The first section of this paper will briefly describe the plea made by the European Union for recognition of special rules of responsibility for regional economic integration organizations, with an emphasis on rules on attribution (Part 1). The paper will then critically evaluate this claim and the way it was addressed by the ILC in its work on the Articles on the Responsibility of International Organizations (Part 2). Arguing that the Articles on the Responsibility of International Organizations leaves enough room for the development of rules of international responsibility specific to regional economic integration organizations, the paper will then evaluate the possible source for such special rules and gauge the value of EU law for the sake of the lex specialis principle (Part 3). The paper will finally turn to the draft agreement on the accession of the EU to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and will reflect on the extent to which the mechanism set up on that occasion could be conducive to the emergence of special rules of international responsibility for the EU (Part 4).
Saturday, March 30, 2013
d'Aspremont: A European Law of International Responsibility? The Articles on the Responsibility of International Organizations and the European Union
Friday, March 29, 2013
- Werner Bonefeld, Adam Smith and ordoliberalism: on the political form of market liberty
- Seán Molloy, Spinoza, Carr, and the ethics of The Twenty Years' Crisis Y
- Christopher Holmes, Ignorance, denial, internalisation, and transcendence: a post-structural perspective on Polanyi's double movement
- Jessica Auchter, Border monuments: memory, counter-memory, and (b)ordering practices along the US-Mexico border
- Shahar Hameiri, Theorising regions through changes in statehood: rethinking the theory and method of comparative regionalism
- Peter Haldén, A non-sovereign modernity: attempts to engineer stability in the Balkans 1820–90
- Ronan O'Callaghan, Secular theology and noble sacrifice: the ethics of Michael Walzer's just war theory
- Jaremey R. McMullin, Integration or separation? The stigmatisation of ex-combatants after war
- Doerthe Rosenow, Nomadic life's counter-attack: moving beyond the subaltern's voice
- Barry J. Ryan, Reasonable force: the emergence of global policing power
Through transnational litigation, national courts enforce human rights norms “horizontally.” Jurisdictional doctrines and immunity principles both shape the permissible contours of horizontal enforcement. Conflicts may arise between the principles of state sovereignty and non-interference, on the one hand, and the goals of promoting accountability and providing remedies for victims, on the other. This chapter in the forthcoming Oxford Handbook of Human Rights explores the bases for asserting jurisdiction in human rights cases and focuses on the development, and limits, of foreign official immunity and foreign state immunity. It also discusses claims against non-state actors including private corporations for committing or assisting human rights violations. While the horizontal enforcement of human rights norms by national courts carries the potential for both salutary and disruptive effects, national courts remain important developers and enforcers of international human rights law.
- Lucy Reed, The 2013 Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre Kaplan Lecture – Arbitral Decision-Making: Art, Science or Sport?
- Mark Baker & Lucy Greenwood, Are Challenges Overused in International Arbitration?
- Jean-Pierre Harb & Alexander G. Leventhal, The New Saudi Arbitration Law: Modernization to the Tune of Shari’a
- Felipe Suescun de Roa, Investor-State Arbitration in Sovereign Debt Restructuring: The Role of Holdouts
- Michael J. Moser, The ‘Pre-Hearing Checklist’ – A Technique for Enhancing Efficiency in International Arbitral Proceedings
- Mauro Rubino-Sammartano, Optional Additions to Standard Arbitration Agreements Issued by the European Court of Arbitration
- Victor Bonnin Reynes, Forum non conveniens: A Hidden Ground to Refuse Enforcement of Arbitral Awards in the United States
- Denis Brock & Laura Feldman, Recent Trends in the Conduct of Arbitrations
- Research Articles
- Amanda Glassman, Denizhan Duran & Andy Sumner, Global Health and the New Bottom Billion: What do Shifts in Global Poverty and Disease Burden Mean for Donor Agencies?
- Nick Bostrom, Existential Risk Prevention as Global Priority
- Michael Jennings, Climate Disruption: Are We Beyond the Worst Case Scenario?
- Steven Slaughter, Debating the International Legitimacy of the G20: Global Policymaking and Contemporary International Society
- Frans-Paul van der Putten, Harmony with Diversity: China’s Preferred World Order and Weakening Western Influence in the Developing World
- Special Section - Contemporary Maritime Piracy: responding to a Wicked Problem
- Christian Bueger, The Global Fight against Piracy
- Sarah Percy & Anja Shortland, Contemporary Maritime Piracy: Five Obstacles to Ending Somali Piracy
- Douglas Guilfoyle, Prosecuting Pirates: The Contact Group on Piracy off the Coast of Somalia, Governance and International Law
- Basil Germond, The European Union at the Horn of Africa: The Contribution of Critical Geopolitics to Piracy Studies
- Christian Bueger, Orchestrating the Response: Somali Piracy and Ontological Complexity
- Axel Klein, The Moral Economy of Somali Piracy – Organised Criminal Business or Subsistence Activity?
- Survey Articles
- Claire A. Auplat, The Challenges of Nanotechnology Policy Making Part 2. Discussing Voluntary Frameworks and Options
- Special Section - Export Credit Availability and Global Trade
- Andreas Klasen, Export Credit Availability and Global Trade
- Jon Coleman, Why Exporters Need Export Credit
- Geetha Muralidhar, The Role of Export Credit Agencies in a Fast-growing BRIC Economy
- Peter Luketa, Export Credit Availability and the Euro Debt Crisis
- Pedro Carriço, Export Financing in Brazil: Challenges and Opportunities
- Practitioner's Commentary
- Geoffrey D. Stevens, Controlling Munitions Stockpiles: How to Stop the Inadvertent Arming of Insurgencies
- Response to Article
- Djims Milius, ‘Information Aid’ and the Dissemination of Innovation
- Symposium: Global Environmental Risk Governance under Conditions of Scientiﬁc Uncertainty: Legal, Political and Social Transformations
- Oren Perez & Reut Snir, Foreword
- Timothy Meyer, Epistemic Institutions and Epistemic Cooperation in International Environmental Governance
- Adi Ayal, Ronen Hareuveny & Oren Perez, Science, Politics and Transnational Regulation: Regulatory Scientiﬁc Institutions and the Dilemmas of Hybrid Authority
- Reut Snir, Governance by Disclosure: Transnational Convergence in the Field of Nanotechnology
- Dirk A. Heyen, Inﬂuence of the EU Chemicals Regulation on the US Policy Reform Debate: Is a ‘California Effect’ within REACH?
- Arie Trouwborst, Richard Caddell & Ed Couzens, To Free or Not to Free? State Obligations and the Rescue and Release of Marine Mammals: A Case Study of ‘Morgan the Orca’
- Till Markus, Changing the Base: Legal Implications of Scientiﬁc Criteria and Methodological Standards on what Constitutes Good Marine Environmental Status
- Aline Jaeckel, Intellectual Property Rights and the Conservation of Plant Biodiversity as a Common Concern of Humankind
Thursday, March 28, 2013
King's College London presents the International Graduate Legal Research Conference (IGLRC) on 8 and 9 April, 2013. The 2013 keynote lecture this year will be given by Professor David Caron, the newly appointed Dean of the Dickson Poon School of Law. The title of his lecture is 'Scholarship (n): What is valued as, What is, Thrust of' and it is intended to set a reference point for discussions at the conference. The IGLRC is comprised of Panel and Poster Sessions. The Poster Session presents a wonderful opportunity for Conference participants to debate and discuss cutting edge legal research in a supportive environment.
- Alexandra Huneeus, International Criminal Law by Other Means: The Quasi-criminal Jurisdiction of the Human Rights Courts
- Anthea Roberts, Clash of Paradigms: Actors and Analogies Shaping the Investment Treaty System
- Agora: The South China Sea
- Lori Fisler Damrosch & Bernard H. Oxman, Editors' Introduction
- Zhiguo Gao & Bing Bing Jia, The Nine-Dash Line in the South China Sea: History, Status, and Implications
- Florian Dupuy & Pierre-Marie Dupuy, A Legal Analysis of China's Historic Rights Claim in the South China Sea
- Robert Beckman, The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea and the Maritime Disputes in the South China Sea
- Current Developments
- Sean D. Murphy, The Expulsion of Aliens and Other Topics: The Sixty-Fourth Session of the International Law Commission
- Articles on Assessing Progress in International Environmental Law
- Jorge E. Viñuales, The Rise and Fall of Sustainable Development
- Elisa Morgera & Annalisa Savaresi, A Conceptual and Legal Perspective on the Green Economy
- Joost Pauwelyn, The End of Differential Treatment for Developing Countries? Lessons from the Trade and Climate Change Regimes
- Daniel Farber, Beyond the North–South Dichotomy in International Climate Law: The Distinctive Adaptation Responsibilities of the Emerging Economies
- Carlos M. Correa, Innovation and Technology Transfer of Environmentally Sound Technologies: The Need to Engage in a Substantive Debate
- Derek Eaton, Technology and Innovation for a Green Economy
- David N. Cassuto & Rômulo S.R. Sampaio, The Importance of Information and Participation Principles in Environmental Law in Brazil, the United States and Beyond
- General Articles
- Veerle Heyvaert, What's in a Name? The Covenant of Mayors as Transnational Environmental Regulation
- Anne-Sophie Tabau, Shared Accountability of the European Union and its Member States in the Climate Change Regime
- Meinhard Doelle, Nigel Bankes & Louie Porta, Using Strategic Environmental Assessments to Guide Oil and Gas Exploration Decisions: Applying Lessons Learned from Atlantic Canada to the Beaufort Sea
The similarity between investment treaty law and systems of public law is an observable dynamic. From the adoption by investment treaty tribunals of public law terms in the interpretation of substantive guarantees of protection to questions about the degree of deference owed to states in the adjudication of investor-state claims, the litigation of public law concepts has become central to the investment treaty regime. This conference looks at this nexus from both practical and theoretical perspectives through panels addressing Proportionality, Legitimate Expectations and Standards of Review.
Among other issues, panels will look at the sources of public law concepts in investment treaty law, asking whether such concepts are intrinsic parts of treaty standards or instead form part of custom or 'general principles of law'. Panels will also address the practical challenges presented for arbitrators and litigators in hearing and preparing cases in which public law concepts may feature prominently. More broadly, panels will consider whether the adoption of public law concepts rooted in particular systems of law might tend to assimilate treaty guarantees to those systems rather than aid the ascertainment of treaty meaning.
Panels will address:
- Proportionality. The concept of proportionality cuts across the interpretation and application of treaty provisions. But what is the positive basis for its invocation as a principle of interpretation in the application of treaties that make no mention of it as a value? Is it an inherent aspect of certain treaty standards, or is it a 'general principle of law' or custom? Does its use tend to 'Europeanize' treaty guarantees? What challenges does it present for arbitrators and litigators in hearing and preparing cases?
- Legitimate Expectations. Like proportionality, the concept of legitimate expectations cuts across the interpretation and application of treaty provisions. And like proportionality as well, questions remain about its pedigree in investment treaty cases. In nomenclature at least it is a concept of European public law, although it finds analogy in US law as well. Does municipal public law have anything to add to the use of this concept in investment treaty interpretation or in the application of investment treaty standards? Are legitimate expectations an inherent part of substantive protections like fair and equitable treatment? What is the standard of proof to establish a 'legitimate' expectation?
- Standards of Review. In domestic systems, the balance of power between the judiciary and other branches of government depends upon the use of standards of review by the courts. In European public law the concept of margins of appreciation has been adopted to a similar end. Public international law has few rules on the subject and such rules as are found in general PIL are complicated by the particular nature of investor-State arbitration. Is investor-State developing its own rules and principles? Does the increasingly variegated character of investment treaties make this possible or proper?
Victim states occasionally use force to target non-state actors that have allegedly attacked the victim state, on the pretext that the host state is “unwilling or unable” (“ineffective”) to act. The international law permissibility of such force is unclear: state responsibility principles do not hold ineffective states liable, the universe of state practice is small and the International Court of Justice and some scholars deny the legality of such force while others disagree. This article is the first dedicated to a critical analysis of the “unwilling or unable” doctrine from both, a law and policy perspective. It argues that, although a right of self-defense in ineffective host states may be desirable in light of contemporary security threats, extant scholarship on the doctrine suffers from blind spots. Not only has debate been almost exclusively doctrinal but, in focusing myopically on the security concerns of victim states vis a vis non-state actors, scholars have paid little attention to security vulnerabilities of host states vis a vis victim states. In fact, much of the literature on the “unwilling or unable” doctrine unquestionably assumes that it should be the victim state that should self-determine when another state is ineffective and fails to recognize two conditions that make erroneous determinations particularly likely. First, host states tend to be weak states, susceptible to coercion and unable to retaliate against misbehavior by powerful victim states. Second, even if the international community is willing to punish erroneous uses of force, since host state ineffectiveness may not be observable, detection of misbehavior becomes very difficult. This article argues that any serious analysis of the doctrine must be based on an appreciation of these conditions and suggests that a right of self-defense on grounds of state ineffectiveness must thus be subject to corresponding constraints. It accordingly proposes an alternate framework to induce transparency: victim states seeking to rely on ineffectiveness as grounds for self-defense must disclose claims of host state ineffectiveness to the Security Council which acts as a fact-finder and information transmitter for the benefit of the international community. The host state can challenge the claim of ineffectiveness while the Counter-Terrorism Committee can provide empirical information as to that host state’s ability and willingness to comply with anti-terrorism obligations.
- Tadeuxz Kugler, Kyung Kook Kang, Jacek Kugler, Marina Arbetman-Rabinowitz, & John Thomas, Demographic and Economic Consequences of Conflict
- Christina J. Schneider & Johannes Urpelainen, Distributional Conflict Between Powerful States and International Treaty Ratification
- Yagil Levy, How Military Recruitment Affects Collective Action and its Outcomes
- Mehmet Ugur, Europeanization, EU Conditionality, and Governance Quality: Empirical Evidence on Central and Eastern European Countries
- Nils B. Weidmann & Idean Salehyan, Violence and Ethnic Segregation: A Computational Model Applied to Baghdad
- David Lektzian & Glen Biglaiser, Investment, Opportunity, and Risk: Do US Sanctions Deter or Encourage Global Investment?
- Luke Glanville, The Myth of “Traditional” Sovereignty
- Krzysztof J. Pelc, The Cost of Wiggle-Room: Looking at the Welfare Effects of Flexibility in Tariff Rates at the WTO
- Christina J. Schneider & Jennifer L. Tobin, Interest Coalitions and Multilateral Aid Allocation in the European Union
- Andrea Oelsner, The Institutional Identity of Regional Organizations, Or Mercosur’s Identity Crisis
- Sebastian Karcher & David A. Steinberg, Assessing the Causes of Capital Account Liberalization: How Measurement Matters
- Lucian M. Ashworth, Mapping a New World: Geography and the Interwar Study of International Relations
- Ayşe Zarakol, Revisiting Second Image Reversed: Lessons from Turkey and Thailand
- David H. Bearce, Steven E. Finkel, Anibal S. Pérez-Liñán, Juan Rodríguez-Zepeda & Lena Surzhko-Harned, Has the New Aid for Trade Agenda been Export Effective? Evidence on the Impact of US AfT Allocations 1999–2008
- Erik Gartzke & Alex Weisiger, Permanent Friends? Dynamic Difference and the Democratic Peace
- Michael Mousseau, The Democratic Peace Unraveled: It’s the Economy
- James Lee Ray, War on Democratic Peace
- Allan Dafoe, John R. Oneal & Bruce Russett, The Democratic Peace: Weighing the Evidence and Cautious Inference
Wednesday, March 27, 2013
This short paper advances the hypothesis that international law, far from being a purely neutral “indeterminate” technology that can lend itself to both good and bad uses, might actually be structurally biased to produce exploitative outcomes. This hypothesis is presented through several steps. The first part presents Martti Koskenniemi’s indeterminacy thesis, followed by Anthony Anghie’s depiction of international law as a technology. The possibility of an inherent bias of technology, such that it will lend itself to exploitative uses, even with the best of intentions, is then introduced in Section III, using the writing of radical ecological thinkers Ran Prieur and Derrick Jensen. This theory is then discussed specifically in relation to international law in Section IV.
"Responsibility to Protect in Theory and Practice" is the first conference devoted exclusively to the concept of Responsibility to Protect (R2P/RtoP) in this part of the world, with the objective to create an opportunity for scholars and practitioners to engage in an interdisciplinary academic debate on the theoretical and practical implications of the concept of Responsibility to Protect (R2P). The conference will be organized as a forum where international legal experts and researchers will have the opportunity to participate in a discourse with international political scientists to advance the scientific research on the issues related to R2P and the applicability of the concept in practice. The keynote speaker at the conference will be Dr Edward Luck, former Special Adviser of the UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon on Responsibility to Protect. The introductory lecture will be held by Adama Dieng, current Special Adviser of the UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon on Prevention of Genocide. More than 90 speakers and poster presenters from almost 40 countries and international institutions will discuss issues regarding R2P in 3 parallel panels each day. A meeting of regional R2P focal points will we held in Slovenia a day before the conference (April 10, 2013) and the regional R2P focal points will participate at the conference in a separate panel on the first day (April 11, 2013).
Women were historically treated in wartime as property. Yet in the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907, prohibitions against pillaging property did not extend to the female body. There is a gap of nearly a hundred years between those early prohibitions of pillage and the prohibition of rape finally enacted in the Rome Statute of 1998. In Looting and Rape in Wartime, Tuba Inal addresses the development of these two separate "prohibition regimes," exploring why states make and agree to laws that determine the way war is conducted, and what role gender plays in this process.
Inal argues that three conditions are necessary for the emergence of a global prohibition regime: first, a state must believe that it is necessary to comply with the prohibition and that to do otherwise would be costly; second, the idea that a particular practice is undesirable must become the norm; finally, a prohibition regime emerges with state and nonstate actors supporting it all along the way. These conditions are met by the prohibition against pillage, which developed from a confluence of material circumstances and an ideological context: the nineteenth century fostered ideas about the sanctity of private property, which made the act of looting seem more abhorrent. Meanwhile, the existence of conscripted and regulated armies meant that militaries could take measures to prevent it. In that period, however, rape was still considered a crime of passion or a symptom of behavioral disorder—in other words, a distortion of male sexuality and outside of state control—and it would take many decades to erode the grip of those ideas. Only toward the end of the twentieth century did transformations in gender ideology and the increased participation of women in politics bring about broad cultural shifts in the way we perceive sexual violence, women, and women's roles in policy and lawmaking.
- Part I Topics
- Special Focus: International Competition Law and Policy
- William E. Kovacic, Distinguished Essay: Good Agency Practice and the Implementation of Competition Law
- Alden F. Abbott & Shanker Singham, Competition Policy and International Trade Distortions
- Hanspeter Tschaeni & Valérie Engammare, The Relationship between Trade and Competition in Free Trade Agreements: Developments since the 1990s and Challenges
- Peter Hilpold, Regulating International Competition Issues by Regional Trade Agreements: A Stepping Stone Towards a Plurilateral Trade Agreement?
- Anestis Papadopoulos, External Competition Law of the EU
- Johan van de Gronden, Transnational Competition Law and Public Services
- Trudi Hartzenberg, Competition Policy in Africa
- Gralf-Peter Calliess, Jens Mertens, & Moritz Renner, Privatizing the Economic Constitution: Can the World Market Reproduce its own Institutional Prerequisites?
- Yane Svetiev, Competition Law and Development Policy: Subordination, Self-Sufficiency or Integration?
- Part II Regional Integration
- Lucrezia Tuis & Colin M. Brown, The European Union and Regional Trade Agreements
- Patrick C. Reed, US International Trade Agreements in the Western Hemisphere: Legal Developments in 2011
- James T. Gathii, The Status of African Regional Trade Agreements
- Ashique Rahman & Chester Brown, Regional Economic Integration in Southeast Asia
- Part III International Economic Institutions
- Wolfgang Bergthaler & Andrew Giddings, Recent Quota and Governance Reforms at the International Monetary Fund
- Hans-Michael Wolffgang & Christopher Dallimore, The Valuation of Goods for Customs Purposes
- Andrea Wechsler, WIPO and the Public–Private Web of Global Intellectual Property Governance
- Marc Bungenberg & Catharine Titi, Developments in International Investment Law
- Edwini Kessie, The Future of the Doha Development Agenda
- Andreas Krallmann, WTO Dispute Settlement: Current Cases
- Elisabeth Tuerk & Diana Rosert, UNCTAD’s Role in Addressing International Investment Trends and Challenges
‘Przegląd Prawa Międzynarodowego’ provides brief descriptions of current issues important to development of international law, predominantly focusing on Public International Law. Thanks to cooperation of editors specialising in various branches of international law and speaking many foreign languages, it offers Polish readers a synthetic, regular review of information published by international organisations, international and domestic courts, blogs and media. Brief posts contain direct links to relevant pages and necessary documents. Readers are welcomed to leave their comments and discuss at the PPM website.
- Steven Ratner, Ethics and international law: integrating the global justice project(s)
- Seva Gunitsky, Complexity and theories of change in international politics
- Magnus Reitberger, License to kill: is legitimate authority a requirement for just war?
- Symposium: The politics of international recognition
- Hans Agné, Introduction
- Jens Bartelson, Three concepts of recognition
- Eva Erman, The recognitive practices of declaring and constituting statehood
- Thomas Lindemann, The case for an empirical and social-psychological study of recognition in international relations
- Oliver Kessler & Benjamin Herborth, Recognition and the constitution of social order
- Christine Chwaszcza, ‘Recognition’: some analytical remarks
- Mikulas Fabry, Theorizing state recognition
- Stephen D. Krasner, Recognition: organized hypocrisy once again
Tuesday, March 26, 2013
- Axel Springer AG v. Germany; Von Hannover v. Germany (No. 2) (Eur. Ct. H.R.), with introductory note by Guido Westkamp
- Aksu v. Turkey (Eur. Ct. H.R.), with introductory note by Christiane Bourloyannis-Vrailas
- Obligation to Prosecute or Extradite (Belg. v. Sen.), Judgment (I.C.J.), with introductory note by Cindy Galway Buys
- Ahmadou Sadio Diallo (Guinea v. Dem. Rep. Congo), Compensation Owed by the Democratic Republic of the Congo to the Republic of Guinea (I.C.J.), with introductory note by Chiara Giorgetti
- Appellate Body Report, United States - Measures Affecting the Production and Sale of Clove Cigarettes (WTO), with introductory note by Tania Voon
- Charter of the Financial Stability Board, with introductory note by Christopher J. Brummer
- Delimitation of the Maritime Boundary Between Bangladesh and Myanmar in the Bay of Bengal (Bangl. v. Myan.) (ITLOS), with introductory note by David P. Riesenberg
- Charles E. Ziegler, Energy Pipeline Networks and Trust: The European Union and Russia in Comparative Perspective
- David A. Scott, Multipolarity, Multilateralism and Beyond ...? EU– China Understandings of the International System
- Alper Kaliber, Contextual and Contested: Reassessing Europeanization in the Case of Turkey
- Saskia Stachowitsch, Military Privatization and the Remasculinization of the State: Making the Link Between the Outsourcing of Military Security and Gendered State Transformations
- Daniel J. Levine, Why Hans Morgenthau Was Not a Critical Theorist (and Why Contemporary IR Realists Should Care)
- Symposium: Climate Change Justice
- Eric A. Posner & David Weisbach. International Paretianism: a defense
- Daniel A. Farber, Carbon leakage versus policy diffusion: the perils and promise of subglobal climate action
- Henry Shue, Climate hope: implementing the exit strategy
- Matthew Ranson & Robert N. Stavins, Post-Durban climate policy architecture based on linkage of cap-and-trade systems
- Dale Jamieson, Climate change, consequentialism, and the road ahead
- Martha C. Nussbaum, Climate change: why theories of justice matter
- Yoram Margalioth, Analysis of the US case in climate change negotiations
- Paul Baer, Who should pay for climate change? “Not me”
- R.T. Pierrehumbert, Cumulative carbon and just allocation of the global carbon commons
- Christian Gollier, The debate on discounting: reconciling positivists and ethicists
- Marc Fleurbaey & Stéphane Zuber, Climate policies deserve a negative discount rate
- Lukas H. Meyer, Why historical emissions should count
- Manfred Nowak, Comments on the UN High Commissioner’s Proposals Aimed at Strengthening the UN Human Rights Treaty Body System
- Charles G. Ngwena, Developing Regional Abortion Jurisprudence: Comparative Lessons for African Charter Organs
- Barbara Oomen, The Rights for Others: The Contested Homecoming of Human Rights in the Netherlands
- Maya Sabatello, Are the Kids All Right? A Child-Centred Approach to Assisted Reproductive Technologies
- Álvaro Paúl, Translation Challenges of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and Cost-Effective Proposals for Improvement
- Ajit Singh, American Convention on Human Rights Articles 46(1)(a) and 46(2)(c): Achilles Heel or Trojan Horse?
- Gabriella Citroni, Measures of Reparation for Victims of Gross Human Rights Violations: Developments and Challenges in the Jurisprudence of Two Regional Human Rights Courts
- Erick Acuña Pereda, The Institutionalization of People with Mental Disabilities: Comparative Analysis between its Treatment under the Inter-American and European System of Human Rights
- Laurence Burgorgue-Larsen, Interpreting the European Convention: What can the African Human Rights System Learn from the Case law of the European Court of Human Rights on the Interpretation of the European Convention?
- Norberto E. Garay Boza, Gobernar desde abajo: Del control de convencionalidad a la instrumentalización de la inversión estructural de la pirámide kelseniana
- Yuri Alexander Romaña-Rivas, Advocacy for a U.S. Commission of Inquiry on Torture in the Context of the “War on Terror” Inspired by the Latin American Experience: Chile and El Salvador
- Eric Tardif, El sistema africano: Pilar más incipiente de la trilogía de mecanismos regionales de salvaguardia de los derechos humanos
- Jan Schneider, Implementation of Judgments: Should Supervision be Unlinked from the General Assembly of the Organization of American States?
SIDIBlog is the blog of the Italian Society of International Law. It is a space for discussion and debate over current issues of Private International Law, Public International Law and European Union Law. All scholars and practicing lawyers having an interest in these topics are invited to participate through posts and comments. Posts are brief pieces (maximum 1500 words) that may discuss a relevant topic, present an innovative idea, or comment upon recent developments. They may be sent to the following e-mail address: email@example.com
Monday, March 25, 2013
Alter, Helfer, & McAllister: A New Human Rights Court for West Africa: The ECOWAS Community Court of Justice
The ECOWAS Community Court of Justice (ECCJ) is an increasingly active and bold international adjudicator of human rights violations in West Africa. Since acquiring jurisdiction over human rights issues in 2005, the ECCJ has issued several path-breaking judgments, including against the Gambia for the torture of journalists, against Niger for condoning modern forms of slavery, and against Nigeria for failing to regulate the multinational oil companies that polluted the Niger Delta. This article explains why ECOWAS member states authorized the ECCJ to review human rights suits by individuals but did not allow private actors to complain about violations of regional economic rules. In addition to explaining the ECCJ’s striking transformation, the article makes several other contributions. It illustrates how an existing international institution can be redeployed for new purposes; it highlights the contributions of civil society, supranational officials, and ECOWAS judges to expanding the Court’s mandate; it analyzes the ECCJ’s distinctive jurisdiction and access rules; and it shows how the ECCJ has survived challenges to its authority. Our analysis is based on original field research in Nigeria, including more than two-dozen interviews with judges, government officials, attorneys, and NGOs. We also draw upon the first-ever coding of all ECCJ decisions through 2010. The ECCJ’s transformation is also theoretically significant. The article’s final section and conclusion reassesses theories of regional integration, institutional change, and transnational legal mobilization in light of the ECCJ’s experience to demonstrate the implications of our findings for international institutions beyond West Africa.
Historia del pensamiento iusinternacionalista español del siglo XX inicia una serie de estudios sobre la historia de la historiografía del derecho internacional en España. Si la crítica post-colonial y el constitucionalismo internacional proporcionan dos visiones contrapuestas del legado Vitoriano, cuyo misterio continúan explorando diversas corrientes doctrinales en la actualidad, con esta obra se contribuye a dar luz a cómo la tradición española del derecho internacional llegó a ser recobrada en torno a un olvidado Vitoria en el último tercio del siglo XIX, y a desenterrar los efectos que tal recuperación tuvo en la propia evolución del estudio del Derecho internacional en una España en la que, por entonces, empezaban a despuntar los estudios profesionales del derecho internacional. La doctrina iusinternacionalista española ha limitado, hasta este momento, su interés historiográfico -salvo contadas excepciones- al examen de la genealogía iusinternacionalista de la Escuela de Salamanca desde la perspectiva de la guerra y el derecho humanitario y, por extensión, de los derechos humanos. En un contexto en que sólo, recientemente, la doctrina iusinternacionalista europea ha ido venciendo la repugnancia de observarse en el espejo de los más oscuros legados del Derecho en Europa, y en las sombras que el nacional-socialismo, el fascismo, el imperialismo y el colonialismo arrojan sobre sus tradiciones jurídicas, la doctrina iusinternacionalista española comienza a recuperar su pasado historiográfico.
International Criminal Procedure: Principles and Rules is a comprehensive study of international criminal proceedings written by over forty leading experts in the field. The book offers a systematic overview and detailed comparison of the standards governing the conduct of proceedings in all major international and internationalized criminal courts from the Nuremberg and Tokyo Tribunals to the recently established Cambodian Extraordinary Chambers and the Special Tribunal for Lebanon.
Based on a major research project, the study covers all procedural phases from the initiation of investigation to the appeals process. It pays special attention to the crosscutting themes which shape the contemporary discourse on international criminal justice, including the law of evidence, the defence issues, the procedural role of victims, and negotiated dismissal of international crime cases.
The book not only takes stock of the procedural legacy of the UN ad hoc Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda and the International Criminal Court, but also reflects on the future directions of international criminal procedure. Investigating the tribunals' procedural law and practice through the prism of human rights law, domestic legal traditions, and tribunals' special objectives, the expert group puts forth proposals on how the challenges facing international criminal jurisdictions can best be met.
The Power of Human Rights (published in 1999) was an innovative and influential contribution to the study of international human rights. At its center was a 'spiral model' of human rights change which described the various socialization processes through which international norms were internalized into the domestic practices of various authoritarian states during the Cold War years. The Persistent Power of Human Rights builds on these insights, extending its reach and analysis. It updates our understanding of the various causal mechanisms and conditions which produce behavioural compliance, and expands the range of rights-violating actors examined to include democratic and authoritarian Great Powers, corporations, guerrilla groups, and private actors. Using a unique blend of quantitative and qualitative research and theory, this book yields not only important new academic insights but also a host of useful lessons for policy-makers and practitioners.
Sunday, March 24, 2013
- Special Issue: Exploring the Legacy of a Life Dedicated to Humanitarianism: A Special Issue in Celebration of the 100th Anniversary of Raoul Wallenberg
- Kofi Annan, Foreword
- J. Craig Barker, The Function of Diplomatic Missions in Times of Armed Conflict or Foreign Armed Intervention
- Nina H. B. Jørgensen, “The Next Darfur” and Accountability for the Failure to Prevent Genocide
- Paul Blokker, Dilemmas of Democratisation from Legal Revolutions to Democratic Constitutionalism?
- Joseph Siegle, Overcoming Dilemmas of Democratisation: Protecting Civil Liberties and the Right to Democracy
- Antônio Augusto Cançado Trindade, Enforced Disappearances of Persons as a Violation of Jus Cogens: The Contribution of the Jurisprudence of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights
- Jeremy Sarkin, Why the Prohibition of Enforced Disappearance Has Attained Jus Cogens Status in International Law