settlement Systems and the Intergration of External Norms
- Thi Anh Nguyet Le & Hong Quy Mai, Double Counting in the US Legislation against Non-Market Economies: ‘As Such’ and ‘As Applied’ Analysis
This paper will form the introductory chapter of a research project the authors are presently directing, entitled International Legal Positivism in a Post-Modern World. The edited volume with the same title, to be published in 2012, will consist of 24 chapters and will be co-edited by the two authors. In its present manifestation, the paper serves as advertisement for the core aims and goals of the project, as a way of engaging with the wider scholarly community and debating the issues the project raises before the book is published.
The core idea of the project is that positivism as family of theoretical approaches to international law has radically transformed itself in the 21st century, not least because of the critique leveled at ‘classical’ forms of international legal positivism. This ‘post-modern’ positivism is different, because it takes into account the arguments of inter alia the Critical Legal Studies movement while departing from it with respect to its own constructive project. The project introduced here will seek to carry out an in-depth scholarly study of where the positivist approach to international legal scholarship stands at the end of the first decade of the 21st century and whether it can be sustainable. This means taking a hard look at whether positivism remains a cogent approach for the future of international legal scholarship, and, if so, what forms it is, can be, or ought to be taking. We will enquire whether the current state of the international society and of international legal scholarship calls for a profound renewal of the paradigms of international legal positivism and what this renewal looks like.
Wednesday, December 8, 2010
International law governing international armed conflict has grown since 1945 to include many crimes for which individuals may be held criminally liable. The ICTY and its supporters claim that much of this law has been extended to non-international armed conflict. Nevertheless, states have resisted the extension. The two domains of war are too different, legally and politically, for any simple extension of the law. What, really, has caused the rapid growth of internal-armed-conflict law at the ICTY? The answer given in this paper is that it has been accomplished by an ICTY moral philosophy masquerading as method. The tribunal’s judges, free from state or legislative oversight, proceeded almost immediately after the institution’s establishment to create a legal code for non-international armed conflict. They were well aware that the majority of states - which ultimately decide the substance of international law - were, as late as 1977, opposed to or had doubts about, such expansionism. Under a veneer of legality, a humanitarian sentiment that had been blocked by states at the diplomatic conferences convened by the ICRC found an opening with the establishment of the ICTY. Some of the very people who had been most vocal about the moral deficiency of the states’ position obtained senior appointments at the new tribunal. In the name of a kinder and fairer world for victims of civil war, what had been a regulatory desert in international law was systematically populated with criminal-law rules transposed from the field of international humanitarian law. Can the ICTY’s law survive in the long term against the power of sovereign interest? I consider this question in the light of the United States’ critique of the ICRC’s 2005 customary-law study.
The period since 1989 has seen both statehood at its peak, and at its low point. On the one hand, a quasi-colonial (soviet) empire dissolved, and numerous new states emerged. Moreover, secessionist movements all over the world seek to become independent states. On the other hand, the globalisation of markets and the emergence of global problems have, especially in the 1990s, led to the perception of a weakening or even decline of the nation state. Global governance, the strengthening of transnational or even supranational regimes, large scale privatisation and the rise of “non-state actors” have been both a cause and effect of this trend. The concomitant international legal discourses have been those on secession and ethno-nationalism on the one hand, and those on the transformations or disaggregation of states, on transnational networks and multilevel governance, on the other hand. The paper brings together these discourses.
Already before 1989, the facticist concept of the state as a subject of international law had been overcome, and negative conditions of legality (non-use of force and non-violation of self determination) had been added as criteria of statehood (or at least of recognition). After 1989, legality has come to play a positive role, with the idea of a remedial secession, with self determination as a legal title to statehood.
The state, as an international legal subject, of course needs a factual basis. But for the purpose of legal analysis, statehood is a legal concept, and not a “primary fact”. The post-1989 concept of “failed state” refers to this factual side of statehood. And the post-1989 concept of “rogue states” relates to its legal side.
Effectiveness is a bridge-concept which brings together the factual and the legal side of statehood. Effectiveness means both real factual power as opposed to powerless or even virtual institutions. But effectiveness also means power (independent of the lawfulness of its exercise) as opposed to institutions satisfying standards of legality or even legitimacy.
The paper concludes that effectiveness is and should remain a necessary, but is not a sufficient criterion for statehood. Political entities which are arguably effective but not legal (e.g. Abkhazia in Georgia) should not count as states in terms of international law. But political entities which are legal but barely effective (such as Kosovo and Bosnia-Herzegovina) should probably not count as states either. However, the standards of effectiveness are a highly relative one. In the era of globalisation, no state is fully effective. If and only if the international legal rules on states continue to embody the concept of effectiveness in the sense just described, international law will perform well as a factor of order in international relations.
This book examines to what extent the right of self-defence, as laid down in Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, permits States to launch military operations against other States. In particular, it focuses on the occurrence of an 'armed attack' - the crucial trigger for the activation of this right. In light of the developments since 9/11, the author analyses relevant physical and verbal customary practice, ranging from the 1974 Definition of Aggression to recent incidents such as the 2001 US intervention in Afghanistan and the 2006 Israeli intervention in Lebanon. The notion of 'armed attack' is examined from a threefold perspective. What acts can be regarded as an 'armed attack'? When can an 'armed attack' be considered to take place? And from whom must an 'armed attack' emanate? By way of conclusion, the different findings are brought together in a draft 'Definition of Armed Attack'.
- Stefan P. Fleischauer, Non-State Negotiations between China and Taiwan – On the Road to European-Style Integration?
- Tom Hart, How Far Can They Succeed? Systematic Speculation on the Prospects for Further Advances in Cross-Strait Relations
- Der-Chin Horng, The EU Model for a Taiwan-China Free Trade Agreement
- Michael Romancov & Magda Leichtová, Kosovo, Ossetia and Abkhazia – A New Strategy of Superpowers? Challenges and Risks for Taiwan
- Günter Schucher, Where Minds Meet: The “Professionalization” of Cross-Strait Academic Exchange
- Han-yi Shaw, Revisiting the Diaoyutai/Senkaku Islands Dispute: Examining Legal Claims and New Historical Evidence under International Law and the Traditional East Asian World Order
- Chun-Yuan Lin, Global Positioning and Transjudicialism: Taiwanese Experience from a Global Perspective
- Ivan Willis Rasmussen, Regional Conflict and Contrasting Nationalisms: The Impact of Nationalism on the China-Taiwan Conflict Negotiation
- Chapter I Introduction and Purpose
- John H. Jackson, Introductory Note to the Special Issue
- Thomas Cottier & Rosa M. Lastra, Introduction to the Special Issue
- Chapter II The Crisis of 2007-2009: Nature, Causes and Reactions
- Rosa M. Lastra & Geoffrey Wood, The Crisis of 2007–09: Nature, Causes, and Reactions
- Chapter III Architecture and Conceptual Issues
- R. Michael Gadbaw, Systemic Regulation of Global Trade and Finance: A Tale of Two Systems
- Andreas F. Lowenfeld, The International Monetary System: A Look Back Over Seven Decades
- Luis Garicano & Rosa M. Lastra, Towards a New Architecture for Financial Stability: Seven Principles
- Chris Brummer, Why Soft Law Dominates International Finance—and not Trade
- Joseph J. Norton, The ‘Santiago Principles’ for Sovereign Wealth Funds: A Case Study on International Financial Standard-Setting Processes
- Chapter IV Financial Market Regulation
- Christian Tietje and Matthias Lehmann, The Role and Prospects of International Law in Financial Regulation and Supervision
- Rolf H. Weber, Multilayered Governance in International Financial Regulation and Supervision
- Charles A. E. Goodhart & Rosa M. Lastra, Border Problems
- Joel P. Trachtman, The International Law of Financial Crisis: Spillovers, Subsidiarity, Fragmentation and Cooperation
- Steve Charnovitz, Addressing Government Failure Through International Financial Law
- Hal S. Scott, Reducing Systemic Risk Through the Reform of Capital Regulation
- Christine Kaufmann & Rolf H. Weber, The Role of Transparency in Financial Regulation
- Donald C. Langevoort, Global Securities Regulation after the Financial Crisis
- Chapter V Trade, Competition and Tax Related Aspects
- Thomas Cottier & Markus Krajewski, What Role for Non-Discrimination and Prudential Standards in International Financial Law?
- Panagiotis Delimatsis & Pierre Sauvé, Financial Services Trade after the Crisis: Policy and Legal Conjectures
- Gary N. Horlick & Peggy A. Clarke, WTO Subsidies Discipline During and after the Crisis
- Philip Marsden & Ioannis Kokkoris, The Role of Competition and State Aid Policy in Financial and Monetary Law
- Kern Alexander, International Regulatory Reform and Financial Taxes
- Chapter VI Monetary Regulation
- Ernst Baltensperger & Thomas Cottier, The Role of International Law in Monetary Affairs
- Gary Hufbauer & Daniel Danxia Xie, Financial Stability and Monetary Policy: Need for International Surveillance
- Sean Hagan, Enhancing the IMF’s Regulatory Authority
Tuesday, December 7, 2010
Barnidge: The Principle of Proportionality Under International Humanitarian Law and Operation Cast Lead
This chapter critically examines the principle of proportionality under international humanitarian law and contextualizes its vulnerabilities by looking at Israel’s actions during Operation Cast Lead in the Gaza Strip between December 27, 2008, and January 18, 2009. It begins by providing a black letter law overview of the principle. Although widely accepted, the proportionality principle suffers from significant shortcomings that impact its usefulness as a predictable tool for distinguishing between the lawful and the unlawful, particularly in the context of asymmetrical warfare. These shortcomings exist at both a theoretical level, in the abstract, and at a practical level. To focus these discussions, the second half of this chapter looks at the largely negative international reaction to Israel’s actions during Operation Cast Lead. This reaction, which was, and has been, typically couched with a feigned certainty that belies and leaves unanswered the theoretical shortcomings of the principle of proportionality, suggests that, more often than not, proportionality acts as the ultimate exemplar of law used instrumentally, as a tool to further a particular politics and paradigm of power.
Although human trafficking has a long and ignoble history, it is only recently that trafficking has become a major political issue for states and the international community and the subject of detailed international rules. This book presents the first-ever comprehensive and in-depth analysis of the international law of human trafficking. Anne T. Gallagher calls on her direct experience working within the United Nations to chart the development of new international laws on this issue. She links these rules to the international law of state responsibility as well as key norms of international human rights law, transnational criminal law, refugee law, and international criminal law, in the process identifying and explaining the major legal obligations of states with respect to preventing trafficking, protecting and supporting victims, and prosecuting perpetrators. This is a timely and groundbreaking work: a unique and valuable resource for policymakers, advocates, practitioners, and scholars working in this new, controversial, and important field.
- Ted Hopf, The logic of habit in International Relations
- Jean-Frédéric Morin & E. Richard Gold, Consensus-seeking, distrust and rhetorical entrapment: The WTO decision on access to medicines
- Thomas Rixen, Bilateralism or multilateralism? The political economy of avoiding international double taxation
- Ian Bruff, European varieties of capitalism and the international
- C. William Walldorf, Jr, Argument, institutional process, and human rights sanctions in democratic foreign policy
- Andrei P. Tsygankov & Pavel A. Tsygankov, National ideology and IR theory: Three incarnations of the ‘Russian idea’
- Brent E. Sasley, Affective attachments and foreign policy: Israel and the 1993 Oslo Accords
- Stephanie J. Rickard, Democratic differences: Electoral institutions and compliance with GATT/WTO agreements
- Derrick Frazier & Robert Stewart-Ingersoll, Regional powers and security: A framework for understanding order within regional security complexes
- Loretta Malintoppi & Eduardo Valencia-Ospina, Obituary - Shabtai Rosenne
- Annebeth Rosenboom, Shabtai Rosenne (24 November 1917-21 September 2010) A Personal Reflection
- Nikos Lavranos, New Developments in the Interaction between International Investment Law and EU Law
- Julian Arato, Subsequent Practice and Evolutive Interpretation: Techniques of Treaty Interpretation over Time and Their Diverse Consequences
- Julieta Solano McCausland & Enrique Carnero Rojo, Developments at the International Criminal Court
Call for Papers: Post-Conflict Justice and 'Local Ownership': Assessing the Impact of the International Criminal Court
CALL FOR PAPERS
Post-Conflict Justice and ‘Local Ownership’
Assessing the Impact of the International Criminal Court
The Peace Palace / Leiden University (The Hague Campus)
The Hague, Netherlands
May 5-6, 2011
International criminal justice interventions are increasingly seen as necessary components of a broader peace-building process. They are conceived not only as a tool for criminal punishment but also as a means to facilitate the end of hostilities and strengthen domestic legal institutions in post-conflict societies. Moreover, international criminal justice interventions remain largely founded on the assumption that pursuing prosecutions and other forms of accountability has beneficial effects for local constituencies affected by violence and on domestic legal systems more generally.
But are these assumptions well-founded? To date, studies on the short- and long-term impact of international criminal justice interventions remain the exception, while those that have been carried out too often exist in disciplinary isolation. As Eric Stover has argued, “[A] primary weakness of writing on justice in the aftermath of war and political violence is the paucity of empirical evidence to substantiate claims about how well criminal trials achieve the goals ascribed to them” (Stover, 2005). This empirical gap has narrowed in recent years; however many of the common indicators of “successful impact”—deterrence, reconciliation, incapacitation—often reflect the same justifications offered for the creation of international justice mechanisms in the first place, with insufficient attention paid to how the intended beneficiaries of these mechanisms understand and articulate the goals of a criminal justice intervention.
The anticipated closing of the ad hoc and hybrid tribunals, combined with the expanding jurisdiction and practice of the International Criminal Court (ICC), offers an important opportunity to step back and critically assess the social and legal impact of the ICC’s prosecutions and investigations on local populations. More research is needed as to whether and how ‘local ownership’ of the ICC can be operationalized if, indeed, it can. Given that the ICC’s jurisdiction is complementary to that of domestic legal systems, there is an acute need to revisit the modalities and timing of legal reform and international justice in light of the priorities and interests of local constituencies and actors.
This workshop, as part of a larger, four-year study on post-conflict justice and ‘local ownership,’ will critically assess the impact of the ICC’s intervention in its situation-countries to date—Democratic Republic of Congo, Uganda, Central African Republic, Sudan, and Kenya—with particular attention paid to what methodologies might best guide such assessments. To that end, papers are invited under the following four themes:
I. Conceptualizing the Local
- Who are the ‘locals’ in the context of the ICC? How are their interests articulated and how can they be taken into account?
- Can we speak of a unitary ‘local’ or are there multiple locals? How might the distinction between conflict and post-conflict situations shape what local interests are perceived to be?
- To what extent can judicial intervention promote ‘ownership’ as an objective? How might ownership of the ICC’s work be conceived in relation to the state, to domestic political elites, to affected communities, and/or customary legal authorities?
- What is the relationship between ‘individual’ and ‘collective’ interests? How do these distinctions figure in the ICC’s work thus far, and how might they inform the Court’s approach to reparations in the future?
II. Social Impact of the ICC
- What effects are ICC interventions perceived to have had on domestic societies? Does the manner of intervention—self-referral, proprio motu investigation, or Security Council referral—affect how the Court is perceived by local actors?
- What expectations have local communities had of ICC intervention efforts? To what extent have these expectations been met and how have they fallen short?
- How has the ICC sought to explain its activities to local communities and what has been the effect of these efforts on understanding the Court’s work?
- How might the ICC draw upon the experiences of other criminal tribunals (ad hoc and hybrid tribunals) to effectively engage with local communities?
III. Legal Impact of the ICC
- What measures has the ICC taken to engage with local actors, and/or to promote engagement with national justice institutions?
- To what extent has the Rome Statute been used as basis for national-level prosecution efforts? How have its provisions been interpreted at the local level?
- Has the principle of complementarity, and its interpretation by the ICC, had an effect on investigations and prosecutions at the domestic level?
- What techniques have been used to foster the implementation of international criminal law within domestic criminal codes? Should states be allowed a margin of discretion in adapting international criminal standards to local legal tradition and circumstances?
IV. Methods and Methodology
- Is it possible to identify impact measurement criteria for international criminal justice interventions? Who should be responsible for developing these criteria?
- What types of “indicators” of impact at the local level should be taken into account? What risks might be posed by the use of such indicators?
- What methods have been used to determine impact and interests? What techniques and research instruments have been used to collect such data?
- What criticisms have been made of existing qualitative and/or quantitative impact studies? How might these critiques animate future empirical research?
Paper proposals should be submitted electronically by February 1, 2011 to firstname.lastname@example.org. Proposals should include the author’s name and full contact information, and an abstract of no more than 500 words.
This conference is supported through a grant from the Netherlands Organization for Social Research (NWO). Conference registration is therefore complimentary. The conference is sponsored by the University of Leiden – Campus The Hague and the Grotius Centre for International Legal Studies, which is home to the Criminal Law Forum. Papers submitted for the conference may be considered for publication as part of a special symposium issue of the Forum, and/or for an ongoing working paper series on the project website.
For additional information, please see the Grotius Centre’s project website.
Monday, December 6, 2010
- Navid R. Sato, Principle of necessity in China – intellectual property rights
- Mohammad Masudur Rahman & Laila Arjuman Ara, Bangladesh trade potential: a dynamic gravity approach
- Muhammad Abu Sadah, International arbitration contract principles: analysis of Middle East perceptions
- Miron Mushkat & Roda Mushkat, The political economy of Hong Kong's transboundary pollution: The challenge of effective governance
- Afkan R. Isazade, Azerbaijan: legal status of business entities
- Robert H. Smit & Tyler B. Robinson, Cost Awards in International Commercial Arbitration: Proposed Guidelines for Promoting Time and Cost Efficiency
- John P. Bowman, In-House Lawyer's Role in International Arbitration
- Peter J.W. Sherwin & Douglas C. Rennie, Interim Relief Under International Arbitration Rules and Guidelines: A Comparative Analysis
- Harout Jack Samra, Two to Tango: Domestic Grounds for Vacatur Under the New York Convention
- Hans Smit, The Unilateral Arbitration Clause: A Comparative Analysis
- Helen Keller & Luca Cirigliano, Die Krux mit der Blasphemie – Analyse zweier richterlicher Lösungsansätze
- Leonardo Álvarez, Die spanische Dogmatik der Verfassungstreue - Geschichte einer fehlgeschlagenen Rezeption des deutschen Verfassungsdenkens
- Mia Swart, Judicial Lawmaking at the ad hoc Tribunals: The Creative Use of the Sources of International Law and „Adventurous Interpretation”
- Walter Frenz, Die neue GASP
- Christian Wohlfahrt, Veränderungen des Lissabon-Vertrages im Hinblick auf die Doktrin der unmittelbaren Wirkung
- Matthias Kottmann, Plaumanns Ende: Ein Vorschlag zu Art. 263 Abs. 4 AEUV
- Stellungnahmen und Berichte
- Issues in the South China Sea
- Chris Rahman & Martin Tsamenyi, A Strategic Perspective on Security and Naval Issues in the South China Sea
- Aldo Chircop, Regional Cooperation in Marine Environmental Protection in the South China Sea: A Reflection on New Directions for Marine Conservation
- Bjørn Kunoy, Martin V. Heinesen, & Finn Mørk, Appraisal of Applicable Depth Constraint for the Purpose of Establishing the Outer Limits of the Continental Shelf
- Engagement and Escape: International Legal Institutions and Public Political Contestation
- Aaron Kreaden & Dan Moore, Editors' Introduction
- Sébastien Jodoin, Understanding the Behaviour of International Courts: An Examination of Decision-Making at the ad hoc International Criminal Tribunals
- Darren Hawkins & Wade Jacoby, Partial Compliance: A Comparison of the European and Inter-American Courts of Human Rights
- Eric Cox, State Interests and the Creation and Functioning of the United Nations Human Rights Council
Sunday, December 5, 2010
Language carries more than meanings; language conveys a means of conceiving the world. In this sense, national legal systems expressed through national languages organize the Law based on their own understanding of reality. International Law becomes, in this context, the meeting point where different legal cultures and different views of world intersect.
The diversity of languages and legal systems can enrich the possibilities of understanding and developing international law, but it can also represent an instability and unsafety factor to the international scenario. This multilegal-system and multilingual scenario adds to the complexity of international law and poses new challenges. One of them is legal translation, which is a field of knowledge and professional skill that has not been the subject of theoretical thinking on the part of legal scholars. How to negotiate, draft or interpret an international treaty that mirrors what the parties, – who belong to different legal cultures and who, on many occasions, speak different mother tongues – , want or wanted to say?
By analyzing the decision-making process and the legal discourse adopted by the WTO’s Appellate Body, this book highlights the active role of language in diplomatic negotiations and in interpreting international law. In addition, it also shows that the debate on the effectiveness and legitimacy of International Law cannot be separated from the linguistic issue.