Der Iran steht aufgrund seines Atomprogramms seit fast einem Jahrzehnt im Zentrum der Aufmerksamkeit der Weltöffentlichkeit. Wirtschaftssanktionen waren und sind dabei die Hauptinstrumente, mit denen zahlreiche Staaten versuchen, den Iran zu beeinflussen. Durch kontinuierliche Veränderungen und Verschärfungen hat sich so ein komplexes Regime, bestehend aus Sanktionen der Vereinten Nationen, der Europäischen Union sowie einzelner Staaten entwickelt.
Die Arbeit widmet sich der Überprüfung der Rechtmäßigkeit dieses Regimes im Lichte des Völker- und Europarechts. Die Maßnahmen gegen den Iran dienen zudem als Anknüpfungspunkt, um den Blick auf die rechtlichen Rahmenbedingungen, Rechtsgrundlagen und Grenzen der Verhängung von Wirtschaftssanktionen insgesamt zu weiten.
Saturday, April 4, 2015
Conference: State Oppression, Violence Against Minorities, and the Possibilities for Remedial Secession and Independence
Friday, April 3, 2015
- Special Issue: Spaces and Places: Geopolitics in an Era of Globalization
- Zaryab Iqbal & Harvey Starr, Introduction: Spaces and Places: Geopolitics in an Era of Globalization
- Andreas Forø Tollefsen & Halvard Buhaug, Insurgency and Inaccessibility
- Andrew M. Linke, Sebastian Schutte & Halvard Buhaug, Population Attitudes and the Spread of Political Violence in Sub-Saharan Africa
- Matthew Powers, Bryce W. Reeder & Ashly Adam Townsen, Hot Spot Peacekeeping
- Kyle Beardsley & Kristian Skrede Gleditsch, Peacekeeping as Conflict Containment
- Clionadh Raleigh, Urban Violence Patterns Across African States
- Andrew M. Linke & John O'Loughlin, Reconceptualizing, Measuring, and Evaluating Distance and Context in the Study of Conflicts: Using Survey Data from the North Caucasus of Russia
- L'État de droit en Amérique latine et au Canada
- Sébastien Grammond, L'État de droit, au coeur du dialogue entre le Canada et l'Amérique latine? / El Estado de derecho, ¿Estará en el meollo del diálogo entre Canadá y América latina?
- Luis Torres González, Política criminal y derechos humanos en Chile : notas y desafíos actuales
- Pierre Gilles Bélanger, Une réforme pénale en Amérique latine qui devrait chercher sa légitimité
- Joaquín Bardallo Bandera, A Tale of Two Latin American Countries : The Democratic Rule of Law in Mexico and Uruguay
- Verónica Martínez Solares, Experiencias individuales y colectivas de violencia y victimización en torno a la delincuencia organizada en México. Una aproximación cualitativa
- Jaime Alberto Sandoval Mesa, El problema de los límites de la pena de las FARC frente a las propuestas presentadas en las negociaciones de paz en Colombia
- Sophie Thériault, Justice environnementale et peuples autochtones : les possibilités et les limites de la jurisprudence de la Cour interaméricaine des droits de l'homme
- Sergio Fuenzalida B., Desarrollo de la jurisprudencia en chile sobre la consulta indígena : los casos del tribunal constitucional y la corte suprema
- Gonzalo Bustamante, The Right to Consultation and Free, Prior and Informed Consent in Latin America : The Governmentality of the Extraction of Natural Resources
- Salvador Herencia Carrasco, Public Interest Litigation in the Inter-American Court of Human Rights : The Protection of Indigenous Peoples and the Gap between Legal Victories and Social Change
- Marie-Christine Doran, La criminalisation de l’action collective dans la crise actuelle des droits humains en Amérique latine
- Ricardo Penafiel, La criminalisation de la participation citoyenne par des conceptions consensualistes de la démocratie participative
- Luis Eduardo Zavala de Alba, Gobernanza en derechos humanos : hacia una eficacia y eficiencia institucional
- Karine Vanthuyne, La justice transitionnelle à l'épreuve d'inégalités structurelles historiques au Guatemala
- Nelson Arturo Ovalle Diaz, Le pluralisme juridique, la justice transitionnelle et alternative : le cas du conflit armé interne colombien
- Nataly Ponce, La agenda actual de los derechos humanos en la region andina. Reflexiónes para el análisis y el debate
- Cindy Bors, Andrew Christie, Daniel Gervais & Ellen Wright Clayton, Improving Access to Medicines in Low-Income Countries: A Review of Mechanisms
- Ruchi Sharma, Influence of Patent Policy in the South on the Research and Development of the North: Exploration of the Foreign Direct Investment Channel
- Anitha Ramanna-Pathak, Intellectual Property Rights Access to Genetic Resources and Indian Shrimp Aquaculture: Evolving Policy Responses to Globalization
- Peter Munyi, Plant Variety Protection Regime in Relation to Relevant International Obligations: Implications for Smallholder Farmers in Kenya
Juliane Ahner untersucht die Reichweite der Kompetenz der Europäischen Union für ein Investor-Staat-Schiedsverfahren für Auslandsinvestitionen sowie mögliche primärrechtliche Beschränkungen. Dabei kommt sie zu dem Ergebnis, dass die Union gemischte Investitionsabkommen gemeinsam mit den Mitgliedstaaten abschließen muss. Die ausschließliche Zuständigkeit des Europäischen Gerichtshofs für die Auslegung und Anwendung der Verträge und die Autonomie der Unionsrechtsordnung stehen der Unterwerfung unter ein Investor-Staat-Schiedsverfahren nicht entgegen. Juliane Ahner stellt fest, dass die Union nicht alle bestehenden Schiedsverfahren nutzen kann und einige Verfahrensregeln modifiziert werden sollten. Vor dem Hintergrund drohender Schadensersatzansprüche von Investoren gegenüber der Union und den Mitgliedstaaten entwickelt sie Regelungen für die völkerrechtliche und die unionsinterne Haftung.
Does human rights have a history? As late as 1998 not a single reference to the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights had appeared in any article of the American Historical Review. But by 2006 the field of human rights history had become prominent enough for the President of the American Historical Association to claim “we are all historians of human rights.” In this recent and very rapid development of the field, the fundamental premises of how we conceive of a history of human rights remain in flux and must be reconsidered: when were “human rights” invented and what were the major stages of the evolution of their different elements? Rights talk emerged in early modern natural law theory, if not before, and played a famous role in early modern revolutions. But while humanitarian agendas sprouted throughout modern history, the international human rights regime began to take root only in the 1940s, and exploded to public prominence in the 1970s.
Do we then tell the longue durée of human rights history as an evolutionary narrative or one of sharp disjunctures and discontinuities? There are also critical substantive issues that remain unresolved. What counts as human rights history? What rights at particular times and places have been seen as human rights and what has made them visible in those moments? What leads ordinary people to band together to found initiatives to monitor human rights violations? When and under what conditions have states propounded and conformed to crucial cosmopolitan norms? Are human rights a Western discourse or are they rooted in a broader array of geographical, gendered and cultural contexts?
You are invited to a one day workshop with papers by: Christoph Kletzer of King’s College London; Grant Lamond of the University of Oxford; Jean d’Aspremont of the University of Manchester; and Janne Nijman of the University of Amsterdam. And discussing such weighty matters as: The diverging foundations of legal positivism; Custom as foundation and/or source of law; Interpretation and the variety of interpretive processes; and Subjects of law or agents of (re)cognition? There is no registration fee, but places are limited. Please register to attend on the Eventbrite website. Lunch is provided courtesy of the Oxford Law Faculty.
This paper reviews the contribution of the International Court of Justice in defining the concept of aggression against the background of the Kampala Amendments to the 1998 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. It argues that the ICJ, while not contributing directly to the elaboration of the concept of aggression, has indeed influenced the internal gradation of the concept of aggression through drawing an implicit parallel with the concept of armed attack. The paper then completes this picture by introducing a three-step parallel gradation of concepts: use of force-armed attack-serious breach of jus cogens and use of force-act of aggression-war and/or crime of aggression; and by discussing their potential relationship and interaction.
Thursday, April 2, 2015
- Whaling in the Antarctic (Australia v. Japan: New Zealand Intervening) (I.C.J.), with introductory note by Jacqueline Peel
- Request for Interpretation of the Judgment of 15 June 1962 in the Case concerning the Temple of Preah Vihear (Cambodia v. Thailand) (I.C.J.), with introductory note by David P. Riesenberg
- Hassan v. The United Kingdom (Eur. Ct. H.R.), with introductory note by Elizabeth Stubbins Bates
- BG Group PLC v. Republic of Argentina (Sup. Ct. U.S.), with introductory note by Christina Trahanas
- National Commissioner of the South African Police Service v. Southern African Human Rights Litigation Centre (Sup. Ct. App. S. Afr.), with introductory note by Dire Tladi
- Audrey Soussan, From Law as a Means to Law as an End: About the Influence of International Human Rights Law on the Structure of International Law Rules
- Erika Hennequet, Jus Cogens and Human Rights: Interactions Between Two Factors of Harmonization of International Law
- Marianne Lamour, Are Human Rights Law Rules “Special”? Study on Interactions Between Human Rights Law Rules and Other International Law Rules
- Julian Udich, Human Rights and Interpretation: Limits and Demands of Harmonizing Interpretation of International Law
- Sebastian tho Pesch, The Influence of Human Rights on Diplomatic Protection: Reviving an Old Instrument of Public International Law
- Isabella Risini, The Inter-State Application Under the European Convention on Human Rights: More Than Diplomatic Protection
- Andreas S. Kolb, The “Responsibility While Protecting”: A Recent Twist in the Evolution of the “Responsibility to Protect”
- Marjorie Beulay, Human Rights Protection and the Notion of Responsibility: Some Considerations About the European Case Law on State’s Activities Under U.N. Charter
- Jean-Marc Thouvenin, International Economic Sanctions and Fundamental Rights: Friend or Foe?
- Anne-Laure Vaurs-Chaumette, Provisional Release in International Criminal Proceedings: The Limits of the Influence of Human Rights Law
- Stefan Lorenzmeier, WTO and Human Rights
- Sarah Schadendorf, Investor-State Arbitrations and the Human Rights of the Host State’s Population: An Empirical Approach to the Impact of
- Camille Papinot, The Assertion of Subjective Rights for Migrant Workers
- Sinthiou Estelle Buszewski, The Individual, the State and a Cosmopolitan Legal Order
- Tobias Dolle, Human Rights Clauses in EU Trade Agreements: The New European Strategy in Free Trade Agreement Negotiations Focuses on Human Rights—Advantages and Disadvantages
- Astrid Epiney & Benedikt Pirker, The Binding Effect of EU Fundamental Rights for Switzerland
The gradual transfer of emergency power to the international level, as seen in the control of infectious disease outbreaks, creates new challenges for the legitimacy for global institutions. In particular, this Article contends, the expert nature of international bureaucracies fits awkwardly with the political decision-making required of crisis managers, often producing decisions that appear neither scientifically nor politically justifiable. Worse, the ordinary deliberative mechanisms for smoothing the interaction between expert knowledge and political decision often appear unavailable in the midst of a disaster.
The task for law and institutional design, then, is to develop tools for easing this interaction between expertise and decision-making, in ways that function even under the strain of crisis. This Article undertakes this challenge through an in-depth case study of the World Health Organization’s responses to Ebola and swine flu. After diagnosing the key problems facing the WHO and other global emergency governors, the Article elaborates three novel design principles for improving emergency decision-making: managed decentralization, epistemic openness, and forced dissent. This inquiry constitutes an initial step in what must be an ongoing project to redesign the institutions of global governance to capably and legitimately meet the challenges of crisis management beyond the state.
- Symposium: International Criminal Justice and the Responsibility to Protect
- Jason Ralph, Symposium: International Criminal Justice and the Responsibility to Protect
- Carsten Stahn, Marital Stress or Grounds for Divorce? Re-Thinking the Relationship Between R2P and International Criminal Justice
- Andrea Birdsall, The Responsibility to Prosecute and the ICC: A Problematic Relationship?
- Kurt Mills, R2P and the ICC: At Odds or in Sync?
- Frédéric Mégret, Between R2P and the ICC: “Robust Peacekeeping” and the Quest for Civilian Protection
- Aidan Hehir & Anthony Lang, The Impact of the Security Council on the Efficacy of the International Criminal Court and the Responsibility to Protect
Is the neglect of economic, social and cultural abuses in international criminal law a problem of positive international law or the result of choices made by lawyers involved in mechanisms such as criminal prosecutions or truth commissions? Evelyne Schmid explores this question via an assessment of the relationship between violations of economic, social and cultural rights and international crimes. Based on a thorough examination of the elements of international crimes, she demonstrates how a situation can simultaneously be described as a violation of economic, social and cultural rights and as an international crime. Against the background of the emerging debates on selectivity in international criminal law and the role of socio-economic and cultural abuses in transitional justice, she argues that international crimes overlapping with violations of economic, social and cultural rights deserve to be taken seriously, for much the same reasons as other international crimes.
Wednesday, April 1, 2015
- Janie A. Chuang, Exploitation Creep and the Unmaking of Human Trafficking Law
- Anthony D'Amato, Groundwork for International Law
- Agora: Reflections on Anthony D'Amato's “Groundwork for International Law”
- Jean d'Aspremont, Send back the Lifeboats: Confronting the Project of Saving International Law
- Mónica García-Salmones Rovira, Who Is the System? On Commitment, Biology, and Human Beings in the Politics of “Groundwork for International Law”
- Tom Farer, Can the United States Violently Punish the Assad Regime? Competing Visions (Including That of Anthony D'Amato) of the Applicable International Law
- Anthony D'Amato Responds
- Current Developments
- Nina H. B. Jørgensen, State Responsibility for Aiding or Assisting International Crimes in the Context of the Arms Trade Treaty
- International Decisions
- Anthea Roberts & Christina Trahanas, Judicial Review of Investment Treaty Awards: BG Group v. Argentina
- Ronald J. Bettauer, Questions Relating to the Seizure and Detention of Certain Documents and Data (Timor-Leste v. Australia)
- Bernard H. Oxman & Vincent P. Cogliati-Bantz, The M/V “Virginia G” (Panama/Guinea-Bissau)
- Shen Wei, FG Hemisphere Associates v. Democratic Republic of the Congo
- Contemporary Practice of the United States Relating to International Law
- Kristina Daugirdas & Julian Davis Mortenson, Contemporary Practice of the United States Relating to International Law
- Recent Books on International Law
- Karen Knop, Hard Facts: Implications of Policy Diffusion for International Law, reviewing The Democratic Foundations of Policy Diffusion: How Health, Family and Employment Laws Spread Across Countries, by Katerina Linos
- Jacques deLisle, reviewing Chinese Contemporary Perspectives on International Law: History, Culture and International Law, by Xue Hanqin
- Stephen M. Schwebel, reviewing The Interpretation of International Investment Law: Equality, Discrimination and Minimum Standards of Treatment in Historical Context, by Todd Weiler
- Jean Galbraith, reviewing The Oxford Guide to Treaties, edited by Duncan B. Hollis
- Donald L. Brown, reviewing Modern Piracy: Legal Challenges and Responses, edited by Douglas Guilfoyle
- Symposium: Crossing Borders: Rethinking International Development
- Hassane Cissé, Crossing Borders in International Development: Some Perspectives on Human Rights, Governance, and Anti-Corruption
- Susan D. Franck, Conflating Politics and Development? Examining Investment Treaty Arbitration Outcomes
- Margaret M. deGuzman, When Are International Crimes Just Cause for War?
- Patricia L. Judd, Retooling TRIPS
- Charles W. Mooney, Jr., The Cape Town Convention’s Improbable-but-Possible Progeny Part One: An International Secured Transactions Registry of General Application
- Catherine Moore, The Game Changer: How the P5 Caused a Paradigm Shift in Norm Diffusion Post-9/11
- O. De Schutter, L’adhésion de l’Union européenne à la Charte sociale européenne
- C. Ruet, La vulnérabilité dans la jurisprudence de la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme
- L. Callejon-sereni, La Cour européenne des droits de l’homme et l’imputation aux États parties des actes adoptés en vertu d’obligations internationales : entre labyrinthe méthodologique et effectivité des droits
- G-.F-. Ntwari, La Cour africaine des droits de l’homme et des peuples à la croisée des chemins – Bilan des cinq premières années d’activités judiciaires (2009-2014)
- J. Andriantsimbazovina, La décision Marc-Antoine de la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme ouvre-t-elle la voie au rapprochement de l’avocat général de la Cour de cassation avec le rapporteur public du Conseil d’État ?
- J-.M-. Larralde, Le Comité européen des droits sociaux face aux dysfonctionnements des interruptions de grossesse
- L. Milano, Délai de prescription en matière d’indemnisation des atteintes à l’intégrité physique : quand la Cour européenne dicte aux États le point de départ du délai
- A. Petropoulou, Les mesures d’amnistie, le principe ne bis in idem et l’évolution du droit international
- C-.A-. Chassin, Heurs et malheurs du mariage des transsexuels
- P. Frumer, Quand droits de l’homme et droit international humanitaire s’emmêlent – Un regard critique sur l’arrêt
- JHHW, Brexit: No Happy Endings; The EJIL Annual Foreword; EJIL on your iPad!!!; Vital Statistics; ICON·S Conference; In this Issue
- The EJIL Foreword
- Jan Klabbers, The Transformation of International Organizations Law
- Janina Dill, The 21st-Century Belligerent’s Trilemma
- Amanda Alexander, A Short History of International Humanitarian Law
- Bart L. Smit Duijzentkunst & Sophia L.R. Dawkins, Arbitrary Peace? Consent Management in International Arbitration
- Ulf Linderfalk, Is Treaty Interpretation an Art or a Science? International Law and Rational Decision Making
- Roaming Charges: Moments of Dignity
- Martin Lestra, Conserving Traditions: Jam-making in Ruoms, France
- EJIL: Debate!
- Stéphanie Hennette Vauchez, More Women – But Which Women? The Rule and the Politics of Gender Balance at the European Court of Human Rights
- Françoise Tulkens, More Women – But Which Women? A Reply to Stéphanie Hennette Vauchez
- Fionnuala Ní Aoláin, More Women – But Which Women? A Reply to Stéphanie Hennette Vauchez
- Critical Review of International Jurisprudence
- Paolo Lobba, Holocaust Denial before the European Court of Human Rights: Evolution of an Exceptional Regime
- Review Essays
- Helmut Philipp Aust, Shining Cities on the Hill? The Global City, Climate Change, and International Law
- Jochen von Bernstorff, International Law and Global Justice: On Recent Inquiries into the Dark Side of Economic Globalization
Tuesday, March 31, 2015
This chapter revisits customary international law (hereafter CIL) as a source of international criminal law (hereafter ICL) in the era of the International Criminal Court (hereafter ICC). Most contemporary reflections on the role of CIL in ICL and most observations regarding creative judicial identification processes still tend to zero in on the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (hereafter ICTY). True, the 1990s were a decade-long experiment or perhaps indeed an extended “Grotian Moment.” In any event, it was a period of accelerated, and at times artificial, CIL-creation on a variety of ICLissues by the ad hoc Tribunals. The ICTY’s innovative methodologies nourished theories about the fragmentation of sources and ensuing claims regarding the existence of autonomized regimes. Being predominantly based on ICTY experiences, these claims may well have become outdated. The coming into operation of the ICC Statute has gradually engendered a new momentum that is best described as the “Codified Moment.” In this new ICC-era, CIL plays a much less prominent role.
This chapter explores the decline of CIL in ICL. It begins by delimiting the concept of “international criminal law” and highlights some consequences of this delimitation for a discussion on the role of CIL. It argues that the essence of this area of law is its judicial application as part of a process to determine guilt and to impose a sentence. Hence, only judicial agents truly apply ICL. By implication, ICL does not operate in a traditional interstate setting, a feature that also has consequences for CIL-formation and identification.
The chapter then presents the causal claim that this decline is a direct consequence of the introduction of the ICC Statute and the move towards a universal and more consent-based regime. As will be demonstrated, the ICC Statute’s design reflects the drafters’ explicit resolve to marginalize CIL. Subsequently, this chapter argues that the move away from CIL in ICL can itself be explained by the difficulties inherent in grounding rules of ICL in CIL. This normative claim is developed through an analysis of different types of rules, i.e., procedural rules, substantive rules regarding the definition of crimes, and rules regarding modes of liability. In doing so, this chapter sheds light on the distinct methodological challenges that may arise in attempts to construe a customary basis for such rules.
The importance of the relationship between treaties providing for uninterrupted energy transit and customary international law is starkly demonstrated by the relationship between the relevant treaties and countermeasures under the law of international responsibility, as a means of enforcing the transit state's obligations, and as circumstances that preclude the wrongfulness of the transit state's interruptions of energy transit. This monograph undertakes a comprehensive analysis of and provides a coherent method for establishing obligations governing the transit of energy through pipelines in multilateral and bilateral treaties, including the WTO Agreement, Energy Charter Treaty, and fourteen bespoke pipeline treaties. It examines whether breach of these treaties can give rise to countermeasures by thoroughly engaging with the law of treaties, especially treaty interpretation.
The book offers an original argument about the nature of these treaty obligations in relation to state responsibility, and about the relationship between provisions for dispute settlement and compliance supervision in transit treaties and countermeasures. The analysis is placed in the historical and normative landscape of freedom of transit in international law, and after setting out the obligations' content and distinguishing countermeasures from treaty law responses, the book identifies a trend towards the multilateralisation of obligations and their institutional equipment. Building on these findings the work explains the availability and lawfulness of countermeasures against the responsible transit state. The competing interests of the transit state and those of the states dependent on the pipeline, as well as the states' interpretations of treaty rules and their relationship with international responsibility in numerous disputes, make this question one of the most controversial aspects of modern energy law.
International Law and Domestic Policies
Turgut Ozal University School of Law, in cooperation with Association for Canadian Studies and IDI, invites scholars and policy-makers to submit paper proposals to International Conference on International Law and Domestic Policies. The Conference will take place on 30-31 October 2015 in Ankara, Turkey.
The aim of this International Conference is to evaluate the impact of international law and transnational law on the legal orders of nation states in different national contexts. The importance of international law in an increasingly globalized world is duly and frequently acknowledged. However, it is difficult to say that international law produces the desired impact across different national legal orders.
On the one hand, practitioners, legal scholars and policy-makers note that as well as the force on domestic law of international law in the form of treaties, conventions and customary law, newer concepts such as global common law, international human rights adjudication and the regulatory powers created through transnational agreements all create the sense that the supremacy of the international legal order is well established and that most states and national communities act as responsible members of an ordered global community. On the other hand, however, international community faces a multitude of challenges and problematic situations stemming both from international and national levels.
Governments are often reluctant to incorporate relevant provisions of international law in their domestic orders. They may also exert their influence over international organizations to prevent the latter from dealing effectively with common challenges. In this context, the aim of the Conference is to provide opportunities to discuss the interplay between international law and domestic policies. Besides focusing on the impact of international treaty and customary law, the Conference also welcomes submissions dealing with the effects on domestic policies of other sources of globalized norms, such as the emergence of global common law arising from pressures for regulatory commonality, different trade and investment regimes, international sanctions and others. Scholars, Policy-makers, lawyers, judges and professionals from all disciplines are invited to submit a proposal to the conference organizing committee.
Papers on following and similar topics are welcome:
– Impact of international law on domestic policies
– Convergence between international law and municipal law
– Supremacy of international law
– Domestic courts and international law
– Global common law; the globalization of legal values and legal method
– Rise of regulatory governance in international law
– International human rights law
– International law and national constitutions
– The interplay between international law and domestic law
– International sanctions and domestic law
For more information, including information on deadline for proposals, please refer to the website of the conference.
Human activities have taken place in the world's oceans and seas for most of human history. With such a vast number of ways in which the oceans can be used for trade, exploited for natural resources and fishing, as well as concerns over maritime security, the legal systems regulating the rights and responsibilities of nations in their use of the world's oceans have long been a crucial part of international law. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea comprehensively defined the parameters of the law of the sea in 1982, and since the Convention was concluded it has seen considerable development. This Oxford Handbook provides a comprehensive and original analysis of its current debates and controversies, both theoretical and practical. Written by over forty expert and interdisciplinary contributors, the Handbook sets out how the law of the sea has developed, and the challenges it is currently facing.
The Handbook consists of forty chapters divided into six parts. First, it explains the origins and evolution of the law of the sea, with a particular focus upon the role of key publicists such as Hugo Grotius and John Selden, the gradual development of state practice, and the creation of the 1982 UN Convention. It then reviews the components which comprise the maritime domain, assessing their definition, assertion, and recognition. It also analyses the ways in which coastal states or the international community can assert control over areas of the sea, and the management and regulation of each of the maritime zones. This includes investigating the development of the mechanisms for maritime boundary delimitation, and the decisions of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. The Handbook also discusses the actors and intuitions that impact on the law of the sea, considering their particular rights and interests, in particular those of state actors and the principle law of the sea institutions. Then it focuses on operational issues, investigating longstanding matters of resource management and the integrated oceans framework. This includes a discussion and assessment of the broad and increasingly influential integrated oceans management governance framework that interacts with the traditional law of the sea. It considers six distinctive regions that have been pivotal to the development of the law of the sea, before finally providing a detailed analysis of the critical contemporary issues facing the law of the sea. These include threatened species, climate change, bioprospecting, and piracy. The Handbook will be an invaluable and thought-provoking resource for scholars, students, and practitioners of the law of the sea.
Monday, March 30, 2015
- Lianne J.M. Boer, ‘Echoes of Times Past’: On the Paradoxical Nature of Article 2(4)
- Rob Grace, From Design to Implementation: The Interpretation of Fact-finding Mandates
- Helmut Philipp Aust, The UN Human Rights Due Diligence Policy: An Effective Mechanism against Complicity of Peacekeeping Forces?
- Manuela Melandri, Self-determination and State-building in International Law: The Need for a New Research Approach
- Daragh Murray, How International Humanitarian Law Treaties Bind Non-State Armed Groups
- Nobuo Hayashi, Do the Good Intentions of European Human Rights Law Really Pave the Road to IHL Hell for Civilian Detainees in Occupied Territory?
- Part I Thematic Part: Identity, Nationality and Citizenship
- Péter Kovács, The Background and the Functions of the European Convention on Nationality
- Mónika Ganczer, The Right to a Nationality as a Human Right?
- Gábor Kardos, Fear of Autonomy for Minorities
- Judit Tóth, The ‘Genuine Link’ Principle in Nationality Law
- Tamás Wetzel & Kinga Debisso, Multiple Citizenship in Hungary: Recent Developments in a European Perspective
- Tamás Molnár, The Prohibition of Arbitrary Deprivation of Nationality under International Law and EU Law: New Perspectives
- Laura Gyeney, Dual Citizenship in the Force Field of the European Union
- Petra Lea Láncos, Multiple Citizenship – A Break with the One Man, One Vote Principle?
- Part II Forum: The Baka Case
- Mart Susi, The Baka Case – The Unbearable Price of Individual Justice
- Gábor Kártyás, The Labour Lawyer’s Reading of the Baka Case
- Part III Developments in International Law
- Dinah Shelton, The Benefits and Limitations of a Human Rights Approach to Environmental Protection
- László Blutman, Law in Mind: Towards an Explanatory Framework for Customary International Law
- László Burián, Jurisdiction v. State Immunity in the 21st Century
- Gábor Sulyok, Understanding the Responsibility to Protect: Textual Anomalies and Interpretative Challenges in the 2005 World Summit Outcome
- Tamás Lattmann, 14, 15, 16… Reforms of the European Court of Human Rights
- Sándor Szemesi, Repetitive Cases before the Strasbourg Court: The Pilot Judgment Procedure at the European Court of Human Rights
- Zsuzsa Szakály, Human Rights, Civil Rights and Eternity Clauses
- Anikó Raisz, GMO as a Weapon – a.k.a. a New Form of Aggression?
- Reinhard Quick, Why TTIP Should Have an Investment Chapter Including ISDS
- Simon Lester, Rethinking the International Investment Law System
- Adarsh Ramanujan & Seetharaman Sampath, ‘Double Counting’: Is There Light at the End of the Tunnel?
- Alessandro Antimiani & Luca Salvatici, Regionalism versus Multilateralism: The Case of the European Union Trade Policy
- Gonzalo Villalta Puig & Lee Tsun Tat, Problems with the ASEAN Free Trade Area Dispute Settlement Mechanism and Solutions for the ASEAN Economic Community
- Kai Purnhagen, Mapping Private Regulation – Classification, Market Access and Market Closure Policy and Law’s Response
- Gustav Brink, One Hundred Years of Anti-dumping in South Africa
The published version of this essay appears in a symposium issue of the Leiden Journal of International Law on the "new legal realism." My contribution to the symposium provides a brief overview of legal realism and sketches out its implications for international law, using international environmental law as an example. Although “new” legal realism is not especially new, its anti-formalist, pragmatic perspective still offers important insights about the international legal process, and serves as a useful counterpoint to a new variety of formalism, which continues to resist the social scientific study of international law. Among its distinctive elements, legal realism views international law instrumentally, is empirical in orientation, and focuses on the processes by which international law is developed, implemented, and enforced, rather than limiting itself to international law doctrine. The fear of critics is that, by deemphasizing the internal point of view and the concept of legal validity, legal realism deprives international law of the very features that make it a distinctive enterprise.
Sunday, March 29, 2015
The role of sanctions as instruments of coercive diplomacy has undergone fundamental changes in the aftermath of the Cold War. Not only have States made larger recourse to such measures, but new regimes of "smart" and "targeted" sanctions have been developed. On 13 February 2015, the Istituto Affari Internazionali (IAI) organised an international conference in Rome on this issue, with the support of Eni and Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung. The questions addressed throughout the conference were manifold. They included the role of sanctions as instruments of coercive diplomacy; the compatibility and legitimacy of sanctions imposed by States and international and regional organisations; the connection between sanctions and individual rights; the impact of sanctions on existing treaties and contracts; the impact of sanctions on non-State actors; the practice of the European Union; the extraterritorial effects of national legislation implementing sanctions; and the effectiveness of sanctions in contributing to the maintenance of international peace and security. The debate delved into a number of theoretical arguments and combined different perspectives from international law and international relations scholars. The conference thus managed to illustrate the current state of the academic debate over sanctions and confirmed the evolving nature of the practice in this field, offering an interesting overview for public and private stakeholders, academics and practitioners alike.
European Society of International Law Interest Group on International Human Rights Law Roundtable, ESIL 11th Anniversary Conference on ‘The Judicialization of International Law - A Mixed Blessing’ Oslo, 10-12 September 2015.
Impact of and Backlash against Human Rights Courts an Quasi-Judicial Bodies
On the occasion of the 11th ESIL Conference in Oslo, the ESIL Interest Group on International Human Rights Law invites submissions for a roundtable on the Impact of and Backlash against International Human Rights Courts and Quasi Judicial Bodies.
This roundtable will focus on two inter-related questions: What is the impact of human rights courts and quasi-judicial bodies domestically? What are the sources of backlash against human rights courts and quasi-judicial bodies?
International and regional human rights courts and quasi-judicial human rights bodies have been part of the international human rights law landscape since the 1960s. Since their inception, they have collectively delivered over twenty thousand judgments. At the level of the United Nations, we have witnessed a proliferation in treaty bodies that have an individual petition provision, alongside increased use of the individual petition systems. In what ways can we analyse the impact of human rights courts and quasi-judicial bodies? What has the impact of the decisions of these bodies been on national judiciaries, legislatures, the executive and society more generally? What factors explain the difference in impact across these institutions? Does the non-legally binding nature of the Views issued by UN treaty bodies hamper the impact of the decisions they deliver? Is the impact strengthened by the fact that these bodies can order implementation of general measures? Does the lack of specificity on general measures in the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights hamper impact of its decisions? What are the implications in choosing a forum for an individual complaints in terms of the desired impact domestically? Are enforcement mechanisms of the judicial and quasi judicial bodies effective/how can they be made more effective? How can implementation of judgments/views be fostered both internationally and domestically? How do different regions and states mediate the impact of regional human rights courts and quasi-judicial bodes? Can we talk about an overall impact of the judicialisation of human rights?
In recent years, backlash talk against human rights courts and quasi-judicial bodies have become commonplace. These have been much pronounced in the European context concerning the European Court of Human Rights, but can also be found in relation to other international courts and treaty bodies. What are the sources of backlash against the international judicialisation of human rights? How can these be countered? Do human rights courts micro-manage? Do human rights treaty bodies overstep the boundaries of sound judicial interpretation? Has international human rights jurisprudence pushed too far? To what extent is the backlash talk a reflection of domestic political and legal battles?
The Interest Group is particularly interested in receiving proposals that examine impact of and/or backlash against less well-explored human rights courts and quasi-judicial bodies, such as the CERD, CEDAW, ICESCR and the African Human Rights System. Equally, it welcomes fresh examinations of impact and backlash of the more well-known human rights courts and quasi judicial bodies and their case-law. In depth case studies of impact and backlash are also welcome.
The Application Process
We invite submissions of abstracts of no more than 400 words. Selection will be based on scholarly merit, and with regard to producing an engaging roundtable with attention paid to a wide variety of human rights courts and quasi judicial bodies. Each submission should include the following:
(a) a short curriculum vitae containing the author’s name, institutional affiliation, contact information and e-mail address;
(b) an abstract of no more than 400 words; and
Applications should be submitted to firstname.lastname@example.org by 15 April 2015.
Abstracts will be reviewed by the co-chair persons of the interest group. All applicants will be notified of the outcome of the selection process by 15 May 2015. Accepted full papers are due by 15 August 2015.
Please note that the ESIL Interest Group on International Human Rights Law is unable to provide funds to cover the conference registration fee or related transport and accommodation costs.
For further information about the ESIL Interest Group on International Human Rights Law, please visit: http://esil-ihrl.tumblr.com