- Symposium: Brian Simpson’s Reflections on ‘The Concept of Law’
- Christopher McCrudden, Brian Simpson's Reflections on 'The Concept of Law': An Introduction to the Symposium
- David Sugarman, Brian Simpson's Approach to Legal Scholarship and the Significance of Reflections on 'The Concept of Law'
- Joshua Getzler, Brian Simpson's Empiricism
- Michael Lobban, History, Law and Language; or, What Can Foxes Teach Hedgehogs?
- William Lucy, Success in Legal Philosophy
- Leslie Green, Jurisprudence for Foxes
- Nicola Lacey, Reflections on Brian Simpson
- William Twining, What is the Point of Legal Archaeology?
- Frederick Schauer, Is the Rule of Recognition a Rule?
- Paul Roberts, Oxford Jurisprudence Redux
- Dino Kritsiotis, Public International Law and the Concept of Law Applied
Saturday, January 26, 2013
- Special Issue: Law, Power-sharing and Human Rights
- Sahla Aroussi, Koen De Feyter & Stef Vandeginste, Law, power-sharing and human rights: introduction to a special issue
- Sahla Aroussi & Stef Vandeginste, When interests meet norms: the relevance of human rights for peace and power-sharing
- Christine Bell, Power-sharing and human rights law
- Pacifique Manirakiza, The African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights' perspective on power-sharing arrangements
- Rowland J.V. Cole, Power-sharing, post-electoral contestations and the dismemberment of the right to democracy in Africa
- Chandra Lekha Sriram, Making rights real? Minority and gender provisions and power-sharing arrangements
- Laura Davis, Power shared and justice shelved: the Democratic Republic of Congo
- Thomas Obel Hansen, Kenya's power-sharing arrangement and its implications for transitional justice
Friday, January 25, 2013
- Kevin T. Jackson, Collaborative Governance and International Economic Relations
- Fiona Marshall, The WTO's Trade Policy Review Mecahnism: An Effective Surveillance Mechanism for Aid for Trade?
- Yolanda Gamarra, The Tragedy of the Euro: When the Economy Dominates Politics and the Law
- Cătălin Graure & Marieclaire Colaiacomo, International Sanctions Regimes vs. Privileges and Immunities of the UN Specialized Agencies: The Case of Financial Transactions of the International Fund for Agricultural Development
- Andreas Witte, The Greek Bond Haircut: Public and Private International Law and European Law Limits to Unilateral Sovereign Debt Restructuring
- Rudolf Adlung, Peter Morrison, Martin Roy, & Weiwei Zhang, FOG in GATS commitments – why WTO Members should care
- Douglas A. Irwin, The Nixon shock after forty years: the import surcharge revisited
- Lionel Fontagné & Cristina Mitaritonna, Assessing barriers to trade in the distribution and telecom sectors in emerging countries
- Dominic Coppens, How special is the Special and Differential Treatment under the SCM Agreement? A legal and normative analysis of WTO subsidy disciplines on developing countries
- Cristina Campiglio, Los conflictos normo-culturales en el ámbito familiar
- Hilda Aguilar Grieder, Desafíos y tendencias en el actual Derecho Internacional Privado europeo de los contratos
- Elisa Baroncini, The China-Rare Earths WTO Dispute: A Precious Chance to Revise the China-Raw Materials Conclusions on the Applicability of GATT Article XX to China’s WTO Accession Protocol
- Esperanza Castellanos Ruiz, El concepto de actividad profesional «dirigida» al Estado miembro del consumidor: stream-of-commerce
- Esperanza Castellanos Ruiz, El valor de los Incoterms para precisar el juez del lugar de entrega
- Silvia Feliu Álvarez de Sotomayor, El tratamiento legal del contrato de viaje combinado en el Derecho internacional privado
- Federico Garau Sobrino, ¿Qué derecho internacional privado queremos para el siglo XXI?
- Aurora Hernández Rodríguez & Carolina Macho Gómez, Eficacia internacional de las nacionalizaciones sobre las marcas de empresa: el asunto «Havana Club» ante los tribunales españoles
- Raúl Lafuente Sánchez, El criterio del International Stream-of-Commerce y los foros de competencia en materia de contratos electrónicos celebrados con consumidores
- Luis de Lima Pinheiro, Sobre a lei aplicável ao contrato de seguro perante o regulamento Roma I
- Rosa Miquel Sala, La futura orden europea de retención de cuentas para simplificar el cobro transfronterizo de deudas en materia civil y mercantil
- Alfonso Ybarra Bores, La práctica de prueba en materia civil y mercantil en la Unión Europea en el marco del Reglamento 1206/2001 y su articulación con el Derecho español
- Pablo Zapatero, La liberalización progresiva del comercio de servicios: a vueltas con la formulación de políticas públicas
- Belén García Álvarez, Los derechos de los viajeros en la Unión Europea: a propósito de la comunicación de la comisión al parlamento europeo y al consejo de 19 de diciembre de 2011
- Natividad Goñi Urriza, Alcance de la competencia exclusiva del reglamento 44/2001 en materia de sociedades y personas jurídicas: comentario a la STJCE de 12 mayo 2011 BVG
- Aurora Hernández Rodríguez, Accidentes aéreos y forum non conveniens. Algunas cuestiones en torno al asunto Honeywell en España
- Pilar Maestre Casas, El contrato de trabajo de marinos a bordo de buques mercantes (A propósito de la STJUE de 15 diciembre 2011, Jan Voogsgeerd y Navimer SA, As. C-384/10)
- Alberto Muñoz Fernández, Nuevas iniciativas contra la trata de personas: la implicación de todos los actores (el papel de los particulares)
- Ángeles Rodríguez Vázquez, De nuevo una sentencia del TJUE sobre un demandado cuyo domicilio se desconoce en el ámbito de aplicación del Reglamento Bruselas I
- José Ángel Rueda García, Entra en vigor el acuerdo para la promoción y protección recíproca de inversiones (APPRI) entre España y Vietnam de 20 de febrero de 2006
- Bárbara de la Vega Justribó, Las reglas de Rotterdam y el seguro marítimo de mercancías. Su influencia en el proyecto de ley general de navegación marítima: la duración de la cobertura
- Nicolás Zambrana Tévar, Shortcomings and Disadvantages of Existing Legal Mechanisms to Hold Multinational Corporations Accountable for Human Rights Violations
- Lukas Heckendorn Urscheler, L’impact du droit étranger et international sur les systèmes juridiques nationaux – comparaisons de développement juridique
- Christian Kohler, La Convention de Lugano devant la Cour internationale de Justice: L’affaire Belgique c. Suisse
- Ljupcho Grozdanovski & Araceli Turmo, Le juge national, interlocuteur privilégié de la Cour de justice de l’Union européenne
- Nadja Capus, Ursula Cassani & Sabine Gless, Chronique de droit pénal suisse dans le domaine international (2011) / Schweizerische Praxis zum Strafrecht im internationalen Umfeld (2011)
- Ivo Schwander, Rechtsprechung zum internationalen Sachen-, Schuld-, Gesellschafts- und Zwangsvollstreckungsrecht
- Michel Hottelier & Vincent Martenet, La pratique suisse relative aux droits de l’homme 2011
Morris: Knocking on the WTO’s Door: International Law and the Principle of First Sale Download in UsedSoft v. Oracle
Thursday, January 24, 2013
- Michael O’Flaherty, Freedom of Expression: Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Human Rights Committee’s General Comment No 34
- Steven Greer & Luzius Wildhaber, Revisiting the Debate about ‘constitutionalising’ the European Court of Human Rights
- Marie-Bénédicte Dembour, Gaygusuz Revisited: The Limits of the European Court of Human Rights’ Equality Agenda
- Natasa Mavronicola, What is an ‘absolute right’? Deciphering Absoluteness in the Context of Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights
- Short Articles and Recent Developments
- Dominic McGoldrick, Religion and Legal Spaces—In Gods we Trust; in the Church we Trust, but need to Verify
- Adélaïde Remiche, Yordanova and Others v Bulgaria: The Influence of the Social Right to Adequate Housing on the Interpretation of the Civil Right to Respect for One’s Home
- Bharat Malkani, Sentencing Children Who Kill: One Giant Leap for the US Supreme Court, One Small Step for International Human Rights Law
Lindemann: Referral of Cases from International to National Criminal Jurisdictions: Transferring Cases from the ICTY and the ICTR to National Jurisdictions
Die beiden Ad-hoc-Tribunale zur Verfolgung völkerrechtlicher Verbrechen im ehemaligen Jugoslawien und in Ruanda befinden sich in einer Phase der Abwicklung. Die sogenannten „Completion Strategy“ soll dazu führen, dass beide Gerichtshöfe möglichst bald Ihre Arbeit einstellen können. Zu dieser Strategie gehört mit dem Instrument der sogenannten Referrals (Abgabe) auch die Möglichkeit, dass die beiden Tribunale bei Ihnen anhängige Strafverfahren an die nationale Gerichtsbarkeit von Staaten abgeben, die zu einer Strafverfolgung bereit sind. Mit einer solchen Abgabe kehrt sich das Verhältnis zwischen nationaler und internationaler Strafgerichtsbarkeit in gewisser Weise um: Stand bislang die Abgabe von Strafverfahren aus der nationalen Gerichtsbarkeit zu den internationalen Strafgerichtshöfen im Vordergrund, so geht es nun darum, die internationalen Gerichte dadurch zu entlasten, dass die Verfahren an nationalen Gerichten zu Ende geführt werden. Das neue Instrument der Abgabe wirft zahlreiche völkerrechtliche und strafverfahrensrechtliche Fragen auf, die diese Studie systematisch untersucht.
Le droit international contemporain se trouve face à un défi majeur : assurer la sécurité et la liberté des espaces maritimes, alors que l’on y observe une recrudescence des activités illicites ou dangereuses. L’étude s’inscrit dans le cadre de ce défi et tente de cerner la problématique de l’emploi de la force en mer afin de lutter contre ces activités.
Dans le contexte du développement et de la mise en oeuvre de pouvoirs de police dans les zones maritimes, l’ouvrage démontre l’ambivalence de la police internationale relative à la mer.
Il est caractérisé par une double juxtaposition entre l’objet de l’emploi de la force en mer (activités illicites de personnes privées ou actes illicites des états) et entre les acteurs chargés de lutter contre l’illicite en mer.
L’étude se traduit par deux dialectiques distinctes mais imbriquées. La première, police internationale en mer et police internationale des mers, repose sur les acteurs de l’illicite et déterminera le corps de règles applicable. La seconde, emploi de la force décentralisé et emploi de la force centralisé, met en scène les acteurs de la police relative à la mer et permet de mettre en lumière le besoin croissant d’une gestion commune centralisée des atteintes à l’ordre des mers.
- Chad P. Bown, Emerging Economies and the Emergence of South-South Protectionism
- Matthew Kennedy, The Integration of Accession Protocols into the WTO Agreement
- Kristina M.W. Mitchell, Developing Country Success in WTO Disputes
- Tokio Yamaoka, Analysis of China’s Accession Commitments in the WTO: New Taxonomy of More and Less Stringent Commitments, and the Struggle for Mitigation by China
- TEmily Barrett Lydgate, he EU, the WTO and Indirect Land-Use Change
- Ka Zeng, Legal Capacity and Developing Country Performance in the Panel Stage of the WTO Dispute Settlement System
- Ling Ling He & Razeen Sappideen, Investor-State Arbitration under Bilateral Trade and Investment Agreements: Finding Rhythm in Inconsistent Drumbeats
A recurring question in international criminal procedure is how to ensure that prosecutors are held accountable for their errors and misconduct. When International Criminal Court (ICC) judges encountered the first serious error by the prosecution in Prosecutor v. Lubanga, they opted for an absolutist approach to remedies: the judges stayed the proceedings and ordered the release of the defendant. Although termination of the case was avoided through the intervention of the Appeals Chamber, the standoff between the judges and the prosecution highlighted the dilemmas that the ICC faces in these circumstances. To protect the integrity of its proceedings, the court must order remedies that effectively punish misconduct. At the same time, sweeping remedies may harm other interests of international criminal justice, including deterrence, retribution, and the establishment of an accurate historical record.
In its more recent decisions, the ICC has acknowledged these competing interests and weighed them in determining remedies for prosecutorial misconduct. This Article argues that the court should fully and openly embrace a balancing approach to remedies. Because of the gravity and systematic nature of international crimes, it is essential to recognize and accommodate the significant interests of the international community and victims in preventing impunity and establishing an accurate record of the crimes.
The balancing approach is not without shortcomings — it can be unpredictable, and it risks weakening enforcement of defendants’ rights. To avoid these dangers, the court should take several concrete steps in conducting the balancing analysis: specify clearly the factors that will guide it; place special importance on the fair trial rights of the defendant; temper remedies only when a significant and legitimate goal of the international criminal justice system warrants it; and finally, develop a broader range of responses to prosecutorial misconduct, including sentence reductions, partial dismissals, fines, and disciplinary referrals. By applying a well-defined balancing analysis, the ICC can achieve an approach to prosecutorial misconduct that is both effective and able to accommodate the competing interests of international criminal justice.
Wednesday, January 23, 2013
The existing literature on the substantive and procedural aspects of bilateral investment treaties (BITs) relies heavily on investment treaty arbitration decisions as a source of law. What is missing is a comprehensive, analytical review of state practice. This volume fills this gap, providing detailed analyses of the investment treaty policy and practice of nineteen leading capital-exporting states and emerging market economies.
The authors are leading experts in government, academia, and private legal practice, and their chapters are largely based on primary source materials. Each chapter provides a description of the regulatory or policy framework governing foreign investment (both inflows and outflows) with a historical presentation of the state's Model BIT; an examination of internal government processes and practices relating to treaty negotiation, conclusion, ratification and record-keeping; and a detailed article-by-article analytical commentary of the state's Model BIT, elucidating the policy behind each provision and highlighting the ways in which the actual investment treaty practice of that state deviates from this standard text. This commentary is supplemented by the case law relevant to that state's investment treaties.
For its Research Cluster “European and Global Governance”, the Hertie School of Governance in Berlin invites applications for a
Postdoctoral Research Fellow in Global Governance
from 1 September 2013 for a duration of 2 years, with a possible extension for another year.
The position is a 75% position. We can offer a salary of approximately €30,000 p.a. The European and Global Governance Research Cluster analyses contemporary governance institutions and processes of change beyond the nation-state from a variety of perspectives and disciplines, especially political science and law. It unites faculty members, postdoctoral fellows and PhD students and organizes joint projects, colloquia, and workshops. For more information on the Cluster and its activities, please visit the Cluster's website.
The Cluster seeks to attract a Research Fellow with an intellectual and research agenda that complements and provides links with the research interests pursued by its members. Current research at the Cluster focuses on ‘The Legitimacy of Global Governance’, and sub-projects include ‘Diversity-preserving Global Governance’ (Markus Jachtenfuchs), ‘The Legitimacy of International Courts’ (Mark Dawson), ‘The Liquid Authority of Global Governance’ (Nico Krisch) and ‘Constitutional Interfaces in Global Governance’ (Markus Jachtenfuchs & Nico Krisch).
The Research Fellow will be expected
- To engage in research related to global governance at the highest level,
- To develop a proposal for own research funding, and to contribute to the preparation of joint reseach cluster proposals,
- To provide limited organizational and administrative support to research cluster activities, and
- To teach one course per semester in a Master’s program at the Hertie School.
A successful candidate will hold an outstanding PhD in law or the social sciences, with a strong background in international/European politics or international/European law, will be fluent in English (the working language at the Hertie School), and will have a concept for a research project that is related to the cluster research described above.
To apply: Please send your application, including a CV, an outline of the research project you intend to pursue at the Hertie School (up to 3 pages), a writing sample (publication or working paper), three academic references and a cover letter stating your background, career plans and relevant experiences to Vera Jeiter at the HR Department at firstname.lastname@example.org by 24 February 2013. The outline of the intended research project – indicating links to the research projects of existing members of the Cluster – is central to the application. Please visit www.hertie-school.org for further information about the Hertie School. The Hertie School is an equal opportunity employer. If you should have any questions regarding the position, please contact Prof. Nico Krisch at email@example.com.
- Guillaume Van der Loo, EU-Russia Trade Relations: It Takes WTO to Tango?
- Eva van der Zee, Incorporating the OECD Guidelines in International Investment Agreements: Turning a Soft Law Obligation into Hard Law?
- Enrico Partiti, The Appellate Body Report in US – Tuna II and Its Impact on Eco-Labelling and Standardization
- Shintaro Hamanaka, Unexpected Usage of Enabling Clause? Proliferation of Bilateral Trade Agreements in Asia
- Christina Fattore, Interest Group Influence on WTO Dispute Behaviour: A Test of State Commitment
- Cui Huang & Wenhua Ji, Understanding China’s Recent Active Moves On WTO Litigation: Rising Legalism and/or Reluctant Response?
- Panagiotis Delimatsis, Financial Innovation and Prudential Regulation: The New Basel III Rules
- Jong Bum Kim, The Evolution of Preferential Rules of Origin In ASEAN’s RTAs: A Guide to Multilateral Harmonization
- Gabriel Gari, GATS and Offshoring: Is the Regulatory Framework Ready for the Trade Revolution?
- Ilaria Espa, The Appellate Body Approach to the Applicability of Article XX GATT In the Light of China – Raw Materials: A Missed Opportunity?
- Kofi Oteng Kufuor, Reformulating Material Injury: The Socialization of Ghana’s Antidumping System
- Carsten Weerth, Customs Sanctions of the EU-27: A Detailed Analysis and a Preview on the Modernized Customs Code of the EU and the European Union Customs Code
- Vinitha Johnson, Market Economy Treatment for Chinese Producers under the Indian Antidumping Regime
- Puloma Mukherjee, Seizure of 'Goods in Transit': A GATT Perspective
Tuesday, January 22, 2013
- Ponencias del XXVI Congreso
- Adriana Dreyzin de Klor, La influencia de los derechos humanos en el Derecho internacional de familia: sustracción internacional de niños
- Arturo Santiago Pagliari, La fragmentación: ¿una amenaza para la unidad del Derecho internacional?
- Fredys Orlando Sorto, O projeto jurídico de cidadania universal: reflexões à luz do direito de liberdade
- José Antonio Yturriaga Barberán, La descolonización del Sahara Occidental
- Orlando Mejía Herrera, La influencia de la jurisprudencia comunitaria europea en los principales tribunales de los sistemas de integración latinoamericanos: un estudio exploratorio
d'Aspremont: Towards an International Law of Brigandage: Interpretative Engineering for the Regulation of Natural Resources Exploitation
The exploitation of natural resources in times of conflict has been the object of prolific literature due to the extremely laconic character of the standards of conduct prescribed by the Hague and Geneva Conventions. Such laconicism has led scholars to be creative in ensuring that this central aspect of modern conflicts falls within the scope of existing legal instruments. This paper starts by depicting the rich argumentative creativity developed by scholars and experts to ensure a more comprehensive regulation of what has often been perceived as a form of international brigandage. Subsequently it reflects on the biases of the professional community that has dedicated its efforts to the elaboration of a fairer framework of natural resources exploitation in times of conflict. In particular, it formulates some critical remark on the “just world business” that has dictated the methodology behind most of the interpretative engineering to be found.
This symposium will explore solutions to contemporary global problems from the perspectives of international law and policy. Distinguished scholars from across the United States and overseas will discuss pressing problems in areas of international law including environmental law, investment and trade law, the use of force, and human rights.
The Centre is designed to bring together young international lawyers of a high standard from all over the world, to undertake original research on a common general theme which is determined each year by the Academy. The research work undertaken at the Centre may be included in a collective work published by the Academy.
- Benarji Chakka, Commercial Disputes Settlement Mechanims in International Air Transportation: A Search of Viable Alternatives
- C. Raj Kumar, Human Rights Crisis of Public Health Policy: Comparative Perspectives on the Protection and Promotion of Economic and Social Rights
- Pinki Sharma, Right to Education and Human Rights: National and International Perspectives, with Special Reference to India
- Shorter Articles
- Katariina Simonen, Premature Recognition and Intervention in Libyan Internal Affairs - Who Had the Right to Decide that Gaddafi Must Go?
- Anna Konert, International Court of Civil Aviation - The Best Hope for Uniformity
The conference will give participants insight into the latest developments in international law over the preceding year, especially those most salient for Australia.
Monday, January 21, 2013
Of the office of the Secretary-General (SG) a great deal has been written, but nothing sums up the position quite as well as the remark made by the first SG, Trygve Lie, to his successor, Dag Hammarskjöld, on meeting him at New York’s Idlewild Airport on 9 April 1953, that Hammarskjöld was about to inherit ‘the most impossible job in the world’. Called on to be politician, diplomat and administrator, the SG who speaks with the ostensible authority of the United Nations on matters great and small whilst at the same time working behind the scenes for the advancement of international peace and security. His – there has never been a female SG – is a continuous balancing act, serving the interests of multiple constituencies which did not elect him. Professor James Crawford reflects on the roles and challenges of the UN Secretary-General.
Recent years have seen much speculation over executive branch legal interpretation and internal decisionmaking, particularly in matters of national security and international law. Debate persists over how and why the executive arrives at particular understandings of its legal constraints, the extent to which the positions taken by one presidential administration may bind the next, and, indeed, the extent to which the President is constrained by law at all. Current scholarship focuses on rational, political, and structural arguments to explain executive actions and legal positioning, but it has yet to take account of the diverse ways in which legal questions arise for the executive branch, which have a significant effect on executive decisionmaking.
This Article adds necessary texture to these debates by identifying and exploring the role of distinct triggers for legal interpretation–which this Article terms “interpretation catalysts”–in driving and shaping executive branch decisionmaking, particularly at the intersection of national security and international law. Interpretation catalysts impel the executive to consider, crystallize and potentially assert a legal interpretation of its obligations under domestic or international law on a particular matter, and they can both impede and facilitate change within the executive. Examples of interpretation catalysts include such diverse triggering events as decisions whether to use force against an armed group; lawsuits filed against the U.S. government; obligatory reports to human rights treaty bodies; and even the act of speechmaking. Each of these unique catalysts triggers a distinct process for legal decisionmaking within the executive, and is instrumental in framing the task at hand, shaping the process engaged to arrive at the substantive decision, establishing the relative influence of the actors who will decide the matter, and informing the contextual pressures and interests that may bear on the decision, and thus shapes the ultimate substantive position itself. These distinct mechanisms for decisionmaking each carry their own individual pressures and biases; thus in laying bare the interpretation catalysts phenomenon, this Article demonstrates potential avenues for actors inside and external to the executive branch to predict, to explain, and even to affect executive decisionmaking. This Article will explore the effect of interpretation catalysts on executive legal interpretation, and address some of the implications of this phenomenon for scholars, private actors, courts, and executive branch officials.
This publication succeeds previously published seminars of the Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law (Heidelberg, Germany) dealing with evolving principles and new developments in international law. Due to the limits of traditional dispute settlement in international law and the ongoing scholarly debate on those limits, it focuses on possible innovations and functional approaches to improve international dispute settlement mechanisms. In doing so, it covers a wide variety of topics such as procedures of the WTO, advisory opinions of international courts and tribunals, the privatization of international dispute settlement, the interaction between counsels and international courts and tribunals, and the law-making function of international courts. The aim of this publication is to contribute to the cross-fertilization between these mechanisms and to offer creative impulses for the promotion of international dispute settlement.
- Gonzalo Aguilar Cavallo, Justicia internacional penal: un pilar del Estado de Derecho internacional
- Massimiliano Castellari, El derecho societario en la Unión Europea
- Holger P. Hestermeyer, Los Derechos Económicos, Sociales y Culturales en la Organización Mundial del Comercio
- Rita Lages, La situación actual de los migrantes menores a la luz del derecho internacional público
- Hugo Ignacio Llanos Mardones, La Responsabilidad de Proteger: el rol de la comunidad internacional
- Edmundo Vargas Carreño, El desarme y la regulación de armamentos
- Iris Vittini & Ana María Moure, La importancia de Mercosur frente a los cambios y perspectivas de su institucionalidad jurídica
AUSTRALIAN AND NEW ZEALAND
SOCIETY OF INTERNATIONAL LAW
21st ANNUAL CONFERENCE
CANBERRA, 4-6 JULY 2013
ACCOUNTABILITY AND INTERNATIONAL LAW
Call for Papers – Deadline 14 February 2013
The 21st Annual Conference of the Australian and New Zealand Society of International Law (‘ANZSIL’) will take place from Thursday, 4 July 2013 to Saturday, 6 July 2013 at The Australian National University, Canberra. The conference will be hosted by the Centre for International and Public Law, ANU College of Law. The Conference Organising Committee now invites proposals for papers to be presented at the Conference.
Central to many understandings of international law is the concept of accountability. While the concept takes traditional forms in the context of the law of State responsibility and the responsibility of international organisations, the notion is much broader in scope. The accountability of international law-makers to their communities and to a broader international community for their acts and failures to act; of the State to its citizens in the fields of diplomatic protection and human rights; the evolving law in relation to responsibilities of non-State actors including corporations; global administrative law; the accountability of arbitral tribunals; the accountability of international and national NGOs for their activities; and the role played by civil society institutions in filling lacunae in the international systems of accountability. All these are aspects of the operation of international law that might be fruitfully explored from the perspective of accountability (or its absence). Papers are invited in any field of public or private international law which address some aspect of accountability (or its absence). Topics on which papers would be particularly welcome include:
• Climate change and international law
• Queerying International Law
• International law and technology (including international humanitarian law)
• International law and the regulation of cyberspace
• Middle powers and the Security Council
• Peacekeeping and peacemaking
• Law of the sea
• International dispute resolution
• International environmental law
• International criminal law
• International financial
• International trade and investment law
• International human rights law
Proposals for panels will also be considered, but the organising committee would appreciate notification of such proposals as soon as possible (and preferably well before the closing date for individual paper submissions).
Submission of paper proposalsThose proposing papers for presentation at the Conference should submit
• a one‐page abstract
• a brief curriculum vitae (1-2 pp)
• 150-200 words of bio-data (for possible inclusion in the conference program).
by email to the Conference Organising Committee (firstname.lastname@example.org) by no later than Thursday, 14 February 2013. Please include the heading on your email message ‘ANZSIL Conference 2013 Paper Proposal: [Your Name]’. The Conference Organising Committee will inform applicants of the outcome of their proposals by early March 2013. Further information about the Conference, including program and registration details, will be available on the ANZSIL web-site soon.
Postgraduate research students wishing to present their postgraduate thesis work are encouraged to submit their proposals (marked 'PG Workshop') for presentation at the Postgraduate Workshop (to be held on Wednesday, 3 July 2013 – for further details and call for papers, see the ANZSIL website. The closing date for applications to the Postgraduate Workshop is 14 February 2013.
Sunday, January 20, 2013
The President, Congress, and the courts have long disagreed about who has the power to terminate treaties. Presidents have claimed the power to terminate treaties unilaterally, while Congress and particularly the Senate have argued that because the political branches share the power to make treaties, they should also share the power to terminate them. Unilateral presidential treaty terminations have prompted lawsuits by congressmen and private parties, Senate hearings and reports, and a divided academic literature. Meanwhile, the courts have deemed treaty termination to be a nonjusticiable political question.
This article reframes the debate over treaty termination by looking to treaty formation and analogizing to the Supreme Court’s precedents on the Appointments Clause and removal power. The Appointments Clause uses the same “by and with the advice and consent of the Senate” language as the Treaty Clause and is found in the same sentence of the Constitution. Proponents of presidential power have relied on the Supreme Court’s Appointments Clause jurisprudence to argue that Congress cannot limit the President’s termination power. This article agrees that the oft-proposed requirement of Senate consent prior to treaty termination would be unconstitutional by analogy to the Appointments Clause. However, the Appointments Clause analogy points toward a new solution to the termination debate — namely, that the Senate could impose a “for-cause” restriction on the President’s termination power. In particular, this article proposes a “for-cause” limitation implemented via a reservation, understanding, or declaration at the time of a treaty’s ratification.
Recognizing the constitutionality of a “for-cause” termination reservation alters the terms of the ongoing debate about the interchangeability of congressional-executive agreements and Article II treaties. Both proponents and opponents of interchangeability have noted that the President’s ability to terminate Article II treaties unilaterally makes treaties unreliable as compared to congressional-executive agreements, which cannot be terminated absent action by both Congress and the President. A “for-cause” termination reservation would increase the reliability of Article II treaties and so would shift the comparative utility of congressional-executive agreements and Article II treaties.