- January 19, 2018: Gleider I Hernández (Durham Univ.), Systemic Agents in International Law
- January 26, 2018: Matthew Nicholson (Durham Univ.), Psychoanalyzing International Law
- February 2, 2018: Photini Pazartzis (National and Kapodistrian University of Athens ), Whose Authority? The Human Rights Committee and the Interpretation of the ICCPR
- February 9, 2018: Catriona Drew (SOAS Univ. of London), tbd
- February 16, 2018: Sean Aughey (11KBW), Refracting international law ideas through the prism of the common law: act of state is (almost) dead, long live act of state!
- February 23, 2018: Tsilly Dagan (Bar-Ilan Univ.), International Tax policy: Between Competition and Cooperation
- March 2, 2018: Petros C. Mavroidis (Columbia Univ.), Last Mile for Tuna (to a Safe Harbor) How the WTO Appellate Body Has Misconstrued the TBT Agreement and Why a Sea Change is Not Enough
- March 16, 2018: Karen Engle (Univ. of Texas), The Common Sense of Anti-Impunity: Human Rights, Amnesties, and Sexual Violence in Conflict
Thursday, January 18, 2018
This chapter considers two important and unresolved issues raised by unilateral withdrawal from or denunciation of treaties. The first issue concerns whether treaty obligations end in both international and domestic law after a state leaves a treaty. Exit often produces the same effects in both legal systems, but some withdrawals bifurcate a treaty’s status, ending its obligations in domestic law but continuing to bind the state internationally, or vice versa. The second issue concerns denunciations initiated by different branches of government. The decision to withdraw from a treaty is usually carried out by the executive acting unilaterally. Less well known, but potentially more fraught from a foreign relations perspective, are instances in which the impetus for exit originates with legislators or judges.
Conflicts involving both dimensions of treaty exit stem from a common source – the different domestic and international rules governing how states enter into and leave treaties and the divergent policies that underlie those rules. The chapter develops a typology to categorize these conflicts, drawing upon examples of actual and potential treaty denunciations in several countries as well as actions by the executive, legislature, and judiciary that make such withdrawals more likely.
- The Changing Nature of Territoriality in International Law
- Martin Kuijer & Wouter Werner, The Paradoxical Place of Territory in International Law
- Veronika Bílková, A State Without Territory?
- Cedric Ryngaert, Territory in the Law of Jurisdiction: Imagining Alternatives
- Sara Kendall, Cartographies of the Present: ‘Contingent Sovereignty’ and Territorial Integrity
- Fleur Johns, Data Territories: Changing Architectures of Association in International Law
- Lianne J.M. Boer, ‘Spoofed Presence Does not Suffice’: On Territoriality in the Tallinn Manual
- Jan Kleijssen & Pierluigi Perri, Cybercrime, Evidence and Territoriality: Issues and Options
- Alessandra Arcuri & Federica Violi, Reconfiguring Territoriality in International Economic Law
- Sigrun Skogly, Extraterritorial Obligations and the Obligation to Protect
- Ernst M.H. Hirsch Ballin, Citizenship at Home and Across Borders
- Hemme Battjes, Territoriality and Asylum Law: The Use of Territorial Jurisdiction to Circumvent Legal Obligations and Human Rights Law Responses
- Ciarán Burke, Ólafur Ísberg Hannesson, & Kristin Bangsund, Schrödinger’s Cake? Territorial Truths for Post-Brexit Britain
- Annecoos Wiersema, CITES and the Whole Chain Approach to Combating Illegal Wildlife Trade
- Marissa C. G. Altmann & Jonathan E. Kolby, Trends in US Imports of Amphibians in Light of the Potential Spread of Chytrid Fungus, Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis (Bd), and Implications for Conservation
- Kimberley Graham, International Intent and Domestic Application of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES): The Case of the Ocelot (Leopardus pardalis)
- Sabrina Persaud, Losing Our “CITES” on the “Traffic”: How Taxing Ivory Trafficking Can Save the African Elephant From Its Bloody Extinction
The concept of utopianism, however one looks at it, is not a technical legal concept. It is not a formal product of the everyday legal process and it certainly cannot be considered a legal term of art – the way, for instance, the concept of anticipatory self-defence can. Nor does it form an operative part of some other legal construct or doctrine – the way, for example, the idea of the common heritage of mankind does. And yet if one looks at the broader conceptual landscape surrounding the contemporary international legal discourse, it certainly seems to carry a very particular meaning in the eyes of what one might call the international legal profession lato sensu, a meaning which in many ways appears to be unique and without any discernible parallel in other comparable cultural arenas and discursive traditions. In this paper I propose to explore the internal phenomenology and the external theoretical structures surrounding this meaning.
What is that basic complex of ideas, tropes, assumptions, and discursive devices by means of which the phenomenon of utopianism is constructed, encoded, and represented in the contemporary international legal culture? What is the cultural logic behind the traditional anti-utopianist reflex within the broader disciplinary field of international law? Why do international lawyers tend to resent utopianism? How do they rationalise the logic of this resentment and what can this tell us about the broader power dynamics underlying the anti-utopianist discourse?
- Ana Stevenson, The "Great Doctrine Of Human Rights'': Articulation and Authentication in the Nineteenth-Century U.S. Antislavery And Women's Rights Movements
- Lyndsey Stonebridge. Humanitarianism Was Never Enough: Dorothy Thompson, Sands of Sorrow, and the Arabs of Palestine
- Joseph R. Slaughter, Life, Story, Violence: What Narrative Doesn't Say
- Sumi Madhok, On Vernacular Rights Cultures and the Political Imaginaries of Haq
- Contemporary Refugee Timespaces
- Angela Naimou, Preface
- Anooradha Iyer Siddiqi, On Humanitarian Architecture: A Story of a Border
- Maurizio Albahari, Beyond Europe, Borders Adrift
- Adam Goodman, The Human Costs of Outsourcing Deportation
- Tanya Golash-Boza, An Immigration and Customs Enforcement Home Raid Before Church
- Gilberto Rosas, Refusing Refuge at the United States–Mexico Border
- Sharif Youssef, Necessary Decisions
- Yogita Goyal, The Logic of Analogy: Slavery and the Contemporary Refugee
- Crystal Parikh, The Innocents: Reading Refugees in National Culture and Diasporic Literatures
- Alexandra Schultheis Moore, Anglophone Novels from the Tibetan Diaspora: Negotiations of Empire, Nation, and Culture
- April Shemak, Haitian Refugees and the Guantánamo Public Memory Project: Remembering Haitian Refugees
- John McCallum, War and the Historical Sociology of Human Rights: Violent Entanglements
Wednesday, January 17, 2018
International human rights efforts have been overly reliant on reactive tools and focused on treaty compliance, while often under emphasizing the prevention of human rights violations. I argue that data analytics can play an important role in refocusing the international human rights regime on its original goal of preventing human rights abuses, but it comes at a cost. There are risks in advancing a data-driven approach to human rights, including the privileging of certain rights subject to quantitative measurement and the precipitation of further human rights abuses in the process of preventing other violations. Moreover, the increasing use of big data can ultimately privatize the international human rights regime by transforming the corporation into a primary gatekeeper of rights protection. Such unintended consequences need to be addressed in order to maximize the benefits and minimize the risks of using big data in this field.
- January 18, 2018: Yvonne McDermott Rees (Swansea Univ.), Proving International Crimes
- January 25, 2018: Amy Sander (Essex Court Chambers), Advocacy in International Forums
- February 1, 2018: Danai Azaria (Univ. College London), The International Law Commission as an Interpreter of International Law
- February 8, 2018: Christine Chinkin (London School of Economics), Women, Peace, and Security: What does it Mean in the Contemporary World?
- February 15, 2018: Alan Boyle (Univ. of Edinburgh; Essex Court Chambers), Interaction between Hard and Soft Law in United Nations LawMaking
- February 22, 2018: Andrea Bjorklund (McGill Univ.), Arbitral Authority to Address Corruption
- March 1, 2018: Ilias Plakokefalos, André Nollkaemper & Jean d’Aspremont (SHARES project), Draft Principles on Shared Responsibility
- March 8, 2018: Payam Akhavan (McGill Univ.), In Search of a Better World: A Human Rights Odyssey
- Jonathan G. Odom, Navigating Between Treaties and Tweets: How to Ensure Discourse about Maritime Freedom Is Meaningful
- Alexander N. Vylegzhanin, Oran R. Young & Paul Arthur Berkman, Governing the Barents Sea Region: Current Status, Emerging Issues, and Future Options
- Clive R. Symmons, Recent Developments in Ireland: The Voisinage Doctrine and Irish Waters: Recent Judicial and Legislative Developments
- Yaodong Yu, Yue Zhao & Yen-Chiang Chang, Challenges to the Primary Jurisdiction of Flag States Over Ships
- CILJ 2017 Conference: Transforming Institutions
- Jan Klabbers, Transforming institutions: autonomous international organisations in institutional theory
- Rob van Gestel & Jurgen de Poorter, Supreme administrative courts’ preliminary questions to the CJEU: start of a dialogue or talking to deaf ears?
- Catherine Warin & Zheni Zhekova, The Joint Way Forward on migration issues between Afghanistan and the EU: EU external policy and the recourse to non-binding law
- Dominik Düsterhaus, Does the European Court of Justice constitutionalise EU Private International Law?
- Leonie M Huijbers, The European Court of Human Rights’ procedural approach in the age of subsidiarity
- Desmond Johnson, The institutional balance as an agent of transformation in the EU constitutional order: reconciling the simultaneous rise of the European Parliament and European agencies
- Anastasia Karatzia & Menelaos Markakis, What role for the Commission and the ECB in the European Stability Mechanism?
- Tim Kluwen, Universal Jurisdiction in Absentia Before Domestic Courts Prosecuting International Crimes: A Suitable Weapon to Fight Impunity?
- Ezequiel Heffes & Brian E. Frenkel, The International Responsibility of Non-State Armed Groups: In Search of the Applicable Rules
- Esmé Shirlow, Three Manifestations of Transparency in International Investment Law: A Story of Sources, Stakeholders and Structures
- Tomás Restrepo, Modification of Renewable Energy Support Schemes Under the Energy Charter Treaty: Eiser and Charanne in the Context of Climate Change
Tuesday, January 16, 2018
- Tilmann Altwicker, Explaining the Emergence of Transnational Counter-Terrorism Legislation in International Law-Making
- Mehrnoosh Farzamfar, Diplomatic Assurances in Cases of Expulsion to Torture:A Critical Analysis
- Vincent Dalpé, Delimiting the ICC's Ominous Shadow: An Analysis of the Inability Criterion's Nebulous Contours
- Special Section: Sovereignty, Territory and Jurisdiction
- Ilja Richard Pavone, The Ukraine Crisis as a Paradigm of the Limits of International Law and the West's Faults
- Richard C Watkins, Jurisdiction in International Human Rights Law: Application of the European Convention to Soldiers Deployed Overseas
- Heini Tuura, Intervention by Invitation and the Principle of Self-Determination in the Crimean Crisis
- Marc Shucksmith-Wesley, Uti Possidetis: The Procrustean Bed of International Law?
- Giuliano Vosa, From Authorisation to Multi-Parliamentarism: Parliaments in Global Law-Making
Monday, January 15, 2018
TEACHING AND RESEARCHING INTERNATIONAL LAW IN ASIA
The Centre for International Law at the National University of Singapore will be hosting a conference from 21 to 22 June 2018 on “Teaching and Researching International Law in Asia” (TRILA). The broad purposes of the Conference are to assess the current state of teaching and research in International Law in the Asia Pacific region, to identify commonly experienced challenges for teachers of international law, and to formulate a programme of further action and activities to assist individuals in their teaching and research. This Conference follows in the footsteps of the successful Conference held on the same topic in Singapore in 2001. It also complements the ongoing work of the Asian Society of International Law.
The Conference will be preceded by a Junior Faculty Workshop on the 20th of June, which is directed at exploring the challenges junior faculty confront at the beginning of their careers in establishing themselves as teachers and in developing a scholarly agenda.
The Conference on Teaching and Researching
International Law (TRILA)
The Conference will feature a variety of formats – panels, roundtables, break-out sessions – to enable both focused discussion and widespread participation. Topics, themes and issues to be explored include, but are not confined to the following:
- the relevance and importance of international law to the practice of law
- how to make the study of public international law relevant and engaging to students
- the relationship between international and national law
- the place of international law in the law school curriculum
- curriculum content–what topics should be included in a core public international law course, including the possibility of incorporating non-traditional areas (e.g., technology, cyberspace, environment, investment, corporate social responsibility, and others)
- what should be the purpose of teaching international law in an era of globalization
- teaching and research methods in institutions with limited resources
- what teaching methods and materials are appropriate for a course taught in the Asia Pacific region, including the role of moot courts and other experiential learning methods
- the history and theory of international law in the Asia Pacific region and its place in the teaching of international law
- the challenges of teaching international law in the local language
- balancing the demands of teaching and scholarship
- recent developments in international law scholarship
- the internet and the teaching of international law
- the relationship between teaching, scholarly work, and national policy
- the challenges of researching and publishing with limited resources
- comparing the challenges faced by scholars and teachers in Asia with those facing their colleagues in Africa and Latin America
The Conference will be held from 21 to 22 June 2018.
How to Participate
Persons anywhere in the world who are interested in participating in the Conference are invited to submit the following:
1. a curriculum vitae listing work experience, qualifications, publications, and other relevant information
2. a short think piece of no more than 600 words dealing with any issue/topic relating to the broad themes of the Conference OR an official nomination from the Dean of the Law School indicating why the nominee should be selected and how the nominee can contribute to the conference
The deadline for submissions is on 15 January 2018 (extended to 22 January 2018). We expect to be able to announce the result of the paper selection in mid-February 2018.
You may sign up here to express your interest in joining the Conference. We will then provide you with updates, reminders, and other relevant information pertaining to the Conference. You may submit your application requirements here.
Participation in this event is by invitation of selected applicants only.
Junior Faculty Workshop
The Conference will be preceded by a Junior Faculty Workshop on 20 June 2018 which is directed at exploring the challenges junior faculty confront at the beginning of their careers in establishing themselves as teachers and developing a scholarly agenda. Participants of the workshop will have the opportunity to present their works in progress for comment. The workshop will include a forum which will deal with topics including: developing a research agenda; the relationship between teaching and scholarship; the elements of good scholarship; preparing an article for publication.
Participants in the Junior Faculty Workshop will be invited to remain for the Conference on 21st and 22d June.
How to Participate
Teachers of international law who are younger than 35 years of age OR who have no more than six years of teaching experience, are invited to apply. Please submit:
1. a 600 words or less abstract of your paper in progress
2. a curriculum vitae containing details of qualifications, work experience, publications
Papers relating to all topics of international law – General international law, the use of force, human rights, international environmental law, investment law, the history and theory of international law – are welcome.
The deadline for the submission of these materials is 22 January 2018. We expect to be able to announce the result of the paper selection by the last week of February. Participants who are selected will be requested to submit their completed papers (no more than 8,000 words) by 15 April 2018.
You may sign up here to express your interest in joining the Junior Faculty Workshop. We will then provide you with updates, reminders, and other relevant information pertaining to the workshop. You may submit your application requirements here.
Participation in the Conference and in the Workshop are free while lunch and snacks will be provided at the venue. Participants are, however, expected to take care of their other costs.
For inquiries, please contact Mr. Robert Real (email@example.com)
Saturday, January 13, 2018
Reading current statements of world leaders on subjects relevant to international law is liable to cause confusion, even distress to those for whom the 1945 regulatory arrangements, as completed in the post-Cold War era, have become the norm. On occasions international law is invoked, but in what seems an increasingly antagonistic way, amounting often to a dialogue of the deaf. At other times it is apparently or even transparently ignored. This touches many of the arrangements governments spent the preceding period seeking to establish. Is there a pattern to all this, and how should we respond? How susceptible is the edifice of international law to such rhetoric? These issues are examined in the context of the law of withdrawal from treaties. Three recent high profile examples are examined: Brexit, South Africa's purported withdrawal from the Rome Statute, and the United States’ announced withdrawal from the Paris Agreement.
Thursday, January 11, 2018
- Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biodiversity: Southern Hemisphere Issues and Approaches
- Robin Warner, Strengthening Governance Frameworks for Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biodiversity in Areas beyond National Jurisdiction: Southern Hemisphere Perspectives
- Carole Durussel; Eulogio Soto Oyarzún & Osvaldo Urrutia S., Strengthening the Legal and Institutional Frame-work of the Southeast Pacific: Focus on the BBNJ Package Elements
- Genevieve C. Quirk & Harriet R. Harden-Davies, Cooperation, Competence and Coherence: The Role of Regional Ocean Governance in the South West Pacific for the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Biodiversity beyond National Jurisdiction
- Constance M. Johnson, The Relevance of the Southern Ocean to the Development of a Global Regime for Marine Areas beyond National Jurisdiction—An Uncommon Commons
- Marta Chantal Ribeiro, South Atlantic Perspectives on the Future International Legally Binding Instrument under the LOSC on Conservation and Sustainable Use of BBNJ
- Glen Wright & Julien Rochette, Regional Management of Areas beyond National Jurisdiction in the Western Indian Ocean: State of Play and Possible Ways Forward
- Harriet R. Harden-Davies, Research for Regions: Strengthening Marine Technology Transfer for Pacific Island Countries and Biodiversity beyond National Jurisdiction
Wednesday, January 10, 2018
- Ordering the World? Liberal Internationalism in Theory and Practice
- G. John Ikenberry, Inderjeet Parmar, & Doug Stokes, Introduction: Ordering the world? Liberal internationalism in theory and practice
- G. John Ikenberry, The end of liberal international order?
- Constance Duncombe & Tim Dunne, After liberal world order
- Beate Jahn, Liberal internationalism: historical trajectory and current prospects
- Carla Norrlof, Hegemony and inequality: Trump and the liberal playbook
- Christopher Layne, The US–Chinese power shift and the end of the Pax Americana
- Naná De Graaff & Bastiaan Van Apeldoorn, US–China relations and the liberal world order: contending elites, colliding visions?
- Doug Stokes, Trump, American hegemony and the future of the liberal international order
- Inderjeet Parmar, The US-led liberal order: imperialism by another name?
- H. Tuerk, 20 years of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS): an overview
- M. Chochorelou & C. Espaliu Berdud, Recent regional investment treaties and dispute settlement: investors and States on a rollercoaster of predominance
- C. Lequesne-Roth, Le contentieux arbitral des dettes souveraines
- M. Ambomo, Le cycle de Doha 15 ans après: l’OMC ou l’illusion du développement
- A. Ibrahim, La Déclaration De Khartoum du 23 mars 2015 : une réévaluation des rapports juridiques entre États du bassin du Nil?
- F. Dubuisson & G. Poissonnier, La Cour de justice de l’Union européenne et la question du Sahara occidental: cachez cette pratique (illégale) que je ne saurais voir
- C. Verrier, L’obtention du statut de réfugié sous la directive 2004/83/CE pour les déserteurs: un parcours du combattant? Un commentaire de l’arrêt Shepherd de la Cour de justice de l’Union européenne
- Sara Bailey, Beyond radical rhetoric: translating structural conceptions of the right to food into concrete demands for change
- Dominique Clément, Human rights or social justice? The problem of rights inflation
- Joshua B. Forrest, Local autonomy as a human right
- Ignatius Yordan Nugraha, Human rights derogation during coup situations
- Jeremy Sarkin, Respecting and protecting the lives of migrants and refugees: the need for a human rights approach to save lives and find missing persons
- Sebastien Moretti, Protection in the context of mixed migratory movements by sea: the case of the Bay of Bengal and Andaman Sea Crisis
- Jessika Eichler, New responses to mining extractivism in the Bolivian lowlands: the role and potential of indigenous cooperatives in self-managing mining resources
- Luke G.G. Bhatia, Intersections between the local and global: the Bahrain human rights movement
- Claudia Aradau & Tobias Blanke, Governing others: Anomaly and the algorithmic subject of security
- Stephane J. Baele, Thierry Balzacq, & Philippe Bourbeau, Numbers in global security governance
- Meredith Loken & Anna Zelenz, Explaining extremism: Western women in Daesh
- Luca Trenta, The Obama administration’s conceptual change: Imminence and the legitimation of targeted killings
- Marcus Schulzke, Necessary and surplus militarisation: Rethinking civil-military interactions and their consequences
- Freya Irani, ‘Lawfare’, US military discourse, and the colonial constitution of law and war
- In Memoriam
- Iain Scobbie, Jean d’Aspremont, & Yenkong Ngangjoh Hodu, Professor Gillian White (1936–2016)
- Andrew Dickinson, Keeping up Appearances: The Development of Adjudicatory Jurisdiction in the English Courts
- Harriet Moynihan, Regulating the Past: The European Court of Human Rights’ Approach to the Investigation of Historical Deaths under Article 2 ECHR
- Jamie Trinidad, The Disputed Waters around Gibraltar
- Jack Wass, Jurisdiction by Estoppel and Acquiescence in International Courts and Tribunals
Indeterminacy in the law of war exacts a severe humanitarian toll, and it is not likely to be reduced by the conclusion of additional treaties. The present article argues that the adverse consequences of this indeterminacy may be mitigated through a U.N. Security Council action establishing an international advisory regime and using the broad powers of the Security Council to provide incentives for states to subscribe to this regime voluntarily. States subscribing to the advisory regime (“operating states”) would undertake to follow the interpretation of the law of war laid out by international legal advisors. The advisory regime would represent a bargain between the Security Council and operating states, which would grant protection for states against the costs that typically attach to non-compliance with the law of war, to the extent that the state followed the legal guidance provided by the international advisors. This article demonstrates that the powers of the Security Council under the U.N. Charter accommodate such a bargain. The desirability of the proposed advisory regime from a humanitarian perspective, and its appeal for states, depend on the interpretive approach to the law of war that would guide the international advisors. This article identifies an interpretive approach to the law of war that would make the proposed advisory regime the best bargain from a humanitarian perspective that is politically feasible. Such an interpretive approach marks the farthest a state would be willing to stray from the most permissive interpretive approach to the law of war made possible by the indeterminacy of the law to secure the benefits that the advisory regime offers. Use of such an interpretive approach would be secured through the selection of international advisors, tailored to ensure that they are inclined to embrace the desired interpretive approach.
Tuesday, January 9, 2018
This Brief uses the theory of norm contestation as a model for understanding variation in norm-related behavior in international relations. While most typical approaches to understanding norms view norms as stable structures and actor responses to them as unquestioned, in a global political climate where departures from expected behavior may occur, a more nuanced model is needed. By using a norm contestation framework that highlights norm fluidity and actor agency, this book expands the discussion, providing insight into divergent interpretations of norm violation and compliance and the dynamic nature of norms. The first two chapters introduce the norm contestation model, explain how it contributes to the literature on norm violations, and discuss the reasons for the cases discussed. Chapters Three and Four provide detailed case studies of the mechanisms of norm contestation as they apply to the civilian immunity and non-intervention norms. Chapter Five concludes by reconnecting the norm contestation model to the case studies and describing how it can be applied to norms other than those regulating armed conflict. It also discusses policy implications and avenues for future research.
Call for Papers
Polish Yearbook of International Law
Polish Yearbook of International Law (PYIL) is currently seeking articles for its next volume (XXXVII), which will be published in June 2018. Authors are invited to submit complete unpublished papers in areas connected with public and private international law, including European law. Although it is not a formal condition for acceptance, we are specifically interested in articles that address issues in international and European law relating to Central and Eastern Europe. Authors from the region are also strongly encouraged to submit their works.
Submissions should not exceed 12,000 words (including footnotes) but in exceptional cases we may also accept longer works. We assess manuscripts on a rolling basis and will consider requests for expedited review in case of a pending acceptance for publication from another journal.
All details about submission procedure and required formatting are available at the PYIL’s webpage.
Please send manuscripts to firstname.lastname@example.org. The deadline for submissions is 31 January 2018.
- Eirik Bjorge & Cameron Miles, Introduction
- William S Dodge, The Charming Betsy and The Paquete Habana (1804 and 1900)
- Michael Waibel, Mavrommatis Palestine Concessions (Greece v Great Britain) (1924–27)
- Chester Brown, Factory at Chorzów (Germany v Poland) (1927–28)
- Douglas Guilfoyle, SS Lotus (France v Turkey) (1927)
- Eirik Bjorge, Island of Palmas (Netherlands v United States of America) (1928)
- Rolf Einar Fife, Legal Status of Eastern Greenland (Denmark v Norway) (1933)
- Duncan French, Trail Smelter (United States of America/Canada) (1938 and 1941)
- Katherine O'Byrne & Philippe Sands, Trial Before the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg (1945–46)
- Thomas D Grant & Rowan Nicholson, The Early United Nations Advisory Opinions (1948–62)
- James Crawford & Paul Mertenskötter, The South West Africa Cases (1949 to 1971)
- Nikiforos Panagis & Antonios Tzanakopoulos, North Sea Continental Shelf (Federal Republic of Germany v Netherlands; Federal Republic of Germany v Denmark) (1969)
- Giorgio Gaja, Barcelona Traction, Light and Power Company (Belgium v Spain) (1970)
- Nigel Rodley, Tyrer v United Kingdom (1978)
- Robert Kolb, Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v United States of America) (1984 to 1986)
- Sarah MH Nouwen & Michael A Becker, Tadic v Prosecutor (1995)
- Surabhi Ranganathan, The Nuclear Weapons Advisory Opinions (1996)
- Laurence Boisson de Chazournes & Makane Moïse Mbengue, Gabcíkovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary/Slovakia) (1997)
- Sam Luttrell, Vivendi v Argentina (1997–2010)
- Callum Musto & Catherine Redgwell, US-Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products (1998)
- Cameron Miles, LaGrand (Germany v United States of America) (2001)
- John Dugard, Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (2004)
- Omri Sender & Michael Wood, Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v Italy; Greece intervening) (2012)
- Claire Q. Smith & Tom Jarvis, Ending Mass Atrocities: An Empirical Reinterpretation of ‘Successful’ International Military Intervention in East Timor
- Paul F. Diehl & Daniel Druckman, Multiple Peacekeeping Missions: Analysing Interdependence
- Andrew T. Wolff, Invitations to Intervene and the Legitimacy of EU and NATO Civilian and Military Operations
- Kseniya Oksamytna, Policy Entrepreneurship by International Bureaucracies: The Evolution of Public Information in UN Peacekeeping
- Kathia Légaré, Transnational State-Building in Lebanon and Bosnia-Herzegovina: Strengthening or Shattering the Peace?
- Dorina A. Bekoe, The United Nations Operation in Côte d’Ivoire: How a Certified Election Still Turned Violent
Monday, January 8, 2018
- Arthur J. Cockfield, How Countries Should Share Tax Information
- Jonathan Hafetz, Fairness, Legitimacy, and Selection Decisions in International Criminal Law
- Amnon Lehavi, Globalizing Property Law: An Institutional Analysis
- Stephen Townley, Indiscriminate Attacks and the Past, Present, and Future of the Rules/Standards and Objective/Subjective Debates in International Humanitarian Law
- Part One
- Ilan Strauss, Explaining Global Trends in FDI in 2015 and Beyond
- Jesse Coleman, Lisa Sachs, Lise Johnson, & Kanika Gupta, International Investment Agreements, 2015-2016: A Review of Trends and New Approaches
- Notable Developments in International Investment Arbitration Case Law: 2015-2016, Kendra Magraw
- Part Two
- Karen Remmer, The Outcomes of Investment Treaty Arbitration: A Reassessment
- Mark Feldman, Multinational Enterprises and Investment Treaties
- Shu XU, Yingying Wu & Henry Hailong Jia, Investment Law's Roots in Customary International Law: Why investment law and trade diverge regarding the Right to Regulate
- Jean-Michel Marcoux, Embedding the International Investment Regime: An assessment of UNCTAD's proposal for reform
- Eve Bain, When Some Are More Equal Than Others: The need for a more substantive conception of 'equality of the parties' in investment arbitration
- Facundo Pérez-Aznar, Federal States and Investment Arbitration
- Giorgio Sacerdoti, Has China Become 'Legally' a Market-Economy Country on 11 December 2016 under The WTO Antidumping Agreement? Analyzing an open question
- Chin Leg Lim, Fragrant Harbour and Oyster Mirror: Beijing's investment treaty policy toward Hong Kong and Macao
- Gus Van Harten & Dayna Nadine Scott, Investment Treaties and the Internal Vetting of Regulatory Proposals: A Case Study from Canada (Part 2)
- Ely Caetano Xavier Junior & José Augusto Fontoura Costa, Expropriation in Brazil's Cooperation and Facilitation Investment Agreements: A failed attempt to think outside the box
Saturday, January 6, 2018
Voon: Restricting Trade in Cultural Property: National Treasures at the Intersection between Cultural Heritage and International Trade Law
Culture and trade have a longstanding, complex relationship, covering a range of areas from digital products, to intangible cultural heritage, and the diversity of cultural expressions. Some of these areas have been subject to greater research than others. Each area requires an understanding with insights from culture, law and economics. One of the most basic interactions of culture and trade, namely through the illicit trade in cultural property, is typically assumed from a legal perspective to be addressed through the explicit exception in international trade law for measures imposed to protect national treasures. However, the definition of cultural property in the relevant treaty of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (‘UNESCO’) is not necessarily identical to the meaning of national treasures in the law of the World Trade Organization (‘WTO’). Moreover, the WTO Appellate Body has shown reluctance to apply non-WTO law in determining WTO disputes, such that a conflict between relevant UNESCO and WTO provisions or the corresponding domestic regulations might not necessarily be resolved as expected. This conclusion provides one example of the possible limitations of the current Appellate Body approach to broader international law and also suggests, with respect to cultural property, that closer alliance in treaty drafting may be required to ensure greater coherence between these regimes.
Sterio: Self-Determination and Secession Under International Law: The Cases of Kurdistan and Catalonia
Friday, January 5, 2018
- M. Buscemi, La codificazione della responsabilità delle organizzazioni internazionali alla prova dei fatti. Il caso della diffusione del colera a Haiti
- P. Acconci, Biofuel Production through Sustainable Investments from the Standpoint of the European Union
- S. Tonolo, L’evoluzione dei rapporti di filiazione e la riconoscibilità dello status da essi derivante tra ordine pubblico e superiore interesse del minore
- Note e Commenti
- D. Damascelli, La legge applicabile ai rapporti patrimoniali tra coniugi, uniti civilmente e conviventi di fatto nel diritto internazionale privato italiano ed europeo
- M. Fornari, Conflitto in Ucraina, orsi fantasiosi e programmi malevoli
- G. Pascale, Sull’obbligo degli Stati di registrare gli accordi internazionali presso il Segretariato generale delle Nazioni Unite: il caso Jadhav
- M. Lando, The Croatia/Slovenia Arbitral Award of 29 June 2017: Is there a Common Method for Delimiting All Maritime Zones under International Law?
- O. Vanin, L’incidenza dei diritti fondamentali in materia penale sulla ricostruzione dell’ordine pubblico internazionale: il caso del riconoscimento delle decisioni straniere attributive di punitive damages
- Emmanuel Gaillard, Introduction
- Boaz Moselle, Economics and the Meaning of ‘Investment’
- Stanimir Alexandrov, Is There a Legal Definition of ‘Investment’?
- Pierre-Marie Dupuy, About the Definition of an International Investment – The Requirement of a Contribution to the Economic Development of the Host State
- Stephen M. Schwebel, Does the Consent of the Contracting Parties Govern the Requirement of an ‘Investment’ as Specified in Article 25 of the ICSID Convention?
- Michael Pokinghorne & Sven-Michael Volkmer, The Legality Requirement in Investment Arbitration
- Margaret Clare Ryan, Is There a “Nationality” of Investment? Origin of Funds and Territorial Link to the Host State
- Megan Clifford & Christophe Douaire de Bondy, Determining State Intention when Negotiating and Entering into Investment Treaties – A Canadian Perspective /li>
- Roberto Echandi-Gurdián, Determining State Intention when Negotiating and Entering into Investment Treaties – A Developing Country Perspective
- Jae-Hoon Kim, Determining State Intention when Negotiating and Entering into Investment Treaties – A South Korean Perspective
- Doak Bishop & Margrete Stevens, Jurisdiction Ratione Personae – Is There a Standard Definition of an ‘Investor’ in Investment Treaties?
- Yas Banifatemi, Taking Into Account Control Under Denial of Benefits Clauses
- Geneviève Bastid-Burdeau, Defining the Respondent State in Investment Treaty Arbitration: Are There Specific Standards of Jurisdiction?
- Veijo Heiskanen, Entretemps: Is There a Distinction Between Jurisdiction Ratione Temporis and Substantive Protection Ratione Temporis?
- Zachary Douglas, When Does an Investment Treaty Claim Arise? An Excursus on the Anatomy of the Cause of Action
- Florian Kriener, Determining an International Watercourse: The Dispute of Chile v. Bolivia concerning the Silala
- Alamiro Andrés Alfaro Zepeda, Renewable Energy Support in the Light of the World Trade System. The Role of the WTO Agreements in Allowing the Development of Renewable Energy Projects
- Ignacio Odriozola, Sobre aislacionismo y excepcionalidad: Donald J. Trump, los Neoconservadores y el Derecho Internacional
- Comentarios de Jurisprudencia
- Francisco Lertora Pinto, The Application of the Rules on Interpretation of Treaties in the light of the Judgment on Preliminary Objections in the Case between Somalia v. Kenya
Thursday, January 4, 2018
- Michael Fuchs, Der Kampf gegen die Zerstörung von Kulturgut
- Federico Lenzerini, Intentional Destruction of Cultural Heritage, Crimes Against Humanity and Genocide: Towards an Evolutionary Interpretation of International Criminal Law
- Janet Blake, Protection of Intangible Cultural Heritage in the Event of Armed Conflict: An Imperative for Cultural Heritage, Humanitarian and Human Rights Law
- Thomas D. Grant, Autonomy and Self-determination
- Noelle Higgins & Mohamed Bada, The Destruction of Cultural Property in Timbuktu: Challenging the ICC War Crime Paradigm
- Mark V. Vlasic & Jeffrey Paul DeSousa, Combatting Blood Antiquities with Social Impact Television: How we Can Leverage Media to Combat Illicit Markets and Terrorism
- Fiona Macmillan, Heritage, Imperialism and Commodification: How the West Can Always Do It Best
- Marlene Horvat & Alja Lipavic Oštir, Vergessene sprachliche Welt im Westen von Goričko in Slowenien
Standing in the background of the global legal order are a range of what might be called “market principles” or “market givens”-collective presentations or beliefs about how markets work-which are treated as objective descriptions at a particular time and place. This Article argues that such market givens should be understood as a kind of “law in hiding,” shaping the policy space available to states and other actors and affecting global legal developments in important but unrecognized ways. Drawing on examples from global financial law, rules on capital mobility, and sovereign debt practices, I demonstrate how market principles can provide the real substantive content for conventionally recognized law, effectively counter official law, and act as powerful rules in the absence of clear legal standards. I further consider why “law” is a suitable categorization for these market principles, adopting a broad definition that derives from and pushes forward recent international legal scholarship. I contend that deliberately incorporating market principles into our understanding of the global legal order would be not only theoretically plausible but also productive, especially by expanding the field of legal work and activism and by raising important questions about lawmaking mechanisms, accountability, and norm coherence. I also suggest that market principles have thus far escaped attention from lawyers in part because of tendencies and assumptions in multiple variants of international legal scholarship itself.
- Harold Hongju Koh (Yale University), Inaugural Lecture: Schools of International Law in the United States of America
- Catherine Kessedjian (Université Paris II (Panthéon-Assas)), Cours général: Le tiers impartial et indépendant en droit international - Juge, arbitre, médiateur, conciliateur
- Jutta Brunnée (University of Toronto), Procedure and Substance in International Environmental Law
- Ryan Goodman (New York University), International Humanitarian Law and the Use of Lethal Force
- Makane Moïse Mbengue (Université de Genève), Les juridictions internationales et la science
- Jan Paulsson (University of Miami), Issues Arising from Findings of Denial of Justice
- Anne Peters (Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law), International Law and Animals
- Yuval Shany (Hebrew University of Jerusalem), The Extraterritorial Application of International Human Rights Law
In this article, the authors examine the contributions of Shakespearean legal thought to our understanding of core aspects of international dispute settlement. These aspects include: the sweeping role of masks in law and in the resolution of disputes; the construction and deconstruction of authority; the purpose of law in arousing desire and thus action; the limits in recognizing informal international law as law; the benefits of exaggeration; the problematic ambition of adjudicators; the key role of passion, against rationality, in understanding and dealing with international disputes; the decision-making resources to be found in logics of life; exercising measure in the enforcement and reach of law; remembering that law deals with human beings in our quest for law’s purity and systematic organization; resisting single-mindedness; the relevance of a dialectic form of proportionality; and the inescapable need to embrace uncertainty. The authors also discuss the general relevance of law & literature, and law & theatre, for all manner of legal professionals and review Shakespeare’s own legal background and thus his a priori ability to deal with legal matters.
Although appearing to be a relatively benign method of warfare when viewed from a distance, a close examination of maritime blockade unveils a sinister character that can, in cases where countries are highly reliant on imports of foodstuffs to feed their populations, prove incredibly deadly, particularly for the young and elderly. This book is unique in that it is the only contemporary book that is dedicated to the study of the law of maritime blockade in the context of modern humanitarian law.
Reviewing the development of blockade law over the past four centuries, The Law of Maritime Blockade provides a historical analysis of the law as it emerged, tracing its evolution through armed conflicts between 1684 and the present. Referring to the starvation caused by the blockade of Germany during World War I and the humanitarian crisis caused by the sanctions regime against Iraq (1991-2003), this book demonstrates that blockade can have extremely deleterious effects for vulnerable civilian populations. In this context the current law of blockade is examined, and found to be deficient in terms of its protection for civilians. Recognizing and advocating that blockade should remain as a valid and effective method of warfare, the book offers a template for a modern law of maritime blockade that incorporates many of the traditional aspects of the law, while reducing the possibilities that blockades can cause or exacerbate humanitarian disasters.
Wednesday, January 3, 2018
- Larry Catá Backer, The Human Rights Obligations of State-Owned Enterprises: Emerging Conceptual Structures and Principles in National and International Law and Policy
- Eric Blinderman & Myra Din, Hidden by Sovereign Shadows: Improving the Domestic Framework for Deterring State-Sponsored Cybercrime
- Magnus Hörnqvist,·Sovereign Display and Fiscal Techniques: Some Notes on Recent Strategies to Counteract Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing
- Nicholas Calcina Howson, China’s “Corporatization without Privatization” and the Late Nineteenth Century Roots of a Stubborn Path Dependency
- Rainer Hülsse, The Money Mule: Its Discursive Construction and the Implications
- Stephen Kim Park & Tim R. Samples, Tribunalizing Sovereign Debt: Argentina’s Experience with Investor–State Dispute Settlement
- Pammela S. Quinn, “Head-of-State–Owned Enterprise” Immunity
Mixing insights from critical sociology and legal scholarship, this article analyses the diverging professional interests at play in the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC) and examines how they affect the Chambers’ application of the law. The article shows that judicial interpretation in the ECCC is influenced by two non-legal factors. One is the overall shared interest of the competing groups of professionals occupying the Chambers that the Khmer Rouge leaders are tried before an internationalised rather than purely a domestic court. The other is the profound power battle between the international and the national constituents of the ECCC. In a broader context, the findings of the article point to a fundamental divide between an international market of criminal lawyers promoting a very specific idea of international criminal justice and the local context this market purports to cater to.
Amicus curiae participation in international courts and investment arbitration tribunals is increasing despite lack of clarity on the concept's nature, function and added value in international dispute settlement. The book examines the laws and practices of amicus curiae to assess the concept's status quo, and to determine if it meets the many expectations. Does it infuse proceedings with alternative views and the public interest? Does it increase the legitimacy and transparency of international dispute settlement, or the coherence of international law? Or does it derail the proceedings at the expense of the parties to advance its agenda? The book argues that neither the expectations nor the concerns attached to amicus curiae have materialized. It shows a hesitation by courts with a strong adversarial tradition to consider the views of non-parties, and argues that amicus curiae is not the best vehicle to present a public interest or increase legitimacy. However, it can improve judicial decisions and decision-making if regulated and used properly.
Most free trade agreements signed over the past two decades should more appropriately be called preferential trade and investment agreements (PTIA). Measured in words, investment provisions already occupy more space in the corpus of the 450 trade treaties notified to the World Trade Organization than any other issue area. This chapter introduces the main rules, issues and controversies raised by investment provisions in trade agreements. It provides an overview over investment commitments in trade agreements and sets out the wider policy context in favor of and against the inclusion of such investment rules. It then discusses normative issues raised by investment provisions in trade agreements in their substantive and procedural dimension as well as in relation to their interaction with parallel and often overlapping bilateral investment treaties (BITs). Even though the future inclusion of investment rules in trade agreements, at least in some parts of the world, is uncertain, PTIAs will likely remain a central venue for reforming and updating investment rules.
Tuesday, January 2, 2018
- Lauren Benton & Adam Clulow, Introduction: The Long, Strange History of Protection
- Luca Scholz, Protection and the Channelling of Movement on the Margins of the Holy Roman Empire
- Karen B. Graubart, Containing Law within the Walls: The Protection of Customary Law in Santiago del Cercado, Peru
- Lauren Benton & Adam Clulow, Webs of Protection and Interpolity Zones in the Early Modern World
- Gabriel de Avilez Rocha, Plunder and Profit in the Name of Protection: Royal Iberian Armadas in the Early Atlantic
- Annabel Brett, Protection as a Political Concept in English Political Thought, 1603–51
- Philip J. Stern, Limited Liabilities: The Corporation and the Political Economy of Protection in the British Empire
- David L. Howell, From Nurturing to Protection in Nineteenth-Century Japan
- Bain Attwood, Protection Claims: The British, Maori and the Islands of New Zealand, 1800–40
- Lisa Ford, Protecting the Peace on the Edges of Empire: Commissioners of Crown Lands in New South Wales
- Inge Van Hulle, British Protection, Extraterritoriality and Protectorates in West Africa, 1807–80
- Ahmad Amara, Between Imperial Subjects and Political Partners: Bedouin Borders and Protection in Ottoman Palestine, 1900–17
- Moses E. Ochonu, Protection by Proxy: The Hausa-Fulani as Agents of British Colonial Rule in Northern Nigeria
- Barnaby Crowcroft, The Problem of Protectorates in an Age of Decolonisation: Britain and West Africa, 1955–60
In Europe and the United States, it is common for public discourse to frame Russia as a state 'outside' international law. However, when we consider the evolution of international law since 1800, we see that Russia was both the source and the object of many international juridical innovations. Perhaps most famously, the 1899 Hague Convention on the Laws of War was initiated by Nicholas II and his ministers, while émigré Russians were central to the evolution of legal doctrines regarding statelessness after 1918. At the same time, refugees from the Soviet Union were the object of the first attempts at an international passport system in the interwar period. Soviet lawyers and diplomats consistently engaged with international law after 1945, helping to shape crucial articles in the Nuremberg Charter and proposing influential formulations of economic and social rights in the early United Nations. Meanwhile, Soviet international legal scholars elaborated theories of international law that attempted an (often uneasy) reconciliation of Marxist scepticism of law as a tool of imperialism and a belief that in the era of 'peaceful coexistence' international law could further both Soviet foreign policy goals and the struggle against global capitalism.
As the above brief summary demonstrates, a global history of international law cannot be told without Russia. This workshop will gather both senior and early career scholars from UK, Russian, US, and European academia to reconsider the role of Russia and the Soviet Union in the history of international law. Uniting specialists in the histories of international criminal law, international humanitarian law, private international law, the international law of intellectual property, human rights, and global migration management, the workshop will ask whether there was a distinctive imperial Russian or Soviet approach to international law and if so, how did changed, developed and evolved over the past two hundred years.
Confirmed speakers include: Vladislav Starzhenetskii (Higher School of Economics Moscow), Peter Holquist (University of Pennsylvania), Tatiana Borisova (Higher School of Economics St Petersburg), Bill Bowring (Birkbeck), Kristy Ironside (McGill), Lauri Malksoo (Tartu), Greg Afinogenov (Georgetown), Julia Leikin (Exeter), Valentyna Polunina (Munich), Franziska Exeler (Berlin), Devika Hovell (LSE) and more.
Roth-Isigkeit: The Blinkered Discipline? – Martti Koskenniemi and Interdisciplinary Approaches to International Law
This article is concerned with the debate about interdisciplinary methods in international law, in particular the turn to International Relations. It finds the historical critique of Martti Koskenniemi grounded in a more methodological issue: the turn toward a redefinition of norm properties impedes on the critical discursive quality of law. Shaping this historical critique into a research question that allows for meaningful engagement, the article discusses Koskenniemi’s charges drawing on recent constructivist scholarship. Giving an account of what it means to be ‘obliged’ to obey the law, this article defends the coherence of Koskenniemi’s position and suggests that we should take the critique of the interdisciplinary project between law and International Relations seriously. While it agrees that a significant part of the discourse fails to appreciate the particularities of the law, it suggests that understanding legal obligations requires taking the institutional autonomy of the law into account. Respecting this autonomy, in turn, points to a multi- instead of an interdisciplinary project. The reflexive formalist conception of the law that this article advocates captures the obligating nature of the law, independent of the normative content of particular rules.
Recent economic treaties contain references to labour standards with increasing specificity and stringent enforcement mechanisms. However, despite evidence for continuing massive violations of workers’ rights, forced and child labour, these mechanisms are very seldom used. This article focuses on enforcement in respect of gross and continuing violations of so-called peremptory standards i.e. those generally recognised as norms from which no derogation is permitted (cogent law or ius cogens). It looks at a number of new trade and investment agreements, and conditional tariff preferences. Goods and services produced in violation of clearly peremptory standards not only raise the question of importer involvement. These violations may also cause trade distortions against which importers may take countermeasures, sometimes explicitly in cooperation with non-state stakeholders. Sanctions may consist, for instance, in suspensions of tariff concessions or outright import bans in response to labour standard violations creating trade and investment conditions.
A possible barrier against sanctions are the non-discrimination rules enshrined in all economic treaties which seem to overprotect policy space and hence to also prevent, for instance, countermeasures against social dumping. This is particularly true for the rules framework of the World Trade Organization (WTO) which has no social clauses, but also for economic treaties with few stringent commitments, and a dearth of case law. Adjudicators in litigation cases would then have to decide whether ius cogens does take precedence over WTO and other economic treaty rules. Even though this has never occurred, this article argues that when trade measures are taken against violations of cogent law, they will withstand legal challenges better than would appear from looking at comparable WTO cases involving public morals. At the same time, producers respecting these international bottom lines for employment policies can defend their treaty-enshrined market access rights against unilateral standard setting and protectionism in disguise.
It is too early to contend that economic treaty implementation has become more holistic by adding social and environmental dumping to the list of trade distortions subject to trade remedies. Nonetheless, this article concludes that some peremptory labour standards have become easier to enforce. International Economic Treaty Law still protects against non-trade distorting sanctions. But the new venues described here can limit the race to the bottom, and contribute to sustainable employment even in countries needing ‘more’ rather than ‘better’ jobs.
Monday, January 1, 2018
Scholars Workshop: Challenges to Global Constitutionalism
The editorial team of Global Constitutionalism, in conjunction with PluriCourts, will be organizing a workshop from July 4th to 6th at the WZB Berlin Social Science Center. As part of this workshop we will be running special sessions for scholars interested in publishing in the field of global constitutionalism. Each selected scholar will be invited to present a paper to the workshop. They will also receive extensive feedback on their papers from senior scholars. The expectation is that selected papers, after revisions based upon feedback at the workshop, would be submitted to Global Constitutionalism for peer review with the possibility of publication. This is intended as an opportunity for researchers to receive mentorship in the craft of publishing in peer reviewed journals. Editors from the journal will work closely with the selected scholars throughout the process.
We invite paper proposals on any topic related to global constitutionalism. We define global constitutionalism as the foundations, limitations, and contestations of the principles and norms of political order and their dynamics over time on a global scale. One of the goals of the workshop is to advance global constitutionalism as an interdisciplinary field. Another is to promote the creation of networks of scholars working in similar fields. Thus, we invite submissions from a broad range of disciplines including International Law, Political Science, International Relations, Comparative Constitutional Law, Comparative Politics, Political Theory and Philosophy.
Possible topics include but are not limited to
In order to apply, please submit a paper abstract of up to 400 words and an academic biography of 150 words at email@example.com.
- International courts and contemporary challenges to international courts
- Human rights
- The rule of law from a global perspective
- Contemporary challenges to democracy
- The legitimate role of the judiciary in the global order
- Contestation of global norms
- Global justice
- Transnational democracy
- Post-colonial critiques of global constitutionalism
- Non-western approaches to global constitutionalism
- The implications of the rise of populist and nationalist movements for global constitutionalism
- Global constitutionalism and cultural diversity
The deadline for submissions is February 23rd, 2018.
If you have any questions, please contact: firstname.lastname@example.org.
Most transnational criminal law treaties do not benefit from any sort of monitoring mechanism that would allow states parties or other actors to assess their domestic implementation and enforcement. There are a few exceptions, as treaties and other instruments concerning drug control, corruption, and money laundering are indeed accompanied by monitoring mechanisms. But the general pattern across the field of transnational criminal law is clear. This article explores some possible explanations for why transnational criminal law treaties generally lack monitoring mechanisms, and it also highlights the significance of this absence from a compliance perspective. The article advocates not for the creation of more treaty monitoring bodies in the field of transnational criminal law, but instead seeks to explain their relative absence and its significance for the field. The argument, therefore, is not that monitoring bodies are necessarily desirable and ought to exist in greater numbers in this field, but rather that the absence of these bodies obscures information about compliance and impedes research about what these treaties are actually accomplishing. The current state of treaty monitoring in the field of transnational criminal law is significant because of the extent of what we do not know about the effects of these instruments.