Call for Papers: Agri-Food and Environmental Regulatory Agenda in Regional Trade Agreements: Legal Implications and Trends

The Scuola Superiore Sant’Anna and the Institute of Law, Politics and Sustainability have issued a call for papers for the 2016 AgLaw Colloquium, which take place October 20-21. The theme is: "Agri-Food and Environmental Regulatory Agenda in Regional Trade Agreements: Legal Implications and Trends." The call is here.

Cerna: Status of Human Rights Treaties In Mexican Domestic Law

Christina M. Cerna has posted an ASIL Insight on Status of Human Rights Treaties In Mexican Domestic Law.

d'Aspremont: International Responsibility and the Constitution of Power: International Organizations Bolstered

Jean d'Aspremont (Univ. of Manchester - Law) has posted International Responsibility and the Constitution of Power: International Organizations Bolstered (International Organizations Law Review, forthcoming). Here's the abstract:

This article contests mainstream accounts of international responsibility and argues that the act of subjecting certain forms of conduct to the regime of international responsibility has a constitutive dimension. It argues that international responsibility constitutes, rather than constrains, power. More than legal personality, it is international responsibility that makes international organizations huge hubs of power. This article starts with some introductory remarks on the extent to which responsibility ought to be understood as a set of formal modes of legal reasoning through which the determination and allocation of the burden of compensation is debated, as well as a few reminders of the political choices that informed the design of its main formal modes of legal reasoning. After showing how the rules regarding the responsibility of States are constitutive of the power of States, attention turns to the claim that the regime of responsibility of international organizations similarly constitutes the power of international organizations and their member States. This article ends with some remarks on the divergent constitutive roles of personality and responsibility, and on the consequences of a shift in perspective from accountability to power in studies on international responsibility.

New Issue: Global Trade and Customs Journal

The latest issue of Global Trade and Customs Journal (Vol. 11, no. 2, 2016) is out. Contents include:

• Gerard Depayre, Why the EU Anti-dumping Practice to Adjust Inputs Costs in Situations Where Such Costs Are ‘Artificially Low’ Is Legitimate and Justified
• Bruno G. Simões, Cross-Border Intellectual Property Rights in Digital Data: The Legal Framework in Europe and the United States in the Light of ClearCorrect v. US International Trade Commission
• Shintaro Hamanaka, Aiken Tafgar, & Ronaldo Ico, The World Ranking of Trade Statistics Accuracy
• Miguel A. Rodriguez Cuadros, The Non-discrimination Principle and VAT: Rules of Thumb for Trade and Tax Policy-Makers
• Akhil Raina, ‘The Day the Music Died’: The Curious Case of Peru-Agricultural Products

New Issue: International Legal Materials

The latest issue of International Legal Materials (Vol. 54, no. 6, 2015) is out. Contents include:

• Chiragov and Others v. Armenia (Eur. Ct. H.R.), with introductory note by Valentina Azarova
• Belhaj v. Staw (Eng. Wales Ct. App.), with introductory note by Jonathan P. Worboys
• Guidelines on International Protection No. 11: Prima Facie Recognition of Refugee Status (UNHCR), with introductory note by Marjoleine Zieck
• Resolution 2060 on Improving the Protection of Whistle-Blowers (Parl. Ass. Council Eur.), with introductory note by Günter Schirmer and Sandra Coliver

Delile: L'invocabilité des accords internationaux devant la CJUE et le Conseil d'État français

Jean Félix Delile (Université de Nancy - Law) has published L'invocabilité des accords internationaux devant la CJUE et le Conseil d'État français (Bruylant 2016). Here's the abstract:

L’observation de l’invocabilité des accords internationaux devant la Cour de justice de l’Union européenne et le Conseil d’État français permet de constater une convergence des jurisprudences des deux juridictions en la matière. D’une part, les conditions constitutionnelles d’incorporation de la norme conventionnelle sont semblables en raison de l’orientation moniste des ordres juridiques français et de l’Union européenne. D’autre part, l’effet direct – c’est-à-dire l’aptitude de la norme à produire un droit subjectif – est le principal filtre de l’invocabilité du droit conventionnel devant les juridictions de Paris et de Luxembourg. La dévolution de l’effet direct à une norme conventionnelle procède d’un choix du juge. Et il apparaît que les méthodes d’interprétation employées par le Conseil d’État pour opérer ce choix, mêlant téléologie et formalisme, tendent à s’aligner sur celles prônées par la Cour de justice. Dans le cadre du contrôle de légalité, la subordination de l’invocabilité à l’effet direct est toutefois contestable, dans la mesure où le requérant n’appelle pas le juge à statuer sur un rapport entre la norme conventionnelle et le particulier, mais sur un rapport entre la norme conventionnelle et la norme interne. La Cour de justice et le Conseil d’État ont certes développé des palliatifs au principe du défaut d’invocabilité des règles conventionnelles dépourvues d’effet direct. Elles permettent par exemple que celles-ci soient employées comme référentiels d’interprétation du droit interne. Mais l’angle mort de l’État de droit que constitue l’impossibilité de contester la violation des règles conventionnelles dépourvues d’effet direct par un acte interne doit être comblé. C’est pourquoi, il apparaît nécessaire de fonder sur la primauté une forme d’invocabilité, autonome de l’effet direct, qui permettrait d’obtenir la sanction des violations manifestes de ces règles.

New Additions to the UN Audiovisual Library of International Law

The Codification Division of the UN Office of Legal Affairs recently added two lectures to the UN Audiovisual Library of International Law. They were given by Concepción Escobar Hernández on “Inmunidad de jurisdicción penal extranjera de los funcionarios del Estado” and Françoise J. Hampson on “Reservations to Human Rights Treaties.”

New Issue: Questions of International Law

The latest issue of Questions of International Law / Questioni di Diritto Internazionale (no. 25, 2016) is out. Contents include:

• The UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention’s opinion in the Assange case: flawed or flawless?
• Introduced by Eirik Bjorge
• Valère Ndior, L’avis no 54/2015 adopté par le Groupe de travail sur la détention arbitraire concernant la situation de Julian Assange
• Johann Ruben Leiss, The UNWGAD’s Opinion in the case concerning Julian Assange: Some remarks on ‘Elephants in the Room’

Schultz & Mitchenson: Navigating Sovereignty and Transnational Commercial Law: The Use of Comity by Australian Courts

Thomas Schultz (King's College London – Law) & Jason Mitchenson have posted Navigating Sovereignty and Transnational Commercial Law: The Use of Comity by Australian Courts (Journal of Private International Law, forthcoming). Here's the abstract:

Academically, the principle of comity is all but dead. Not only is there a distinct lack of literature regarding the principle, but in circumstances where it is addressed it is considered to be of negligible importance for the resolution of modern private international law disputes. However, a review of Australian case law demonstrates that there is a significant disjunct between the academic view of comity and its actual use in judicial practice. In the last ten years, over 850 Australian court decisions have made reference to comity – many of which relate to the field of private international law. In this article, the authors review 77 Australian cases where comity played a definitive role in the resolution of private international law issues. These cases demonstrate that comity is a relevant, useful legal tool to guide the development and application of private international law rules – doing so in a manner that helpfully mediates between the political need to uphold the doctrine of sovereignty and the commercial and judicial need to permit law to act transnationally in order to accommodate international commerce. This is the purpose for which comity was created almost 400 years ago and the examined case law demonstrates that it continues to be effective in reflecting these interests in the law.

New Issue: International Community Law Review

The latest issue of the International Community Law Review (Vol. 18, no. 1, 2016) is out. Contents include:

• Foluke Ifejola Ipinyomi, The Impact of African Philosophy on the Realisation of International Community and the Observance of International Law
• Antonius R. Hippolyte, Correcting TWAIL’s Blind Spots
• Taryn Lee, The Rights Granted to Indigenous Peoples under International Law
• Alex Davidson, Human Rights Protection before the International Criminal Court

Conference: ILA British Branch 2016 Spring Conference

The International Law Association British Branch will hold its spring conference at Lancaster University, on April 8-9, 2016. The theme is: "Non-State Actors and Changing Relations in International Law." The program is here. Here's the idea:

Non-state actors lie at the heart of many developing trends in international law: in business, human rights, the environment, and international humanitarian and criminal law: and drive its agendas. Equally though, they are also defined by exclusion: by not being the principal subject of international law, the sovereign state. Correspondingly, non-state actors are a wide and diverse group, defined in essence not by their varied contributions but by a lack of sovereignty. This two day conference will first explore the implications of non-state actors for the structure of international law: its sources, boundaries, functions and obligations, and in dispute settlement and responsibility. Second, it will investigate the role of prominent non-state actors: corporations, international organisations, organised armed groups and terrorist networks.

New Issue: Global Policy

The latest issue of Global Policy (Vol. 7, no. 1, February 2016) is out. Contents include:

• Stephen McBride, Constitutionalizing Austerity: Taking the Public out of Public Policy
• Lorenzo Fioramonti, A Post-GDP World? Rethinking International Politics in the 21st Century
• Alex Cobham, Lukas Schlögl & Andy Sumner, Inequality and the Tails: the Palma Proposition and Ratio
• Edward Whitfield, China and the Great Doubling: Racing to the Top or Bottom of Global Labour Standards?
• Astrid T. Sinnes & Christoffer C. Eriksen, Education for Sustainable Development and International Student Assessments: Governing Education in Times of Climate Change
• Ilan Noy, A Global Comprehensive Measure of the Impact of Natural Hazards and Disasters
• Sash Jayawardane, Joris Larik & Mahima Kaul, Governing Cyberspace: Building Confidence, Capacity and Consensus
• Chelsey Slack, Wired yet Disconnected: The Governance of International Cyber Relations
• Mark T. Fliegauf, In Cyber (Governance) We Trust
• Patryk Pawlak, Capacity Building in Cyberspace as an Instrument of Foreign Policy
• Samir Saran, Striving for an International Consensus on Cyber Security: Lessons from the 20th Century
• Ian Hurd, Enchanted and Disenchanted International Law
• Sangjung Ha, Thomas Hale & Peter Ogden, Climate Finance in and between Developing Countries: An Emerging Opportunity to Build On
• Bjorn Lomborg Impact of Current Climate Proposals
• Vicente Lopez-Ibor Mayor, The EU Needs a New Arctic Strategy
• Johanna K. Schenner, Stateless Persons and the Question of Rights
• Robert E.T. Ward, Comment on ‘Impact of Current Climate Proposals’
• Peter Wagner, Modernity, Capitalism and Crisis: Understanding the New Great Transformation

Dijkstra: International Organizations and Military Affairs

Hylke Dijkstra (Maastricht Univ. - Political Science) has published International Organizations and Military Affairs (Routledge 2016). Here's the abstract:

From the UN Department of Peacekeeping Operations to the NATO International Staff and the European External Action Service, international bureaucrats make decisions that affect life and death. In carrying out their functions, these officials not only facilitate the work of the member states, but also pursue their own distinct agendas. This book analyzes how states seek to control secretariats when it comes to military operations by international organizations. It introduces an innovative theoretical framework that identifies different types of control mechanisms.

The book presents six empirical chapters on the UN, NATO, and EU secretariats. It provides new data from a unique dataset and in-depth interviews. It shows that member states employ a wide range of control mechanisms to reduce the potential loss of influence. They frequently forfeit the gains of delegation to avoid becoming dependent on the work of secretariats. Yet while states invest heavily in control, this book also argues that they cannot benefit from the services of secretariats and keep full control over outcomes in international organizations. In their delegation and control decisions, states face trade-offs and have to weigh different cost categories: the costs of policy, administrative capacity, and agency loss.

New Issue: Chinese Journal of Global Governance

The latest issue of the Chinese Journal of Global Governance (Vol. 1, no. 2, 2015) is out. Contents include:

• Esref Aksu, What, Then, is ‘Global’ about Global Governance?
• Lukas Vanhonnaeker, Promoting Successful and Sustainable Foreign Direct Investment through Political Risk Mitigation Strategies
• Qingjiang Kong & Xiaojuan Ping, International Law and International Institutions: Implications for a Rising China
• Zhengxin Huo, The Statutory Reform of Chinese Private International Law in Property Rights: A Silent Revolution
• Pinghua Sun, Chinese Discourse on Human Rights in Global Governance

New Issue: International Peacekeeping

The latest issue of International Peacekeeping (Vol. 23, no. 1, 2016) is out. Contents include:

• Anna Danielsson, Informality and Peacebuilding: Field Notes on the Intrinsic Reproductive Principles of Informal Economic Practices in Post-Conflict Kosovo
• Séverine Autesserre, The responsibility to protect in Congo: the failure of grassroots prevention
• Birte Julia Gippert, Exploring local compliance with peacebuilding reforms: legitimacy, coercion and reward-seeking in police reform in Kosovo
• Nina Wilén, From Foe to Friend? amy integration after war in Burundi, Rwanda and the Congo
• Jamie Levin, Joseph MacKay & Abouzar Nasirzadeh, Selectorate theory and the democratic peacekeeping hypothesis: evidence from Fiji and Bangladesh
• Vanessa Frances Newby, The pieces that make the peace: the micro-processes of international security
• Sabrina Karim & Ryan Gorman, Building a more competent security sector: The case of UNMIL and the Liberian National Police

New Volume: Austrian Review of International and European Law

The latest volume of the Austrian Review of International and European Law (Vol. 17, 2012) is out. Contents include:

• August Reinisch & Peter Bachmayer, The Identification of Customary International Law by Austrian Courts
• James D. Fry, Formation of Customary International Law Through Consensus in International Organizations
• Ralph Janik, Judicial Dialogue on the 1267 Smart Sanctions Regime
• Markus P. Beham, Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros as a ‘MOX Dam’? Thoughts on a Possible Solution by the European Court of Justice
• Malgosia Fitzmaurice, The 2007 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

Call for Submissions: John Westlake Prize

The Institut de Droit International has announced that it is accepting submissions for the John Westlake Prize. Here's the call (English/Français):

JUSTITIA ET PACE

INSTITUT DE DROIT INTERNATIONAL

Established by James Brown Scott in memory of his mother and sister:

JOHN WESTLAKE PRIZE

This competition, endowing an award of 10'000 Swiss francs, is organized under the auspices of the Institute of International Law in accordance with the Regulations of the Prize as established by the late J.B. SCOTT. This Prize bears the name of thirteen distinguished international lawyers on a rotating basis.

The subject of this competition is:

DISPUTE SETTLEMENT BEFORE INTERNATIONAL

COURTS AND TRIBUNALS

Papers related to this subject can be submitted in German, English, Spanish French, or Italian and should comply with all other requirements as specified in the Regulations of the Prize, which can be consulted in the Yearbook of the Institute of International Law, Vol. 61-II, 1986, p. 359-367 and on the website of the Institute of International Law: www.idi-iil.org. The papers have to be submitted to the Secretary-General of the Institute at the latest by 31 December 2016 to the following address:

Professor Marcelo Kohen
IHEID
Chemin Eugène Rigot 2
Case postale 136
CH-1211 Geneva 21

The Prize will be awarded during the 2017 session of the Institute of International Law.

Geneva, 4 February 2016

* * *

JUSTITIA ET PACE

INSTITUT DE DROIT INTERNATIONAL

Institué par James Brown Scott en hommage à sa mère et sa sœur:

PRIX JOHN WESTLAKE

Ce concours, doté d'un prix de 10'000 francs suisses, est organisé sous les auspices de l’Institut de droit international conformément au Règlement des prix institués par feu J. B. SCOTT. Le prix porte à tour de rôle le nom de treize éminents internationalistes

Le sujet mis au concours est le suivant :

LE REGLEMENT DES DIFFERENDS DEVANT LES

JURIDICTIONS INTERNATIONALES

Les textes portant sur tout aspect relatif à ce sujet peuvent être soumis en allemand, anglais, espagnol, français ou italien et satisfaire les autres conditions requises par le Règlement dont le texte peut être consulté dans l'Annuaire de l'Institut de Droit international, Vol 61-II, 1986, pp. 359-367, et dans le site internet de l’Institut de Droit international : www.idi-iil.org. Ils doivent parvenir au Secrétaire général de l’Institut au plus tard le 31 décembre 2016 à l'adresse suivante :

Professeur Marcelo Kohen
IHEID
Chemin Eugène Rigot 2
Case postale 136
CH-1211 Genève 21

Le prix sera décerné lors de la session 2017 de l’Institut de Droit international.

Genève, le 4 février 2016

New Issue: International Review of the Red Cross

The latest issue of the International Review of the Red Cross (Vol. 97, nos. 897-898, Spring/Summer 2015) is out. The theme is "Principles Guiding Humanitarian Action." Contents include:

• Interview with Mr Ma Qiang - Former Executive Vice-President of the Shanghai branch of the Chinese Red Cross
• Andrew Thompson, Humanitarian principles put to the test: Challenges to humanitarian action during decolonization
• Stuart Gordon & Antonio Donini, Romancing principles and human rights: Are humanitarian principles salvageable?
• Larissa Fast, Unpacking the principle of humanity: Tensions and implications
• Caroline Abu Sa'Da & Xavier Crombé, Volunteers and responsibility for risk-taking: Changing interpretations of the Charter of Médecins Sans Frontières
• Kubo Mačák, A matter of principle(s): The legal effect of impartiality and neutrality on States as humanitarian actors
• Jérémie Labbé & Pascal Daudin, Applying the humanitarian principles: Reflecting on the experience of the International Committee of the Red Cross
• Amelia B. Kyazze, Walking the walk: Evidence of Principles in Action from Red Cross and Red Crescent National Societies
• Phoebe Wynn-Pope, Yvette Zegenhagen & Fauve Kurnadi, Legislating against humanitarian principles: A case study on the humanitarian implications of Australian counterterrorism legislation
• Katrien Beeckman, From Fundamental Principles to individual action: Making the Principles come alive to promote a culture of non-violence and peace
• Ed Schenkenberg van Mierop, Coming clean on neutrality and independence: The need to assess the application of humanitarian principles
• Els Debuf, Tools to do the job: The ICRC's legal status, privileges and immunities
• Lucy V. Salek, Faith inspiration in a secular world: An Islamic perspective on humanitarian principles
• Abdulfatah Said Mohamed & Ronald Ofteringer, “Rahmatan lil-'alamin” (A mercy to all creation): Islamic voices in the debate on humanitarian principles
• Kathryn Kraft, Faith and impartiality in humanitarian response: Lessons from Lebanese evangelical churches providing food aid
• Mohd Hisham Mohd Kamal, Is neutral humanitarian action permissible under Islamic law?

Kennedy: A World of Struggle: How Power, Law, and Expertise Shape Global Political Economy

David Kennedy (Harvard Univ. - Law) has published A World of Struggle: How Power, Law, and Expertise Shape Global Political Economy (Princeton Univ. Press 2016). Here's the abstract:

A World of Struggle reveals the role of expert knowledge in our political and economic life. As politicians, citizens, and experts engage one another on a technocratic terrain of irresolvable argument and uncertain knowledge, a world of astonishing inequality and injustice is born.

In this provocative book, David Kennedy draws on his experience working with international lawyers, human rights advocates, policy professionals, economic development specialists, military lawyers, and humanitarian strategists to provide a unique insider's perspective on the complexities of global governance. He describes the conflicts, unexamined assumptions, and assertions of power and entitlement that lie at the center of expert rule. Kennedy explores the history of intellectual innovation by which experts developed a sophisticated legal vocabulary for global management strangely detached from its distributive consequences. At the center of expert rule is struggle: myriad everyday disputes in which expertise drifts free of its moorings in analytic rigor and observable fact. He proposes tools to model and contest expert work and concludes with an in-depth examination of modern law in warfare as an example of sophisticated expertise in action.

Charting a major new direction in global governance at a moment when the international order is ready for change, this critically important book explains how we can harness expert knowledge to remake an unjust world.

Call for Papers: Regulating the Energy Transition: Issues at the Intersection of Energy and Environmental Law

A call for papers has been issued for a workshop on "Regulating the Energy Transition: Issues at the Intersection of Energy and Environmental Law," to be held June 30-July 1, 2016, at the University of Oxford. Here's the call:

WORKSHOP ANNOUNCEMENT AND CALL FOR PAPERS

Regulating the Energy Transition:

Issues at the Intersection of Energy and Environmental Law

All Souls College, University of Oxford, 30 June-1 July 2016

Background

In the face of climate change and severe energy poverty, our energy systems find themselves at a critical point of transition. Legal frameworks at the international, domestic and regional levels have an important but as yet under-examined role to play in this process.

There is worldwide consensus on the urgent need for deep cuts in carbon emissions in order to avoid the disastrous ecological and social effects of climate change. The recently adopted Paris Agreement on climate change aims to hold “the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2 °C above pre-industrial levels and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 °C, recognizing that this would significantly reduce the risks and impacts of climate change.”[1] At the same time, improving energy access is indispensable to the “right to development” of the world’s poor. As the single greatest source of carbon emissions, the energy sector will need to undergo fundamental change at all scales to ensure equitable access to clean and secure energy in response to this three-fold ecological, economic and equity crisis. Some change is already underway thanks to efforts to limit carbon emissions and promote low-carbon technologies at national, regional and international levels.

While this has spurred investigation and inquiry in the areas of science, technology and economics, the role of law in this transition has been relatively unexamined[2]. Both international and domestic law has tended to treat energy and the environment as two discrete and separate areas of practice and research. Traditionally, energy law is concerned with securing energy supply and regulates the exploitation of natural resources for generation, energy transmission and distribution. On the other hand, the object of environmental law is the protection of the environment from the adverse impacts of human activities while promoting sustainable development. This siloed approach is outdated in the face of ever-growing overlap and interconnection between the two areas. There is pressing need to interrogate the issues emerging at the intersection of energy and environmental law and to consider the extent to which these fields should seek to develop integrated approaches to common problems.

For example, in the quest to transition to low-carbon energy systems, we must consider how to account for the environmental impacts of new energy sources (e.g. biofuels and shale oil and gas), expanding energy frontiers (e.g. oil drilling in the Arctic), and novel extraction methods (e.g. hydraulic fracturing) and technologies (e.g. offshore wind farms and energy storage). Similarly, as countries move away from traditional models of centralized production and distribution based on burning fossil fuels to systems with decentralized and intermittent renewable energy technology, new forms of regulation will be required. Indeed for many developing countries, these new models present an opportunity to circumvent the costly investment required for conventional energy transmission infrastructure and to improve energy access at the household level through solar panels and cookers. In turn, law has a role to play in strengthening the resilience of existing and new energy infrastructure to the impacts of current and future climate change for energy security.

The workshop

This event, to be held at All Souls College, University of Oxford, on Thursday, 30 June and Friday, 1 July 2016, will build on existing scholarship and foster dialogue among scholars and practitioners over the growing intersection between international/transnational energy and environmental law in the energy transition. The workshop is being organised by the Oxford Law Faculty, the University of Minnesota Law School and Energy Transition Lab and Melbourne Law School, together with the American Society of International Law (ASIL).

The workshop is intended to bring together leading academic thinkers together with key stakeholders to consider questions at the cutting edge of law, policy and practice at the intersection of the environmental and energy fields. It is hoped that the papers presented and discussions held at the workshop will foster novel, cross-cutting international energy/environmental law scholarship.

Call for papers

In addition to several invited speakers for each panel at the workshop, the organizers are issuing an open call for papers on the themes to be addressed at the workshop, including:

• What do Paris Agreement and international efforts to address energy poverty mean for the growing intersection between international energy and environmental law?
• How does international law interface with domestic law with regard to environmental issues emerging from new energy sources and technologies?
• What is the role of international and transnational law in the context of grid transformation?
• How is law to regulate the environmental impacts associated with the development and exploitation of offshore energy sources?
• How can law and legal processes such as litigation be used to spur the energy transition in developed and developing countries?
• What are some of the emerging issues and challenges at the intersection of energy and environmental law?

Interested persons should submit abstracts of no more than 500 words for papers addressing one of the panel themes, along with a CV. The organizers are particularly interested in well-developed proposals that could be refined following the workshop into papers for publication. We also aim to have a diverse set of participants from multiple countries and perspectives, including people at multiple stages of career.

Abstracts should be submitted to Catherine Redgwell (catherine.redgwell@law.ox.ac.uk), Jacqueline Peel (j.peel@unimelb.edu.au) or Hari Osofsky (hosofsky@umn.edu) no later than 11 March 2016 to be guaranteed consideration. Speakers selected from the open call will be kindly expected to submit a draft of their paper no later than 31 May 2016 to allow circulation to other workshop participants.

Successful applicants will be asked to cover their own travel costs, however, all meals at the workshop will be supplied and the workshop organizers have arranged a block hotel booking in Oxford at a competitive rate for workshop participants.

1. Paris Agreement, article 2(1).

2. The organisers acknowledge early work in the field such as D. Zillman et al Beyond the carbon economy (OUP, 2008).

Glennon & Sloane: Foreign Affairs Federalism: The Myth of National Exclusivity

Michael J. Glennon (Tufts Univ. - Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy) & Robert D. Sloane (Boston Univ. - Law) have published Foreign Affairs Federalism: The Myth of National Exclusivity (Oxford Univ. Press 2016). Here's the abstract:

In the U.S. legal system, the federal government has traditionally been the only rightful arena for the conduct of foreign affairs, especially in the case of national security, military action, international trade, and treaty-making. However, the pervasiveness of globalization and the attendant ease of cross-border interactions, with implications for commerce and terrorism, have brought U.S. states, counties, and municipalities increasingly into the federal government's long-standing province of international relations. For example, states now forge trade relationships with foreign governments through energy and investment contracts that very much resemble treaties. If a foreign sovereign violates any of these contracts or statutes, then civil or criminal action against that sovereign could interfere with the U.S. federal government's diplomatic relations overseas. Consequently, the legal status of states and local governments in the conduct of foreign affairs is unclear and in need of thoughtful analysis and guidance. In Foreign Affairs Federalism, Michael Glennon and Robert Sloane study the constitutional allocation of foreign affairs powers between the federal government and the states. They explain the current law clearly and accessibly, identifying those areas where the law can be confidently ascertained. Where the law cannot be determined, they suggest the most plausible or compelling perspectives on existing doctrine. They also appraise existing doctrine against the background of the diverse and incompatible goals and challenges facing the United States in the twenty-first century.

Inaugural Issue: Business and Human Rights Journal

The inaugural issue of the Business and Human Rights Journal (Vol. 1, no. 1, January 2016) is out. Contents include:

• Patricia H Werhane, Corporate Moral Agency and the Responsibility to Respect Human Rights in the UN Guiding Principles: Do Corporations Have Moral Rights?
• Upendra Baxi, Human Rights Responsibility of Multinational Corporations, Political Ecology of Injustice: Learning from Bhopal Thirty Plus?
• Olivier De Schutter, Towards a New Treaty on Business and Human Rights
• James Gathii & Ibironke T Odumosu-Ayanu, The Turn to Contractual Responsibility in the Global Extractive Industry
• Menno T. Kamminga, Company Responses to Human Rights Reports: An Empirical Analysis

Tams: World Peace Through International Adjudication?

Christian J. Tams (Univ. of Glasgow - Law) has posted World Peace Through International Adjudication? Here's the abstract:

The paper (written for a collection of essays commemorating the fiftieth anniversary of John XIII's encyclical PACEM IN TERRIS) assesses the changing role of international courts and tribunals in the international legal system over the past 150 years. It does so by identifying four stages of development: (i) the gradual re-emergence of arbitration as a common method of dispute settlement from the end of the 18th century; (ii) the consolidation of this practice, coupled with efforts to make it compulsory, from the late 19th century onwards in what might is described as an 'idealistic turn' in dispute resolution; (iii) the 'pragmatic turn' from the inter-War period, which envisioned a much more circumscribed role for international courts and which continues to dominate debates; and (iv) the more recent re-vitalisation, characterised by the establishment of dozens of new courts and tribunals, but firmly wedded to the pragmatist understanding of their role. With respect to each of these stages, the paper outlines the general development of international courts and tribunals, and highlights the evolution of Catholic thinking.

Distefano, Gaggioli, & Hêche: La convention de Vienne de 1978 sur la succession d'États en matière de traités

Giovanni Distefano, Gloria Gaggioli, & Aymeric Hêche have published La convention de Vienne de 1978 sur la succession d'États en matière de traités : Commentaire article par article et études thématiques (Bruylant 2016). Here's the abstract:

La Convention de Vienne de 1978 traite d’un problème intemporel dans la vie internationale des États, à savoir leurs mutations territoriales. Il s’agit là d’une réalité internationale qui survit au phénomène de la décolonisation, mutation territoriale hautement typée et délimitée historiquement. Les exemples sont innombrables. L’on peut mentionner la réunification de l’Allemagne, l’éclatement de l’Union soviétique, le démembrement de la Yougoslavie, la séparation entre la Tchéquie et la Slovaquie, la sécession de l’Erythrée de l’Ethiopie, la séparation du Timor oriental de l’Indonésie, la sécession du Pakistan oriental (Bangladesh) du Pakistan. La pratique récente, relative au Kosovo notamment, qui a déclaré son indépendance le 17 février 2008, met en exergue l’actualité juridique du sujet. Des cas de succession d’États dans un futur proche ou lointain ne sont donc pas à exclure. Les régions sécessionnistes et les pulsions séparatistes sont nombreuses, même si très généralement non reconnues par la communauté internationale. Pourtant, la succession d’États n’est toujours pas dotée d’un régime juridique cohérent complet. Il convient dès lors de s’intéresser à cette lacune juridique en partant du traité-clef en la matière qu’est la Convention de 1978. Un commentaire exhaustif, article par article, de cette Convention se révèle donc être nécessaire. Cet ouvrage contient une analyse serrée des apports et des lacunes de cette Convention à la lumière des travaux préparatoires ainsi que de la pratique récente. Il permet ainsi d’identifier les éléments de codification de la Convention de Vienne de 1978, mais aussi de voir en quoi celle-ci a pu donner naissance à des principes et règles coutumières en la matière. Il a pour ambition de remettre au goût du jour cette Convention et d’offrir aux chercheurs intéressés, mais également aux États et sujets concernés et à la communauté internationale une vue d’ensemble détaillée, analytique et systématique du droit actuel en matière de succession d’États et de découvrir ainsi les éléments de continuité et de rupture qui la caractérisent.

Anthony: The Problematic Use of Human Rights Discourse in the Greek Crisis Debate

Dorothea Anthony (Univ. of New South Wales - Law) has posted an ESIL Reflection on The Problematic Use of Human Rights Discourse in the Greek Crisis Debate.

Call for Papers: Le droit international face aux défis culturels/Völkerrecht vor kulturellen Herausforderungen/Cultural Challenges Facing International Law

In conjunction with the biennial joint meeting of the Société française pour le droit international and the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationales Recht, the Chair of Public and International Law at the Universität Regensburg has issued a call for papers directed at junior scholars for a workshop on "Le droit international face aux défis culturels/Völkerrecht vor kulturellen Herausforderungen/Cultural Challenges Facing International Law." Here's the call:

Dans le cadre des échanges biennaux entre la Société française pour le droit international et la Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationales Recht, la Chaire de droit public et international de l’Université de Ratisbonne organise, conjointement avec les professeurs Evelyne Lagrange (Université Paris 1 – Panthéon-Sorbonne) et Stefan Oeter (Université de Hambourg), des

Rencontres de jeunes chercheurs en droit international

Ces rencontres, qui auront pour thème « Le droit international face aux défis culturels », se tiendront en Allemagne, à Ratisbonne, les 2 et 3 novembre 2016. Les participants aux rencontres sont cordialement invités à prolonger leur séjour pendant les journées d’études conjointes franco-allemandes qui auront lieu les 4 et 5 novembre 2016 sur le thème « La religion et le droit international ».

Les rencontres des jeunes chercheurs visent à approfondir la connaissance des pratiques et des traditions juridiques françaises et allemandes et à favoriser les échanges entre les centres de recherche des deux Etats.

Un appel à contributions est lancé à l’adresse des doctorants, docteurs, post-doctorants et jeunes maîtres de conférence des universités des espaces franco- et germanophones, ou d’autres universités européennes, pouvant justifier d’un sujet de recherche en rapport avec le thème général des journées conjointes.

Les propositions de contribution peuvent porter sur l’une des thématiques suivantes, ou sur toute autre thématique liée au thème général des rencontres :

1. La protection des biens culturels
   (par ex. UNESCO, patrimoine mondial culturel, protection dans les conflits armés)
2. Le droit économique des biens culturels
   (par ex. OMC, médias audiovisuels)
3. La protection et la promotion de la diversité culturelle
4. Les libertés culturelles
   (par ex. liberté de l’art, liberté religieuse, droits des minorités)
5. Les migrations et les identités culturelles
6. Les défis culturels en phases de conflit et d’après conflit
7. Les traditions européennes et non européennes de droit international
8. La pensée internationaliste face aux différentes cultures de droit

Les propositions de contribution (quatre pages maximum, rédigées en français, allemand ou anglais) seront accompagnées d’un C.V. et envoyées à

robert.uerpmann-wittzack@ur.de.

La date limite d’envoi des candidatures est fixée au 15 avril 2016.

Les organisateurs retiendront jusqu’à 14 candidats, en veillant à l’équilibre entre les thématiques et les approches. L’originalité et/ou l’actualité de la recherche seront valorisées. Les candidats seront rapidement informés du résultat de la sélection.

Les rencontres prendront la forme d’atelier. Les interventions seront présentées en français, en anglais ou en allemand (durée maximale : 20 mn) et elles feront ensuite l’objet de discussions entre les participants. En l’absence de traduction simultanée, la compréhension de l’allemand, du français et de l’anglais est requise. Il sera demandé à chaque participant d’adresser à l’avance aux organisateurs un plan de son intervention avec les mots et notions clés en allemand et/ou en anglais respectivement français et une bibliographie sélective. Ces documents seront communiqués aux participants.

Les organisateurs favoriseront la publication des meilleures contributions.

Les frais de voyage et d’hébergement des candidats retenus seront couverts.

Evelyne Lagrange, Université Paris 1 – Panthéon-Sorbonne

Stefan Oeter, Universität Hamburg

Robert Uerpmann-Wittzack, Universität Regensburg

* * *

Im Rahmen des zweijährlichen Austauschs zwischen der Société française pour le droit international und der Deutschen Gesellschaft für internationales Recht veranstaltet der Lehrstuhl für Öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht der Universität Regensburg gemeinsam mit Professorin Evelyne Lagrange (Universität Paris 1 – Panthéon-Sorbonne) und Professor Stefan Oeter (Universität Hamburg) ein

Treffen junger Wissenschaftler im Völkerrecht

Das Treffen zum Thema: Völkerrecht vor kulturellen Herausforderungen, wird am 2. und 3. November 2016 in Regensburg abgehalten. Im Anschluss findet am 4. und 5. November 2016 in Regensburg das zweijährliche Kolloquium der beiden Gesellschaften zum Thema Religion und Völkerrecht statt, zu welchem die jungen Wissenschaftlerinnen und Wissenschaftler herzlich eingeladen sind.

Das Treffen der jungen Wissenschaftlerinnen und Wissenschaftler ist dazu bestimmt, den Einblick in die Rechtspraxis und Rechtstradition beider Länder zu vertiefen und den Austausch bezüglich Forschungsmethoden und bevorzugten Denkmustern zu fördern.

Doktoranden, Doktoren, Post-Doktoranden und junge Dozenten, die an Universitäten des deutsch- und französischsprachigen Raums tätig sind – möglicherweise auch an weiteren europäischen Universitäten, solange ihr Forschungsschwerpunkt einen Bezug zu diesem Thema aufweist –, sind herzlich eingeladen, diesbezüglich Beiträge vorzulegen.

Vorschläge für Beiträge zum Treffen können sich auf alle folgenden Unterthemen beziehen, oder auf jedes andere Thema mit Bezug zum Generalthema des Treffens:

1. Kulturgüterschutz(z.B. UNESCO, Weltkulturerbe, Schutz in bewaffneten Konflikten)
2. Kulturgüterwirtschaftsrecht(z.B. WTO, audiovisuelle Medien)
3. Schutz und Förderung kultureller Diversität
4. Kulturelle Freiheit(z.B. Kunstfreiheit, Religionsfreiheit, Minderheitenrechte)
5. Migration und kulturelle Identität
6. Kulturelle Herausforderungen in Konflikt- und Post-Konflikt-Phasen
7. Europäische und außereuropäische Völkerrechtstraditionen
8. Rechtskulturen und ihr Verhätnis zum Völkerrechtsdenken

Die Bewerbungen (max. 4 Seiten in einer der drei Arbeitssprachen Deutsch, Französisch oder Englisch) sind mit einem Lebenslauf an folgende Email-Adresse zu senden:

robert.uerpmann-wittzack@ur.de.

Einsendefrist der Bewerbungen ist der 15. April 2016.

Die Veranstalter wählen höchstens 14 Kandidaten aus, wobei auf ein Gleichgewicht der Themen und der Perspektiven geachtet wird. Besonderer Wert wird auf die Originalität und/oder die Aktualitätsrelevanz des Beitrags gelegt. Die Ergebnisse der Auswahl werden den Kandidaten schnellstmöglich mitgeteilt.

Das Treffen soll als Workshop abgehalten werden. Die Vorträge werden auf Französisch, Englisch oder Deutsch gehalten (Dauer: max. 20 Minuten) und anschließend zwischen den Teilnehmern diskutiert. Mangels simultaner Übersetzung ist das Verständnis der deutschen, englischen und französischen Sprache erforderlich. Deswegen sollte auch jeder Vortragende im Voraus eine Gliederung seines Vortrags an die Veranstalter senden (auf Deutsch und/oder Englisch bzw. Französisch), mit Schlüsselwörtern und einer ausgewählten Bibliographie. Diese Materialien werden anschließend an die Teilnehmer weitergeleitet.

Die Veröffentlichung der besten Vorträge wird im Anschluss an das Treffen von den Veranstaltern unterstützt.

Reise- und Unterkunftskosten werden vom Tagungshaushalt gedeckt.

Evelyne Lagrange, Université Paris 1 – Panthéon-Sorbonne

Stefan Oeter, Universität Hamburg

Robert Uerpmann-Wittzack, Universität Regensburg

* * *

Within the framework of the conference jointly organised every two year by the Société française pour le droit international and the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationales Recht, the Chair of Public and International Law of the University of Regensburg organises in cooperation with Professor Evelyne Lagrange (Université Paris 1 – Panthéon-Sorbonne) and Professor Stefan Oeter (University of Hamburg) a

Workshop for Junior Scholars in International Law

The workshop will be held in Regensburg, Germany, on 2 and 3 November 2016 on the topic of “Cultural Challenges Facing International Law”. Immediately after the workshop, the biannual joint conference of the Société française pour le droit international and the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationales Recht will take place from 4-5 November 2016, to which the participants to the workshop are cordially invited. The topic of the joint conference is “Religion and International Law”.

The workshop for junior scholars aims at deepening mutual knowledge of French and German legal practice and traditions and at facilitating exchanges between international law research centers of both States.

A call for papers is addressed to doctoral students, Ph.D. holders, postdoc researchers and junior lecturers from universities of French and German speaking areas, as well as from other European universities who have developed a research interest in the topic of the joint conference.

Draft contributions may relate to one of the following sub-themes, or to any other issue relating to the general topic of the workshop:

1. Protection of Cultural Property
   (e.g. UNESCO, world cultural heritage, protection during armed conflicts)
2. Economic Law of Cultural Property
   (e.g. WTO, audio-visual media)
3. Protection and Promotion of Cultural Diversity
4. Cultural Freedoms
   (e.g. freedom of art, freedom of religion, minority rights)
5. Migration and Cultural Identities
6. Cultural Challenges in Conflict and Post-Conflict Situations
7. European and Non-European Traditions of International Law
8. Different legal cultures facing internationalist legal thinking

Proposals (four pages at most, written either in French, German or English), together with a curriculum vitae must be sent to

robert.uerpmann-wittzack@ur.de.

The deadline for sending applications is 15 April 2016.

Up to 14 proposals will be selected, having in mind a certain variety between the themes and the approaches. Originality and/or link with current issues will be favoured. Candidates will be quickly informed of the result of the selection process.

Participants will have about 20 minutes to present their respective papers in French, English or German during the workshop, which will be followed by a general discussion between the participants. As no translation will be provided, candidates must have at least a passive command of the two other working languages. All participants will be asked to send to the organizers an outline, a short bibliography, an abstract, together with a list keywords translated in at least one of the other working languages, in advance. Those documents will be distributed to the participants.

Publication of best papers will be encouraged by the organisers.

Travel costs and hotel will be covered.

Evelyne Lagrange, Universität Paris 1 – Panthéon-Sorbonne

Stefan Oeter, Universität Hamburg

Robert Uerpmann-Wittzack, Université Regensburg

Ford: Us and Them: The Unequal Allocation of Resources in Domestic and International Criminal Investigations

Stuart Ford (The John Marshall Law School) has posted Us and Them: The Unequal Allocation of Resources in Domestic and International Criminal Investigations. Here's the abstract:

The crimes typically investigated by the International Criminal Court (ICC) are at least as grave and complex as the most serious mass atrocity crimes investigated by states. Yet a comparison of the investigative resources available to the ICC and the investigative resources committed to domestic investigations of mass atrocities shows that national governments are willing to devote vastly more resources to domestic investigations. There is also a stark difference in the way states talk about national and international investigations. The rhetoric of national responses to mass atrocities usually involves a commitment to “make every effort,” “pursue every lead,” and “use all means at our disposal” to bring those responsible to justice. In contrast, while most states are generally supportive of the idea of the ICC, their rhetoric often changes dramatically when it comes to discussions about funding the Court. Some of the states that have been most supportive of the Court in their public statements have vigorously opposed attempts to increase the ICC’s budget to adequately fund its investigations.

This Article draws three principal conclusions from its analysis. First and most importantly, the ICC is enormously under-resourced compared to domestic mass atrocity investigations. Second, this lack of resources is at least partly to blame for some of the difficulties the ICC has encountered. The ICC would probably be more successful if it had more resources. Third and finally, some of the ICC’s strongest supporters, like Britain and France, are being hypocritical and discriminatory by opposing any increase in the ICC’s investigative capacity while simultaneously devoting nearly unlimited resources to their own domestic mass atrocity investigations.

Bodansky: The Legal Character of the Paris Agreement

Daniel Bodansky (Arizona State Univ. - Law) has posted The Legal Character of the Paris Agreement. Here's the abstract:

From start to finish, the question of legal form or character was central to the Paris negotiations. The Paris agreement is a treaty within the definition of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, but not every provision of the agreement creates a legal obligation. It contains a mix of mandatory and non-mandatory provisions relating to parties’ mitigation contributions, as well as to the other elements of the Durban Platform, including adaptation and finance. One cannot definitively say how much the legal or non-legal character of the agreement's provisions matters. Making a provision legally binding may provide a greater signal of commitment and greater assurance of compliance. But transparency, accountability, and precision can also make a significant difference, and legal bindingness can be a double-edged sword if it leads states not to participate or to make less ambitious commitments. Thus, the issue of legal bindingness, though important, is only one factor in assessing the significance of the Paris outcome.

Tams: Regulating Treaty Breaches

Christian J. Tams (Univ. of Glasgow - Law) has posted Regulating Treaty Breaches. Here's the abstract:

This paper, written for an edited volume on the law of treaties, assesses how international law deals with treaty breaches. It identifies the three main 'sites' of the international regulation, viz. the general law of treaties, the law of State responsibility, and particular treaties containing express clauses on treaty breaches. It analyses the key features of the three regimes and, in so doing, evaluates controversial rules on countermeasures and on suspension and termination of treaties. Beyond those specific issues, it also offers a general account of the respective fields of treaty law and responsibility.

Laval & Prouvèze: L'ONU, entre internationalisation et constitutionnalisation

Pierre-François Laval (Université d’Orléans) & Rémy Prouvèze (Université Paul Valéry Montpellier III) have published L'ONU, entre internationalisation et constitutionnalisation (Pedone 2015). Contents include:

• Pierre-François Laval, Propos introductifs
• Nicolas Haupais, Les techniques de participation des Nations Unies à l’élaboration des constitutions
• Ioannis Prezas, L’internationalisation structurelle des systèmes constitutionnels nationaux : les cas de la Bosnie-Herzégovine et du Kosovo
• Baptiste Tranchant, Les instruments de la constitutionnalisation : la Charte des Nations Unies
• Laurent Trigeaud, La force d’attraction des organes des Nations Unies : le Conseil de Sécurité et les organisations tierces
• Daniel Colard, Introduction : Table ronde : Internationalisation des constitutions, constitutionnalisation de l’ordre juridique international et globalisation des valeurs
• Julien Ancelin, La globalisation des valeurs par l’action des opérations de paix des Nations Unies
• Rémy Prouvèze, La légitimité de l’ONU à diffuser ses « valeurs » en question