- 60th Anniversary Issue
- Bruce Russett, A History of the Journal of Conflict Resolution
- Erik Gartzke & Matthew Kroenig, Social Scientific Analysis of Nuclear Weapons: Past Scholarly Successes, Contemporary Challenges, and Future Research Opportunities
- Todd Sandler, International Peacekeeping Operations: Burden Sharing and Effectiveness
- Daniel Druckman & James A. Wall, A Treasure Trove of Insights: Sixty Years of JCR Research on Negotiation and Mediation
- Christopher Gelpi, Democracies in Conflict: The Role of Public Opinion, Political Parties, and the Press in Shaping Security Policy
- Erica Chenoweth, Evan Perkoski, & Sooyeon Kang, State Repression and Nonviolent Resistance
- Thomas Zeitzoff, How Social Media Is Changing Conflict
- Lars-Erik Cederman & Manuel Vogt, Dynamics and Logics of Civil War
Saturday, September 16, 2017
- Special Issue: The International Criminal Court’s Policies and Strategies
- Matthew E. Cross & Antonio Coco, Foreword
- Carsten Stahn, Damned If You Do, Damned If You Don’t: Challenges and Critiques of Preliminary Examinations at the ICC
- Anni Pues, Towards the ‘Golden Hour’? A Critical Exploration of the Length of Preliminary Examinations
- Maria Varaki, Revisiting the ‘Interests of Justice’ Policy Paper
- Sophie T. Rosenberg, The International Criminal Court in Côte d’Ivoire: Impartiality at Stake?
- Eliana Teresa Cusato, Beyond Symbolism: Problems and Prospects with Prosecuting Environmental Destruction before the ICC
- Luigi Prosperi & Jacopo Terrosi, Embracing the ‘Human Factor’: Is There New Impetus at the ICC for Conceiving and Prioritizing Intentional Environmental Harms as Crimes Against Humanity?
- Nadia Bernaz, An Analysis of the ICC Office of the Prosecutor’s Policy Paper on Case Selection and Prioritization from the Perspective of Business and Human Rights
- Birju Kotecha, The ICC’s Office of the Prosecutor and the Limits of Performance Indicators
- Gaelle Carayon & Jonathan O’Donohue, The International Criminal Court’s Strategies in Relation to Victims
- Antonio Coco & Matthew E. Cross, Epilogue – The ICC on the Yellow Brick Road
Thirty years ago, the Leiden Journal of International Law was born, at a time when the writing of histories was hardly a popular endeavour for international legal scholars. In his 1987 article ‘Probleme der Völkerrechtsgeschichte’ (‘The Problems of International Legal History’), Heinhard Steiger argued that only very few, ‘mostly authors of the older generation’, were interested in international legal history. Much has changed since that time.
The aim of this symposium is to pay tribute to the remarkable developments within the field, to engage in critical reflection on the directions that it has taken, and to discuss the potential avenues for future research. The symposium will engage with questions of methodology and perspective. We hope that it will encourage further historical work on international law and reveal the new possible ways of its application.
- Jeffrey L. Dunoff & Mark A. Pollack, The Judicial Trilemma
- Gráinne de Búrca, Human Rights Experimentalism
- Monica Hakimi, Constructing an International Community
- Notes and Comments
- Theodor Meron, The West Bank and International Humanitarian Law on the Eve of the Fiftieth Anniversary of the Six-Day War
- J. Samuel Barkin & Yuliya Rashchupkina, Public Goods, Common Pool Resources, and International Law
- David Bosco, Discretion and State Influence at the International Criminal Court: The Prosecutor's Preliminary Examinations
- Current Developments
- Christine Gray, The 2016 Judicial Activity of the International Court of Justice
- In Memoriam
- Stephen M. Schwebel, Sir Elihu Lauterpacht (1928–2017)
- International Decisions
- Diane Marie Amann, Obligations Concerning Negotiations Relating to Cessation of the Nuclear Arms Race and to Nuclear Disarmament
- Santiago Diaz-Cediel, Garcia de Borissow and Others v. Supreme Court of Justice – Labor Chamber, Embassy of the Lebanese Republic in Colombia and Embassy of the United States of America in Colombia
- Eloïse Glucksmann, Commisimpex v. Republic of Congo
- A.Kh. Abashidze, M.V. Ilyashevich, & A.M. Solntsev, Anchugov & Gladkov v. Russia
- Ágoston Mohay & Norbert Tóth, Decision 22/2016. (XII. 5.) AB on the Interpretation of Article E)(2) of the Fundamental Law
- Contemporary Practice of the United States Relating to International Law
- Kristina Daugirdas & Julian Davis Mortenson, Contemporary Practice of the United States Relating to International Law
- Recent Books on International Law
- Kevin L. Cope & Mila Versteeg, The Interpretation of International Law by Domestic Courts: Uniformity, Diversity, Convergence
- Donald McRae, reviewing Transnational Legal Orders. edited by Terence C. Halliday and Gregory Shaffer
- Steven R. Ratner, reviewing Compliant Rebels: Rebel Groups and International Law in World Politics, by Hyeran Jo
- Tom Farer, reviewing Sovereignty: The Origin and Future of a Political and Legal Concept, by Dieter Grimm
- David Scheffer, reviewing East West Street: On the Origins of “Genocide” and “Crimes Against Humanity”, by Philippe Sands
- William R. (Bill) Mansfield, reviewing Whaling and International Law, by Malgosia Fitzmaurice
Friday, September 15, 2017
International law is enjoying increasing popularity among historians of global and interna-tional affairs, due to a re-reading of legal norms and rules that questions a state-centered approach. Instead of seeing law as an outcome of state behavior, recent scholarship has ex-amined the transnational character of law and legal communities, and the oftentimes com-plex negotiation processes that precede the codification and subsequent ratification of in-ternational conventions. This perspective aligns with the focus on border-crossing relations and on professional and nonstate actors and institutions that has become essential to global and international history. Moreover, connections forged between the history of internation-al law and discussions of the limits of legal universalism have increased the legal dimension’s relevance for historians of empire and decolonization. Encircling notions of hegemony, im-perialism, and civilization, and scrutinizing the role of international law in imperial and civiliz-ing missions, this strand of research has given rise to regional histories of international law. Scholars have begun to explore the relationship between legal and regional developments by asking how international law has been tailored to serve specific regional interests, prob-lems, or conflicts. This approach complements the focus on the law’s imperial bias and acknowledges the entanglement of legal and political agendas while also emphasizing the agency of regional actors. It also concedes that regional appropriations of international law could serve these actors’ own agendas or be a vehicle for emancipation.
The conference unites research on the history of international law with studies on Eastern Europe to investigate the controversial role of international law in the complex and conten-tious reordering of the region since the Congress of Vienna. The conference proposes that the extraordinary density of political, social and ethnic conflicts and the decades-long strug-gles over territorial boundaries in Eastern Europe have left clear traces in international law. More specifically, it addresses these issues through the lens of international institutions, which offer a starting point from which to identify topics; single out involved states, groups, and transnational actors from East Central and Eastern Europe; and reveal how regional con-stellations were universalized in the process of negotiating and implementing international norms and rules.
JTMS Winter/Spring 2018 Issue Call for Papers
The Journal of Territorial and Maritime Studies (JTMS) is soliciting submissions for its Winter/Spring 2018 issue. In the interest of increasing submissions, JTMS is offering authors of articles successfully passing peer review and selected for publication in the Winter/Spring 2018 issue an honorarium of $1000. JTMS is an interdisciplinary Journal of research on territorial and maritime issues sponsored by the Northeast Asia History Foundation with editorial offices hosted by Yonsei University in South Korea. The Journal provides an academic medium for the announcement and dissemination of research results the fields of history, international law, international relations, geography, peace studies, and any other relevant discipline. The journal covers all continental areas across the world, and it discusses any territorial and maritime subjects through the various research methods from different perspectives; moreover, practical studies as well as theoretical works, which contribute to a better understanding of territorial and maritime issues, are encouraged.
Manuscript should be submitted electronically to email@example.com . Submitted papers should include four major sections: the title page, structured abstract, main body, and references. The title page should contain the title of the paper, the authors name, the institutional affiliation and keywords. Manuscripts should follow the JTMS style guide available on our website. A length of maximum 9,000 words is preferred for an article, including endnotes, and approximately 2,000 words for a review. Submissions wishing to be considered for the Winter/Spring issue must submit their manuscripts by no later than October 1st, 2017. Inquiries may be sent via the email address provided above.
Our style guide and other journal information may be found on our website.
CALL FOR NOMINATIONS:
WILIG’s Prominent Women in International Law Award, 2018
The Women in International Law Interest Group of ASIL invites nominations for the Prominent Women in International Law Award. 2018 marks the 25th year that the award is being given, and in honor of this milestone, WILIG has determined to formalize the nomination process through this call for nominees.
The WILIG Prominent Women in International Law Award honors those who have advanced women, gender, and women’s rights in international law.
The diverse accomplishments of previous awardees demonstrate the multiple ways in which honorees achieve this feat. Awardees have included: Justices on the ICJ and International Criminal Tribunals, founders of women’s rights NGOs, business leaders, government officials, and scholars. Some of these women have broken glass ceilings in the field, while others have worked tirelessly to promote women and women’s voices in international law, and still others contribute substantively to advancing, researching, or advocating for women’s rights.
Please submit letters of nomination for a Prominent Woman in International Law who meets some or all of the following criteria:
Letters of nomination should be addressed to WILIG’s Co-Chairs, Tracy Roosevelt and Shana Tabak, and should be submitted by October 30, 2017 to firstname.lastname@example.org. Any supporting documentation in addition to the nomination letter is welcome; please submit all information in one PDF document titled with the nominee’s name and “PWIL Award.”
- Employs international law to advance women and women’s rights -- awardees need not be attorneys, though most are;
- Breaks through glass ceilings for women in international law;
- Promotes women and women’s voices in the field;
- Contributes substantively to advancing, researching, advocating for, or promoting women’s rights and/or gender justice;
- Is considered prominent in the field of international law – or whose accomplishments merit further recognition through this prestigious award.
With the accession of Afghanistan in 2016, the World Trade Organization (WTO) numbered 164 members with nineteen other states in line to join. The WTO is certainly not alone in its growth though; the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), and the European Union (EU) are all expanding with dozens of states continuing to negotiate their potential membership. What impact does membership in international organizations really have? Why do some states have a seemingly easy path to joining international organizations while others find the process nearly impossible? What implications do these difficult accession processes have on the domestic and international politics of the acceding states? The author presents the two-level theory of accession, which highlights factors at the domestic level and international organization level, to explain how accession processes in the WTO and EU vary from state to state and the impact of these variations. In so doing, this book provides a unique perspective on the topic of membership in international organizations.
- Stijn Smet, Introduction - Conflicts of Rights in Theoretical and Comparative Perspective
- Samantha Besson, Human Rights in Relation - A Critical Reading of the ECtHR's Approach to Conflicts of Rights
- Stijn Smet, Conflicts between Human Rights and the ECtHR: Towards a Structured Balancing Test
- Sébastien Van Drooghenbroeck, Conflict and Consent: Does the Theory of Waiver of Fundamental Rights Offer Solutions to Settle Their Conflicts?
- Eva Brems, Evans v UK: Three Grounds for Ruling Differently
- Lorenzo Zucca, The Comedy of Mrs Evans
- Dolores Morondo Taramundi, To Discriminate in order to Fight Discrimination: Paradox or Abuse?
- Russell Sandberg, The Future of Religious Freedom
- Dirk Voorhoof, Freedom of Expression versus Privacy and the Right to Reputation
- Leto Cariolou, Circumnavigating the Conflict Between the Right to Reputation and the Right to Freedom of Expression
- Javier Martínez-Torrón, Fernández Martínez v Spain: An Unclear Intersection of Rights
- Ian Leigh, Reversibility, Proportionality, and Conflicting Rights: Fernández Martínez v Spain
- Eva Brems, Conclusion - Conflicting Views on Conflicting Rights
International law feeds on preconditions which it cannot guarantee itself. International scholarship, too, must come to grips with pre-conditions and existing parameters over which it has no control itself. But such scholarship must not ‘succumb’ to these factual and ideational realities by adapting its methods and findings to any given political, social, and economic climate. It is the job of international legal scholars to produce ideas in a spirit of realist utopianism (John Rawls). Depending on the existing parameters, these ideas are apt to shape attitudes and actions, or not. Such scholarship also needs to distance itself from its object of study in order not to lose its capacity to criticise the law and the practice. How far exactly scholarly writing should transcend or keep aloof from the prevailing political climate and from concerns of feasibility depends on the research questions under discussion and is a matter of judgment. The style of scholarship suggested here is illustrated by the work of three eminent scholars whose careers continued through different political eras more or less favourable to the international rule of law: Hersch Lauterpacht, Antonio Cassese, and Josef Kunz.
Thursday, September 14, 2017
This chapter constitutes a heuristic exercise meant to re-imagine international courts and arbitral tribunals as bureaucratic bodies controlling the social reality created by the definitional categories of international law. It primarily claims that, in performing their wide variety of functions, international courts and arbitral tribunals, not only make use of the social reality created by international law, but also exert control over it. This control over the social reality created by the definitional categories of international law is approached as a form of control over knowledge and, it is argued, constitutes a feature of bureaucratic processes. In contending that international courts and arbitral tribunals control knowledge in this way, this chapter projects an image of international dispute resolution processes as bureaucratic sites where power is exercised. By virtue of this specific representation of international courts and arbitral tribunals as bureaucratic bodies controlling knowledge, this chapter challenges some common representations of international courts and arbitral tribunals as resorting to some pre-existing knowledge and accordingly sheds light on the extent to which international courts and arbitral tribunals define social reality and the problems in which they intervene. This chapter ultimately aims at providing new perspectives on the power exercised by international courts and arbitral tribunals, while also inviting international lawyers to reflect on the extent to which the knowledge they rely on to manage the world is controlled by international courts and arbitral tribunals.
Wednesday, September 13, 2017
Workshop: International Human Rights and Freedom: Possibilities, Epistemologies, Legacies and Alternatives
We are delighted to present a two-day workshop that examines critiques of human rights and looks at possible alternative routes to emancipation and progressive politics. We warmly invite interested scholars at all stages in their career and from any discipline to join us. Extensive critiques of International human rights (IHR) by critical legal scholars - especially feminists and postcolonial theorists – have called into question its worth as a path to human freedom and progressive politics. As a facet of liberal freedom and justice at the global level, human rights have been discredited as part of an Enlightenment project that is neither inclusive nor non-violent and which compels a specific way to be and be free in the world. Encounters with the world’s `Others’ - particularly well-meaning missions to save them - expose the gender, cultural, racial and religious norms on which rescue projects are based and the discomfort caused by these encounters often ends in epistemicide (de Santos) – the destruction of non-liberal/alternate epistemologies.
From this starting point, the workshop seeks to start four conversations. The first interrogates our own assumptions; are the possibilities of human rights really exhausted as a path to freedom? The second grapples with the violence of Enlightenment epistemologies. The third panel draws historical work on the colonial past of human rights into the present moment by thinking about its legacy. The final panel attempts to move beyond the liberal imaginary to rethink freedom - if human rights are not the key to human freedom, what is?
The workshop brings together a host of academics from a range of social science and humanities backgrounds. In taking human rights and freedom as our subject matter at a time of deep suspicion of others in the West, we seek to contribute to a broader conversation about critique and what lies beyond it.
The purpose of this book is to consider the legality of the changing practice of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). It provides extensive legal analysis of the ICRC as an organisation, legal person, and humanitarian actor. It draws on the law of organisations, International Humanitarian Law, International Human Rights Law, and other relevant branches of international law in order to critically assess the mandate and practice of the ICRC on the ground. The book also draws on more abstract human-centric concepts, including sovereignty as responsibility and human security, in order to assess the development of the concept of humanity for the mandate and practice of the ICRC. Critically this book uses semi- structured interviews with ICRC delegates to test the theoretical and doctrinal conclusions. The book provides a unique insight into the work of the ICRC. It also includes a case study of the work of the ICRC in the Democratic Republic of Congo.
Ultimately the book concludes that the ICRC is no longer restricted to the provision of humanitarian assistance on the battlefield. It is increasingly drawn into long-term and extremely complicated conflicts, in which, civilians, soldiers and non-State actors intermingle. In order to remain useful for the people on the ground, therefore, the ICRC is progressively developing its mandate. This book questions whether, on occasion, this could threaten its promise to remain neutral, impartial and independent. Finally, however, it should be said that this author finds that the work of the ICRC is unparalleled on the international stage and its humanitarian mandate is a vital component for those embroiled in the undertaking of and recovery from conflict.
- Sarra Sefrioui, Adapting to Sea Level Rise: A Law of the Sea Perspective
- José Manuel Sobrino & Marta Sobrido, The Common Fisheries Policy: A Difficult Compromise Between Relative Stability and the Discard Ban
- Gabriela A.Oanta, Some Recent Questions Regarding the European Union’s Public Access Fisheries Agreements
- Marta Chantal Ribeiro, The Protection of Biodiversity in the Framework of the Common Fisheries Policy: What Room for the Shared Competence?
- Emmanuella Doussis, Marine Scientific Research: Taking Stock and Looking Ahead
- Kamrul Hossain & Kathleen Morris, Protecting Arctic Ocean Marine Biodiversity in the Area Beyond National Jurisdiction
- Enrique J. Martínez Pérez, The Environmental Legal Framework for the Development of Blue Energy in Europe
- Montserrat Abad Castelos, The Black Sea and Blue Energy: Challenges, Opportunities and the Role of the European Union
- Giorgia Bevilacqua, Exploring the Ambiguity of Operation Sophia Between Military and Search and Rescue Activities
- Jasenko Marin, Mišo Mudrić, & Robert Mikac, Private Maritime Security Contractors and Use of Lethal Force in Maritime Domain
- Magne Frostad, United Nations Authorized Embargos and Maritime Interdiction: A Special Focus on Somalia
- Pirjo Kleemola-Juntunen, The Right of Innocent Passage: The Challenge of the Proliferation Security Initiative and the Implications for the Territorial Waters of the Åland Islands
In her manuscript Elisa Ravasi examines how the ECtHR responds to the growing challenges of overlapping legal systems. She focuses, in particular, on the relationship between the ECHR and EU law. First, she systematically analyses 10 years of ECtHR jurisprudence on the principle of equivalent protection and develops an innovative analysis scheme for its application. Afterwards, she examines the equivalency of the human rights protection provided by the ECJ in light of the minimum standards of the ECHR in three specific fields (naming law, ne bis in idem and equality of arms). Finally, she considers whether the presumption of equivalent protection of the ECtHR in favour of the EU is still justified.
- Jason Morgan-Foster, Giulia Pinzauti, & Philippa Webb, The International Court of Justice in the Leiden Journal: A Retrospective
- International Legal Theory
- Salvatore Caserta, Regional Integration through Law and International Courts – the Interplay between De Jure and De Facto Supranationality in Central America and the Caribbean
- International Law and Practice
- Guy Harpaz, The EU’s New Approach to the Two-State Solution in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: A Paradigm Shift or PR Exercise?
- Amy Strecker, Indigenous Land Rights and Caribbean Reparations Discourse
- Yen-Chiang Chang, How Does the Amicus Curiae Submission Affect a Tribunal Decision?
- Hague International Tribunals: International Court of Justice
- Sergey M. Punzhin, Procedural Normative System of the International Court of Justice
- International Criminal Courts and Tribunals
- Rachel Killean, Eithne Dowds & Amanda Kramer, Soldiers as Victims at the ECCC: Exploring the Concept of ‘Civilian’ in Crimes against Humanity
- Caitlin Lambert, Environmental Destruction in Ecuador: Crimes Against Humanity Under the Rome Statute?
- Talita de Souza Dias, ‘Interests of justice’: Defining the scope of Prosecutorial discretion in Article 53(1)(c) and (2)(c) of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court
- Philipp Kastner, Transitional Justice + Cyberjustice = Justice2?
- Marise Cremona, Anne Thies & Ramses A Wessel, Introduction
- Christophe Hillion & Ramses A Wessel, The European Union and International Dispute Settlement: Mapping Principles and Conditions
- Esa Paasivirta, European Union and Dispute Settlement: Managing Proliferation and Fragmentation
- Danae Azaria, The European Union's Contribution to the Law on Standing and Jurisdiction in International Dispute Settlement
- Catharine Titi, Aspects of the EU's Responsibility in International Investment Disputes
- Niilo Jääskinen & Alicja Sikora, The Exclusive Jurisdiction of the Court of Justice of the European Union and the Unity of the EU Legal Order
- Tobias Lock, The Not So Free Choice of EU Member States in International Dispute Settlement
- Anne Thies, European Union Member States and State–State Arbitration: What's Left?
- Christina Eckes, International Rulings and the EU Legal Order: Autonomy as Legitimacy?
- Andrés Delgado Casteleiro, The Effects of International Dispute Settlement Decisions in EU Law
- Ernst-Ulrich Petersmann, The Position of European Citizens in International Dispute Settlement
- Gracia Marín Durán, The EU and its Member States in WTO Dispute Settlement: A 'Competence Model' or a Case Apart for Managing International Responsibility?
- Aurora Plomer, The Unitary Patent and Unified Patent Court: Past, Present and Future
This book deals with child soldiers’ involvement in crimes under international law. Child soldiers are often victims of grave human rights abuses, and yet, in some cases, they also participate actively in inflicting violence upon others. Nonetheless, the international discourse on child soldiers often tends to ignore the latter dimension of children’s involvement in armed conflict and instead focuses exclusively on their role as victims.
While it might seem as though the discourse is therefore beneficial for child soldiers as it protects them from blame and responsibility, it is important to realize that the so-called passive victim narrative entails various adverse consequences, which can hinder the successful reintegration of child soldiers into their families, communities and societies. This book aims to address this dilemma. First, the available options for dealing with child soldiers’ participation in crimes under international law, such as transitional justice and criminal justice, and their shortcomings are analyzed in depth. Subsequently a new approach is developed towards achieving accountability in a child-adequate way, which is called restorative transitional justice.
Tuesday, September 12, 2017
What do recent international developments and the current political climate mean for the investment treaty world now and in the future? This conference will examine this question: first looking at developments in the past year, then turning to current issues in arbitration, and concluding with a discussion on the impact of global currents on international trade and investment agreements now and in the future.
- Erin Hannah, Holly Ryan & James Scott, Power, knowledge and resistance: between co-optation and revolution in global trade
- Susan Park, Accountability as justice for the Multilateral Development Banks? Borrower opposition and bank avoidance to US power and influence
- Steffen Murau, Shadow money and the public money supply: the impact of the 2007–2009 financial crisis on the monetary system
- Eivind Thomassen, Translating central bank independence into Norwegian: central bankers and the diffusion of central bank independence to Norway in the 1990s
- Matthew J. Baltz, Institutionalizing neoliberalism: CFIUS and the governance of inward foreign direct investment in the United States since 1975
- Ruben Gonzalez-Vicente, South–South relations under world market capitalism: the state and the elusive promise of national development in the China–Ecuador resource-development nexus
- Philipp Heimberger & Jakob Kapeller, The performativity of potential output: pro-cyclicality and path dependency in coordinating European fiscal policies
- J.S. Mbogning, Le livre I du Nouveau Code pénal camerounais : entre conservatisme et modernisation
- F. Bouhon, L’(ir)responsabilité du pouvoir judiciaire : fondement et mise à l’épreuve de l’immunité judiciaire en droits québécois et belge
- T. Garcia, Règlement des différends juridictionnels et respect des règles procédurales fondamentales à l’OMC
- C.I. Nagy, Est-ce que l’Union européenne devrait avoir le pouvoir de forcer les états membres à respecter les droits de l’homme ? Une analyse prospective relative à l’application de la charte des droits fondamentaux aux états membres
The conference theme New International Order in an Isolationist World will address the pressing challenges faced by international law in the political and economic climate prevailing in many regions of the world.
These include the challenges caused by rising populism in Europe and North America and reactions against free trade and economic interdependence, manifested most obviously in the Brexit referendum and policies advocated by President Trump, the changing foreign policies of many countries towards military and diplomatic intervention in politically unstable regions and the flows of refugees into Europe, the role of international criminal law in the modern world along with the challenges faced by the International Criminal Court, and the increased scrutiny of the legitimacy of investment treaty arbitration, whether as a standalone system or as an aspect of mixed trade and investment agreements.
The conference will include six panels covering the following topics: peace and security; human rights and international humanitarian law; international trade law; international investment law; regionalism; and accountability and remedies under international law, and will include selected speakers drawn from private practice, the public sector and academia in order to incorporate diverse perspectives, both theoretical and practical, on the conference theme.
Few areas of international law practice illustrate the tensions between business and human rights as the implementation of the duty to consult with indigenous peoples. Consultations give indigenous and tribal peoples a safeguard for protection of their rights when confronted by the decisions of governments and business enterprises that may directly affect them. While states, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and corporations start to rely on, and to take, this duty seriously, states struggle with tailoring adequate processes, NGOs often argue that the duty provides indigenous peoples with an absolute right to give or withhold consent, and corporations use different strategies to limit the scope of consultations. Based on two case studies in Latin America, we identify divergent positions on the duty to consult – positions we call instrumentalist, consent-or-veto power, and minimalist – and we explain the main elements of each of these positions. After clarifying common imprecisions, we argue for an approach centred on the human rights of indigenous peoples to reconcile this divergent conceptualization of the duty by different stakeholders. Finally, we argue for reinforcing indigenous peoples’ rights with mechanisms for specific safeguards and direct participation in benefits, drawing on the United Nation’s ‘protect, respect, and remedy’ framework, to mitigate the adverse consequences of the existing distribution of sovereign power as predicated by Patrick Macklem’s influential work.
What is ‘global law’? What is specifically global and specifically legal about global law? Is it even coherent to define law by reference to its ‘globality’? These are just some of the questions taken up by Neil Walker in his new book, Intimations of Global Law. In this review essay, I engage critically with Walker’s response to these and other questions. Whilst I believe that Walker’s mapping of different ‘species’ of global law is useful and informative in revealing a ‘state of the art’ of globalising legal trends, his effort to draw these various and not necessarily commensurate species together into a coherent meta-theorisation of global law is, I believe, far less convincing. Walker’s conceptualisation of global law is self-defined by reference to its openness, its intimated quality and its ‘adjectival’ categorisation—characteristics that leave the concept of global law somewhat ‘slippery’ and malleable to the point of its non-utility in actually helping to guide law’s direction, resolve normative disputes or remedy apparent accountability deficits and injustices at the global level.
In February of 2017, Amnesty International released their Annual Report for 2016 to 2017, concluding that the “us versus them” rhetoric increasingly employed by politicians is endangering human rights the world over. Renowned UN prosecutor and human rights scholar Payam Akhavan has encountered the grim realities of contemporary genocide throughout his life and career. He argues that deceptive utopias, political cynicism, and public apathy have given rise to major human rights abuses: from the religious persecution of Iranian Bahá’ís that shaped his personal life, to the horrors of ethnic cleansing in Yugoslavia, the genocide in Rwanda, and the rise of contemporary phenomena such as the Islamic State. But he also reflects on the inspiring resilience of the human spirit and the reality of our inextricable interdependence to liberate us, whether from hateful ideologies that deny the humanity of others or an empty consumerist culture that worships greed and self-indulgence.
A bold and provocative history of the men who fought to outlaw war and how an often overlooked treaty signed in 1928 was among the most transformative events in modern history.
On a hot summer afternoon in 1928, the leaders of the world assembled in Paris to outlaw war. Within the year, the treaty signed that day, known as the Peace Pact, had been ratified by nearly every state in the world. War, for the first time in history, had become illegal the world over. But the promise of that summer day was fleeting. Within a decade of its signing, each state that had gathered in Paris to renounce war was at war. And in the century that followed, the Peace Pact was dismissed as an act of folly and an unmistakable failure. This book argues that that understanding is inaccurate, and that the Peace Pact ushered in a sustained march toward peace that lasts to this day.
The Internationalists tells the story of the Peace Pact by placing it in the long history of international law from the seventeenth century through the present, tracing this rich history through a fascinating and diverse array of lawyers, politicians and intellectuals—Hugo Grotius, Nishi Amane, Salmon Levinson, James Shotwell, Sumner Welles, Carl Schmitt, Hersch Lauterpacht, and Sayyid Qutb. It tells of a centuries-long struggle of ideas over the role of war in a just world order. It details the brutal world of conflict the Peace Pact helped extinguish, and the subsequent era where tariffs and sanctions take the place of tanks and gunships.
The Internationalists examines with renewed appreciation an international system that has outlawed wars of aggression and brought unprecedented stability to the world map. Accessible and gripping, this book will change the way we view the history of the twentieth century—and how we must work together to protect the global order the internationalists fought to make possible.
Monday, September 11, 2017
International organizations have increasingly taken on state or quasi state-like functions in order to exercise control over individuals and societies, most pressingly in contexts of conflict and transition. Their engagement in peace operations has progressively widened, with mandates now regularly including the protection of civilian populations and, in several new operations, containing peace enforcement responsibilities with active combat duties. This increases the risk that their conduct may infringe human rights and international humanitarian law.
This book explores the ways in which the principles of accountability and reparation apply to international organizations. When considering whether international organizations are obliged to afford reparation and to whom it is owed, as well as what it entails, we are confronted with the challenge of understanding how the law of responsibility intersects with specialized regimes of human rights and international humanitarian law, particularly in its application to individuals. The justifications for organizational immunities and other limits on international organizations' responsibilities were conceived to ensure IOs independence from state influences and their capacity to engage in often difficult circumstances. Many, if not all, of these rationales remain relevant today, yet disciplinary, oversight, and judicial structures that exist in state administrations to promote accountability and forestall abuses have only partially been put into place for international organizations. At the same time, individuals affected by their conduct have had no, or only cursory recourse to domestic, regional and international courts and they have not been able to rely on their states of nationality to pursue claims on their behalf.
Submissions for the new SIEL/Hart Prize in International Economic Law are now open!
ABOUT THE PRIZE
The SIEL/Hart Prize is a brand new prize awarded every two years to an outstanding unpublished manuscript by an early career scholar in the field of International Economic Law. The manuscript can be a doctoral thesis or an original, book-length piece of scholarship. The manuscript can focus on any field of, or perspective on, International Economic Law. The prize is sponsored by Hart Publishing The winner of the prize will receive a contract for publication within the Hart series Studies in International Trade and Investment Law and a £250 Hart book voucher Submissions are now open for the 2018 Prize! The deadline for submissions is 15th January 2018 The winner of the Prize will be announced on 15th May 2018 on the SIEL and Hart Publishing websites
Individuals may submit a manuscript for consideration if they have completed either (1) a doctoral degree; or (2) a law degree that satisfies the academic requirements for the relevant national bar, no earlier than ten years before the submission deadline (15th January 2018) Co-authorship is permitted provided all authors meet the stated conditions
Submissions must include:
- The doctoral thesis or full manuscript
- An abstract of up to 1,000 words, including a description of the monograph's contribution vis-a-vis existing literature
- An author CV (not longer than five pages)
- If the manuscript is a doctoral thesis, all examiners’ reports and a detailed revision plan
Pleae note: manuscripts/theses submitted for consideration must not be under review for publication elsewhere at the time of application
The series editors of the series Studies in International Trade and Investment Law (Tomer Broude, Krista Nadakavukaren Schefer and Federico Ortino) will compile the final shortlist. The shortlisted submissions will undergo peer-review. The final selection of the winner will be carried out by the Prize Committee, consisting of the Series Editors of the series Studies in International Trade and Investment Law, and designated SIEL members.
HOW TO ENTER
Submissions and enquiries should be emailed to SielHartPrize@hartpub.co.uk by 15th January 2018
Sunday, September 10, 2017
- Amartya Sen, Ethics and the Foundation of Global Justice
- Amitav Acharya, After Liberal Hegemony: The Advent of a Multiplex World Order
- Jamie Gaskarth, Rising Powers, Responsibility, and International Society
- Laura M. Hartman, Climate Engineering and the Playing God Critique
- Aidan Hehir, “Utopian in the Right Sense”: The Responsibility to Protect and the Logical Necessity of Reform
- Review Essays
- Chris Brown, Poverty Alleviation, Global Justice, and the Real World
- James Turner Johnson, The Ethics of Insurgency
- Yasuhito Fukui, CTBT: Legal Questions Arising from Its Non–Entry into Force Revisited
- Jonathan Black-Branch, Nuclear Terrorism by States and Non-state Actors: Global Responses to Threats to Military and Human Security in International Law
- Sia Spiliopoulou Åkermark, The Puzzle of Collective Self-defence: Dangerous Fragmentation or a Window of Opportunity? An Analysis with Finland and the Åland Islands as a Case Study
- Michael John-Hopkins, Extrapolation of Criminal Law Modes of Liability to Target Analysis under International Humanitarian Law: Developing the Framework for Understanding Direct Participation in Hostilities and Membership in Organized Armed Groups in Non-International Armed Conflict
- Merel A.C. Ekelhof, Complications of a Common Language: Why it is so Hard to Talk about Autonomous Weapons
- James A. Green & Stephen Samuel, The Chilcot Report: Some Thoughts on International Law and Legal Advice