The article analyzes the use of autonomous weapon systems (AWS) and the challenges that such systems pose with respect to compliance with the law of armed conflict. Importantly, AWS pose different questions than those surrounding the current use of unmanned aerial systems. For that reason, the article briefly sketches the history of AWS. It then distinguishes the current technologies, which operate either by way of remote control or through automated mechanisms, from systems which are currently under development and which operate either wholly autonomously or at least at a higher level of autonomy and without direct human input while carrying out their missions (II.).
Part III. provides a detailed analysis of AWS under the principle of distinction and the principle of proportionality. It argues that while AWS may be able to satisfy the former principle under certain conditions, it is not clear that the same is true for the latter. The critical challenges with respect to the principle of proportionality and its applicability for AWS is manifold. The principle is difficult to apply in the abstract and thus is difficult to "translate" into machine code in a manner that allows it to be applied to real-life situations and changing circumstances. This problem originates in the lack of a generally accepted definition of what exactly the principle of proportionality requires in each situation. The article therefore concludes that current technology is incapable of allowing AWS to be operated within the existing framework of the law of armed conflict. While there may well be situations in which these requirements are met, these situations include only a fraction of modern military operations and AWS do not provide additional benefits over existing weaponry for these situations. Part IV. provides concluding observations.
Saturday, April 27, 2013
Wagner: Autonomy in the Battlespace: Independently Operating Weapon Systems and the Law of Armed Conflict
Friday, April 26, 2013
- Stefan Leible & Michael Müller, Die Reichweite von Artikel 80 CISG
- Patrick A. Droese B2B Kaufverträge und das GEK: Das Ende des CISG?
- Burghard Piltz, „Bekannter Versender“– Sicherheitskontrollen bei Luftfracht
Jalloh: Prosecuting Those Bearing 'Greatest Responsibility': The Lessons of the Special Court for Sierra Leone
This Article examines the controversial article 1(1) of the Statute of the Special Court for Sierra Leone (SCSL) giving that tribunal the competence “to prosecute those who bear the greatest responsibility” for serious international and domestic crimes committed during the latter part of the notoriously brutal Sierra Leonean conflict. The debate that arose during the SCSL trials was whether this bare statement constituted a jurisdictional requirement that the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt or merely a type of guideline for the exercise of prosecutorial discretion. The judges of the court split on the issue. This paper is the first to critically assess the reasons why the tribunal’s judges disagreed in the interpretation of this seemingly simple legal question. It then attempts to discern the common ground in the judicial reasoning, and argues that the ultimate conclusion that “greatest responsibility” implied that leaders as well as the worst killers may be prosecuted is a welcome jurisprudential contribution to our understanding of personal jurisdiction in international criminal law. The paper makes several contributions to the literature. First, it takes up and highlights a widely ignored but important legal question. Second, it demonstrates why the reasoning of the Appeals Chamber was results-oriented and wrong. Finally, it identifies the lessons of Sierra Leone and builds on them to offer preliminary recommendations on how the greatest responsibility conundrum can be avoided when drafting personal jurisdiction clauses for future ad hoc international penal tribunals.
- Sección de Derecho Económico Internacional
- Gabrielle Marceau & Julian Wyatt, The WTO's efforts to balance economic development and environmental protection: A short review of Appellate Body jurisprudence
- Alvaro Antoni & Michael Ewing-Chow, Trade and Investment Convergence and Divergence: Revisting The North American Sugar War
- James Gard, The Game of World Trade: Reflections on the Trade in Products Derived from Hunting under the WTO and the Public Morals Exception
- Victor Bovarotti Lopes, Exchange Undervaluation: the Solution must come from the WTO
- Sección de Arbitraje Internacional
- Miguel Oural & Edgardo Muñoz, The 2012 Swiss Rules of International Arbitration – More efficiency and effectiveness of arbitration proceedings
- Ezequiel H. Vetulli & Pablo Jaroslavsky, State justice cooperation in international arbitration: interim measures
- René Gayle, Investment treaty arbitration: a yardstick of the rule of law? An investigation the correlation between the rule of law and international investment treaty arbitration
- Luis Alberto González García, Corruption, Money laundering and International arbitration
L’eau est omniprésente sur notre planète : 70% de la surface de la terre est constituée par les océans. Cependant, l’eau douce rendue disponible aux besoins humains ne compte que pour 0,25% du total des réserves mondiales en eau. On comprend dès lors les interrogations actuelles liées à la diminution de la disponibilité de l’eau douce dans le monde. Ce constat, dû à une convergence de plusieurs facteurs tels que l’accroissement démographique, la salinisation progressive des eaux, le déversement de polluants divers ou les aléas climatiques rendent les enjeux de sa conservation et de son utilisation durable d’autant plus vifs.
Dans ce contexte, une approche juridique est nécessaire pour concilier les différents usages de l'eau, assurer sa préservation et son utilisation durable. Le droit international trouve son fondement dans la nécessité d'une approche globale du cycle naturel de l’eau, mais ne rencontre pas moins de difficultés à concrétiser une approche intégrée des différents usages de l'eau.
La prise en considération simultanée de l’eau en tant que marchandise, droit de l’homme, élément du territoire de l’État ou investissement privé pousse le droit international à appréhender juridiquement ces différents aspects. Celui-ci le réalise à travers l’application à l’eau de ces branches de droit spécialisés mais cela aboutit à une approche qui reste fragmentée et sectorielle. Ce constat explique que, face à ce qui est présenté comme une impossibilité du droit international positif à envisager l’eau de façon globale, des propositions doctrinales en appellent à l’élaboration d’un nouveau statut juridique de l’eau au niveau international, mais leur concrétisation se heurte à des obstacles parfois surmontables, parfois insurmontables.
Thursday, April 25, 2013
Prohibitions against transnational bribery suffer from a paradoxical problem of simultaneous over- and under-enforcement. On the “supply-side,” U.S. enforcement against bribery through the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) is increasingly over-aggressive, while enforcement by other developed economies is nearly non-existent. On the “demand-side,” governments of developing economies where bribes take place often have neither an interest in nor the capacity to rein in their corrupt officials.
In light of these shortcomings, this Article proposes reforming the FCPA as follows. First, the SEC should cease paying profits disgorged by corporate defendants into the U.S. Treasury. Second, disgorgements should instead be transferred to the Host country where bribery took place, conditional on the Host government’s cooperation with the FCPA investigation. And third, if cooperation is not forthcoming, disgorgement proceeds should be transferred to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Working Group — an international organization designed to facilitate the enforcement of the OECD Convention on Combating Bribery. Reforming FCPA enforcement in this manner would re-allocate the proceeds from anti-bribery regulation on a global scale so as to properly align the incentives of the parties involved and provide greater access to the information required for effective enforcement.
Today, the decentralized character of international law, together with the notion of functional specialization of its institutions, has resulted in the multiplication of specialized regimes governing almost all vital fields. This happens, for example, in trade law, law of the sea, human rights law, environmental law, humanitarian law, criminal law, etc. Regime Interactions take place both horizontally, between regimes with distinct but overlapping objectives, as well as vertically, between global and regional regimes dealing with the same subject.
The issue of regime interactions has raised much debate in the academic community under different theoretical perspectives (e.g. M. Young (ed.), Regime Interactions, Cambridge University Press, 2011).The interconnections between regimes have the potential to affect the rights and obligation of states involved, creating legal uncertainty in international law if not properly addressed. The complexity of the legal framework can also undermine the effectiveness of regimes in achieving their goals. As an understanding of how regimes interact on the fragmented international plane holds a key to a more complete perspective of contemporary international law, the purpose of this symposium is to make a further contribution to understanding the role of regimes and their interactions in the international legal system.
Call for Expressions of Interest: Student Workshop on Research in International Law, 4th Biennial Conference of the AsianSIL (Reminder)
FOURTH AsianSIL BIENNIAL CONFERENCE
STUDENT WORKSHOP ON
RESEARCH IN INTERNATIONAL LAW
13 November 2013, Wednesday
New Delhi, India
CALL FOR EXPRESSION OF INTEREST
A half-day workshop for research students of international law is to be held on the afternoon of 13 November, the day preceding the Fourth Biennial Conference of the Asian Society of International Law to be hosted by the Indian Society of International Law in New Delhi.
Postgraduate research students in any area of international law will have the opportunity to present their research to fellow students and to receive advice from senior academics. Research should be well advanced, so that the presentations present results as well as plans for research.
Those selected to present their work at the workshop will be given complimentary registration to attend the conference.
Expressions of interest should include:
- A 600-word synopsis of the paper to be presented;
- A 350-word brief biography or curriculum vitae;
- An indication as to whether or not participation is contingent on receiving travel funding from the conference organizers.
Please submit your expression of interest by Monday, 29 April 2013, 2300 hrs, India Time.
Click HERE for online abstract submission of papers.
Click HERE to view details on the AsianSIL-ISIL Conference 2013.
Any questions about the paper selection process may be addressed to: firstname.lastname@example.org
All enquiries about the India Conference 2013 should be directed to: email@example.com
Successful applicants will be informed by mid July 2013 and are required to submit their completed papers and registration to the Conference Organizers by Monday, 30 September 2013. The paper should be between 6000 and 8000 words.
Die Diskussion um das Spannungsverhältnis von Investitionsschutz und Menschenrechten hat in den letzten Jahren mehr und mehr an Gewicht gewonnen. Hierzu hat nicht zuletzt die Arbeit des UN-Sonderbeauftragten für Wirtschaft und Menschenrechte, John Ruggie, beigetragen. Wird das Hauptaugenmerk bei bilateralen Investitionsschutzabkommen zumeist ausschließlich auf die Investitionssicherheit gelegt, finden darüber hinausgehende Ziele wie der Menschenrechtsschutz nur selten bis gar nicht Einzug in die Abkommen.
Die Arbeit stellt exemplarisch Konflikte zwischen investitionsschutz- und menschenrechtlichen Verpflichtungen dar und beleuchtet in diesem Zusammenhang rechtliche Lösungsansätze. Mangels hinreichender rechtlicher Lösungsmöglichkeiten für die in Rede stehenden Sachverhalte beschäftigt sich die Arbeit sodann mit den Verantwortlichkeiten der beteiligten Akteure – Staaten wie Unternehmen –; dies auch unter Berücksichtigung der Arbeit des UN-Sonderbeauftragten für Wirtschaft und Menschenrechte.
- Michael Moran & Michael Stevenson, Illumination and Innovation: What Philanthropic Foundations Bring to Global Health Governance
- Jeremy Youde, The Rockefeller and Gates Foundations in Global Health Governance
- Christian Enemark, Drug-Resistant Tuberculosis: Security, Ethics and Global Health
- Andrew F. Cooper, Civil Society Relationships with the G20: An Extension of the G8 Template or Distinctive Pattern of Engagement?
- William Vlcek, The Global Pursuit of Tax Revenue: Would Tax Haven Reform Equal Increased Tax Revenues in Developing States?
- Feyzi Baban, Cosmopolitan Europe: Border Crossings and Transnationalism in Europe
- Alexandria J. Innes, International Migration as Criminal Behaviour: Shifting Responsibility to the Migrant in Mexico–US Border Crossings
Arbitration clauses in international commercial contracts are often reused from existing contracts. By so doing, the parties choose to apply, for example, either ad hoc or institutional arbitration and the UNCITRAL, ICC, LCIA, SCC, Swiss or other arbitration rules without necessarily being aware of the consequences. Moreover, parties often assume that an arbitration clause has the effect of excluding any kind of interference from a court of law and of rendering any but the chosen law redundant. This book highlights the specific features of various forms of arbitration and enables lawyers to make informed choices when drafting arbitration clauses. Chapters explain the framework for arbitration, its relationship with national law, and the features of the main arbitration institutions in Europe. The book also highlights new trends in other parts of the world that may have repercussions on the theory of international arbitration.
AUSTRALIAN INTERNATIONAL LAW JOURNAL – CALL FOR PAPERS
The Australian International Law Journal is a leading Australian international law journal. It is an annual, peer-reviewed publication, produced jointly by the International Law Association and the Sydney Centre for International Law, under the guidance of an eminent Editorial Board.
The Journal is currently accepting submissions of articles, case notes and book reviews on any area of public or private international law for inclusion in the 2013 annual volume of the Journal.
Articles should normally be between 6,000 and 12,000 words; case notes should be up to 2,500 words; and book reviews should be up to 1,000 words.
Case notes are to provide a short description of the facts and judgment, and then a longer analysis that critiques the judgment. While we are interested in receiving case notes for any decisions addressing international law issues in 2013 or late 2012, we are particularly interested in notes on the following:
- ICJ - Questions relating to the Obligation to Prosecute or Extradite (Belgium v. Senegal);
- ICC-01/04-01/06: The Prosecutor v. Thomas Lubanga Dyilo - Situation in Democratic Republic of the Congo, ICC;
- ICSID Case No ARB/10/5: Tidewater Inc v Venezuela, Decision on Jurisdiction;
- Case of X and Others v Austria 19010/07, Judgment of European Court of Human Rights of 19/02/2013; and
- Case of Eweida and Others v the United Kingdom, Judgment of European Court of Human Rights of 15/01/2013.
Submissions must not have been submitted elsewhere for publication.
Submissions should be sent to firstname.lastname@example.org by 31 May 2013.
For further information, including submission information and Guidelines for Authors, please see the journal's website.
Trends in legal philosophy, international law, transnational law, religion, and political science all point towards the increasing role played by non-state law in both public and private ordering. Numerous organizations, institutions, associations and groups have emerged alongside the nation-state, each purporting to provide their members with rules and norms to govern their conduct and organize their affairs. Indeed, questions regarding non-state law have moved to the forefront of recent debates over legal pluralism and transnational justice, forcing scholars and practitioners to consider the new and multifaceted mechanisms and ways in which we govern ourselves. This International Legal Theory Interest Group symposium, supported by ASIL Academic Partner Pepperdine School of Law, will explore this Rise of Non-State Law by bringing together experts on international law, transnational law, legal theory, and political philosophy to consider the growing impact of law that derives from outside the nation-state.
Wednesday, April 24, 2013
Dupuy & Viñuales: Harnessing Foreign Investment to Promote Environmental Protection: Incentives and Safeguards
Harnessing Foreign Investment to Promote Environmental Protection investigates the main challenges facing the implementation of environmental protection and the synergies between foreign investment and environmental protection. Adopting legal, economic and political perspectives, the contributing authors analyse the various incentives which encourage foreign investment into pro-environment projects (such as funds, project-finance, market mechanisms, payments-for-ecosystem services and insurance) and the safeguards against its potentially harmful effects (investment regulation, CSR and accountability mechanisms, contracts and codes of conduct).
Si Internet est un outil de communication, il pose aux juristes des difficultés en ce qu’il est aussi qualifié d’espace, et non de territoire, pouvant ainsi échapper partiellement à la compétence des États. Il paraît donc nécessaire de comprendre les contraintes techniques que pose Internet pour le juriste internationaliste, sa portée transnationale et la logique libérale qui l’a encadré depuis ses prémisses pour s’interroger sur le sens de l’évolution du droit applicable. Le droit international apporte sans doute des solutions plus utiles que le droit interne en la matière, du fait de sa nature interétatique et transnationale mais a-t-il besoin d’évoluer pour s’adapter aux spécificités de cette nouvelle technologie ? Les règles en vigueur sont-elles suffisantes pour répondre aux menaces et faiblesses de ce système de communication qu’est Internet, dénoncées par les États et plus largement ses utilisateurs ?
L’idée d’étudier Internet et le droit international part du constat d’une trop faible participation de la doctrine juridique internationaliste francophone à la réflexion scientifique relative aux enjeux juridiques d’Internet et du cyberespace alors que le sujet est de plus en plus d’actualité : déclaration de la maison blanche sur les réactions aux cyberattaques en mai 2011, rapport Livingstone sur les enfants et Internet en décembre 2012, conférence de Doha sur la révision du règlement des télécommunications en décembre 2012, manuel de Talinn au printemps 2013 etc.. Ce thème d’Internet et du droit international est largement traité à l’étranger notamment par la doctrine anglo-saxonne, il fait également l’objet d’études de la part d’institutions privées (thinktanks, ICANN, fournisseurs d’accès) ou publiques, nationales (Etats français, américain, canadien, britannique, etc. s’intéressant aux questions de cybersécurité et de cyberattaques) et internationales (ONU, UIT, OCDE, Union européenne, Conseil de l’Europe sur la cybercriminalité). Internet a fait l'objet de plusieurs colloques mais souvent à travers un aspect particulier (ex : les communications électroniques) ou une branche du droit spécifique (ex : le cyberespace et le droit international humanitaire).
En outre, le droit international applicable à Internet dépasse la dichotomie classique entre droit privé et droit public. Le colloque présente en ce sens une grande modernité en répondant à cette tendance actuelle à favoriser la pluridisciplinarité au sein même des juristes.
Il a donc semblé nécessaire d’organiser en 2013 un colloque adoptant une appréhension globale d’Internet par le droit international. Étant le premier colloque généraliste sur le thème d'Internet et du droit international en France, ce colloque a pour objectif de développer un nouveau champ disciplinaire dans la recherche en droit international. La construction d’un système de communication qui souhaitait s’affranchir des frontières étatiques a-t-elle constitué une atteinte à la souveraineté de l’Etat ? La place de l’Etat dans la formation et l’application du droit international s’est-elle trouvée modifiée ? Peut-on dire que l’innovation technologique que constitue Internet provoque aujourd’hui une révolution du droit international ?
Murphy, Kidane, & Snider: Litigating War: Mass Civil Injury and the Eritrea-Ethiopia Claims Commission
Litigating War offers an in-depth examination of the law and procedure of the Eritrea-Ethiopia Claims Commission, which was tasked with deciding, through binding arbitration, claims for losses, damages, and injuries resulting from the 1998-2000 Eritrean-Ethiopian war. After providing an overview of the war, the authors describe how the Commission was established, its jurisdiction, the sources of law it applied, its treatment of nationality and evidentiary issues, and the relief it rendered. Separate chapters then address particular topics, such as the initiation of the war, battlefield conduct, belligerent occupation, aerial bombardment, prisoners of war, enemy aliens and their property, diplomats and diplomatic property, and general economic loss. A final chapter examines the lessons that might be learned from the experience of the Claims Commission, especially with an eye to the establishment of such commissions in the future.
Government officials who are sued in foreign national courts are entitled, as a matter of customary international law, to immunity for their official actions. Scholars disagree, however, about the basis for and scope of such immunity, especially in human rights cases. Although academic articles on this topic are easy find, far less common are clear examples of the State practice and opinio juris upon which customary international law is based. For this reason, recent Swiss and U.S. court decisions explicitly rejecting foreign official immunity in human rights cases assume particular importance. This article analyzes the decisions and their significance for customary international law, focusing in particular on the invocation of immunity, the purpose that this kind of immunity serves, and the claim that immunity in human rights cases is more limited than in other kinds of litigation. It argues based on State practice and as a matter of policy, that the immunity of officials derives from the immunity of the State itself and its purpose is to protect the State. As a consequence, the State must invoke this form of immunity in order to enjoy its protections. The recent decisions are on far weaker footing, by contrast, to the extent they suggest that immunity generally does not apply in cases alleging human rights violations.
Regionalism in International Investment Law provides a multinational perspective on international investment law. In it, distinguished academics and practitioners provide a critical and comprehensive understanding of issues in a field which has grown exponentially in its importance particularly over the last decade, focusing on the European Union, Australia, North America, Asia, and China.
The book approaches the field of foreign direct investment from both academic and practical viewpoints and analyzes different bilateral, regional, and multinational agreements, often yielding competing perspectives. The academic perspective yields a strong conceptual foundation to often misunderstood elements of international investment law, while the practical perspective aids those actively pursuing foreign direct investment in better understanding the landscape, identifying potential conflicts which may arise, in more accurately assessing the risk underlying the issues in conflict and in resolving those issues.
Thorny issues relating to global commerce, sovereignty, regulation, expropriation, dispute resolution, and investor protections are covered, depicting how they have developed and are applied in different regions of the world. These different treatments ensure that readers are able grasp the subject matter at multiple levels and provide a comprehensive overview of developments in the field of foreign direct investment.
Tuesday, April 23, 2013
The negotiation of a patchy but burgeoning network of international investment agreements and the increasing use to which they are put is generating a growing body of jurisprudence which, while still evolving, requires closer analytical scrutiny. Drawing on many of the most distinguished voices in investment law and policy, and offering novel, multidisciplinary perspectives on the rapidly evolving landscape shaping international investment activity and treaty-making, this book explores the most important economic, legal and policy challenges in contemporary international investment law and policy. It also examines the systemic implications flowing from frenetic recent judicial activism in investment matters and advances several innovative propositions for how best to promote greater overall coherence in rule-design, treaty use and policy making and thus offer a better balance between the rights and obligations of international investors and host states.
- Niki Aloupi, Les rapports entre droit international et droit de l'Union européenne. A propos du statut du chef d'Etat membre au regard de l'arrêt Hongrie c. République slovaque du 16 octobre 2012 (aff. C-364/10)
- Silvia Morgades Gil, La protection internationale des femmes pour des raisons liées au genre en droit international. Interprétations récentes des instruments de droit international soutenant des formes de protection subsidiaire
- Amanda Dezallai, La fonction de dépositaire du secrétaire général des Nations unies à l'heure de l'utilisation des nouvelles technologies continuité dans la modernité
Opinio Juris is calling for abstracts for their New Voices Symposium, starting in July. Submissions are invited on any topic of international law from LL.M., Ph.D., and S.J.D. students as well as those in the early stages of their careers (e.g., post-docs, junior academics or early career practitioners within the first five years of finishing their final degree), anywhere in the world.
If interested, please send a 200-word summary of your idea and your CV to opiniojurisblog [at] gmail [dot] com by May 1, 2013. Selection decisions will be made by mid-May. Final submissions between 1000-1500 words will be required two weeks before publication for review, so at the earliest by mid-June.
More information is here.
- April 25, 2013: Sarah Heathcote (Australian National Univ.), The (In)applicability of the Prohibition on the Use of Force to International Organisations
- May 2, 2013: Jure Vidmar (Univ. of Oxford), Democratic Statehood in International Law
- May 9, 2013: Akbar Rasulov (Univ. of Glasgow), International Law in the Long 1990s: Notes Towards an Investigation
- May 15, 2013: John Bellinger III (formerly, Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State), tba
- May 16, 2013: Zachary Douglas (Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies), Investment Arbitration and the Philosophy of Property
- May 23, 2013: Kriangsak Kittichaisaree (International Law Commission), Ending Impunity through International Law: Universal Jurisdiction, Immunities, and the Obligation to Extradite or Prosecute
Monday, April 22, 2013
- "Interview with Bruno Simma" by Christina Voigt, September 10, 2012, University of Oslo
- "Histories of International Law and Empire" by Anne Orford (Melbourne), January 23, 2013, University Paris 1 (Panthéon-Sorbonne)
- "Discourse Theory and International Law: An Interview with Professor Jürgen Habermas" February 2013, Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law (this is the text of the event, not a video)
- "The True Nature of International Law" by Philip Allott (Cambridge), March 11, 2013, University of Cambridge
- Cristián Gimenez Corte, Lex Mercatoria, International Arbitration and Independent Guarantees: Transnational Law and How Nation States Lost the Monopoly of Legitimate Enforcement
- Alexander Somek, Accidental Cosmopolitanism
- Chris Thornhill, National Sovereignty and the Constitution of Transnational Law: A Sociological Approach to a Classical Antinomy
International courts strive to enhance their legitimacy, that is, they would like the members of the international community to perceive their judgments as just, correct and unbiased even if they do not agree with their specific content. This Article argues that international courts take into account the actors they interact with, the norms they apply, and the conditions they operate under as they try to enhance their legitimacy. It demonstrates strategic behavior towards that end in the judgments of two prominent international courts — the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). International courts interact with states under their jurisdiction and with their national courts. International courts try to preserve their legitimacy vis-à-vis states; at the same time, they want to signal that states will comply with them even if they issue judgments states disagree with. International courts can cooperate with national courts and gain legitimacy from interacting with legitimate national courts. The norms that international courts apply constrain their ability to maneuver their judgments in ways that can help their legitimacy, but at the same time help legitimize their judgments. International courts use various tactics to shape their reasoning in order to improve their legitimacy. The behavior of international courts is scrutinized by the domestic public within each state. That public has certain agendas, priorities and preferences. The domestic public's agenda is a condition that the court must respond to, but sometimes courts can also shape that agenda to their benefit.
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).
- Dossier spécial : Israël - Palestine, trois questions actuelles de droit international
- O. Corten, F. Dubuisson, P. Klein, Présentation
- J. Salmon, La qualité d’État de la Palestine
- M. Forteau, La Palestine comme « État » au regard du Statut de la Cour pénale internationale
- O. Corten, L’applicabilité problématique du droit de légitime défense au sens de l’article 51 de la Charte des Nations Unies aux relations entre la Palestine et Israël
- V. Koutroulis, Appréciation de l’application de certaines règles du droit international humanitaire dans les rapports portant sur l’interception de la flottille naviguant vers Gaza
- E. David, La responsabilité des entreprises privées qui aident Israël à violer le droit international
- E. de Brabandere & L. van den Herik, Les obligations des États tiers et des acteurs non étatiques relatives au commerce des produits en provenance du Territoire palestinien occupé
- F. Dubuisson, La répression de l’appel au boycott des produits israéliens est-elle conforme au droit à la liberté d’expression ?
- M. Falkowska & A. Verdebout, L’opposition de l’Union Africaine aux poursuites contre Omar Al Bashir - Analyse des arguments juridiques avancés pour entraver le travail de la Cour pénale internationale et leur expression sur le terrain de la coopération
- Thomas B. Nachbar, Executive Branch Policy Meets International Law in the Evolution of the Domestic Law of Detention
- Kristen E. Eichensehr, Treaty Termination and the Separation of Powers
- Jean Galbraith, Treaty Options: Towards a Behavioral Understanding of Treaty Design
- Stephen Kim Park, Talking the Talk and Walking the Walk: Reviving Global Trade and Development After Doha
- Andrew P. Morriss & Clifford C. Henson, Regulatory Effectiveness & Offshore Financial Centers
Sunday, April 21, 2013
- Martin S. Flaherty, Hong Kong Fifteen Years After the Handover: One Country, Which Direction?
- Kemal Bokhary, The Rule of Law in Hong Kong Fifteen Years After the Handover
- John F. Coyle, The Treaty of Friendship, Commerce and Navigation in the Modern Era
- William Magnuson, International Corporate Bribery and Unilateral Enforcement
- Iren M. Ten Cate, The Costs of Consistency: Precedent in Investment Treaty Arbitration
Papastavridis: The Interception of Vessels on the High Seas: Contemporary Challenges to the Legal Order of the Oceans
The principal aim of this book is to address the international legal questions arising from the 'right of visit on the high seas' in the twenty-first century. This right is considered the most significant exception to the fundamental principle of the freedom of the high seas (the freedom, in peacetime, to remain free of interference by ships of another flag). It is this freedom that has been challenged by a recent significant increase in interceptions to counter the threats of international terrorism and WMD proliferation, or to suppress transnational organised crime at sea, particularly the trafficking of narcotics and smuggling of migrants. The author questions whether the principle of non-interference has been so significantly curtailed as to have lost its relevance in the contemporary legal order of the oceans. The book begins with an historical and theoretical examination of the framework underlying interception. This historical survey informs the remainder of the work, which then looks at the legal framework of the right of visit, contemporary challenges to the traditional right, interference on the high seas for the maintenance of international peace and security, interferences to maintain the 'bon usage' of the oceans (navigation and fishing), piracy j'ure gentium'and current counter-piracy operations off the coast of Somalia, the problems posed by illegal, unregulated and unreported fishing, interdiction operations to counter drug and people trafficking, and recent interception operations in the Mediterranean Sea organised by FRONTEX.