Saturday, October 24, 2015
Friday, October 23, 2015
These remarks, delivered on April 9, 2015 at the American Society of International Law’s Annual Conference, address the context of complicity discussions in public international law generally then their significance and scope in Business and Human Rights in particular. The Panel on which I delivered this talk was one of the first to discuss the topic of complicity across different fields, including International Criminal Law, the Alien Tort Statute, Business and Human Rights and the Public International Law of State Responsibility. In my comments, I offer five initial points contextualizing these discussions for the field of public international law writ large, then five more about their significance for Business and Human Rights as a discourse. In the first part I suggest that a robust discussion about complicity is vital if we are to lead decent ethical lives in a world that is at once increasingly interconnected and very dysfunctional. In the second, I problematize the use of international criminal law to supply the standards for complicity Business and Human Rights should employ. I suggest that negligence, not normally sufficient for criminal responsibility, should ground the standard for accomplice liability in the human rights context. Overall, I posit the idea of a tiered wall of complicity standards that are attuned to the conceptual pre-commitments of the fields they operate in, not a monolithic system that takes international criminal law as the sole determinant of the concept. Nevertheless, even if a coherent system of complicity along these lines never emerges across international law as a whole, the mere fact that we are discussing the topic improves our chances of leading ethically decent lives in this our very imperfect world.
- Sonderausgabe: Katalonien
- Georg Kremnitz, Was nun? Nach dem 27 S
- Georg Kremnitz, Sprachenpolitische Folgen des Spanischen Bürgerkrieges
- Esther Gimeno Ugalde, Der Faktor Sprache in den katalanischen Autonomiestatuten von 1932, 1979 und 2006
- Klaus-Jürgen Nagel, Katalonien – vom Autonomismus zum Separatismus?
- Klaus-Jürgen Nagel, Die katalanische Bewegung 2014-15: Ein Hindernislauf – zur Unabhängigkeit?
- Roberto L. Blanco Valdes, Spanien: Föderalismus versus interne Nationalismen
- Alfons Aragoneses, Die plurale Nation im Spiegel des Rechts
- Peter Bußjäger, Katalonien. Ein neuer Staat in Europa?
- Peter A. Kraus, Demokratisierung der Souveränität: Der katalanische „Prozess“
- Georg Kremnitz, Katalonien: zur augenblicklichen Situation und zu möglichen sprachenpolitischen Perspektiven für die Zukunft
- Jordi Martí Pidelaserra & Hannes Schnitzer, „Wie Österreich oder Dänemark“? Lage und Perspektiven der katalanischen Wirtschaft
This chapter seeks to "sociologize" Martti Koskenniemi's "From Apology to Utopia" to understand it less as a theoretical critique of law's indeterminacy and more as a description of the "common sense" of international lawyers, constantly called upon to navigate apology and utopia. It does so by invoking Bourdieusian "field analysis" and looking in particular at the laws of war as a semi-autonomous field of socio-legal practice within international law. The chapter looks at the emergence of that field at the intersection of law, humanitarianism and military necessity, and explores how the field both constrains and makes possible various argumentative strategies within it that make the most of the tension between apology and utopia. It seeks to examine the "navigation" of the field from the point of view of individual participants within it seeking to maximize their relative position as part of ongoing struggles for domination but who can ultimately never do so in a way that would undermine the field's claim to relevance. In the conclusion some of the implications are drawn both for our understanding of the "social determinacy" of international law underscored by the resilience of the field, and the inevitable normative circularity and conservatism of the project of the laws of war. Note: This is the unedited version that was originally prepared for a workshop. The final and authoritative version is to be found in the published volume.
- Symposium: The Human Rights of Migrants: From Treaty to Reality
- Susan Gzesh, The Human Rights of Migrants: From Treaty to Reality: Reflections on Hannah Arendt
- Daniel Kanstroom & Jessica Chicco, The Forgotten Deported: A Declaration on the Rights of Expelled and Deported Persons
- Jayne Huckerby, Same, but Different: Assessing the Interaction of the Migrant Workers' Rights and Anti-Trafficking Regimes Under International Law
Call for Submissions: International Arbitration involving Commercial and Investment Disputes in Africa
TDM Call for Papers: Special Issue on Int'l Arbitration involving Commercial and Investment Disputes in Africa
We are pleased to announce a forthcoming TDM special issue on international arbitration involving commercial and investment disputes in Africa.
Africa's accelerating economic development is attracting a substantial increase in cross-border commerce, trade, and investment on the continent, and disputes arising from this increased economic activity are inevitably bound to follow. International arbitration will be the preferred method for resolving many of these disputes. Indeed, the growing focus on international arbitration to resolve commercial and investment disputes relating to Africa is reflected, among other ways, in the fact that the International Council on Commercial Arbitration (ICCA) will be holding its 22nd Congress for the first time in Africa in May 2016 in Mauritius.
To a great extent, the issues that arise in international arbitration in or relating to Africa will be no different than those that arise in arbitrations around the globe. Converging international arbitration procedures and the predictability and stability afforded by the New York Convention and Washington Convention help to ensure that this is the case. Yet party autonomy remains a core value of the international arbitral system, and, as such, regional approaches and local culture will continue to shape African-related arbitrations to a degree, just as they do elsewhere. Africa's rapid development is also likely to play a role in shaping international arbitration in this region.
This special issue will explore topics of particular interest and relevance to international arbitration in light of Africa's unique and evolving situation. The issue will focus on sub-Saharan Africa and will address issues pertaining to both commercial and investment arbitration. It will also likely explore alternative methods for resolving disputes, including litigation, mediation, and local dispute-resolution mechanisms.
Possible topics for submission to the special issue might include:
- The proliferation of international arbitral institutions in Africa and what the future holds for institutional arbitration on the African continent;
- The attitudes of African states and state-owned enterprises towards international commercial arbitration;
- Salient issues in the OHADA international arbitration framework;
- The influence of China and other Asian countries on international arbitration in Africa;
- Issues in enforcing arbitral awards in African states;
- Evolving attitudes in Africa towards bilateral investment treaties (BITs) and the extent to which BITs are (or are not) helping African states attract foreign direct investment;
- South Africa's draft investment law and other notable country-specific developments in Africa;
- Cultural issues impacting international arbitration in Africa;
- Empirical studies relating to international arbitration in Africa;
- Capacity building for arbitrators, judges, and practitioners in the region; and
- Alternative methods of resolving cross-border commercial and investment disputes in Africa.
We invite all those with an interest in the subject to contribute articles or notes on one of the above topics or any other relevant issue.
This special issue will be edited by Thomas R. Snider (Greenberg Traurig LLP), Professor Won Kidane (Seattle University Law School and the Addis Transnational Law Group), and Perry S. Bechky (International Trade & Investment Law PLLC).
Feel free to circulate this call for papers to friends, colleagues, and others who may have an interest in the topic.
Publication is expected in July-August 2016. Proposals for papers should be submitted to the editors by January 31st, 2016.
Thursday, October 22, 2015
Much has been written on the Argentine dictatorship and the transitional justice movement that brought its members to justice. However there has been no study to date of the economic accomplices to this dictatorship and the recent advancements in Argentina towards holding these actors accountable. What was the role of banks, companies, and individuals in perpetuating a murderous regime? To what extent should they be held responsible? As the first academic study on economic complicity in Argentina, this book attempts to answer these questions. Renowned human rights scholars investigate the role played by such actors as Ford, Mercedes Benz, the press, foreign banks, and even the Catholic Church. Across numerous case studies, the authors make a compelling argument for the legal responsibility of economic accomplices. A groundbreaking interdisciplinary study, this book will be essential to anyone interested in transitional justice, business, and human rights.
- Emilia Justyna Powell, Islamic Law States and Peaceful Resolution of Territorial Disputes
- Ronald R. Krebs, How Dominant Narratives Rise and Fall: Military Conflict, Politics, and the Cold War Consensus
- Todd H. Hall & Andrew A.G. Ross, Affective Politics after 9/11
- Colin M. Barry & Katja B. Kleinberg, Profiting from Sanctions: Economic Coercion and US Foreign Direct Investment in Third-Party States
- J. Bradford Jensen, Dennis P. Quinn & Stephen Weymouth, The Influence of Firm Global Supply Chains and Foreign Currency Undervaluations on US Trade Disputes
- Shuhei Kurizaki & Taehee Whang, Detecting Audience Costs in International Disputes
- Research Notes
- Guy Grossman, Devorah Manekin & Dan Miodownik, The Political Legacies of Combat: Attitudes Toward War and Peace Among Israeli Ex-Combatants
Wednesday, October 21, 2015
The conference aims to comprehensively address the contemporary challenges of energy activities in the marine environment. We will consider the multiple facets and problems of the legal framework of energy at sea, ranging from the preliminary yet imperative question of maritime delimitation to issues of energy investment and energy production as well as the potential conflict of energy activities with other uses of the sea. The final goal is to approach energy at sea from an integrated perspective, combining knowledge from several disciplines, including the academia, policy-making and practice, with the view to making a decisive contribution to our understanding of current trends and challenges.
- Rolf H. Weber, Digital Trade and E-Commerce: Challenges and Opportunities of the Asia-Pacific Regionalism
- Rostam J. Neuwirth & Alexandr Svetlicinii, The Regulation of Trade and Public Health in Asia-Pacific: A Case for “Inter-Regime Regulatory Co-opetition”
- Jaemin Lee, Beneath the Tip of the Iceberg ─ Global Financial Crisis, Bank Bailouts and the SCM Agreement
- Hyo-young Lee, “Remedying” the Remedy System for Prohibited Subsidies in the WTO: Reconsidering Its Retrospective Aspect
- Takemasa Sekine, Financial Compensation in Trade Dispute Settlements: Can the Free Trade Agreement Experiment Be Successful?
- Ruibo Yan, Is the Principle of Lex Specialis Useful to Resolve the Conflict Between GATT and GATS? Examining the Inclusive Relationship of Subject Matter
- Guang Ma & Jiang Li, A Legalization Theory Based Response to Timothy Webster’s “Paper Compliance” of China in WTO Dispute Settlement
- Prapanpong Khumon, Rules of Origin for Services in Asia-Pacific Trade Agreements
In 1998, the Rome Statute to the International Criminal Court (ICC) emerged as a groundbreaking treaty both due to its codification of international criminal law and its recognition of the crimes committed against women in times of war and conflict. The ICC criminalized acts of rape, sexual slavery, and enforced pregnancy, amongst others, to provide the most advanced articulation ever of gender based violence under international law. However, thus far no scholarly book has analyzed whether or not the implementation of the ICC has been successful.
The Politics of Gender Justice at the International Criminal Court fills this intellectual gap, specifically examining the gender justice design features of the Rome Statute (the foundation of the ICC), and assessing the effectiveness of the statute's implementation in the first decade of the court's operation. Louise Chappell argues that although the ICC has provided mixed outcomes for gender justice, there have also been a number of important breakthroughs, particularly in regards to support for female judges. Meticulous and comprehensive, this book refines the notion of gender justice principles and adds a valuable, but as yet unrecognized, gender dimension to the burgeoning historical institutionalist approach to international relations. Chappell links feminist international relations literature with feminist institutionalism literature for the first time, thereby strengthening and adding to both fields.
On the occasion of the ESIL 12th Annual Conference (Riga, 8-10 September 2016, titled “How International Law Works in Times of Crisis”) the ESIL Interest Group on the History of International Law hereby invites submissions, in English or in French, for its annual Workshop.
Call for Papers
The idea of crisis is a permanent feature of international law debates, increasing in popularity over the past few decades. There are many possible explanations for this phenomenon. One is that the discipline of international law is constantly experiencing a state of crisis, crisis being an analytical tool measuring stable content. Another explanation is that crisis is no more than an epithet, deployed to single out an event or situation as exceptional or dramatic, thus paving the road for transformation and renewal. Other examples also exist. The intersection between crisis and international law, however, inevitably infers questions of time and history. It raises questions about the normal and the exceptional; about continuity and rupture; about the direction of history, and its periodization. It prompts questions about whether the history of international law can be written as a history of crises and questions about what is at stake each time ‘crisis’ is used to characterize a situation as exceptional.
In this context, the IGHIL invites submissions by scholars working within the fields of international law, history, and politics on the following inter-related themes:
a) To (re)tell the stories of events (situations, phenomenal, linkages) that have captured the imagination of international legal historiography as paradigmatic instances of crisis;
b) To examine questions of method and epistemology involved in the history writing of crises (e.g. questions of teleology, narrative, tropology) in international law;
c) To reflect on the relationship between crisis, exceptionalism, and projects of legal reform, and what is to be learned by studying past crises for the present and future of international law.
Each submission should include:
a) An abstract of no more than 400 words;
b) The intended language of presentation;
c) A short curriculum vitae containing the author’s name, institutional affiliation, contact information and e-mail address.
Abstracts must be submitted no later than 15 February 2016 to both Thomas Skouteris (email@example.com) and Inge Van Hulle (Inge.VanHulle@law.kuleuven.be) on behalf of the Steering Committee of the Interest Group, which shall collectively supervise the peer-review process of the abstracts. Applicants will be notified on the outcome of the selection process by 15 March 2016.Selection will be based on scholarly merit and with regard to producing an engaging workshop, without prejudice to gender, seniority, language or geographical location. Please note that the ESIL Interest Group on the History of International Law is unable to provide funds to cover the conference registration fee or related transport and accommodation costs.
The IG currently investigates publication possibilities for selected abstracts.
Tuesday, October 20, 2015
- Forum: 1914–2014 Niemeyer's International Law Revisited
- Andreas von Arnauld, Reflections upon Reflections: Koskenniemi on Niemeyer
- Theodor Niemeyer, Tasks of the Future Science of Public International Law
- Martti Koskenniemi, International Law as ›Science‹ – Reflections on a Mandarin Essay
- Focus: Law of the Sea in the 21st Century
- Nele Matz-Lück, The Law of the Sea as a Research Focus in Kiel: Looking Back and Moving Ahead
- Shunji Yanai, Can the UNCLOS Address Challenges of the 21st Century?
- Bing Bing Jia, The Principle of the Domination of the Land over the Sea: A Historical Perspective on the Adaptability of the Law of the Sea to New Challenges
- Rüdiger Wolfrum, Evolution of the Law of the Sea from an Institutional Perspective
- Liesbeth Lijnzaad, Formal and Informal Processes in the Contemporary Law of the Sea at the United Nations, a Practitioner's View
- Yoshifumi Tanaka, The Institutional Application of the Law of Dédoublement Fonctionnel in Marine Environmental Protection: A Critical Assessment of Regional Regimes
- Tullio Scovazzi, The Exploitation of Resources of the Deep Seabed and the Protection of the Environment
- Doris König, Maritime Security: Cooperative Means to Address New Challenges
- Alexander Proelss, Dispute Settlement in Multi-Layered Constellations: International Law and the EU
- Isabel Feichtner, Power and Purpose of Ecolabelling: An Examination Based on the WTO Disputes Tuna II and COOL
- General Articles
- Diego Germán Mejía-Lemos, On Self-Reflectivity, Performativity, and Conditions for Existence of Sources of Law in International Law
- Tobias Thienel, Third States and the Jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice: The Monetary Gold Principle
- Mart Susi, Implied Constitutional Competence of the European Court of Human Rights
- Paul Gragl, The Silence of the Treaties: General International Law and the European Union
- Isabel Daum, Legal Conflicts in the Protection of Traditional Knowledge and Intellectual Property in International Law
- Kevin Grimmeiß, International Criminal Tribunals and the Right to a Lawful Judge
- Thiago Braz Jardim Oliveira, State Immunity and Criminal Proceedings: Why Foreign Officials Cannot Enjoy Immunity Ratione Materiae from the Legal Process of Extradition
- Sinthiou Buszewski & Henner Gött, Avoiding Kadi – ›Pre-emptive Compliance‹ with Human Rights when Imposing Targeted Sanctions
- Anja Kießling, The Uncertain Fate of the African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights: The Problematic Merger with the African Court of Justice and the Establishment of an International Criminal Law Section
- German Practice
- Stefan Talmon, At last! Germany Admits Illegality of the Kosovo Intervention
- Christoph Beinlich & Benjamin Jüdes, Germany's Role in the Destruction of Syrian Chemical Weapons
- Philipp Stöckle, Recent Developments in German Case Law on Compensation for Violations of International Humanitarian Law
- Arne Reißmann & Sarah Bothe, Ending Impunity for the Bottommost Diplomatic Caste: German Practice in Relation to Domestic Workers in Diplomatic Households
- Martin Weiler, The Right to Privacy in the Digital Age: The Commitment to Human Rights Online
- Sina Hartwigsen & Jasmin Oschkinat, The Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage and Its Relevance for Germany
- Sarah Gahlen, Watercourses: The UN Convention and Germany's International Treaties
- Berenike Schriewer, The German Federal Constitutional Court's First Reference for a Preliminary Ruling to the European Court of Justice
In The Inter-American Human Rights System as a Safeguard for Justice in National Transitions, Annelen Micus analyzes the importance of the Inter-American Human Rights System for transitional justice processes in Latin America, with a focus on Argentina, Chile and Peru. She examines which factors influence a country’s approach in confronting its past and addressing impunity. The emphasis is placed on the way countries may overcome amnesty laws with the support of international law in order to hold perpetrators of grave human rights violations to account. The book’s main focus is on the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, and the impact of its jurisprudence on legal proceedings and political decisions within the national transitional justice processes in the three countries.
Black-Branch & Fleck: Nuclear Non-Proliferation in International Law: Volume II - Verification and Compliance
This second Volume in the book Series on Nuclear Non-Proliferation in International Law discusses the legal interpretation and implementation of verification and compliance with the Treaty of the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, 1968; the Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty, 1996; and the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community (EURATOM), 1957. It specifically examines the question, contested in recent academic writings, whether the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is competent to verify not only the correctness, but also the completeness of national declarations. Topical legal issues of verification and its technical and political limits as well as peaceful settlement of disputes and countermeasures are discussed in-depth.
- Alexander Orakhelashvili, State Jurisdiction in International Law: Complexities of a Basic Concept
- Cedric Ryngaert, The Concept of Jurisdiction in International Law
- Sienho Yee, Universal Jurisdiction: Concept, Logic and Reality
- Yoshifumi Tanaka, Jurisdiction of States and the Law of the Sea
- Alexander Orakhelashvili, State Immunity from Jurisdiction between Law, Comity, and Ideology
- J Craig Barker, Shared Foundations and Conceptual Differentiation in Immunities from Jurisdiction
- Elizabeth Franey, Immunity from the Criminal Jurisdiction of National Courts
- Alexander Orakhelashvili, The UK State Immunity Act 1978: History, Scope and Relation to International Law
- Alexander Orakhelashvili, Treaties on State Immunity: the 1972 and 2004 Conventions
- Richard Garnett, Foreign State Immunity: A Private International Law Analysis
- Aurel Sari, The Status of Armed Forces in Public International Law: Jurisdiction and Immunity
- Xiaodong Yang, Immunity from Execution
- Francois Larocque, Torture, Jurisdiction and Immunity: Theories and Practices in Search of One Another
- Robert Cryer, Immunities and International Criminal Tribunals
- Alexander Orakhelashvili, Jurisdictional Immunity of International Organisations: from Abstract Functionality to Absolute Immunity
Monday, October 19, 2015
The topic of transparency in international investment arbitration is gaining increasing attention. This in-depth commentary analyses the UNCITRAL Rules on Transparency in Treaty-Based Investor-State Arbitration, one of the most recent and innovative developments in international law. Focusing on the application of these rules, contributors analyse the issue of transparency in investment law more broadly and provide in-depth guidance on how to apply the UNCITRAL transparency rules. Chapters encompass all treaty-based disputes between investors and state, examining the perspectives of disputing parties, third parties, non-disputing state parties and arbitral tribunals. The contributors each have a strong background in investment arbitration, in both professional practice and academia. This commentary will be of interest to all actors involved in investment arbitrations, especially practitioners, counsels, NGOs and scholars in the fields of international law, commercial arbitration and investor-state arbitration.
- Seung Chong & Chin Leng Lim, The Convergence of China’s Foreign and Domestic Investment Regimes and China’s Investment Treaty Commitments
- Sam Luttrell & Isuru Devendra, Inherent Jurisdiction and Implied Power to Stay Proceedings in Aid of Arbitration: “A Nice Question”
- Deyan Draguiev, The Effect of Insolvency on Pending International Arbitration: What Is and What Should Not Be
- Benoit Le Bars, Recent Developments in International Energy Dispute Arbitration
- Nitish Monebhurrun, Gold Reserve Inc. v. Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela: Enshrining Legitimate Expectations as a General Principle of International Law?
This contribution analyses the development of the doctrine of fundamental rights of states in German international law doctrine. It shows how the doctrine, despite its natural law origins, was able to adapt and flourish in a more positivist environment in the late 19th and early 20th century. It was highly malleable with respect to the uses to which it was put. Accordingly, it was both relied on in order to support National Socialist conceptions of international law as well as to connect with a return to natural law after World War II. With a turn to more pragmatist approaches in German scholarship since the middle of the 20th century the doctrine seemed to have faded away. However, the contribution argues that it has witnessed a somewhat unexpected comeback. Driven by some functional and constructive analogies with parts of the constitutionalisation literature, it is possible to see traces of the doctrine reemerge. In this respect, it may even be said to resemble parts of the recent case law of the German Federal Constitutional Court which has put a strong emphasis on sovereignty and self-determination as limits towards international and European integration.
- Sébastien Rioux, Mind the (Theoretical) Gap: On the Poverty of International Relations Theorising of Uneven and Combined Development
- Nichola Harmer, Jamie Gaskarth & Richard Gibb, Distant Relations: Identity and Materiality in Elite Discourse on Britain's Overseas Territories
- Peter Weber, The Pacifism of Andrew Carnegie and Edwin Ginn: The Emergence of a Philanthropic Internationalism
- Sandra Pogodda, Oliver P. Richmond & Roger Mac Ginty, The Great Disconnect: Global Governance and Localised Conflict in the Cases of India and the EU
d'Aspremont: The Doctrine of Fundamental Rights of States and the Functions of Anthropomorphic Thinking in International Law
This article recalls the various manifestations of the anthropomorphic doctrine of the fundamental rights of states with a view to critically examining the various functions of anthropomorphic thinking in international law. This allows the article to provide some critical insights on the remnants of the doctrine of fundamental rights of states and the role played by those anthropomorphic residues in contemporary international law. This article is built on a diachronic examination of the functional changes which the doctrine of fundamental rights of states underwent since its origin. This article, after some introductory considerations on the relations between rights and anthropomorphic thinking, examines how anthropomorphic thinking materialised in the form of a doctrine of fundamental rights of states and came to thrive in international legal thought. The article then turns to the manifestation of the doctrine of fundamental rights of states in the inter-American and United Nations contexts with a view to shedding light on the functions that such positive rules pertaining to the fundamental rights of states were meant to play in the international legal order. The article subsequently discusses the demise of the classical doctrine of fundamental rights of states and the foundering of the codification process in order to examine the role that the remains thereof are meant to play in contemporary international law. It ends with a few concluding remarks on the ubiquity of anthropomorphic thinking about international law. Throughout this examination of the functions of the anthropomorphic doctrine of fundamental rights of states, this article espoused the view that, in of contemporary legal argumentation, the notion of fundamental right of state does not constitute any autonomous construction to which specific legal effects are ascribed but rather a textual package of contestation and resistance.
A Century after Russian Revolution: Its Legacy in International Law
Thursday 19 May 2016, Heidelberg
Call for engaged listeners
In the context with the upcoming centennial anniversary of the Russian Revolution in 2017, the Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law in Heidelberg will host a workshop with experts in the field to reflect on the Russian Revolution and its aftermath. The workshop convenes lawyers, historians and political scientists to present a paper which will be published in a focus session of the Journal of the History of International Law (JHIL). The central theme is ‘A Century after Russian Revolution: Its Legacy in International Law’. Issues to be addressed are the international right to self-determination of peoples, the role of revolution for statehood, state succession, recognition and Russian international law in the sense of its historiography and doctrine.
Speakers presenting their papers during the day are Prof. Sabine Dullin (Sciences Po Paris), Prof. John B. Quigley (Ohio State University), Prof. Lauri Mälksoo (University of Tartu), Prof. Veronika Bilkova (Charles University Prague), Dr. Janis Grzybowski (Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies Geneva) and Prof. Vittorio Hösle (University of Notre Dame).
The workshop will take place on Thursday 19 May 2016 in Heidelberg, beginning in the morning and ending on in the afternoon around 17.00. Scholars and practitioners interested in participating in the workshop as engaged listeners, that is, as audience (and participants in the discussions following the presentations), are invited to respond to this call.
The presentations of invited speakers will relate to the following topics:
- Statehood and recognition
- Property and sovereignty
- The Russian Revolution from a philosophical and historical perspective
- Secret treaties
The final programme will be publicized soon.
If you are interested in participating in the audience (not as a speaker), send an application with a statement of motivation explaining you interest and expertise or current research interest (maximum ½ to 1 page), and your cv including list of publications (maximum one page) to Dr. Mieke van der Linden (firstname.lastname@example.org).
Participation is at your own expense; the Max Planck Institute cannot contribute to your travel and accommodation costs. Admitted participants must secure their own accommodation, and we advise to do this early.
Space is limited, and participants will be admitted on a first come-first serve basis, taking into account their demonstrated expertise on the topic. No applications will be admitted after 10 April 2016.
For all inquiries, please contact Dr. Mieke van der Linden (email@example.com).
Prof. Dr. iur. Anne Peters
Journal of the History of International Law
Sunday, October 18, 2015
- Budi Nugroho & Muhamad Hikmah, COO Dispute Settlement through Tax Court in Indonesia
- Elena Vyboldina, Solving the Conflict Minerals Puzzle
- Aaron Marx, The ITA II: Successful Trade Liberalization
- Pratik Tayal, A New World of Causation in Safeguards: Application of the ‘But for’ Test
Call for Papers: Moving Beyond the Good, the Bad and the Ugly: What to Learn From International Human Rights Systems?
Call for Abstracts
Workshop 'Moving Beyond the Good, the Bad and the Ugly: What to Learn From International Human Rights Systems?'
29 - 30 January 2016
Deadline for submitting abstract: 3 November 2015
The Inter-American Human Rights Network (IAHRN) is inviting submissions for papers to be presented at a two-day Workshop entitled "Moving Beyond the Good, the Bad and the Ugly: What to Learn From International Human Rights Systems?" Academics, judges, and practitioners from all regions of the world are invited to discuss opportunities for improving policies and outcomes through the implementation of decisions of international adjudicators. The workshop will be held at Ghent University’s Human Rights Centre on 29 and 30 January 2016. If you are interested in participating, please send a half page abstract of the paper you would plan to present to Clara.BurbanoHerrera@UGent.be and firstname.lastname@example.org.
Janik: You Can’t Have One Without the Other, Can You? Assessing the Relationship between the Use of Force in the Name of Human Rights and Regime Change
In the post-Cold War world, military operations have often been justified by varying degrees of human rights considerations, a preventive approach towards self-defence, and the morality of overthrowing oppressive regimes. During the accompanying revision of the all too bothersome principle of sovereignty, the focus has shifted away from international peace and security in the original sense, i.e. understood as applying in inter-state relations, towards individuals as the ultimate beneficiaries of the international order. The practical implementation of this doctrinal approach has often led to criticism and sat uneasy with governments suspicious that it could be used against them; more often than not, alleged human rights considerations are deemed as merely providing a convenient shield for geostrategic goals. Many states fear that noble intentions may in reality be abused to impose forcible regime change. Upon closer inspection these fears are well-founded since the use of force in the name of human rights and regime change proceed from the same basic assumption, namely sovereignty as being conditional upon a certain conduct of states and their governments towards their citizens. Thus, it is only a small step from intervening on behalf of human rights to overthrowing the government responsible for mass atrocities. The ius post bellum aspect often even calls for a reorganization of the internal legal system or at least an exchange of leaders. Going even further, some just war theorists argue that no oppressive regime may rely on sovereignty as a shield from forceful interference because of its lack of legitimacy and regardless of the actual perpetration of massive human rights violations. Given the proximity between the Responsibility to Protect doctrine and just war theory, such assumptions need to be taken seriously. After all, the international order seems to be at a crossroads between traditional law and the notion of pluralism and ambitions to establish a worldwide concert of democracies – with the Responsibility to Protect doctrine and just war theory serving as the legal and doctrinal tool in justifying action on behalf of the latter. The ultimate question that still warrants an answer from a doctrinal viewpoint, especially when considering the various historic examples in this regard, is whether there can be an actual implementation of the Responsibility to Protect doctrine in the sense of using force without imposing regime change.