In 1994, the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) coined the term ‘human security’ in the seminal UNDP Human Development Report. This report approached ‘security’ for the first time from a holistic perspective: security would no longer be viewed from a purely military perspective, but rather it would encapsulate economic, food, health, environmental, personal, community and political security. Although the concept of human security accords a higher status to individual than to governmental interests, human security discourses have continually emphasised the central role of States as providers of human security. This volume challenges this paradigm, and highlights the part played by non-state actors in both threatening human security and also in rescuing or providing relief to those whose human security is endangered. It does so from a legal perspective, (international) law being one of the instruments used to realise human security as well as being a material source or guiding principle for the formation of human security-enhancing policies. In particular, the volume critically discusses how various non-state actors, such as armed opposition groups, multinational corporations, private military / security companies, non-governmental organisations, and national human rights institutions, participate in the construction of such policies, and how they are held legally accountable for their adverse impact on human security.
Saturday, January 11, 2014
Friday, January 10, 2014
- January 23, 2014: Qudsi Rasheed (Foreign and Commonwealth Office, United Kingdom), International Law and Foreign Policy: Some Practical Questions
- January 30, 2014: Kevin Jon Heller (SOAS, Univ. of London), What Is an International Crime?
- February 6, 2014: Martti Koskenniemi (Univ. of Helsinki), International Law and the Emergence of Mercantile Capitalism: Grotius to Smith
- February 13, 2014: Susan Breau (Univ. of Reading), Do Dead Civilians have Human Rights? International Legal Obligations towards Civilian Casualties in Armed Conflict
- February 20, 2014: Elies van Sliedregt (Univ. of Amsterdam), Title TBA
- February 27, 2014: Charles N Brower (20 Essex Street), Trashed, Or Treasured? Which Will Be the Fate of International Dispute Resolution?
- March 6, 2014: Malgosia Fitzmaurice (Queen Mary, Univ. of London), Whaling: The Gordian Knot of Animal Rights and Cultural Diversity
- March 13, 2014: Michael Waibel (Univ. of Cambridge), Are Arbitrators Political?
Stahn: Between 'Constructive Engagement', 'Collusion' and 'Critical Distance': The ICRC and the Development of International Criminal Law
This article examines the approach and relationship of the ICRC to International Criminal Law. It argues that the ICRC’s position navigates between normative support, collusion and institutional restraint. The ICRC has shaped some of the foundations of contemporary criminal justice, through its early focus on the implementation of International Humanitarian Law (e.g., through implementation and prosecution of ‘grave breaches) and its role as ‘gentle modernizer’ of the law. But it has at the same time kept a critical distance towards International Criminal Law. Its approach is marked by three cardinal principles: ‘structural independence’, ‘strategic engagement’ and ‘systemic support’. It is grounded in the distinct roles of the ICRC (‘guardianship’, ‘protection’, advocacy and dissemination’) and deeper structural challenges in the relationship between International Humanitarian Law and International Criminal Law. This contribution argues for a re-conceptualization of some of the existing approaches. It claims that it is unhelpful to theorize the relationship between the ICRC and International Criminal Courts and Tribunals (ICCTs) on the basis of the premise that International Humanitarian Law provides a set of ‘primary rules’ that are enforced through criminal institutions, or complemented by ‘secondary rules’ under International Criminal Law (e.g., war crimes law). It may be more appropriate to view the ICRC and ICCTs as part of a polycentric legal system that is built on a plurality of interactive normative structures and governed by certain checks and balances.
Ten years ago, in the wake of massive crimes in central Africa and the Balkans, the first permanent international criminal court was established in The Hague despite resistance from some of the world's most powerful states. In the past decade, the court has grown from a few staff in an empty building to a bustling institution with more than a thousand lawyers, investigators, and administrators from around the world. Despite its growth and the backing of more than 120 nations, the ICC is still struggling to assert itself in often turbulent political crises.
The ICC is generally autonomous in its ability to select cases and investigate crimes, but it is ultimately dependent on sovereign states, and particularly on the world's leading powers. These states can provide the diplomatic, economic, and military clout the court often needs to get cooperation-and to arrest suspects. But states don't expend precious political capital lightly, and the court has often struggled to get the help it needs. When their interests are most affected, moreover, powerful states usually want the court to keep its distance. Directly and indirectly, they make their preferences known in The Hague.
Rough Justice grapples with the court's basic dilemma: designed to be apolitical, it requires the support of politicians who pursue national interests and answer to domestic audiences. Through a sharp analysis of the dynamics at work behind the scenes, Bosco assesses the ways in which powerful states have shaped the court's effort to transform the vision of international justice into reality. This will be the definitive account of the Court and its uneven progress toward advancing accountability around the world.
This article assesses how, fifty years after the ECJ delivered its judgment in Van Gend and Loos (VGL), the doctrine of direct effect of international law has fared outside the European Union. Against the background of an exceedingly heterogeneous practice, this article argues that the concept of direct effect is characterized by a fundamental duality. Direct effect may function as a powerful sword that courts can use to pierce the boundary of the national legal order and protect individual rights where national law falls short. But more often than not, the conditions of direct effect legitimize the non-application of international law and shield the national legal order from international law. International law provides support for both functions. But above all, it defers the choice between these functions to national courts. The practice of direct effect of international law exposes how national courts play a critical political function at the intersection of legal orders.
Die Verankerung moralisch-humanitärer Bezüge im Völkerrecht sieht sich im 19. Jahrhundert juristisch dem Vorwurf eines „Pseudo-Völkerrechts“ zu Unrecht ausgesetzt. Während eine zunehmende internationale Vertragspraxis für eine Positivierung des Völkerrechts und zugleich Abkehr vom Naturrecht spricht, zeichnet der vielfache Rekurs auf die Termini morale internationale sowie humanité in Völkerrechtslehre und -praxis ein differenzierteres wie auch ambivalentes Bild angesichts von Kolonial- und Kriegsgreuel.
Anhand der zeitgenössischen Völkerrechtslehre sowie drei ausgewählten Fallbeispielen aus den Themenfeldern Vertragspraxis (Kongo-Konferenz), Humanitäre Intervention (Kongo-Skandal) und Kriegsrecht/Schiedsgerichtsbarkeit verdeutlicht die Studie besondere juristische Funktionen der Termini: als unverzichtbarer Teil der Rechtsquellenlehre, Fundament der Völkerrechtsordnung und schließlich wehrhafte Grenze staatlichen Handelns.
Merkouris & Fitzmaurice: Uniformity Versus Specialization (1): The Quest for a Uniform Law of Inter-State Treaties
The recent proliferation of international courts and tribunals, accompanied by the expansion of areas regulated by international law with ever increasing density, has led to an equally increasing fear of fragmentation both at an institutional and at a normative level.
The present chapter examines whether the VCLT rules or their customary law equivalents provide the actors in the international arena with a uniform set of rules, or whether practice has demonstrated that they are only a ‘springboard’ allowing the States flexibility to adopt more tailor-made solutions. In order to avoid any overlaps with other contributions in the present Handbook, the analysis will focus on three main areas of the law of treaties: i) the provisions relating to the creation of conventional obligations, ie what is a treaty, ii) the issues relating to consent to be bound and iii) the provisions relating to amendment of treaties. These areas refer, on the one hand, to the emergence of a binding treaty and, on the other, to its continued, albeit somewhat transformed, existence. In this manner a complete overview of the genesis and life of a treaty can be given and certain conclusions can be reached as to the existence or not of a characteristic of uniformity of the relevant provisions amongst inter-State treaties.
Thursday, January 9, 2014
- Susy Frankel & Daniel Gervais, Plain Packaging and the Interpretation of the TRIPS Agreement
- Shalini Bhargava Ray, Optimal Asylum
- Steven Arrigg Koh, Geography and Justice: Why Prison Location Matters in U.S. and International Theories of Criminal Punishment
- Gur Bligh, Defending Democracy: A New Understanding of the Party-Banning Phenomenon
- Eighteenth Annual Herbert Rubin and Justice Rose Luttan Rubin International Law Symposium: Tug of War: The Tension Between Regulation and International Cooperation
- Samuel P. Baumgartner, Understanding the Obstacles to the Recognition and Enforcement of U.S. Judgments Abroad
- Ronald A. Brand, Challenges to Forum Non Conveniens
- Stephen B. Burbank, Whose Regulatory Interests? Outsourcing the Treaty Function
- Peter B. Rutledge, With Apologies to Paxton Blair
- Louise Ellen Teitz, Determining and Applying Foreign Law: The Increasing Need for Cross-Border Cooperation
- Matthew J. Wilson, Improving the Process: Transnational Litigation and the Application of Private Foreign Law in U.S. Courts
The American Society of International Law, the ASIL-Southeast Interest Group, and the University of Virginia School of Law invite submissions for the first ASIL-SE Junior Scholar Workshop, to be held at the University of Virginia on May 5, 2014.
The call for papers is open to untenured professors, visiting assistant professors, graduate students who have earned a J.D., and those who have a J.D. and who are seeking employment as a tenure-track professor. Applicants must live or work in the Southeastern U.S, broadly conceived. In order to be considered, please send a one to two page abstract of the paper to email@example.com and Ingrid.firstname.lastname@example.org by January 21, along with a C.V. Those selected will be notified by February 1. The paper must be completed by April 7. Selected papers will be presented at the May Workshop with commentary by senior scholars in the field. Submissions on any topic/area of international law are welcome.
The Private International Law Interest Group of the American Society of International Law invites submissions for this year’s ASIL Private International Law prize. The prize is given for the best text on private international law written by a young scholar. Essays, articles, and books are welcome, and can address any topic of private international law, can be of any length, and may be published or unpublished, but not published prior to 2013. Submitted essays should be in the English language.
Competitors may be citizens of any nation but must be 35 years old or younger on December 31, 2013. They need not be members of ASIL.
This year, the prize will consist of a $500 stipend to participate in the 2014 or 2015 ASIL Annual Conference, and one year’s membership to ASIL. The prize will be awarded by the Private International Law Interest Group based upon the recommendation of a Prize Committee. Decisions of the Prize Committee on the winning essay and on any conditions relating to this prize are final.
Submissions to the Prize Committee must be received by March 15, 2014.
Entries should be submitted by email in Word or pdf format. They should contain two different documents: a) the essay itself, without any identifying information other than the title; and b) a second document containing the title of the entry and the author’s name, affiliation, and contact details. Submissions and any queries should be addressed by email to Private International Law Interest Group Co-Chairs Rahim Moloo (email@example.com) and Ralf Michaels (firstname.lastname@example.org).
All submissions will be acknowledged by e-mail.
- Althaf Marsoof, The TRIPs Compatibility of Australia's Tobacco Plain Packaging Legislation
- Viola Prifti, The Breeding Exemption in Patent Law: Analysis of Compliance With Article 30 of the TRIPS Agreement
- Xavier Seuba, Intellectual Property in Preferential Trade Agreements: What Treaties, What Content?
- Matthew J. Rippon, Traditional Foods, Territorial Boundaries and the TRIPS Agreement: The Case of the Melton Mowbray Pork Pie
Wednesday, January 8, 2014
- International Law in the Case Law of the Court of Justice: Recent Trends
- Birgitte Egelund Olsen & Karsten Engsig Sørensen, Strengthening the Enforcement of CSR Guidelines: Finding a New Balance between Hard Law and Soft Law
- Arwel Davies, Technical Regulations and Standards under the WTO Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade
- Evangelia Psychogiopoulou, The External Dimension of EU Cultural Action and Free Trade: Exploring an Interface
- Onsando Osiemo, Lost in Translation: The Role of African Regional Courts in Regional Integration in Africa
This article uses the case of Sudan to show how authoritarian regimes benefit from embracing international arbitration, allowing them to maintain domestic control and attract foreign investment. International arbitration ensures that foreign-investment disputes are resolved outside of domestic purview, obviating the need for nondemocratic states to create independent courts. Research on judicial politics in authoritarian regimes has largely overlooked those private and extra-judicial pathways—international arbitration tribunals—that illiberal regimes have been taking. Similarly, research in international commercial law has neglected domestic politics, overlooking arbitration's consequences for domestic stakeholders. Promoting international arbitration without paying heed to its side effects can unwittingly help illiberal regimes, particularly in weak states, to continue to repress their judiciaries and curtail the development of domestic legal institutions and the rule of law.
Toufayan, Tourme-Jouannet, & Ruiz Fabri: Droit international et nouvelles approches sur le tiers-monde : entre répétition et renouveau
L’objet de cet ouvrage collectif – issu d’un colloque organisé à l’Université Paris I en juillet 2010 – est de questionner l’existence présente des règles de droit international relatives au tiers-monde au regard de notre nouveau contexte mondialisé, en demandant aux représentants du courant critique anglophone TWAIL (Third World Approaches to International Law) de bien vouloir exposer leurs idées et leurs réflexions en ce domaine pour la toute première fois à un lectorat francophone. Tantôt un mouvement politique engagé, tantôt un corps d’idées et une pensée intellectuelle féconde sur les problématiques du tiers-monde, les points de vue des Nouvelles approches sur le tiers-monde en droit international ont contribué à prolonger et renouveler la réflexion en ce domaine.
Il est certain que la situation n’est pas la même dans les deux mondes francophone et anglophone. En France notamment, les recherches et enseignements juridiques sur le Tiers Monde semblent tout simplement en voie d’abandon quasi-complet au sein des Facultés de droit. Les centres de recherches se sont fermés, les crédits ont été redistribués, les revues se sont éteintes et la matière ne fait plus l’objet d’un enseignement spécialisé. Elle est désormais enseignée, au mieux, comme une sous-discipline du droit international économique, ce qui marginalise totalement sa portée et son intérêt. Face à cette situation, il est nettement temps de réagir pour relancer la réflexion et l’examiner d’un point de vue autonome et critique.
In recent years, the study of global governance has made much progress in charting the variety of ways in which rules, norms and decisions are produced in the global realm. Yet while this work exhibits processes and institutional structures quite unlike traditional international organizations – and very different from those we know from the domestic sphere – much of the conceptual apparatus of the field remains bound up with traditional models. In theorizing authority, compliance, accountability, legitimacy or law, the focus is typically on 'solid' structures: norms and institutions of a relatively fixed and distinct nature, understood as producing independent effects on states and other actors. This orientation not only leaves out of sight large parts of governance beyond the state, but also tends to obscure the analytical, normative and institutional challenges we are facing. This workshop inquires into whether an explicit focus on 'liquid authority' might provide a better frame. Liquidity in this context is understood in four inter-related dimensions: informality, ideational character, fleetingness, and multiplicity. In its extreme form, it is reflected in governance processes without a clear center, dispersed over a multitude of actors and institutions (public and private) without a formal ascription of authority, never bundled in an identifiable decision, and achieving effects through uncoercive, often nudging or ideational means. The workshop will explore the concept of authority, the shape of liquid governance, and implications for legitimacy and accountability of a turn towards ‘liquid authority’.
Call for Papers: La Tercera Conferencia Bienal de la Sociedad Latinoamericana de Derecho Internacional / La Troisième Conférence biennal de la Société latino-américaine de droit international
Tuesday, January 7, 2014
In the last few decades, the law of the sea has been affected not only by the processes of globalisation that have changed the key interests of the international community but also by natural phenomena like climate change. In addition, technological advances that have opened up new opportunities to exploit marine resources and to produce energy and which make the sea in itself a resource, have contributed to a further development of the law of the sea.
This book analyzes those areas of the law of the sea in which these transformations taking place seem to be more significant: migration by sea, the security of navigation and the fight against piracy, safety of navigation, protection of maritime labour, the legal framework governing the polar regions and some special issues relating to the harnessing of marine resources.
How do EU law and international law interact? Is the relationship between EU law and international law different from the relationship between general international law and one of its specialised legal orders, for example the relationship between international law and the law of the sea? In other words, is the question of the relationship only one about the fragmentation of international law? Are the rules of interaction between the legal orders just ‘technical’ conflict rules in this context? Or are the rules of interaction between the international and the EU legal order which has been described as an autonomous legal order, akin to rules that govern the interaction between international law and national legal orders? Elements of both the international and the constitutional paradigms are reflected in most areas of EU law. But they are particularly prominent when analysing the relationship between international and EU law, a topic that has enjoyed increasing attention in recent years. In this paper, firstly, the more formal basis for the relationship is considered by looking at the international law framework of EU law before, secondly, looking at the relationship between the two legal orders and the realities of the relationship as expressed in the status of international law within the EU legal order.
In 2011, the United Nations Security Council adopted Resolution 1973, authorizing its member states to take measures to protect Libyan civilians from Muammar Gadhafi’s forces. In invoking the “responsibility to protect,” the resolution draws on the principle that sovereign states are responsible and accountable to the international community for the protection of their populations and that the international community can act to protect populations when national authorities fail to do so. The idea that sovereignty includes the responsibility to protect is often seen as a departure from the classic definition, but it actually has deep historical roots.
In Sovereignty and the Responsibility to Protect, Luke Glanville argues that this responsibility extends back to the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, and that states have since been accountable for this responsibility to God, the people, and the international community. Over time, the right to national self-governance came to take priority over the protection of individual liberties, but the noninterventionist understanding of sovereignty was only firmly established in the twentieth century, and it remained for only a few decades before it was challenged by renewed claims that sovereigns are responsible for protection.
Glanville traces the relationship between sovereignty and responsibility from the early modern period to the present day, and offers a new history with profound implications for the present.
- A. Addis, The Role of Human Dignity in a World of Plural Values and Ethical Commitments
- J.P. Mangubhai, Human Rights as Practice: Agency, Power and Strategies of Dalit Women in Rural South India
- C.G. Ngwena, Human Right to Inclusive Education: Exploring a Double Discourse of Inclusive Education Using South Africa as a Case Study
- J.M. Woods, Theorizing Peace as a Human Right
- K. Van Der Borght, From Jackson-Vanik to Magnitsky: Continuing a Tradition of Ineffective Human Rights Bolt-ons to Trade Bills
- H. Morten Haugen, Deciding on Land and Resources: How Can the Influence of the Most Affected Within Communities Be Increased?
Monday, January 6, 2014
Transnational Threats and the National Security State
May 2, 2014 at Stanford Law School
As the 10th anniversary of the 9/11 Commission Report approaches, the recurring dispute over the boundaries of the post-9/11 national security state is once again in full swing. In the United States, legislators, academics, and commentators have put forward various proposals to rein in intelligence gathering ranging from increased transparency in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to enhanced oversight of the Intelligence Community. As a result, Senator Dianne Feinstein, Chair of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, has pledged to conduct a “total review” of all intelligence programs.
The goal of Governing Intelligence is to move beyond the rather narrow focus of today's debate -- largely about surveillance -- to have a much broader conversation about the power and limits of intelligence agencies. We will convene academics, policymakers, business leaders, and civil society groups to analyze the challenges of intelligence governance from a comparative and international perspective. The premise behind the symposium is that the debate to rein in intelligence gathering should occur along with an examination of the power and limits of intelligence agencies in the face of transnational threats such as terrorism, cyber-warfare, drug trafficking, and weapons proliferation. Only then will we appreciate the imperatives of freedom and security in their proper context.
Call for Papers
The Stanford Journal of International Law seeks contributions by academics, practitioners, and policymakers in the form of approx. 10-15,000-word scholarly essays or 5,000-word white papers on either of the following topics: (a) national intelligence and transnational threats; or, (b) individual rights and intelligence gathering. The following is a non-exhaustive list of sub-topics and questions meant to provide guidance on the kinds of submissions we are looking for. Preference will be given to interdisciplinary submissions and submissions that combine descriptive and normative analyses.
National Intelligence and Transnational Threats:
1. Domestic Legal Mandates and Organizational Design: What is the relationship between organizational design and an intelligence system’s ability to counter transnational threats? To what extent should the legal mandates of particular intelligence agencies be reworked in the face of transnational threats? How do states compare in this regard? Can best practices be identified?
2. Intelligence Sharing and Transnational Threats: What role does intelligence sharing play in countering transnational threats? What are the strengths and weaknesses of bilateral or multilateral intelligence sharing agreements? To what extent should international organizations engage in intelligence gathering and sharing to counter transnational threats?
Individual Rights and Intelligence Gathering:
1. Domestic Safeguards and Oversight Mechanisms: How do oversight and accountability systems compare in ensuring the protection of individual rights vis-à-vis intelligence gathering? Do technology-enabled enhancements in intelligence gathering and law enforcement such as data mining and biometrics call for the strengthening of safeguards to protect individual rights? Can best practices be identified?
2. Extraterritorial Intelligence Gathering and Human Rights: What is the scope of a right to privacy, if any, under international law? Who is bound by such international law norms? Is there a need for the development of additional international law rules or instruments to address the changing intelligence gathering capabilities of states?
Submissions Mechanics and Timeline
Please send a 1-2 page abstract of your essay or white paper in Word format, a C.V. of the author(s), and point of contact information to email@example.com by 5:00PM PST on February 1, 2014.
Decisions will be made on a rolling basis and released no later than by February 15, 2014. Shortlisted authors will be invited to make a panel presentation based on their working paper at the journal’s Symposium on May 2, 2014. Although acceptance of the invitation is not required to receive an offer of publication, priority will be given to shortlisted authors who accept the invitation to present at the Symposium. In the case of presenters, a draft presentation paper will be due by April 25, 2014.
Final drafts of approx. 10-15,000-word scholarly essays or 5,000-word white papers must be submitted for publication by August 15, 2014. Subject to customary editorial standards, the selected contributions will be published in Issue 51.1 of the Stanford Journal of International Law, which is scheduled for publication in January 2015.
Please address any questions you may have about the Call for Papers to José Alemán, Editor-in-Chief, at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Travel and Accommodation Expenses
We anticipate paying reasonable round-trip domestic coach airfare and providing hotel accommodation for presenters.
Conference: Africans and Hague Justice: Realities and Perceptions of the International Criminal Court in Africa
In light of the simmering tensions between the Court and some African leaders, ongoing protests in African countries against the ICC and the frequently heard objection that the Court has an anti-Africa bias, it seems timely to explore the perceptions and realities of the ICC in Africa. With high-level contributions from various disciplines, including international law, international relations, political science, anthropology, history and media studies the conference aims to reach a better understanding of African sentiments and insights surrounding the Court.
The proliferation of regional institutions and initiatives in Asia over the past decade is unmatched in any other region of the world. The authors in this collection explore the distinctive features of these institutions by comparing them for the first time to the experience of other regions; from the elaborate institution-building of Europe to the more modest regional projects of the Americas. It is an opportune moment for this reassessment, as the European regional model faces a sovereign debt crisis while Asian economies see more secure sources of growth from their immediate neighbors. Asia's regional institutions display a distinctive combination of decision rules, commitment devices, and membership practices, shaped by underlying features of the region, the dynamics of regional integration, and the availability of institutional substitutes. Within this context, the authors propose changes that will better sustain the prosperity and peace that have marked Asia in recent decades.
- María Dolores Ortiz Vidal, Distribución y venta en España de productos fabricados en el extranjero. Cuestiones de Derecho Internacional Privado
- Mariano J. Aznar Gómez, El Estado sin territorio: La desaparición del territorio debido al cambio climático
- Jordi Bonet Pérez, El sistema de control de la Organización Internacional del Trabajo (OIT) y la interpretación de los convenios de la OIT: Aproximación jurídica a una crisis institucional
- Carlos Fernández de Casadevante Romani, La obligación de investigación efectiva en el Derecho Internacional de los Derechos Humanos: Especial referencia a la práctica española
- Enrique Fernández Masiá, Arbitraje inversor-estado: De “bella durmiente” a “león en la jungla”
- Mireia Estrada Cañamares, Coordinación vertical en la acción exterior de la UE: La dimensión jurídica
- Lourdes Dávalos León, El contrato internacional en la nueva Ley cubana de Contratación Económica
- Vicente Álvarez García, El régimen jurídico de la producción de vehículos de motor a nivel internacional: Reglamentos técnicos armonizados y homologaciones
- José Ignacio Castro Torres, La comunicación (más allá de la ruptura) cuando fallan las relaciones: Los limites de poder entre Irán, Israel, EEUU y la cuestión nuclear
- Marta Sosa Navarro, La evolución de la obligación de extraditar o juzgar a través del caso Hissène Habré
- Nicolás Carrillo Santarelli, La protección y promoción de los derechos humanos frente a violaciones no estatales por los órganos internacionales
- Carles Pérez-Desoy i Fages, La ruptura de las relaciones diplomáticas: Una aproximación sistemática con una referencia especial a las consecuencias de la entrada en vigor del tratado de Lisboa en la praxis diplomática
- Carmen López-Jurado Romero de la Cruz, La secesión de territorios no coloniales y el soberanismo catalán
- Soraya Espino García, Respuestas a las cuestiones planteadas por el Libro Verde sobre el Derecho a la Reagrupación Familiar: Revisión de la Directiva 2003/86/CE del Consejo, de 22 de septiembre de 2003, sobre el derecho a la reagrupación familiar de nacionales de terceros países residentes en la Unión Europea
- Gerardo Tripolone, ¿Es posible una teoría jurídica sobre la aplicación de normas internacionales por el Consejo de Seguridad de Naciones Unidas?
- Richard Garnett, Coexisting and Conflicting Jurisdiction and Arbitration Clauses
- Pippa Rogerson, Problems of the Applicable Law of the Contract in the English Common Law Jurisdiction Rules: The Good Arguable Case
- Uglješa Grušić, The Right to Strike Versus Fundamental Economic Freedoms in the English Courts, Again: Hiding Behind the “Public Law Taboo” In Private International Law
- Verity Winship, Personal Jurisdiction and Corporate Groups: Daimlerchrysler AG v Bauman
- Chukwuma Samuel Adesina Okoli, The Significance of the Doctrine of Accessory Allocation As a Connecting Factor Under Article 4 of the Rome I Regulation
- Sharon Shakargy, Marriage by the State or Married to the State? on Choice of Law in Marriage and Divorce
Sunday, January 5, 2014
In international negotiations, the question of the design and the legal form of the negotiated instrument is as complex as it is often controversial. Intended as a read for both practitioners and academics, this book provides a comprehensive treatise of the characteristics, the potential and the limits of nonbinding instruments in international environmental law and governance. An extensive overview and typology of nonbinding instruments as well as several case studies from the areas of fisheries (FAO), hazardous substances (UNEP/FAO) and corporate social responsibility (OECD) provide the material for an in-depth analysis of the role of nonbinding instruments on all levels of governance. The book demonstrates the potential but also highlights the limits of nonbinding instruments in the interplay with customary and treaty law (e.g. UNCLOS, WTO) as bases for interinstitutional linkages and as tools to shape the behaviour of states and private actors. Legitimacy challenges arising from this form of exercise of authority are then discussed in the final chapter, alongside with remedies to address possible concerns.