Saturday, November 7, 2015
Symposium: Theory and Practice of Export Control: Balancing International Security and International Economic Relations
Friday, November 6, 2015
The article focuses on one of the most intriguing and, at the same time, controversial issues of international criminal law: whether the state policy requirement should be considered as a constitutive element in core international crimes. Adopting a criminal policy perspective, my intention is to contribute to the ongoing discussion by offering a doctrinal and criminological corroboration of the position that answers in the affirmative.Nevertheless, I am not necessarily promoting a normative choice entailing the amendment of the definition of core international crimes, but I rather call for a policy choice of focusing on cases that presume a state policy component.
- Hitoshi Nasu & Kim Rubenstein, Introduction: the expanded conception of security and institutions
- Alexandra Walker, Conscious and unconscious security responses
- Bina D'Costa, 'You cannot hold two watermelons in one hand': gender justice and anti-state local security institutions in Pakistan and Afghanistan
- Anne McNaughton, Institutional competence and the Common Foreign and Security Policy of the European Union
- Chie Kojima, Building international maritime security institutions: public and private initiatives
- Imogen Saunders, General principles of law and a source-based approach to the regulation of international security institutions
- Anna Hood, The United Nations Security Council's legislative phase and the rise of emergency international law-making
- Hitoshi Nasu, Institutional evolution in Africa and the 'peacekeeping institution'
- Solon Solomon Security and the law in international and domestic institutions: lessons from Israel's border security
- Kalman A. Robertson, The evolution of the nuclear non-proliferation regime: the International Atomic Energy Agency and its legitimacy
- Adam Kamradt-Scott, The World Health Organization, global health security, and international law
- See Seng Tan, The institutionalisation of dispute settlements in Southeast Asia: the legitimacy of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations in de-securitising trade and territorial disputes
- Dilan Thampapillai, The Food and Agricultural Organization and food security in the context of international intellectual property rights protection
- Michael Ewing-Chow, Melanie Vilarasau-Slade & Liu Gehuan, Rice is life: regional food security, trade rules and the ASEAN Plus Three Emergency Rice Reserve
- Ottavio Quirico, Legal challenges to cyber security institutions
- Thomas Pogge, Concluding remarks
Killing civilians is worse than killing soldiers. If any moral principle commands near universal assent, this one does. It is written into every major historical and religious tradition that has addressed armed conflict. It is uncompromisingly inscribed in international law. It underpins and informs public discussion of conflict—we always ask first how many civilians died? And it guides political practice, at least in liberal democracies, both in how we fight our wars and in which wars we fight. Few moral principles have been more widely and more viscerally affirmed than this one. And yet, in recent years it has faced a rising tide of dissent. Political and military leaders seeking to slip the constraints of the laws of war have cavilled and qualified. Their complaints have been unwittingly aided by philosophers who, rebuilding just war theory from its foundations, have concluded that this principle is at best a useful fiction. Sparing Civilians aims to turn this tide, and to vindicate international law, and the ruptured consensus. In doing so, Seth Lazar develops new insights into the morality of harm, relevant to everyone interested in normative ethics and political philosophy.
Thursday, November 5, 2015
Scholars agree that international law works in part by empowering activists and have elaborated activist-focused theories particularly in the domains of environment and human rights. Some theories emphasize accountability — that law helps activists coerce, punish and deter offenders. Others emphasize that law helps to foster dialogue that leads to the acceptance of norms, trust and capacity to foster compliance. Possibly, law does both. We assess these views with a pair of survey experiments applied to 243 highly experienced NGO professionals who have first hand experience in either environment or human rights. Activists believe that NGOs would be less effective at reducing emissions of greenhouse gases or violations of core human rights in the absence of international law. They see the chief value of law arising through accountability politics rather than by fostering dialogue or capacity. However, the two communities have different views about whether binding or nonbinding agreements work best in their domain.
Oxford International Organizations
Call for Rapporteurs
Oxford University Press and the Manchester International Law Centre (MILC) are developing a database of annotated documents pertaining to the law of international organizations. This will include documents such as resolutions of international organizations, reports of legal advisers, judicial decisions, international agreements, or any act of legal relevance.
We welcome applications from those who would be interested in acting as rapporteurs for this project. Rapporteurs will have the task of identifying relevant materials and providing a short legal commentary on these documents.
Rapporteurs will be submitting annotated documents on topics which fall within their expertise, and will be paid £35 (or £70 worth of OUP books) for each accepted document. The commentary will follow a template and should not, in principle, exceed 1000 words. Exceptions may be made with the consent of the editorial board in relation to particularly significant documents. Publication in the database will be at the discretion of the Editorial Board and its directors. Each annotated document will be published under the name of its author.
Applicants should possess:
Applications should include:
- A masters degree in international law (a PhD is an advantage), or relevant experience in the law or practice of international organizations;
- Very good analytical skills and the ability to identify documents relevant for the advancement of knowledge of the law of international organizations;
- Current or past affiliation with a specific international organization would be an advantage.
- a CV;
- a short statement highlighting the applicant’s experience and/or knowledge of the law of international organizations;
- a brief list of materials which, according to the applicant, would warrant inclusion in the database. This could be specific to the organization with which the applicant has been or is affiliated, or be thematic, identifying materials which address a particular issue or set of issues.
Applications should be addressed to Professor Jean d’Aspremont and Professor Iain Scobbie and sent to firstname.lastname@example.org.
Cremona, Kleimann, Larik, Lee, & Vennesson: ASEAN's External Agreements: Law, Practice and the Quest for Collective Action
ASEAN is coming of age as an international actor and international treaty-maker. To date, more than two hundred external agreements and other instruments have been concluded in the name of ASEAN. This book provides the first systematic account of the legal framework governing ASEAN's burgeoning external relations practice. It focuses in depth on ASEAN's wide-ranging mandate to promote its values and principles in the wider region and beyond, as well as the highly intergovernmental, and at times haphazard, handling of the bloc's relations with the outside world. Furthermore, it reveals that there are two basic meanings of ASEAN in its international dealings, which have important implications under international law: ASEAN as an international organisation with its own legal personality and ASEAN as the collectivity of its member states. This timely and thoughtful book is a valuable resource for practitioners and scholars of international law, ASEAN law, international relations, regional integration and governance.
The concept of sustainable development has become a fundamental discourse in international decision making. To enable pragmatic sustainable development governance, legally coherent, mutually supportive multilateral treaties are both necessary and important. This timely book provides an accessible insight into how the concept of sustainable development can be made operational for coherent law making through its translation into legal terms.
The book is split into two informative points of inquiry. The first part of the book explores the origins of the sustainable development debate and sheds light on how the international community has inadequately operationalized the concept to utilize its full potential. In this view, Elisabeth Bürgi Bonanomi illustrates how sustainable development can facilitate coherent international law making when it is understood as a multidimensional legal principle and methodical norm. The second part of the book adopts this notion as an analytical lens on the WTO Agreement on Agriculture, placing the focus specifically on food security and food sustainability. The overarching discussion contributes to one of the most intricate debates of international food governance and investigates the unresolved question of what a sustainable and coherent agricultural trade agreement could look like.
Providing a comprehensive overview of sustainable development law, its origins, and its current theories, scholars and students with a background in international public law, trade, and investment law, development and human rights law, international relations, and environmental policy will find this book a valuable reference tool. Practitioners and policy makers will benefit from the insight into the search for politically coherent and sustainable legal agreements.
- Roda Mushkat, The Intricacies of Implementing International Law: A Juxtaposition of Theories with the Actualities of the Sino-British Declaration Regarding the Future of Hong Kong
- Erik Franckx & Marco Benatar, The “Duty” to Co-Operate for States Bordering Enclosed or Semi-Enclosed Seas
- Irena Ilieva, Countering Terrorism and Protecting Human Rights: An Asian International Legal Dimension
- Björn Ahl, Treaty Making by the Chinese Central Government and the Special Administrative Region of Hong Kong
- Jure Vidmar, States, Governments, and Collective Recognition
- Tomoko Yamashita, Do Jus Cogens Norms Invalidate State Immunity? International Restorative Justice and Japanese War Compensation Cases
- Special Report
- Michael Sheng-ti Gau, The Prospects for the Sino-Philippine Arbitration on the South China Sea (U-Shaped Line) Dispute
Wednesday, November 4, 2015
The event will provide a unique and multidisciplinary insight into the complex world of international boundary and sovereignty disputes. Panelists participating are among the world's leading experts and practitioners in the effective resolution of territorial disputes. Professor Tullio Treves, former Judge of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (and President of the Seabed Disputes Chamber), will be the keynote speaker of the Conference. The speakers will examine recent developments in disputed "hotspots" around the world, and discuss new and emerging ideas for the resolution and management of territorial disputes from legal, geopolitical, technical, commercial and other viewpoints. The conference will examine how these varied, emerging perspectives might inform a more integrated approach to international boundary and territorial disputes.
- Ewa Bagińska, Introduction
- Saša Nikšić, Damages for Violation of Human Rights in Croatia
- Pavel Šturma & Veronika Bílková, Damages for the Infringement of Human Rights – The Czech Republic
- Ene Andresen, Compensation for Human Rights Violations in Estonia
- Xavier Philippe, Les dommages-intérêts pour violation des droits de l’homme en France
- Andreas Arnauld, Damages for the Infringement of Human Rights in Germany
- Ioannis Stribis, Damages for the Infringement of Human Rights by the Public Authority in Greece
- Noelle Higgins, Damages as Compensation for Human Rights Violations in Ireland
- Iris Canor, Tamar Gidron, & Haya Zandberg, Litigating Human Rights Violations Through Tort Law: Israeli Law Perspective
- Graziella Romeo, Looking Back in Anger and Forward in Trust: The Complicate Patchwork of the Damages Regime for Infringements of Rights in Italy
- Jessy M. Emaus, Damages for Fundamental Rights Violations, Dutch Perspectives
- Bjarte Thorson, Damages for the Infringements of Human Rights Under Norwegian Law
- Michał Balcerzak, Polish Domestic Remedies Against Human Rights Violations and Their Interaction with ‘Just Satisfaction’ Awarded by the European Court of Human Rights
- Maria José Reis Rangel de Mesquita, Damages for Violations of Human Rights: The Portuguese Legal System
- Samo Bardutzky, Monetary Compensation for Violations of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms in Slovenia
- Zeynep Oya Usal Kanzler, Special Compensation Regimes for Violations of Human Rights in Turkish Law: A Fast Track Remedy or No Remedy at All?
- Merris Amos, Damages for Violations of Human Rights Law in the United Kingdom
- Jacques deLisle, Damages Remedies for Infringements of Human Rights Under U.S. Law
- Nina Półtorak, Action for Damages in the Case of Infringement of Fundamental Rights by the European Union
- Ewa Bagińska, Damages for Violations of Human Rights: A Comparative Analysis
- Francesco Francioni, From Deference to Disobedience: The Uncertain Fate of Constitutional Court Decision No. 238/2014
- Focus: Judgment No. 238/2014 of the Italian Constitutional Court on the Constitutional Legality of State Immunity for International Crimes
- Riccardo Pisillo Mazzeschi, Access to Justice in Constitutional and International Law: The Recent Judgment of the Italian Constitutional Court
- Michael Bothe, The Decision of the Italian Constitutional Court Concerning the Jurisdictional Immunities of Germany
- Giuseppe Cataldi, A Historic Decision of the Italian Constitutional Court on the Balance Between the Italian Legal Order’s Fundamental Values and Customary International Law
- Paolo Palchetti, Can State Action on Behalf of Victims Be an Alternative to Individual Access to Justice in Case of Grave Breaches of Human Rights?
- Symposium: New Horizons in International Environmental Law
- Tullio Scovazzi, Negotiating Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biological Diversity in Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction: Prospects and Challenges
- Massimiliano Montini, The Rise of “Internal Environmental Conflicts” Within the Green Economy
- Elisa Morgera, Justice, Equity and Benefit-Sharing Under the Nagoya Protocol to the Convention on Biological Diversity
- Christine Bakker, Climate Governance Towards “Paris-2015” and Beyond: EU and US Perspectives
- Claudia Cinelli, Protection and Preservation of the Arctic Marine Environment
- Marie-Catherine Petersmann, The Integration of Environmental Protection Considerations Within the Human Rights Law Regime: Which Solutions Have Been Provided by Regional Human Rights Courts?
- Notes and Comments
- Clémentine Bories Fontana-Giusti, Is There a Way to Ensure Effective Protection of Cultural Identities in the Old City of Jerusalem?
- Maria Rosaria Mauro, Sovereign Default and Litigation: NML Capital v. Argentina
- Fulvia Staiano, The Italian Implementation of the Council of Europe Convention on Violence Against Women and Victims’ Rights to Reparations
- Marta Bo, The Interplay Between International Law and National Law in the First Italian Prosecution of Piracy: The M/V Montecristo Case
- Sophia Dingli, We need to talk about silence: Re-examining silence in International Relations theory
- Taesuh Cha, The formation of American exceptional identities: A three-tier model of the “standard of civilization” in US foreign policy
- Matthew D. Stephen, ‘Can you pass the salt?’ The legitimacy of international institutions and indirect speech
- Latha Varadarajan, The trials of imperialism: Radhabinod Pal’s dissent at the Tokyo tribunal
- Martin J. Bayly, Imperial ontological (in)security: ‘Buffer states’, International Relations and the case of Anglo-Afghan relations, 1808–1878
- Alexander Anievas, Revolutions and international relations: Rediscovering the classical bourgeois revolutions
- Werner Bonefeld, European economic constitution and the transformation of democracy: On class and the state of law
- Laura J. Shepherd, Constructing civil society: Gender, power and legitimacy in United Nations peacebuilding discourse
- Faye Donnelly, The Queen’s speech: Desecuritizing the past, present and future of Anglo-Irish relations
- James Pattison, The ethics of diplomatic criticism: The Responsibility to Protect, Just War Theory and Presumptive Last Resort
Tuesday, November 3, 2015
Seminar: Developing International Law at the Bar - A Growing Competition Among International Courts and Tribunals
Initially viewed as a risk of “fragmentation” of international law, today this phenomenon appears as a sign of the current dynamics and vitality of the international legal system. The Seminar will offer two panels, respectively devoted to interstate disputes and disputes between States and non-State Actors. Each panel will focus on thematic, rather than institutional, approaches: law of the sea, international trade law, environmental law cases, transboundary aquifers, foreign investment disputes, and human rights. Speakers are senior academics and experienced practitioners in the international legal field.
An analysis was conducted of 324 national judicial decisions across 55 jurisdictions, in which CEDAW was referred to in the reported decision. Despite predictions to the contrary based on previous scholarship, significant variations between courts in their interpretation of CEDAW occurred relatively infrequently, courts referred relatively seldom to interpretations of CEDAW by other national courts, and there was little evidence of transnational dialogic approaches to judging. An analysis of these results suggests that domestic judges invoking CEDAW act primarily as domestic actors who use international law in order to advance domestic goals, rather than acting primarily as agents of the international community in applying CEDAW domestically, or contributing to the transnational shaping of international law to suit national interests. The Article suggests an understanding of the domestic implementation of a human rights treaty as not only law, but as a unique kind of law that performs a particular function, in light of its quality as something akin to hard and soft law simultaneously.
- Special Issue: Climate Engineering Law
- William C.G. Burns & Simon Nicholson, Introduction to the Special Issue: Climate Engineering Law
- Neil Craik, International EIA Law and Geoengineering: Do Emerging Technologies Require Special Rules?
- David Reichwein, Anna-Maria Hubert, Peter J. Irvine, Francois Benduhn & Mark G. Lawrence, State Responsibility for Environmental Harm from Climate Engineering
- Jesse L. Reynolds, An Economic Analysis of Liability and Compensation for Harm from Large-Scale Field Research in Solar Climate Engineering
- Cymie R. Payne, Rachael Shwom & Samantha Heaton, Public Participation and Norm Formation for Risky Technology: Adaptive Governance of Solar-Radiation Management
- William C.G. Burns & Jane A. Flegal, Climate Geoengineering and the Role of Public Deliberation: A Comment on the US National Academy of Sciences’ Recommendations on Public Participation
- Nigel Moore, Hajar Benmazhar, Kerryn Brent, Haomiao Du, Viliamu Iese, Salif Kone, Cush Ngonzo Luwesi, Vivian Scott, Jordan Smith, Anita Talberg, Michael Thompson & Zhihong Zhuo, Climate Engineering: Early Reflections on a Complex Conversation
The British Indian Ocean Territory was created on 8 November 1965 by excising the Chagos Islands from the colony of Mauritius and three atolls from the Seychelles. The partitioning of Mauritius on the eve of independence; the involuntary displacement of the Chagos Islanders (pursuant to the construction of a US naval facility on Diego Garcia); and their subsequent chronic impoverishment in Mauritius has remained highly controversial. The marking of fifty years since the BIOT was constituted provides scholars and practitioners with a timely opportunity to reflect upon a range of legal issues which continue to affect the BIOT and to evaluate ways in which they might be resolved.
Between September 2006 and December 2008, Simon Bikindi stood trial at the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, accused of inciting genocide with his songs. In the early 1990s, Bikindi had been one of Rwanda's most well-known and popular figures - the country's minister for culture and its most famous and respected singer. But by the end of 1994, his songs had quite literally soundtracked a genocide.
Acoustic Jurisprudence is the first detailed study of the trial that followed. It is also the first work of contemporary legal scholarship to address the many relations between law and sound, which are of much broader importance but which this trial very conspicuously raises. One half of the book addresses the Tribunal's 'sonic imagination'. How did the Tribunal conceive of Bikindi's songs for the purposes of judgment? How did it understand the role of radio and other media in their transmission? And with what consequences for Bikindi?
The other half of the book is addressed to how such concerns played out in court. Bikindi's was a 'musical trial', as one judge pithily observed. Audio and audio-visual recordings of his songs were played regularly throughout. Witnesses, including Bikindi himself, frequently sang, both of their own accord and at the request of the Tribunal. Indeed, Bikindi even sang his final statement. All the while, judges, barristers, and witnesses alike spoke into microphones and listened through headphones. As a result, the Bikindi case offers an ideal opportunity to explore what this book calls the 'judicial soundscape'.
Through the lens of the Bikindi trial, the book's most important innovation is to open up the field of sound to jurisprudential inquiry. Ultimately, it is an argument for a specifically acoustic jurisprudence.
The James Crawford Prize of the Journal of International Dispute Settlement
The James Crawford Prize of the Journal of International Dispute Settlement (JIDS) is an annual prize which awards £500 of OUP books and a subscription to JIDS to the author of the best paper received by the Journal*. The winning papers will also be published in JIDS.
The selections will be made by a Prize Committee composed of the Editor-in-Chief (Thomas Schultz), two of the General Editors (Tom Grant and Andrew Mitchell), and further members of the Editorial Board of JIDS depending on the narrower fields of the papers submitted for the prize. The Committee may choose not to award the prize and hold it over for a subsequent year if, in their view, the papers submitted do not reach the standards required.
Deadline for submissions is Monday 11 January 2016, GMT 5pm. Submissions for the 2016 Prize should be sent to email@example.com
The Editor-in-Chief and Publisher are happy to answer any questions about The James Crawford Prize of the Journal of International Dispute Settlement (JIDS).
* All contributors are eligible for the award, though preference may be given to young academics or authors at early stages of their careers.
Monday, November 2, 2015
- Sergey Vasiliev, On Trajectories and Destinations of International Criminal Law Scholarship
- International Legal Theory
- Isabelle Ley, Opposition in International Law – Alternativity and Revisibility as Elements of a Legitimacy Concept for Public International Law
- Matthew Windsor, Narrative Kill or Capture: Unreliable Narration in International Law
- International Law and Practice
- Sari Graben & Peter Harrison, Arctic Networks and Legal Interpretations of the UN Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf
- Marcin Kałduński, A Commentary on Maritime Boundary Arbitration between Bangladesh and India Concerning the Bay of Bengal
- Mauro Megliani, Vultures in Courts: Why the UNCTAD Principles on Responsible Financing Cannot Stop Litigation
- Adamantia Rachovitsa, Fragmentation of International Law Revisited: Insights, Good Practices, and Lessons to be Learned from the Case Law of the European Court of Human Rights
- Hague International Tribunals: International Court of Justice
- Mini-Symposium on the ICJ Judgment in Croatia v. Serbia
- Andrew Mamo, Introduction to the Mini-Symposium on Croatia v. Serbia
- Payam Akhavan, Balkanizing Jurisdiction: Reflections on Article IX of the Genocide Convention in Croatia v. Serbia
- Andrea Gattini & Giulio Cortesi, Some New Evidence on the ICJ's Treatment of Evidence: The Second Genocide Case
- Caroline Fournet, The Actus Reus of Genocide in the Croatia v. Serbia Judgment: Between Legality and Acceptability
- Paul Behrens, Between Abstract Event and Individualized Crime: Genocidal Intent in the Case of Croatia
- Martin Steinfeld, When Ethnic Cleansing is not Genocide: A Critical Appraisal of the ICJ's Ruling in Croatia v. Serbia in relation to Deportation and Population Transfer
- Giulia Pecorella, Rape and Sexual Violence in the ICJ's Judgment in Croatia v. Serbia
- International Criminal Courts and Tribunals
- Athanasios Chouliaras, A Strategic Choice: The State Policy Requirement in Core International Crimes
- Maria Granik, Indirect Perpetration Theory: A Defence
- Sofia Stolk, ‘The Record on Which History Will Judge Us Tomorrow’: Auto-History in the Opening Statements of International Criminal Trials
Sunday, November 1, 2015
Call for Submissions: CJICL Volume 5(2)
Ends on 12/19/2015
The Cambridge Journal of International and Comparative Law (CJICL) is an open access, double-blind peer reviewed journal run by members of the PhD and wider postgraduate community of the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law. The Editorial Board is pleased to invite submissions for its fifth volume.
General call for submissions – comparative and international law
The Board welcomes long articles, short articles, case notes and book reviews that engage with themes of public and private international and comparative law, as well as EU and transnational law. All submissions are subject to double-blind peer review by our Editorial Board. In addition, all long articles are sent to our Academic Review Board, which consists of distinguished international and comparative law scholars and practitioners. A full list of reviewers is available on our website.
The deadline for submissions is 12th December 2015 at 11.59 p.m. Only submissions received by this date will be considered for publication in Volume 5, Issue 2, to be published in Spring 2016.
Further submission information
The Journal accepts the following types of manuscript:
1. Long Articles between 6,000 and 10,000 words but not exceeding 12,000 words including footnotes;
2. Short Articles not exceeding 6,000 words including footnotes;
3. Case Notes, including substantive analysis, not exceeding 3000 words including footnotes; and
4. Book Reviews not exceeding 2500 words including footnotes.
Please list the word count of the text and the footnotes on your manuscript.
All copies must be submitted in Word (.doc) or (.docx) format and must conform to our style guidelines, which are available at the following links:
Please ensure that your manuscript does not contain any reference to your personal or professional identity.