Legal concepts have served as fundamental tools in re-shaping power relations, in normativizing imperial structures as well as in challenging and destabilizing them. Law has offered an intellectual framework for positing new concepts of civilization, ethics, rights, and resilience, in constructing new kinds of individual as well as social selves. The mutual entanglements of legal ideas, imperial power relations, and globalized encounters therefore constitute a key site of interrogation through which one can study the emergence of the world today, while also imagining sites of radical resistance and transformation. This conference will address such issues, raising questions that also have a broader extra-academic ethical and political significance.
The conference will chart the ways in which future areas of legal-historical research can be informed by critical perspectives derived from the discipline of global intellectual history. The assumption is that this nascent academic field can offer new methodologies for studying the transnationally-constructed and globally-entangled emergence of fundamental legal concepts that inform juridical, social, political, economic, and religious frameworks today. Taking a cue from broader debates on transculturality carried out at the Cluster of Excellence ‘Asia and Europe’ in Heidelberg University, this conference brings scholars from different disciplines together to analyze the multi-sited origins of legal-conceptual foundations that inform present-day debates.
Saturday, June 18, 2016
Jakubowski & Wierczyńska: Fragmentation vs the Constitutionalisation of International Law: A Practical Inquiry
- Andrzej Jakubowski & Karolina Wierczyńska, Introduction
- Jerzy Zajadło & Tomasz Widłak, Constitutionalisation: A New Philosophy of International Law?
- Vassilis Tzevelekos & Lucas Lixinski, From the Internationalisation of National Constitutions to the "Constitutionalisation" of International Law: The Role of Human Rights
- Roman Kwiecień, International Constitutionalism, Language in Legal Discourse, and the Functions of International Law Scholarship
- Maurizio Arcari, The Creeping Constitutionalization and Fragmentation of International Law: From "Constitutional" to "Consistent" Interpretation
- François Finck, The Paradoxes of Fragmentation – Does Regional Constitutionalisation Constitute a Fragmentation Threat to the International Legal Order?
- Krystyna Kowalik Banczyk, International Constitutionalisation of Protection of Privacy in the Internet – the Google Case Example
- Maria Varaki, The "Revival" of Sovereignty via the Complementarity Regime and the ‘Doctrinal’ Idea of Responsibility to Protect; What about Constitutionalization?
- Patrycja Grzebyk, Fragmentation of the Law of Targeting – A Comfortable Excuse or Dangerous Trap
- Karolina Wierczyńska, The Rome Statute and the Debate Surrounding the Constitutionalization, Fragmentation and Pluralisation of International Criminal Law
- Ernst-Ulrich Petersmann, Justifying ‘Fragmentation’ and Constitutional Reforms of International Law in Terms of Justice, Human Rights and ‘Cosmopolitan Constitutionalism’
- Andrzej Jakubowski, A Constitutionalised Legal Order – Exploring the Role of the World Heritage Convention (1972)
- Mónika Ambrus, Constitutionalisation through Fragmented Adjudication
- Chien-Huei Wu, From Fragmentation to Coherence: a Constitutionalist Take on the Trade and Public Health Debates
- Marjolein Schaap & Rubio Imbers, Access to Environmental Justice for NGOs: Interplay Between the Aarhus Convention, the EU Lisbon Treaty, and the European Convention on Human Rights
- Britta Sjöstedt, The ‘Reconciliatory Approach’ – An Interpretative Response to Harmonize International Environmental Law with other Specialised Areas of International Law
Friday, June 17, 2016
- Marie-Agnes Jouanjean, Jean-Christophe Maur, & Ben Shepherd, US phytosanitary restrictions: the forgotten non-tariff barrier
- Sasidaran Gopalan, Rabin Hattari, & Ramkishen S. Rajan, Understanding foreign direct investment in Indonesia
- Davit Sahakyan, Reassessing North-South relations: the case of North-South preferential trade agreements
- Francesco Forte & Cosimo Magazzino, Fiscal policies in EMU countries: strategies and empirical evidence
- Maurice Kamto, Qu’est-ce que l’Etat en droit international ? Nouvelles considérations à la lumière de l’histoire et des évènements internationaux récents
- Rahim Kherad, Le droit des peuples a disposer d’eux-mêmes et l’intégrité territoriale des Etats à l’épreuve des faits
- Laurence Boisson de Chazournes, Des relations entre l’ONU et les organisations régionales à l’aune des tribulations de l’affaire KADI
- Alain Piquemal, Du « statut avancé » au statut d’Etat « associé » : une nouvelle approche des relations euro-méditerranéennes à travers l’exemple du Maroc ?
- Jamel Dimassi, Interrogations à propos des interventions militaires pour des raisons d’humanité
- Philippe Lagrange, « No boots on the ground ». De l’influence des termes employés par le Conseil de sécurité des Nations Unies
- Michael Bothe, La lutte contre le terrorisme et la légitime défense - à propos des bombardements contre l’IS
- Annick de Marffy-Mantuano, Le droit de la mer entre succès et défis
- Laurent Lucchini & Michel Voelckel, Le traitement des petites Iles, notamment dans le sud de la méditerranée centrale
- Tullio Scovazzi, The exploitation of genetic resources in areas beyond national jurisdiction
- Elie Jarmache, Vingt ans après. Les fonds marins
- Nathalie Ros, Régimes juridiques et gouvernance internationale de la mer méditerranée
- Paul Tavernier, La contribution du Conseil de sécurité des Nations Unies à l’élaboration des normes du droit international humanitaire
- Marie-José Domestici-Met, Le Conseil de sécurité et la protection des civils en Syrie : le rôle pivot de l’action humanitaire
- Djamchid Momtaz, La conformité du blocus maritime de Gaza par Israël avec le droit international humanitaire
- Edmond Jouve, Le code d’Hammourabi et la naissance des droits de l’homme
- Emmanuel Decaux, Valeurs, droits et devoirs dans le développement des droits de l’homme
- Chafik Said, Le Conseil des droits de l’homme : quelle évolution ?
- Patrick Daillier, Migration et droit de la mer – menace(s) en méditerranée -
- Giuseppe Cataldi, Quelques observations sur les migrations dans la méditerranée dans la perspective de l’Union européenne
- Pierre-François Mercure, Prolégomènes. A l’Etude de la notion de génération dans la perspective de l’équité en droit international
- Azzouz Kerdoun, Liberté des échanges et protection des droits de l’homme
- Alain Pellet, « La Cour ». Supputations indécises sur l’avenir de la CIJ
- Philippe Gautier, Négociations, échanges de vues, et recours aux mécanismes obligatoires de règlement des différends relatifs à la convention des Nations Unies sur le droit de la mer
- Tullio Treves, Union européenne et règlement des différends dans le cadre de la convention des Nations Unies sur le droit de la mer, aspects récents
- Habib Gherari, L’appel dans le contentieux international
- Saïd Ihrai, La protection diplomatique dans le droit international des investissements : la pratique marocaine
- Othman Ihrai, La reconnaissance des droits de propriété intellectuelle par l’Organisation de la Conférence Islamique
- Mohamed Ammar, L’arbitrage international, une procedure au service d’un mythe : la globalisation
The United Nations Arms Trade Treaty became binding international law in late 2014, and although the text of the treaty is a relatively concise framework for assessing whether to authorize or deny proposed conventional weapons transfers by States Parties, there exists controversy as to the meaning of certain key provisions. Furthermore, the treaty requires a national regulatory body to authorize proposed transfers of conventional weapons covered by the treaty, but does not detail how such a body should be established and how it should effectively function. The Arms Trade Treaty: A Commentary explains in detail each of the treaty provisions, the parameters for prohibitions or the denial of transfers, international cooperation and assistance, and implementation obligations and mechanisms. As states ratify and implement the Treaty over the next few years, the commentary provides invaluable guidance to government officials, commentators, and scholars on the meaning of its contentious provisions. This volume describes in detail which weapons are covered by the treaty and explains the different forms of transfer that the Arms Trade Treaty regulates. It covers international human rights, trade, disarmament, humanitarian law, criminal law, and state-to-state use of force, as well as the application of the treaty to non-state actors.
The circumstances, if any, that permit non-uniform, or differentiated, treaty interpretation are difficult to define. Generally, a differentiated approach stands in tension with the Vienna Convention’s rules of interpretation, which apply a methodology based on plain meaning to all treaties. Yet courts, states, and scholars widely accept the notion that some treaties warrant special interpretive rules. Thus far, however, efforts to justify differentiated treaty interpretation on the grounds of subject matter or treaty purpose have proven inadequate. A more promising avenue is the examination of the objective characteristics shared within a treaty type. One such characteristic, I argue, is the treaty’s degree of completeness. Specifically, all else being equal, standalone instruments call for less reliance upon extrinsic materials; interstitial instruments demand more.
Applying this insight to the tax treaty context, this Article argues that such instruments should not be viewed as complete; consequently, reference to plain meaning or even the treaty parties’ mutual intent is often incoherent. Specifically, I contend that tax treaties are jurisdictional overlays to the parties’ tax systems and substantially rely upon domestic law. Tax treaties also are not heavily negotiated and instead borrow from concepts that are embedded in model treaties, domestic law, and other international instruments. The highly complex nature of tax law and the factual situations to which it applies, the connection between revenue collection and state sovereignty, and the necessity to combat tax abuse retrospectively further explain the interstitial nature of treaties. Courts are thus justified in relying upon extrinsic, and at times unilateral, materials in the interpretation of tax treaties.
Kersten: Justice in Conflict: The Effects of the International Criminal Court's Interventions on Ending Wars and Building Peace
What happens when the international community simultaneously pursues peace and justice in response to ongoing conflicts? What are the effects of interventions by the International Criminal Court (ICC) on the wars in which the institution intervenes? Is holding perpetrators of mass atrocities accountable a help or hindrance to conflict resolution? This book offers an in-depth examination of the effects of interventions by the ICC on peace, justice and conflict processes. The 'peace versus justice' debate, wherein it is argued that the ICC has either positive or negative effects on 'peace', has spawned in response to the Court's propensity to intervene in conflicts as they still rage. This book is a response to, and a critical engagement with, this debate.
Building on theoretical and analytical insights from the fields of conflict and peace studies, conflict resolution, and negotiation theory, the book develops a novel analytical framework to study the Court's effects on peace, justice, and conflict processes. This framework is applied to two cases: Libya and northern Uganda. Drawing on extensive fieldwork, the core of the book examines the empirical effects of the ICC on each case. The book also examines why the ICC has the effects that it does, delineating the relationship between the interests of states that refer situations to the Court and the ICC's institutional interests, arguing that the negotiation of these interests determines which side of a conflict the ICC targets and thus its effects on peace, justice, and conflict processes.
While the effects of the ICC's interventions are ultimately and inevitably mixed, the book makes a unique contribution to the empirical record on ICC interventions and presents a novel and sophisticated means of studying, analyzing, and understanding the effects of the Court's interventions in Libya, northern Uganda - and beyond.
Thursday, June 16, 2016
Call for Abstracts
ASIL Dispute Resolution Interest Group-Yale Law School Center for the Study of Private Law
Junior Scholars Workshop
The American Society of International Law’s Dispute Resolution Interest Group and Yale Law School’s Center for the Study of Private Law are hosting a workshop for junior scholars. The workshop will be a safe space in which aspiring academics, post-docs, doctoral students, fellows, VAPs, other non-tenure-track academics, and pre-tenure professors can get feedback through group discussion on academic works in progress in international dispute resolution. Authors will not give formal presentations of their work. Rather, each accepted paper will be assigned a discussant, who will briefly introduce the paper, provide feedback to the author, and lead a discussion among participants. This format permits lively discussion of ideas and writings that may be inchoate or not yet fully developed. Discussants may include other junior academics at Yale and other authors participating in the workshop.
The workshop will be held at Yale Law School on the afternoon of Friday, October 28, 2016. All participants will be expected to attend the entire workshop and to be prepared to comment on the other papers, up to a maximum of three. We are unfortunately unable to fund travel but will host a dinner in the evening.
500-700 word abstracts may be submitted by midnight Eastern Time, July 15, 2016 to this folder. (A Dropbox account is not necessary to submit documents.) Any topic related to international dispute resolution will be considered. Submissions must be works in progress and should not have been submitted for publication. Abstracts will be reviewed by ASIL Dispute Resolution Interest Group Co-chairs Perry Bechky and Christina Hioureas together with Sadie Blanchard of the Center for the Study of Private Law.
The authors whose proposals are chosen will be informed by August 15th, 2016. All participants must submit a substantial work in progress by October 7, 2016, which will be circulated in advance of the workshop to registered attendees. It is expected that this work will consist of a working draft paper at least 20 pages long. Participants whose drafts are longer than 30 pages will be asked to focus the attention of the discussants and other participants on key excerpts.
Please direct any questions to firstname.lastname@example.org.
Rossi: 'A Unique International Problem': The Svalbard Treaty, Equal Enjoyment, and Terra Nullius: Lessons of Territorial Temptation from History
The 1920 Svalbard Treaty conferred full and absolute sovereignty on Norway but paradoxically limited that sovereignty by conferring on states party to the treaty equal enjoyment and liberty of access provisions on Svalbard and in its territorial waters. Whether these provisions now extend to geographic areas adjacent to Svalbard’s territorial sea—specifically to Svalbard’s oil-rich continental shelf and abundant fishing stock of the superjacent waters of its Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ)—is a matter of considerable debate. Norway repudiates the dynamic legal extension of the Svalbard Treaty to these geographic areas, which post-date the treaty; other Arctic stakeholders, notably Russia, disagree. This Article concentrates on the problematic meaning of full and absolute yet qualified sovereignty within the context of the Svalbard Treaty. Focusing on the factual and historical circumstances, or effectivités pertaining to the archipelago’s 400 year human history are of essential but limited use given competing historical narratives. Instead, this Article concentrates on the historical and legal development of the concept of terra nullius, a term more elusive than commonly thought, and the ways in which states historically made use of that concept to forward territorializing interests over Svalbard’s newly emerging resources, even when pronouncing or professing interest in shared or condominium-like resource management arrangements. In an age of rapid ice melt in the cryosphere, accompanied by emergent technology and increasing access to previously unavailable or uncontemplated resources, Svalbard’s extended geographical area challenges global governance regimes and presents a cautionary tale about territorial temptation in the High Arctic’s diminishing global commons.
Conference: Adjudicating International Trade and Investment Disputes: Between Interaction and Isolation
This conference will focus on the relationship, interactions and comparisons between the international trade and investment regimes in the context of adjudication of disputes.
The conference will present research from the disciplines of law and political science relating to three themes:
1) the new mega-regionals
2) comparisons and practices
3) cross-fertilization and learning
Historically, the global regulation of international trade and investment relations have been closely interrelated; but in the post-war period, international trade law and international investment law developed on largely divergent paths. While international trade regulation has culminated in a multilateral regime with a permanent dispute settlement mechanism, the international regulation of foreign direct investment is primarily governed by 3500 essentially bilateral treaty relationships calling for ad hoc investor – state arbitration potentially to be hosted by a variety of international institutions. Despite these seemingly distinct structures, there is a recent trend that some say signal a move towards regime convergence: most clearly seen in the rise of mega-regional free trade agreements (FTAs) with investment chapters.
This potential convergence may be deceiving, however. The investment chapters of FTAs remain separate from the rest of the agreements and provide for distinct rules and procedures on dispute settlement. Moreover, issues of overlap between trade chapters and investment chapters have not been resolved, which means that the same case could possibly be raised simultaneously in two separate disputes under the same FTA. Legal disputes based on investment chapters in FTAs to date (ie under the NAFTA and DR-CAFTA) appear to interpret the investment protection chapters as standalone agreements with little or no reference to other sections of the FTAs.
Despite the limitations to integration that this new generation of trade and investment agreements may represent, there are other areas of interaction between the trade and investment regimes that could provide better evidence of a gradual move towards cohesion. This conference will look at the development of the new mega-regionals, but also the ways (or lack thereof) that the trade and investment regimes share practices and cross-fertilize.
In this Article, I discuss the ways in which the Inter-American Court of Human Rights addresses cases adopting a novel approach to legal adjudication — one that relies on domestic notions of constitutional law carried out by domestic jurisdictions. Most scholarship on the inter-American human rights system assumes a top-down approach, whereby the Court merely dictates what countries must do. I argue that a new, bottom-up approach is in place and, further, is required to advance the Court’s legitimacy, especially in the face of criticism by countries, legal scholars and advocates for the Court’s decisions as an illegitimate intervention into domestic affairs. To this end, I critically examine the conventionality control doctrine, whereby domestic judges are expected to decide as if they were “inter-American human rights judges,” and I discuss two decisions that shed light on how the Inter-American Court could use a bottom-up model of constitutional dialogue with domestic jurisdictions.
- Editorial Note
- Mark A. Drumbl, Transitional Justice Moments
- Marcos Zunino, Subversive Justice: The Russell Vietnam War Crimes Tribunal and Transitional Justice
- Christalla Yakinthou & Sky Croeser, Transforming Tunisia: Transitional Justice and Internet Governance in a Post-Revolutionary Society
- Lauren Dempster, The Republican Movement, ‘Disappearing’ and Framing the Past in Northern Ireland
- Victor Peskin & Mieczyslaw P. Boduszynski, The Rise and Fall of the ICC in Libya and the Politics of International Surrogate Enforcership
- Jasna Dragovic-Soso, History of a Failure: Attempts to Create a National Truth and Reconciliation Commission in Bosnia and Herzegovina, 1997–2006
- Sarah Williams & Emma Palmer, Transformative Reparations for Women and Girls at the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia
- James Gallen, Jesus Wept: The Roman Catholic Church, Child Sexual Abuse and Transitional Justice
- Review Essay
- Jemima García-Godos, Victims in Focus
This two-day conference will bring together for the first time leading academic and practising lawyers to pool knowledge and share perspectives on the changing relationship between public international law and domestic public law in different jurisdictions.
Organised by the British Institute of International and Comparative Law (BIICL) and the Melbourne Law School (MLS), this event will allow a constructive dialogue on how national public law and public international law and practice should and must co-exist, combining theory with case studies and the experience of practitioners.
An initiative of this kind is badly needed. It is trite that 21st century globalisation is characterised by an interpenetration of domestic public law and international law. It is also characterised by shifting boundaries between public and private spheres of activity at both the international and national levels. The concept of 'global constitutionalism' is used by some in an attempt to capture the implications of these developments for one or both spheres but does not do them justice. Terms of this kind draw attention to the reality of some significant change but mask disagreement over its extent, nature and consequences. Generalisation has inhibited a deeper understanding of what really is going on in this complex and diverse terrain. Focussed dialogue between public lawyers and international lawyers is needed to pool knowledge and share perspectives and to examine how, in present conditions, the two bodies of law and practice can and should co-exist. This event is designed to provide the impetus for a more informed debate which connects theory and doctrine with practice, drawing on the insights that case studies provide.
Rowell & van Zeben: The New Status Quo of the Paris Agreement: The Psychological Impact of the 2 Degrees Aspiration
This brief opinion piece draws upon behavioral and cognitive research to argue that the Paris Agreement’s goal of keeping global temperature change below 2 degrees Celsius sets a psychologically powerful baseline against which future policy failures can be measured. When international law successfully triggers perception of a baseline, it can lead decision-makers to perceive deviations from that baseline as "losses." This implicates loss aversion, which provides an additional motivation to achieve international norms. The psychological impacts of the new status quo set by the Paris Agreement may therefore prove to be more powerful and more durable than either the unusual structure of the document or the domestic implementation questions that have already attracted so much scholarly debate.
Postcolonial Asia offers at least seven types of states and nations. In their somewhat uncritical pursuit of total nationalism, territorial Asian states compete with their archipelagic cousins. The sea gypsy nations--spread across the South China Sea and other East Asian states--reject the monopoly of land as the only inhabitable space, discounting territory as an essential constituent of a nation. Ironically, while history kept them outside the fold of the territorial states, the present attempts to co-opt them. Only by challenging, as the Asian sea gypsies do, land's claim to being the sole inhabitable territory within law, and rethinking the sea as a place of danger can we truly vernacularise our statist imaginations.
Wednesday, June 15, 2016
- Yang Guohua, WTO and Rule of Law in China: A View Based on Personal Experience
- Kazuyoshi Torigoe, FTA Origin Preference Claims: The Shift to Self-Certification
- Anand Swaroop Das & Anand Vardhan Narayan, Settling the Debate of Animal Welfare, Public Morals and Trade: In the Light of the EC-Seal Products Case
- Celeste Brown, Can a WTO Member Restrict or Regulate the Importation of E-Waste?
- Jon Truby & Arnaud Cywie, Free Zones, Foreign Ownership and Tax Incentives for Foreign Direct Investment in Qatar
- Cóman Kenny, Responsibility to recommend: the role of the UN General Assembly in the maintenance of international peace and security
- Olivia Flasch, The legality of the air strikes against ISIL in Syria: new insights on the extraterritorial use of force against non-state actors
- Laurie O'Connor, Legality of the use of force in Syria against Islamic State and the Khorasan Group
- Max Byrne, Consent and the use of force: an examination of ‘intervention by invitation’ as a basis for US drone strikes in Pakistan, Somalia and Yemen
- Sven Simon, 15 Jahre Responsibility to Protect: Worin liegt die Schutzverantwortung?
- Alix Schlüter, Beweisrechtliche Implikationen der margin of appreciation-Doktrin
- Beiträge und Berichte
- Katharina Berner, Judicial Dialogue and Treaty Interpretation: Revisiting the 'Cocktail Party' of International Law
- Kristina Bautze, Die Fragmentierungsdebatte. Zwischen Einheit, Diversifikation und self-fullfilling prophecy
- Peter Philipp Germelmann, Diplomatische Immunität als Sonderopfer: Haftet die Bundesrepublik Deutschland für völkerrechtliche Verpflichtungen?
- David A. Gantz, Assessing the impact of WTO and regional dispute resolution mechanisms on the world trading system
- Chang-fa Lo, Establishing permanent regional good offices for trade disputes in Asia
- Amos Saurombe, African regional judiciaries and their jurisprudence in trade law matters
- Greg Tereposky & Laura Nielsen, Coordinated actions in international economic law as illustrated by investment treaty arbitration and World Trade Organization (WTO) disputes
- Joost Pauwelyn, Minority rules: precedent and participation before the WTO Appellate Body
- Krzysztof J. Pelc, The welfare implications of precedent in international law
- Anton K. Schnyder & Stefanie Pfisterer, Features of trade law adjudication and their impact on the development of legal concepts and precedents
- Krista Nadakavukaren Schefer, Judicial ethics in international economic law: what standards of independence and impartiality apply to arbitrators and panelists?
- Ingo Venzke, Judicial authority and styles of reasoning: self-presentation between legalism and deliberation
- Joanna Jemielniak & Laura Nielsen, Global citizens in international commercial arbitration and WTO dispute resolution
- Benedikt Pirker, Proportionality analysis and international commercial arbitration: the example of public policy and domestic courts
Call for Papers: 11th Annual Minerva-ICRC International Conference on Contemporary Challenges in International Humanitarian Law
11th Annual Minerva-ICRC International Conference on Contemporary Challenges in International Humanitarian Law Conference
Call for Papers
28-29 November 2016, Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Proposal submission deadline: 1 July 2016
The Minerva Center for Human Rights at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and the Delegation of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) in Israel and the Occupied Territories are organizing an international conference that seeks to explore cutting-edge issues in the field of international humanitarian law (IHL).
The conference, the eleventh in the series of Minerva-ICRC Annual International Conferences on IHL, is scheduled for 28-29 November 2016 in Jerusalem.
Recipients of this call for papers are invited to submit proposals to present an original paper at the conference. Authors of selected proposals will be offered full or partial flight and accommodation expenses.
Submission deadline: 1 July 2016
BACKGROUND: Contemporary conflict patterns have created a myriad of complex issues in the field of international humanitarian law, which the 11th Annual Minerva-ICRC Conference on International Humanitarian Law seeks to address.
In armed conflicts across the globe, civilians continue to bear the brunt of the hostilities, especially when fighting takes place in densely populated areas or when civilians are deliberately targeted. Thousands of people are being detained, often outside of any legal framework and are often subjected to ill treatment or inadequate conditions of detention. The number of persons displaced as a result of armed conflict is also dramatic and the number of internally displaced persons, refugees and asylum seekers uprooted by ongoing armed conflicts worldwide has soared in the past two years.
Additionally, the increase in the number and complexity of parties to a conflict is a noticeable feature of contemporary armed conflicts. On the State side, the number of foreign interventions in many ongoing armed conflicts contributes substantially to the multiplication of actors involved. In parallel, on the non-State side, a myriad of fluid, multiplying and fragmenting armed groups frequently take part in the fighting. The spillover of hostilities into neighboring countries, their geographical expanse and their regionalization have also become a distinctive feature of many contemporary armed conflicts - partly as a consequence of foreign involvements.
Violations of IHL, committed both by States and non-State actors continue to be a primary feature of con-temporary conflicts. In many situations, this is linked to a denial of the applicability or relevance of IHL. On the part of non-State armed groups, there is sometimes a rejection of IHL, which some parties do not feel bound by. In addition to this, recent armed conflicts have seen a rise in the deliberate commission of violations of IHL by some non-State armed groups and their use of media to publicize those violations. On the part of States, it is often, though not always, the result of counterterrorism measures and discourses, which seem to be hardening with time. It remains the case that some States deny the existence of armed conflicts, rendering dialogue difficult on the humanitarian consequences of the conflict and the protection of those affected by it.
TOPICS: Against this backdrop, the conference academic committee invites recipients to submit proposals to present a paper at the conference dealing with one of the following contemporary challenges of IHL:
- Rights and obligations of non-State armed groups;
- IHL and vulnerable groups of persons (including asylum seekers, women, minors, etc.);
- Enforcement and implementation of IHL by States;
- IHL and the environment;
- The development of IHL in national and international jurisprudence.
The committee also welcomes additional proposals on other relevant and contemporary issues in the field of IHL.
PAPER SUBMISSION PROCEDURE: Researchers interested in addressing these and other issues are invited to respond to this call for papers with a 1-2 page proposal for an article and presentation, along with a brief CV. Proposals should be submitted by email to the Minerva Center for Human Rights at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem (email@example.com) no later than 1 July 2016.
Applicants should expect notification of the committee's decision by 1 August 2016. Written contributions (of approx. 10-25 pages) based on the selected proposals will be expected no later than 1 November 2016. The Israel Law Review (a Cambridge University Press publication) has expressed interest in publishing selected full length papers based on conference presentations, subject to its standard review and editing procedures.
CONFERENCE ACADEMIC COMMITTEE:
Prof. Yuval Shany, Hebrew University of Jerusalem (Chair)
Mr. Larry Maybee, ICRC, Israel and the Occupied Territories
Adv. Danny Evron, Minerva Center for Human Rights, Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Adv. Miya Keren-Abraham, ICRC, Israel and the Occupied Territories
Adv. Alon Margalit, ICRC, Israel and the Occupied Territories
Prof. Yael Ronen, Israel Law Review, Minerva Center for Human Rights, Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Dr. Re'em Segev, Minerva Center for Human Rights, Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Mr. Charles Shamas, The Mattin Group
- Wolfgang Alschner & Dmitriy Skougarevskiy, The New Gold Standard? Empirically Situating the Trans-Pacific Partnership in the Investment Treaty Universe
- Ingo Venzke, Investor-State Dispute Settlement in TTIP from the Perspective of a Public Law Theory of International Adjudication
- Jason Webb Yackee, The First Investor-State Arbitration: The Suez Canal Company v Egypt (1864)
This article seeks to conceptualize the relationship of the International Criminal Court to the events collectively known as the "Arab Spring." It suggests that an impact of international criminal justice in this context cannot readily be assumed but that the Court has had more of a role than its limited interventions in the region suggest. The article focuses in particular on the work of international criminal justice in connection to the Arab Spring as resulting from the criss-crossing strategies of various actors. It analyzes some of its impacts on the dynamics of war and intervention, in distributing blame, in fighting impunity and on transitional justice more generally. The article concludes with a few thoughts on how the encounter with a macro-social event such as the "Arab Spring" shapes what can be expected of international criminal justice.
Tuesday, June 14, 2016
In this synthesis of some of the themes of a General Course on International Law given at the Xiamen Academy of International Law, Alvarez canvasses the diverse ways that inter-governmental organizations, particularly those of the UN system, have changed the traditional international sources of law contained in Article 38 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice. It argues that the resulting challenge posed to legal positivism underlies the daunting difficulties faced by those seeking to make international organizations “accountable.” It also argues that, paradoxically, the ways that international organizations have sought to make or influence law may make it more difficult for those organizations to subject themselves to the rule of law. If today we question, with good reason, whether the "international rule of law" exists, one reason for doubts may be the ways that international organizations engage in "law-making."
ASIL-Midwest Works-in-Progress Conference
Call for Submissions
ASIL-Midwest, an interest group of the American Society of International Law (ASIL) is co-sponsoring its third scholarly works-in-progress conference with ASIL Academic Partner University of Wisconsin Law School, September 23-24, 2016. The event will take place at the law school, located in Madison, Wisconsin. The goal is to create a friendly, open conversation about works in progress and to foster a midwestern United States international law community. To that end, the workshop will include both full drafts and early works in progress.
Those interested in presenting at the conference should send a 500-word abstract to ASIL-Midwest Co-Chair Milena Sterio (firstname.lastname@example.org) by Friday, July 15, 2016. Please also include a sentence about the stage the paper is expected to be in by September (e.g., reasonably complete draft, early work in progress, etc.). Papers may address any International Law topics, and this Call for Submissions is open to everyone in the international legal community. Preference will be given to ASIL members who are also members of the ASIL-Midwest Interest Group. Paper presenters will be asked to circulate their drafts (or a summary of the project if it's early stage) to workshop attendees no later than September 9, 2016. Those interested in serving as a commentator for a paper should also send an email to the Co-Chair by July 15 (email@example.com).
Commentators will be asked to prepare five to eight minutes of comments on one of the papers. Those interested in presenting should let it be known if they are willing to serve as commentators as well. All University of Wisconsin faculty, staff, and students may attend for free. Participants who are not ASIL members or University of Wisconsin affiliates will be required to pay a $40 registration fee (includes workshop and meals) for the conference. All meals will be provided, but participants are responsible for their own travel and hotel expenses.
For any questions, please contact ASIL-Midwest Interest Group Co-Chairs, Cindy Buys (firstname.lastname@example.org) or Milena Sterio (email@example.com).
- Michael Bowman, Law, Legal Scholarship and the Conservation of Biological Diversity: 2020 Vision and Beyond
- Mattia Fosci & Tom West, In Whose Interest? Instrumental and Intrinsic Value in Biodiversity Law
- Nicole Mohammed, Participatory Resource Management: A Caribbean Case Study
- Elizabeth A. Kirk, The Role of Non-State Actors in Treaty Regimes for the Protection of Marine Biodiversity
- Rosemary Rayfuse, Climate Change, Marine Biodiversity and International Law
- Edward J. Goodwin, Broad Spectrum Efforts to Enhance the Conservation of Vulnerable Marine Ecosystems
- Peter Davies, Alien Invasive Species – is the EU’s Strategy Fit for Purpose?
- Arie Trouwborst, Countering Fragmentation of Habitats under International Wildlife Regimes
- Karen Hulme, Armed Conflict and Biodiversity
- Veit Koester, The Convention on Biological Diversity and the Concept of Sustainable Development: The Extent and Manner of the Convention’s Application of Components of the Concept
- Malgosia Fitzmaurice, Whaling and Inter- and Intra-Generational Equity
- Duncan French, Common Concern, Common Heritage and other Global(-ising) Concepts: Rhetorical Devices, Legal Principles or a Fundamental Challenge?
- Emilie Cloatre, Biodiversity, Knowledge and the Making of Rights: Reviewing the Debates on Bioprospecting and Ownership
- Ecological Restoration in International Biodiversity Law: A Promising Strategy to Address Our Failure to Prevent?
- Karen N. Scott, Non-Compliance Procedures and the Implementation of Commitments under Wildlife Treaties
- Richard Caddell, ‘Only Connect’? Regime Interaction and Global Biodiversity Conservation
The relationship between established powers and emerging powers is one of the most important topics in world politics. Nevertheless, few studies have investigated how the leading state in the international system responds to rising powers in peripheral regions—actors that are not yet and might never become great powers but that are still increasing their strength, extending their influence, and trying to reorder their corner of the world. In the Hegemon's Shadow fills this gap. Evan Braden Montgomery draws on different strands of realist theory to develop a novel framework that explains why leading states have accommodated some rising regional powers but opposed others.
Montgomery examines the interaction between two factors: the type of local order that a leading state prefers and the type of local power shift that appears to be taking place. The first captures a leading state's main interest in a peripheral region and serves as the baseline for its evaluation of any changes in the status quo. Would the leading state like to see a balance of power rather than a preponderance of power, does it favor primacy over parity instead, or is it impartial between these alternatives? The second indicates how a local power shift is likely to unfold. In particular, which regional order is an emerging power trying to create and does a leading state expect it to succeed? Montgomery tests his arguments by analyzing Great Britain’s efforts to manage the rise of Egypt, the Confederacy, and Japan during the nineteenth century and the United States’ efforts to manage the emergence of India and Iraq during the twentieth century.
- W. Michael Reisman & Mahnoush H. Arsanjani, Applicable Law under the ICSID Convention: The Tortured History of the Interpretation of Article 42
- Laurence Boisson de Chazournes, Rules of Interpretation and Investment Arbitration
- James Crawford & Paul Mertenskötter, The Use of the ILC’s Attribution Rules in Investment Arbitration
- Gary B. Born, On Burden and Standard of Proof
- Charles N. Brower & Paula F. Henin, Res Judicata
- Abdulqawi Ahmed Yusuf & Guled Yusuf, Precedent & Jurisprudence Constante
- Jan Paulsson, The Tipping Point
- Emmanuel Gaillard & Yas Banifatemi, The Long March towards a Jurisprudence Constante on the Notion of Investment
- Jean Kalicki, Dmitri Evseev & Mallory Silberman, Legality of Investment
- Pierre Tercier & Nhu-Hoang Tran Thang, Criteria to Determine Investor Nationality (Juridical Persons)
- Christoph Schreuer, Criteria to Determine Investor Nationality (Natural Persons)
- Piero Bernardini, Continuous Nationality Rule in Investor-State Arbitration
- Stephen Jagusch, Anthony Sinclair & Manthi Wickramasooriya, Restructuring Investments to Achieve Investment Treaty Protection
- V.V. Veeder & Andrew Legg, The Meaning of “Foreign Control” under Article 25(2)(B) of the ICSID Convention
- Gabriel Bottini, Indirect Shareholder Claims
- Pierre-Marie Dupuy, Preconditions to Arbitration and Consent of States to ICSID Jurisdiction
- Andrea K. Bjorklund, Waiver of Local Remedies and Limitation Periods
- Stephan W. Schill, Maffezini v. Plama: Reflections on the Jurisprudential Schism in the Application of Most-Favored-Nation Clauses to Matters of Dispute Settlement
- Jeremy K. Sharpe, The Minimum Standard of Treatment, Glamis Gold, and Neer’s Enduring Influence
- Lucy Reed & Simon Consedine, Fair and Equitable Treatment: Legitimate Expectations and Transparency
- Margrete Stevens & Doak Bishop, Fair and Equitable Treatment: Denial of Justice
- Vaughan Lowe, Arbitrary and Discriminatory Treatment
- Stanimir A. Alexandrov, The Evolution of the Full Protection and Security Standard
- Zachary Douglas, Property Rights as the Object of an Expropriation
- L. Yves Fortier & Stephen L. Drymer, Indirect Expropriation
- Oscar M. Garibaldi, Effective Means to Assert Claims and Enforce Rights
- Andrés Rigo Sureda, The Umbrella Clause
- August Reinisch, National Treatment
- David D. Caron & Esmé Shirlow, Most-Favored-Nation Treatment: Substantive Protection
- Barton Legum & Ioana Petculescu, Performance Requirements
- Carolyn B. Lamm & Andrea J. Menaker, The Consequences of Corruption in Investor-State Arbitration
- Alain Pellet, Police Powers or the State’s Right to Regulate
- Mark Feldman, Denial of Benefits after Plama v. Bulgaria
- Peter Tomka, Defenses Based on Necessity under Customary International Law and on Emergency Clauses in Bilateral Investment Treaties
- Donald McRae, Countermeasures and Investment Arbitration
- Anne K. Hoffmann, Counterclaims
- John Y. Gotanda, Assessing Damages: Valuation Standards
- Mark Kantor, The Impact of Contributory Investor Conduct: Only with Difficulty Commensurable
- Donald Francis Donovan, Allocation of Costs
- Eduardo Zuleta, Security for Costs: Authority of the Tribunal and Third-Party Funding
- Albert Jan van den Berg, The Role of Dissenting Opinions
- Antonio R. Parra, ICSID Arbitration Rule 41(5) Objections
- Eduardo Silva Romero Consolidation and Parallel Proceedings
- Veijo Heiskanen, And Others: Mass Claims in ICSID Arbitration
- Brigitte Stern, Interim/Provisional Measures
- Marc Lalonde, Quo Vadis Disqualification? Philippe Sands, Conflict of Interest for Arbitrators and/or Counsel
- Toby Landau & Romesh Weeramantry, A Case for Transparency in Investment Arbitration
- J. Christopher Thomas, Amicus Curiae in ICSID Arbitration
- Hi-Taek Shin, Annulment
- Jan Christoph Nemitz, The Legal Position of International Detainees: Applicable Law and Standards
- Andrew Trotter, Provisional Release from International Remand Detention
- Kai Ambos, Ius Puniendi and Individual Criminal Responsibility in International Criminal Law
- Dirk Van Zyl Smit, Determinate and Indeterminate Sentences of Imprisonment in International Criminal Justice
- Rebecca Young, Fines and Forfeiture in International Criminal Justice
- Silvia D’Ascoli, International Sentencing: Law and Practice
- Annika Jones, Judicial Cross-Referencing in the Sentencing Practice of International(ized) Criminal Courts and Tribunals
- Harmen Van Der Wilt, The Transfer of the Execution of Sentences of the International Criminal Court in Light of Inter-State Practice
- Olympia Bekou, Rule 11bis: Exploring the Penal Aspects of Transferring Cases to National Courts by the Ad Hoc Tribunals
- Göran Sluiter, State Cooperation in the Enforcement of Sentences
- Denis Abels, Limiting the Objectives of the Enforcement of International Punishment
- Barbora Holá & Joris Van Wijk, Rehabilitating International Prisoners
- Lorna McGregor, International Penal Law: Aligned with or Autonomous from International Human Rights Law?
- Sonja Snacken & Nik Kiefer, Oversight of International Imprisonment: The Committee for the Prevention of Torture
- Teresa Anne Doherty & Shireen Avis Fisher, Enforcement of Sentences and Oversight of Prisoners Convicted by the Special Court for Sierra Leone
- Mark A. Drumbl, International Punishment from ‘Other’ Perspectives
- Conor McCarthy, The International Criminal Court’s Regime of Victim Redress: Non-Punitive Responses to Crimes Under the Rome Statute
- Margaret M. Penrose, Creating an International Prison
- Róisín Mulgrew, The Costs of Suspicion: A Critical Analysis of the Compensation Scheme Established By Article 85(3) of the Rome Statute
Monday, June 13, 2016
- William Guillermo Jiménez-Benítez, Reglas Offline Y Online Para Establecer La Jurisdicción En Internet. Mirada Global Y Casos Colombianos
- Juan Pablo Bohoslavsky, Liber Martín, & Juan Justo, La Obligación Estatal De Proteger El Derecho Humano Al Agua Frente A Violaciones Cometidas Por Empresas En Servicios De Agua Potable Y Saneamiento. Implicancias Regulatorias Y Sobre Los Tratados Bilaterales De Inversión (Tbi)
- Diego López Medina, El Nacimiento Del Derecho Comparado Moderno Como Espacio Geográfico Y Como Disciplina: Instrucciones Básicas Para Su Comprensión Y Uso Desde América Latina
- Edgard Junior Cuestas Zamora, Fragmentación De La República De Georgia: Perspectivas Jurídicas De La Separación De Abjasia Y Osetia Del Sur En Derecho Internacional Público
- Alejandro Gómez Velásquez & Julian Correa Saavedra, ¿Sobredimensión De La Tensión Entre Justicia Y Paz? Reflexiones Sobre Justicia Transicional, Justicia Penal Y Justicia Restaurativa En Colombia
- Juan Antonio Gaviria-Gil, El Enigma De La Ausencia De Casos Sobre Cisg En Colombia
- Juan Antonio Gaviria-Gil, El Enigma De La Ausencia De Casos Sobre Cisg En Colombia
- Research Articles
- Daniel C. Mattingly, Elite Capture - How Decentralization and Informal Institutions Weaken Property Rights in China
- Emilie M. Hafner-Burton, Zachary C. Steinert-Threlkeld & David G. Victor, Predictability Versus Flexibility - Secrecy in International Investment Arbitration
- Eric Kramon, Electoral Handouts as Information - Explaining Unmonitored Vote Buying
- Lee Savage, Party System Institutionalization and Government Formation in new Democracies
- Brett Meyer, Learning to Love the Government - Trade Unions and late Adoption of the Minimum Wage
- Ben Juratowitch, Waiver of State Immunity and Enforcement of Arbitral Awards
- Julien Chaisse & Debashis Chakraborty, Normative Obsolescence of the WTO Anti-Dumping Agreement—Topography of the Global Use and Misuse of Initiations and Measures
- Daniel Seah, Problems Concerning the International Law-Making Practice of ASEAN: A Reply to Chen Zhida
- Colin Seow, Chasing the Frontier in Humanitarian Intervention Law: The Case for Aequitas ad Bellum
- Bridget Lewis & Rowena Maguire, A Human Rights-based Approach to Disaster Displacement in the Asia-Pacific
- Alessandro Chechi, The 2013 Judgment of the ICJ in the Temple of Preah Vihear Case and the Protection of World Cultural Heritage Sites in Wartime
Bekou & Birkett: Cooperation and the International Criminal Court: Perspectives from Theory and Practice
- Olympia Bekou & Daley J. Birkett, Introduction
- Annalisa Ciampi, Legal Rules, Policy Choices and Political Realities in the Functioning of the Cooperation Regime of the International Criminal Court
- Pascal Turlan, The International Criminal Court Cooperation Regime – A Practical Perspective from the Office of the Prosecutor
- Göran Sluiter & Stanislas Talontsi, Credible and Authoritative Enforcement of State Cooperation with the International Criminal Court
- Lorraine Smith-van Lin, Non-Compliance and the Law and Politics of State Cooperation: Lessons from the Al Bashir and Kenyatta Cases
- Anne-Aurore Bertrand & Natacha Schauder, Practical Cooperation Challenges Faced by the Registry of the International Criminal Court
- Annika Jones, Non-Cooperation and the Efficiency of the International Criminal Court
- Nicola Palmer, The Place of Consultation in the International Criminal Court’s Approach to Complementarity and Cooperation
- Carla Ferstman, Cooperation and the International Criminal Court: The Freezing, Seizing and Transfer of Assets for the Purpose of Reparations
- Anniken Ramberg Krutnes, Reflections of the Facilitator for Cooperation in The Hague Working Group, 2012-2015
- Gérard Dive & Julie de Hults, A State’s Experience of Cooperation with the International Criminal Court: The Case of Belgium
- Christian Behrmann, Strengthening the International Criminal Court Cooperation Regime from the European Union’s Perspective
- Matthew Cannock, Strengthening International Criminal Court Cooperation – The Role of Civil Society
- Emilie Hunter, Using “Managerial Compliance” to Strengthen the International Criminal Court Cooperation Regime
- Olympia Bekou, William E. M. Lowe & Daley J. Birkett, Fostering Cooperation through Technology-Driven Tools
- Malgosia Fitzmaurice & Dai Tamada, Introduction
- Caroline E. Foster, Methodologies and Motivations: Was Japan’s Whaling Programme for Purposes of Scientific Research?
- Shotaro Hamamoto, From the Requirement of Reasonableness to a ‘Comply and Explain’ Rule: The Standard of Review in the Whaling Judgment
- Malgosia Fitzmaurice, The Whaling Convention and Thorny Issues of Interpretation
- Theodore Christakis, The ‘Margin of Appreciation’ in the Use of Exemptions in International Law: Comparing the ICJ Whaling Judgment and the Case Law of the ECtHR
- Dai Tamada, Unfavourable but Unavoidable Procedures: Procedural Aspects of the Whaling Case
- Christian J. Tams, Roads Not Taken, Opportunities Missed: Procedural and Jurisdictional Questions Sidestepped in the Whaling Judgment
- Mika Hayashi, The Whaling Judgment and the Challenges of Dynamic Treaty Regimes
- Joji Morishita, IWC and the ICJ Judgment
- Donald R. Rothwell, The Whaling Case: An Australian Perspective
- Hironobu Sakai, After the Whaling in the Antarctic Judgment: Its Lessons and Prospects from a Japanese Perspective
- Anthony Press, Science in the Court! The Role of Science in ‘Whaling in the Antarctic’
- Akiho Shibata, Conclusion: The Judgment, Its Implications and Prospects
The global political, economic, normative, structural and ideational landscape has undergone significant change in recent decades, with no signs of abating. There are new – or newly important – players, both state and non-state-based, which affect global political power asymmetries and inject competing ideas, interests, and priorities into the global political scene. New and evolving institutions and authority structures raise deep and profound questions about global (and regional and national) governance. These questions lead to an ambiguous global situation as norms, institutions and power structures are called into question and challenged on multiple levels.
Nowhere has this ambiguity been more acute and clear than in the area of human rights. A human rights regime which, while far from perfect, appeared to rest on a global consensus and seemed impervious to change, has undergone rapid and deep transformation – in ways which appear to both support and undermine the protection of human rights.
Challenges from emerging non-Western powers highlight a lack of consensus on fundamental priorities and approaches to the relationship between people and power, the governed and the governors, freedom and order. Terrorism and other security challenges pose seemingly imponderable conundrums for civilian and basic human rights protection. Climate change raises questions of intergenerational justice and poses corollary rights threats resulting in forced migration, food insecurity, and humanitarian crises.
The global refugee regime, a core set of ideas and institutions dating from the end of the Second World War, now faces unprecedented challenges and been put to tests never imagined by its creators – challenges and tests that states and international institutions have failed to adequately meet. International criminal justice mechanisms have been created with high hopes that those who commit mass atrocities will be punished and justice will be done, only to be undone by lack of adequate global support and political will. The Responsibility to Protect (R2P), which heralded a new recognition that human rights are a core part of states’ claim to legitimacy – has frequently failed to gain decisive advantage over traditional notions of sovereignty and state interest.
This combination of new players, political power asymmetries, institutions, along with deep material challenges to the contemporary global order, raises profound questions about the future of human rights norms and institutions, as well as the actual enjoyment of human rights across the globe.
Sunday, June 12, 2016
- Issue Focus: Imperialism Haunting the Twenty-first Century’s International Law
- M. Ya'kub Aiyub Kadir, Application of the Law of Self-Determination in a Postcolonial Context: A Guideline
- Ping Yi, The Final Splendour of an Aged Empire: Chinese Thought on International Law in the early Twentieth Century
- Sangkul Kim, The Witness Protection Mechanism of Delayed Disclosure at the Ad Hoc International Criminal Tribunals
- Hazmi Rusli & R. Dremliuga & Wan I. Talaat, Legal Framework on the Marine Environment Protection of Straits used for International Navigation: Has It Been Effective in the Straits of Malacca and Singapore?
- Notes & Comments
- Haifeng Deng & Chiyuan Chen, Common and Symmetrical Responsibility in Climate Change: A Bridging Mechanism for Adaptation and Mitigation
- M. Z. Mohd Nor & Anowar Zahid, Competing Interests in the Underwater Cultural Heritage: A Question of Balance
- Regional Focus & Controversies: Right to ‘Innocent Passage’ of Warship in the South China Sea
- Benjamin K. Wagner, Lessons from Lassen: Plotting a Proper Course for Freedom of Navigation Operations in the South China Sea
- Xinjun Zhang, The Latest Developments of the US Freedom of Navigation Programs in the South China Sea: Deregulation or Re-balance?
- East Asian Observer
- Brendan Howe, Japanese 'War Legislation': International and Domestic Threat Assessment
- Eric Yong Joong Lee, Can the SC Resolution 2270 Stop North Korea’s Nuclear Dilemma? From the Geneva Agreed Framework to the Washington Communiqué
- Le Duy Tran, Scenarios of the China's ADIZs above the South China Sea