Sunday, September 20, 2020
- October 9, 2020: Radhika Coomaraswamy, Women and Children and the Transformation of International Law (Eli Lauterpacht Lecture)
- October 16, 2020: Alexandre Kedar (Univ. of Haifa), Emptied Lands: Bedouin rights, dispossession and resistance in the Negev
- October 23, 2020: Philippa Webb (King’s College London), The Right to a Fair Trial in International Law: Shining a light on a critical human rights protection
- October 30, 2020: Monica Hakimi (Univ. of Michigan), Two Visions of the International Rule of Law
- November 6, 2020: Helen Frowe (Univ. of Stockholm), Implementing the 1954 Hague Convention: Conflicts between People and Heritage
- November 13, 2020: Nehal Bhuta (Univ. of Edinburgh), The State Theory of Grotius
- November 20, 2020: Andrew Serdy (Univ. of Southampton), Brexit and Fisheries: International Law Dimensions of the 2018 White Paper and Current Fisheries Bill (CILJ-LCIL Annual Lecture)
- November 27, 2020: Prabhash Ranjan (South Asian Univ.) India and International Investment Law: Refusal, Acceptance, Backlash
Call for Papers: International Organizations Workshop
Friday, 19 February 2021
The International Organizations Interest Group (IOIG) of the American Society of International Law (ASIL) welcomes abstract submissions for its biennial work-in-progress workshop, to be held on Friday, 19 February 2021 virtually.
Abstracts must relate to the study of international organizations (broadly defined). We particularly encourage submissions on one of the following topics: (1) international law and climate change; (2) global health governance.
To submit an abstract, please email the Co-Chairs and Vice-Chair Christie Edwards, Melinda Kuritzky and Ayelet Berman at IOIG@asil.org by midnight on 1 November 2020.
Authors whose abstracts have been selected will be notified by 1 December 2020. Papers are due no later than 5 February 2021 and will be pre-circulated. Papers should not yet be published.
Each paper will be assigned a commentator, who will introduce the paper followed by a discussion with workshop participants. The workshop will be conducted on the assumption that everyone has read all of the papers in advance. Attendance will be open.
The workshop will be held virtually and Zoom details will be provided in advance of the event.
Saturday, September 19, 2020
Economics and security seem increasingly intertwined. Citing national security, states subject foreign investments to new scrutiny, even unwinding mergers like the purchase of Grindr or the creation of TikTok. The provision of 5G has become a diplomatic battleground – Huawei at its center. Meanwhile, states invoke national security to excuse trade wars. The U.S. invoked the GATT national security exception to impose steel and aluminum tariffs, threatening more on automotive parts. Russia invoked that provision to justify its blockade of Ukraine, as did Saudi Arabia and the UAE to excuse theirs of Qatar. And with the spread of COVID-19, states are invoking national security to scrutinize supply lines. Multiplying daily, such stories lead some observers to dub the era one of geoeconomics.
Nonetheless, these developments remain difficult to judge and the relationship between economics and national security confused and slippery. Neither term is self-defining, and the same activities can be defined as either or both. The essay seeks clarity in the deeper logic of these labels, revealing a fundamental choice between the logics of markets and of state. Whether invoked to “secure” borders, privacy, health, the environment, or jobs, “national security” is a claim about the proper location of policymaking. Appeals to economics, with their emphasis on global welfare and global person-to-person relationships, are as well. The logics driving the current economics-national security dynamic represent paradigmatic, competing models for organizing individuals with different normative justifications and concerns. Resolving disputes, this essay argues, requires recognizing these root choices.
Friday, September 18, 2020
This illuminating book explores the nature of international humanitarian law (IHL), so doing by asking whether it should be seen as a permissive or a restrictive regime. An experienced lawyer in the field, Anne Quintin offers an in-depth expert analysis of this highly debated topic.
In the eyes of many, the primary purpose of IHL is to impose restrictions on the actions of parties in armed conflicts, in order to protect victims. But IHL is also increasingly cited as an authority in permitting conduct that would be deemed unlawful in peacetime, for instance some cases of internment or targeting of persons. Considering both international and non-international armed conflicts, Quintin carefully and astutely peels away the layers of this debate, revealing the true nature of IHL and concluding that whilst IHL initially developed as a restrictive regime composed of prohibitions and prescriptions, it nevertheless contains within it rare permissions that allow states to act.
Utilising a scientific methodology to offer concrete and realistic outcomes, whilst couching differing interpretations of IHL in wider debates surrounding the nature of international law, this book will be of interest to all academics, practitioners and policy-makers in the field of international humanitarian law. Its analysis of how people are effectively protected during an armed conflict will also be beneficial for the wider humanitarian community.
Thursday, September 17, 2020
Joshi: Force Majeure under the ILC Draft Articles on State Responsibility: Assessing its Viability Against COVID-19 Claims
- Marianne L. Wade, True EU citizenship as a precursor to genuine criminal justice in Europe: an analysis of EU citizenship as it relates to a sustainable area of freedom, security and justice
- Patricia Hobbs, The Catalysing Effect of the Rome Statute in Africa: Positive Complementarity and Self-Referrals
- Maartje Weerdesteijn & Barbora Holá, “Tool in the R2P Toolbox”? Analysing the Role of the International Criminal Court in the Three Pillars of the Responsibility to Protect
- Cristina Fernández-Pacheco Estrada, On the Prosecution of “Stolen Babies” Cases in Spain
Sebode: Peace-Keeping der 5. Generation? Die Afghanistanmission der Vereinten Nationen und ihre Bedeutung für deren Friedenssicherungspraxis
Über ein Jahrzehnt währte die Afghanistanmission der Vereinten Nationen, bestehend aus den Missionskomponenten ISAF und UNAMA. Sie hat die Praxis des sog. Peace-Keeping der Vereinten Nationen maßgeblich geprägt. Ana Catarina Sebode bettet die Mission in den Kontext des Peace-Keeping ein und zeigt ihre Bedeutung für die Rolle des Sicherheitsrates im Friedenssicherungssystem der Charta der Vereinten Nationen auf. Sie beantwortet die Frage, ob die Afghanistanmission im bestehenden völkerrechtlich etablierten Generationengefüge des Peace-Keeping aufgeht, oder ob sie Teil einer neuen Generation der Friedenssicherung ist. Das besondere Engagement der NATO, die von 2003 bis 2014 die Führung über die militärische Missionskomponente ISAF innehatte, wird dabei kritisch gewürdigt. So entsteht ein Gesamtbild der Vor- und Nachteile des arbeitsteiligen Peace-Keeping zwischen den Vereinten Nationen, ihren Mitgliedstaaten und regionalen Partnern wie der NATO im kriegsgeplagten Land am Hindukusch.
Wednesday, September 16, 2020
- Special Issue: Trade in Services: A Holistic Solution to New-Found Issues in Trade Law?
- Rudolf Adlung, The GATS – A Sleeping Beauty?
- Petros C. Mavroidis, And You Put the Load Right on Me: Digital Taxes, Tax Discrimination and Trade in Services
- Andreas Maurer, Overview on available trade statistics and tools to assess Trade in Services
- Markus Krajewski, The
- Hildegunn Kyvik Nordas, Telecommunications: The Underlying Transport Means for Services Exports
- Weiwei Zhang, Blockchain: Replacing, Eliminating and Creating Trade in Services
- Mira Burri, Trade in Services Regulation in the Data-Driven Economy
- Pralok Gupta, Sunayana Sasmal, The Curious Case of Trade Facilitation in Services: Rejected Multilaterally but Adopted Bilaterally and Plurilaterally
- Ben Shepherd, Quantifying Trade Law: New Perspectives on the Services Trade Restrictiveness Index
- Sunanda Tewari & Prakhar Bhardwaj, Situating India’s Mode 4 Commitments in Geopolitics and Political Economy: The Case of GATS 2000 Proposal, India-Singapore CECA and India-ASEAN TiS
New Issue: Military Law and the Law of War Review / Revue de Droit Militaire et de Droit de la Guerre
- Marine Wéry, La jurisprudence relative à la clause d’exclusion prévue à l’article 141bis du Code pénal: la difficile application du droit international humanitaire par les cours et tribunaux belges
- Julien Tropini, La rupture de l’équilibre juridique de l’article 141bis du code pénal belge par la jurisprudence sur les « combattants étrangers » : La remise en cause de la répartition des compétences entre le droit international humanitaire et le droit antiterroriste
- Matteo Tondini, Espionage and International Law in the Age of Permanent Competition
- Hanna Bourgeois & Jean-Emmanuel Perrin, The Use of Force for Mission Accomplishment: A Pitfall in Contemporary Operations?
- Miek Lamaire, Virginie Lambotte, Sarah Letellier, Celine Van Holsbeeck & Hélène Paquay, Report of the Second ‘Silent leges inter arma?’ International Conference held in Bruges from 19 to 21 September 2018
- Tobias Vestner, Targeting Private Military and Security Companies
- Samuel C. Duckett White, A Soldier by Any Other Name: A Reappraisal Of The ‘Citizen in Uniform’ Doctrine in Light of Part IIIAAA of the Defence Act 1903 (Cth)
- Jens Claerman, Guarding the vigilant guardian: A legal perspective on Belgium’s domestic deployment of the armed forces
- Tokwene A Ndjokou Eloubwe Ilate, Le droit pénal militaire camerounais : combat inégalitaire entre normalisation et spécialisation d'un droit exceptionnel
- Diletta Marchesi, Celine Van Holsbeeck & Hélène Paquay, Report of the Third ‘Silent Leges Inter Arma?’ International Conference held in Bruges from 18 to 20 September 2019
Numerous governments have responded to the COVID-19 pandemic by declaring states of emergency and restricting individual liberties protected by international law. However, many more states have adopted emergency measures than have formally derogated from human rights conventions. This Editorial Comment critically evaluates the existing system of human rights treaty derogations. It analyzes the system’s many problems, identifies recent developments that have exacerbated these problems, and proposes a range of reforms in five areas—embeddedness, engagement, information, timing, and scope.
Tuesday, September 15, 2020
Kagiaros & Tzevelekos: The Importance of State Practice in the Shaping of International Standards Pertaining to the Clash between Free Speech and the Banning of Negationism: The Contribution of the Greek Legal Order
Considering the tension between freedom of expression and the banning/punishing of historical negationism as a means to fight hate speech, the paper makes three interconnected points. First, it identifies a number of international legal authorities calling on states to enact legislation at the domestic level to prohibit and, in particular, to prosecute denialism. This movement is thinner at the global level, but more tangible within Europe. The authorities at issue acknowledge the importance of FoE, but they offer no clear guidance as to the balance that should be maintained between it and the prohibition/punishment of denialism, or as to the limits of FoE more generally. Moreover, these authorities contain no fully shaped and clear criteria as to how to draw a satisfying distinction between legitimate debate and disagreement, on the one hand, and negationism amounting to hate speech that shall constitute a criminal offence, on the other. Second, the paper argues that establishing such limits and balances involves a value judgment. It is not an objective, “dry” technical legal exercise. In this respect, analysis in the study highlights certain criteria established by the European Court of Human Rights in historical negationism cases arguing that, even though they may be useful, they are not adequate, in the sense that these criteria do not suffice to avoid shifting to a subjective appraisal (by means of stricto sensu proportionality or by declaring certain speech as abusive) based upon the personal values, ideals, preferences and the ideological predispositions of judges. Third, the key argument advanced in this note is that the combination of the previous two points invites us to recognise the weight of state practice in the shaping of international standards in an area (namely the balance between FoE and the prohibition/criminalisation of denialism, particularly as a form of hate speech) that is far less settled than one may think or than what the exigencies of legal certainty, particularly in areas like human rights and especially in criminal law, require. In this respect, the paper outlines the importance of state practice and how, from a technical point of view, such practice may help to shape standards, to give the example of the Greek legal order, briefly discussing relatively recent relevant legislative and judicial practice that allows learning certain lessons regarding, inter alia, the dangers of abusive prosecution of free speech on the basis of defective legislation criminalising denialism.
- September 30, 2020: The UN @75 – challenges for the new quarter-century
- October 14, 2020: International law and rival governments
- October 28, 2020: World Trade Governance: 2020 and beyond
- November 11, 2020: Justice for Syria? Roundtable discussion on current developments
- November 25, 2020: Roundtable on the ‘Renaissance Dam’ dispute: the state of transboundary water law in the face of climate insecurity
Call for Submissions: Military Law and the Law of War Review / Revue de Droit Militaire et de Droit de la Guerre
Now accepting submissions for Volume 59
The Editorial Board of The Military Law and the Law of War Review / Revue de Droit Militaire et de Droit de la Guerre (MLLWR) is pleased to invite submissions for the upcoming volume in 2021.
The Review's editorial board welcomes submissions that come within the broader scope of the Review, including military law, law of armed conflict, law on the use of force, as well as international criminal law and human rights law (inasmuch as related to situations of armed conflict).
For vol 59 issue 1, the deadline for submission is 15 November 2020. Submissions after this date will be considered for volume 59 issue 2. Submissions should be sent to email@example.com and will be subject to double-blind peer review.
Articles should normally not be longer than 15,000 words (footnotes included), although longer pieces may exceptionally be considered.
Inquiries as to whether a possible submission comes within the scope of the Review can be sent to the above mentioned email address.
Bartels, van den Boogaard, Ducheine, Pouw, & Voetelink: Military Operations and the Notion of Control Under International Law: Liber Amicorum Terry D. Gill
This book is a tribute to the work of Professor Terry Gill, offered to him by friends and colleagues who are also academics and/or practitioners in the field of International Law of Military Operations (ILMO).
ILMO is a distinct sub-discipline within public international law and domestic public law, covering all domains of military operations: land, sea, air and (cyber)space. As such, ILMO includes elements of other branches of public international law, such as international humanitarian law, human rights law, the law on the use of force, the law of the sea, the law of State responsibility, arms control law and the law of international organisations. Importantly, as a hybrid field of law, ILMO covers the legal basis for military deployment both nationally and internationally, as well as the subsequent international legal regimes applicable to the forces (once deployed) and the domestic administrative and constitutional issues related to the relevant forces.
Control is a central notion of ILMO and is the leading theme of this book. The contributions in this book reflect the variety of legal frameworks applicable to military operations and offer an insightful view into the various legal and factual roles of control. The legal notion of control is considered, inter alia, in relation to restraints in the decision to deploy military forces and the legal basis for doing so. The impact of control is also discussed in relation to State and command responsibility and in different situations, including during peace operations, occupation and other situations of armed conflict. Additionally, control is considered over the armed forces themselves, over detainees, migrants at sea and over the type or scale of force used in military operations, through targeting rules or rules of engagement. Furthermore, the book contains several discussions of control in the case law of international courts, within arms control law, weapons law and in the context of autonomous weapons systems.
Monday, September 14, 2020
- M. Katsivela, Les moyens de défense de la responsabilité extracontractuelle du fait personnel (droit civil québécois) et de la responsabilité délictuelle en common law au canada : une étude en droit comparé
- T. Garcia, Les activités non liées au domaine militaire des entreprises militaires et de sécurité privées
- M.L. Ndiffo Kemetio, La situation du droit international et du droit communautaire dans les constitutions des États d’Afrique subsaharienne francophone
- J.M. Bikoro, L’initiative constitutionnelle dans le nouveau constitutionnalisme des États d’Afrique noire francophone
Lifshits & Ponamorenko: International Financial Standards in the Global Legal Order and in EU and EAEU Law
The global financial crisis strengthened the role of international financial standards in global commercial architecture and outlined the specialization of standard-setting bodies. These standards may be transposed in international agreements or be implemented in the legal order of states and state communities (such as the European Union (EU) and the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU)). The development of standard-setting bodies and the evolving process of soft law rulemaking have led to the establishment of a specific mechanism, which may be called “the soft law mechanism.” The authors argue that this mechanism includes several components: normative (IFS), institutional (SSBs), controlling (peer reviews), and assuring (implementing incentives) components. However, despite the rising influence of international financial standards, a strict boundary between soft and hard law should be established. This article outlines these boundaries and justifies the use of the term soft law. In post-crisis global financial regulation, the role of soft law has increased not only in the financial market but also in the field of monetary regulation. Along with the traditional mechanisms of financial support from the International Monetary Fund (IMF), states may use alternative bilateral and regional mechanisms. At the level of integration associations, soft law manifests in different ways. In the EU, despite the expansion of its field of action, soft law is purely an auxiliary element of the Union’s legal system. In EAEU law, the mechanism of soft-law regulation can be considered promising, given the peculiarities of the integration model.
Private social media companies regulate much more speech than any government does, and their platforms are being used to bring about serious harm. Yet companies govern largely on their own, and in secret.
To correct this, advocates have proposed that companies follow international human-rights law. That law–by far the world’s best-known rules for governing speech–could improve regulation itself, and would also allow for better transparency and oversight on behalf of billions of people who use social media.
This paper argues that for this to work, the law must first be interpreted to clarify how (and whether) each of its provisions are suited to this new purpose. For example, the law provides that speech may be restricted to protect national security, as one of only five permissible bases for limiting speech. Governments, for which international law was written, may regulate on that basis, but not private companies which have no national security to protect.
To fill some of the gap, the paper explains and interprets the most relevant provisions of international human-rights law–Articles 19 and 20 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which pertain to freedom of expression–for use by social media companies, in novel detail.
Giorgetti & Pollack: Beyond Fragmentation: Cross-Fertilization, Cooperation and Competition Among International Courts and Tribunals - Introduction
The international community in the 21st century is more legalized and more judicialized than at any other period in history. Yet today’s international legal order is also fragmented, leading to concerns about the proliferation of specialized legal regimes, adjudicated by an uncoordinated assemblage of international courts and tribunals. In this volume, we and our fellow authors explore international judicial cooperation, competition, and cross-fertilization “beyond fragmentation.” Existing scholarship on international legal fragmentation, we suggest, has moved through three phases in recent decades. In the first phase, practitioners and scholars reacted with alarm to the judicial proliferation of the post-Cold War years, which they feared would create systemic problems of overlapping and contested jurisdiction, as well as conflicting and divergent interpretations of law. Following this period of “postmodern anxieties,” the new century saw the pendulum swing towards towards a second, more optimistic school of thought, which empirically identified (and normatively championed) a series of techniques whereby international judges could “manage” fragmentation through dialogue and cross-fertilization, producing convergence and unity in international law. Most recently, in the opening salvos of a third wave, skeptics have questioned the management account, pointing to the mixed motives of international judges and the limits of cross-fertilization.
Building on this debate, this volume interrogates the record of cross-fertilization, cooperation, and competition among international courts and tribunals. In doing so, we address three important themes. First, we examine the phenomenon of cross-fertilization in the area of procedural law, finding that that courts do indeed learn and borrow from each other in establishing procedural rules, which show signs of convergence. Second, we examine the more complex experience of cross-fertilization in substantive international law, where we find greater variation among international courts and tribunals in their willingness to refer and defer to others. Third and finally, we investigate the agents of cross-fertilization, including not only judges but also international governmental organizations, international court registries and arbitral secretariats, member states, litigants, and counsel. Each of these actors, we suggest, possesses mixed motives, weighing their (perhaps weak) interest in the coherence of the international legal system against their (perhaps dominant) interests in their own regional or substantive legal order or values, or indeed with simply winning their current dispute. The picture that emerges is one in which international judicial cross-fertilization is both real and important, but also highly variable and asymmetric across courts and issue-areas, and likely to remain so.
Sunday, September 13, 2020
Who should bear the costs of the COVID-19 pandemic? While multilateral institutions are beginning to consider how to distribute them, President Trump and others have suggested suing China for damages. This “lawsuit-approach” draws on a deep-seated conception of international law: states have a sovereign “right to be left alone;” the only limit to this right is a correlative duty to avoid harming others. Those harmed can, then, sue for damages. In this view, who should pay for the costs of the pandemic (and how much) is not a normative question about justice, but rather one about factual causes and actuarial calculations.
In this Article, we explore this lawsuit-approach; not for its legal viability, but for its conceptual implications. We exhaustively and critically assess the doctrinal discussion on China’s international liability for the pandemic, while also pointing at deep theoretical implications that this novel crisis has for international law more broadly.
Specifically, we make three novel claims. The first is that the arguments of the lawsuit-approach (based on the International Health Regulations and on the no-harm principle), when meticulously analyzed under existing international norms, run into unexpected obstacles. On top of the jurisdictional and evidentiary hurdles noted by many, we argue that the lawsuit-approach faces difficulties stemming from the lack of deep normative agreement, in international law, on how to deal with unprecedented challenges such as COVID-19.
Our second claim draws on the first. Given the need to fill these normative voids, the lawsuit-approach is led back to the global conversation about the allocation of losses it carefully tries to avoid. This normative dependence cannot be spared by analogy with domestic law. Domestic law builds upon thick cultural understandings that fill empty legal concepts (such as “harm” or “causation”) making them readily operative. International law, however, lacks an equivalent thick culture to fill these voids, and therefore requires complex reconstructions of what states owe to one another.
Our third claim further extends the foregoing reasoning. The lawsuit-approach relies on international law as a means to achieve “corrective justice,” while denying its implications for “distributive justice.” We argue that this is conceptually impossible: The general understandings we need to allocate responsibility for the pandemic are inherently distributive: To decide, an adjudicator would need to rely on a pretorian rule detailing how much effort and resources countries should dedicate to avoiding harm to other countries. That rule is conceptually distributive, independently of its content. The misfortunes derived from the pandemic are not conceptually different from the misfortunes of poverty, financial breakdowns, or climate change. Those going down the road of the lawsuit-approach might be unpleasantly surprised of where that road may lead them.
Saturday, September 12, 2020
Friday, September 11, 2020
- Special Section: Sexual Violence in the Wrong(ed) Bodies: Moving Beyond the Gender Binary in International Relations
- Paula Drumond, Elizabeth Mesok, & Marysia Zalewski, Sexual violence in the wrong(ed) bodies: moving beyond the gender binary in International Relations
- Chris Dolan, Maria Eriksson Baaz, & Maria Stern, What is sexual about conflict-related sexual violence? Stories from men and women survivors
- Philipp Schulz & Heleen Touquet, Queering explanatory frameworks for wartime sexual violence against men
- Billy Holzberg & Priya Raghavan, Securing the nation through the politics of sexual violence: tracing resonances between Delhi and Cologne
- Paul Kirby, Sexual violence in the border zone: the EU, the Women, Peace and Security agenda and carceral humanitarianism in Libya
- Sara E Davies & Clare Wenham, Why the COVID-19 response needs International Relations
- Simon Reich & Peter Dombrowski, The consequence of COVID-19: how the United States moved from security provider to security consumer
- Carla Norrlöf, Is COVID-19 the end of US hegemony? Public bads, leadership failures and monetary hegemony
- Michael Chertoff, Patrick Bury, & Daniela Richterova, Bytes not waves: information communication technologies, global jihadism and counterterrorism
- Kai Liao, The future war studies community and the Chinese revolution in military affairs
- Marwa Daoudy, Water weaponization in the Syrian conflict: strategies of domination and cooperation
- Ann-Kathrin Rothermel, Global–local dynamics in anti-feminist discourses: an analysis of Indian, Russian and US online communities
- Kjølv Egeland, Who stole disarmament? History and nostalgia in nuclear abolition discourse
- The Trade Impacts of Fossil Fuel Subsidies
- Tom Moerenhout, Trade Impacts of Fossil Fuel Subsidies
- Elizabeth L. Roos & Philip D. Adams, The Economy-Wide Impact of Subsidy Reform: A CGE Analysis
- Manal Shehabi, Is Energy Subsidy Reform in an Oil-Exporting Small Economy Beneficial to Trade? Illustrations from Kuwait
- Joerg Beutel, Analysing Fuel Subsidy and Taxation Reform with Input–Output Data
- Habtamu Fuje, Transportation Cost, Fuel Subsidies, and Commodity Prices
- Ronald P. Steenblik & Mark Mateo, Western Europe's Long Retreat from Coal and Implications for Energy Trade
Thursday, September 10, 2020
Alter: Contracting v. Multilateralism in Global Economic Governance: Before, during and after the WTO
This chapter, for a book focused on the future of the World Trade Organization, discusses three ways that global economic law and corresponding transnational dispute settlement systems have been constructed across time: via private contracting, inter-state contracting, or through principled multilateralism. Offering a global capitalism and law perspective, the chapter compares the ideal type of each model to the historical practice, identifying what multilateralism provides that contracting does not. The larger argument is that all three modes of law-making should and will co-exist. We should therefore be thinking about which mode of law-making is best for a particular issue or context, and how we might use the other modes to address problems that arise in each approach. The chapter then considers how contracting can supplant the WTO, and the tradeoffs associated with such an outcome.
Wednesday, September 9, 2020
Tuesday, September 8, 2020
- Eduardo Savarese, ‘What Is Done, Is Done’: come non espugnare la filiazione internazionalprivatistica, ma armonizzarla con i diritti umani
- Gabriele Della Morte, Quanto Immuni? Luci, ombre e penombre dell’app selezionata dal Governo italiano
- Francesca Maoli, Giovanni Sciaccaluga, Sara Lembrechts, Tine Van Hof, Laura Carpaneto, Thalia Kruger, & Wouter Vandenhole, Understanding the Best Interests of the Child in EU Child Abduction Proceedings: Perspectives from the Case Law
- CRC and Its Friends: 30 Years of Outsourcing Interpretation of Children’s Rights
- Giacomo Biagioni, The Convention on the Rights of the Child and the EU Judicial Cooperation in Civil Matters
- Brigida Varesano, The Controversial Condition of Child-Soldiers: The Quest For Consistency Through the Lens of the Child’s Best Interests in the Light of the Convention on the Rights of the Child
- La riforma della prescrizione: diritto costituzionale, diritto penale e Convenzione europea dei diritti umani
- Margherita Cassano, Introduzione
- Marcello Cecchetti, Simone Pajno, Il problema della prescrizione penale alla prova del costituzionalismo ‘per principi’
- Gian Luigi Gatta, Prescrizione del reato, ragionevole durata del processo e tutela dei beni giuridici
- Maria Luisa Padelletti, La riforma della prescrizione tra diritti dell’imputato e della persona offesa: riflessioni dal punto di vista della Convenzione europea dei diritti dell’uomo
- Marcello Di Filippo, Walking the (Barbed) Wire of the Prohibition of Collective Expulsion: An Assessment of the Strasbourg Case Law
- Maria Ferrara, L’ordinanza cautelare della Corte internazionale di giustizia nel caso Gambia c. Myanmar: la prova dell’intento genocidario tra giurisdizione prima facie e test di plausibilità della pretesa
- Pasquale Pirrone, I primi pareri pregiudiziali della Corte europea dei diritti umani: aspetti procedurali
- Gianpaolo Maria Ruotolo, A Little Hate, Worldwide! Di libertà d’opinione e discorsi politici d’odio on-line nel diritto internazionale ed europeo
- Giovanni Zarra, Sulla compatibilità di misure restrittive, adottate in Italia e nella Regione Campania per contenere l’epidemia di COVID-19, con gli articoli 5 e 2 del Protocollo n. 4 CEDU
Monday, September 7, 2020
The interplay between peace and justice plays an important role in any contemporary conflict. Peace can be described in a variety ways, as being 'negative' or 'positive', 'liberal' or 'democratic'. But what is it that makes a peace just? This book draws together leading scholars to study this concept of a 'just peace', analysing different elements of the transition from conflict to peace.
The volume covers six core themes: conceptual approaches towards just peace, macro-principles, the nexus to security and stability, protection of persons and public goods, rule of law, and economic reform and accountability. Contributions engage with understudied issues, such as the pros and cons of robust UN mandates, the link between environmental protection and indigenous peoples, the treatment of illegal settlements, the feasibility of vetting practices, and the protection of labour rights in post-conflict economies. Overall, the book puts forward a case that just peace requires not only negotiation, agreement, and compromise, but contextual understandings of law, multiple dimensions of justice, and strategies of prevention.
- Volume 407
- Jan Wouters, Le statut juridique des standards publics et privés dans les relations économiques internationales
- Sandrine Maljean-Dubois, Le droit international de la biodiversité
Fikfak: War, International Law and the Rise of Parliament - The Influence of International Law on UK Parliamentary Practice with Respect to the Use of Force
In foreign relations law, the power to wage war is inherently an executive power. It is the government that declares war or sends the military forces into battle. Yet, increasingly, the prerogative to engage in military action has been open to scrutiny by domestic parliaments. These are more and more frequently asked to provide support for the Government in its decisions and to the military personnel on the ground. The votes in national parliaments provide legitimacy to the decision made and give the impression of the Government having been held to account by the people’s representatives. In some cases, ie when national parliaments had effectively vetoed the Government’s plans for military actions, there is even talk of a quasi-sharing of powers between the Executive and the Legislature. The paper tracks the decline of ‘government’ and the rise of the ‘house’ in the language used in the debates in the UK Parliament. It reveals how the terminology used in the debates has shifted from the power of the Government to the responsibility of the House. It maps out how this shift is mirrored in the increased relevance of international law and specifically the legality of the military intervention. It is this question – and particularly the experience of Iraq – that has reshaped the position of the UK Parliament vis-à-vis the Government. The investigation also reveals that as more and more MPs become involved and informed on issues of war, the deference shown to international institutions and their evaluation of the situation declines. MPs become more confident and more competent to make these decisions themselves.
This article explores whether domestic courts can deny jurisdictional immunity of a state as a countermeasure. The article offers a survey of state practice that, according to some scholars, would support this argument, demonstrating that the corresponding practice is scarce, and that relevant domestic legislation denying jurisdictional immunity is not adopted as a countermeasure. Typically, countermeasures are adopted by political organs, which are responsible for the state’s international relations and which can assess what is a lawful response to a violation of international law. Domestic courts are not entitled to adopt countermeasures without the involvement of the executive organs that are competent for the international relations of the state. This article demonstrates that a domestic court’s denial of sovereign immunity as a countermeasure is unlawful without a prior determination of the government, and it is highly impractical when that determination is provided.
Sunday, September 6, 2020
Saturday, September 5, 2020
The Subject of Human Rights is the first book to systematically address the "human" part of "human rights." Drawing on the finest thinking in political theory, cultural studies, history, law, anthropology, and literary studies, this volume examines how human rights—as discourse, law, and practice—shape how we understand humanity and human beings. It asks how the humanness that the human rights idea seeks to protect and promote is experienced.
The essays in this volume consider how human rights norms and practices affect the way we relate to ourselves, to other people, and to the nonhuman world. They investigate what kinds of institutions and actors are subjected to human rights and are charged with respecting their demands and realizing their aspirations. And they explore how human rights shape and even create the very subjects they seek to protect. Through critical reflection on these issues, The Subject of Human Rights suggests ways in which we might reimagine the relationship between human rights and subjectivity with a view to benefiting human rights and subjects alike.
Friday, September 4, 2020
This book provides a systematic and comprehensive analysis of the ICC's jurisdiction over nationals of non-States Parties. It is within the context of developments at the Court in recent years that this work addresses the overarching question: On what legal basis is the ICC authorised to exercise jurisdiction over nationals of non-States Parties? Engaging with ICC jurisprudence and building upon arguments developed in legal scholarship, this book explores the theory of delegated jurisdiction and critically examines the idea that the Court might alternatively be exercising jurisdiction inherent to the international community. It argues that delegation of territorial jurisdiction and implied consent by virtue of UN membership provide a legal basis to allow the ICC to exercise jurisdiction over nationals of non-States Parties in almost all situations envisaged by the Rome Statute.
- Catherine Owen, Participatory authoritarianism: From bureaucratic transformation to civic participation in Russia and China
- Merisa S. Thompson, Alasdair Cochrane, & Justa Hopma, Democratising food: The case for a deliberative approach
- Yong Wook Lee, Performing civilisational narratives in East Asia: Asian values, multiple modernities, and the politics of economic development
- Sarah von Billerbeck, No action without talk? UN peacekeeping, discourse, and institutional self-legitimation
- Catherine Van Offelen & M. L. R. Smith, Agonising choices: Tragedy and International Relations – a tragic vision of humanitarian intervention in the Bosnian War
- Patrick Quinton-Brown, The South, the West, and the meanings of humanitarian intervention in history
- Alexander Beresford & Daniel Wand, Understanding bricolage in norm development: South Africa, the International Criminal Court, and the contested politics of transitional justice
- Tracy Adams & Zohar Kampf, ‘Solemn and just demands’: Seeking apologies in the international arena
Thursday, September 3, 2020
- Leslie Barnes, Live-Tweeting And Distant Suffering: Nicholas Kristof As Global Savior
- Kavita Ramakrishnan & Ludĕk Stavinoha, Beyond Humanitarian Logics: Volunteer-Refugee Encounters In Chios And Paris
- Dossier: Moral Economy
- Jeremy Adelman, Introduction: The Moral Economy, The Careers Of A Concept
- Francesca Trivellato, The Moral Economies Of Early Modern Europe
- Tim Rogan, R. H. Tawney
- Marion Fourcade, The Imperfect Promise Of The Gift
- Didier Fassin, Are The Two Approaches To Moral Economy Irreconcilable?
- Emilio Kourì, On The Mexican Ejido
- Margaret R. Somers, The Moral Economy Of The Capitalist Crowd: Utopianism, The Reality Of Society, And The Market As A Morally Instituted Process In Karl Polanyi’s The Great Transformation
- Samuel Moyn, T. H. Marshall, The Moral Economy, And Social Rights
- Timothy Shenk, “I Am No Longer Answerable For Its Actions”: E. P. Thompson After Moral Economy
- Joel Isaac, Moral Economy In Its Place: The Contribution Of James C. Scott
Atchabahian: Transterritorialidade: Uma Teoria de Responsabilização de Empresas por Violações aos Direitos Humanos
Segurança. A humanidade sempre empregou seus instintos e esforços na busca de circunstâncias que a colocasse em segurança. A garantia de conforto foi igualmente o ideal que permitiu o avanço social. Neste momento, a sociedade se depara com a promessa de garantir para si maior conforto e segurança por meio da aquisição de bens. Prosperidade econômica, investimentos, consumo de mercadorias, garantia de conforto e comodidade. Fortuna aparente de uma sociedade que condicionou sua identidade e felicidade à aquisição de produtos, esquecendo-se de avaliar os esforços humanos empregados para a construção desse imaginário. O resultado dessa equação é verificado na mesma proporção em que as mercadorias são produzidas: violações aos direitos humanos e ao meio ambiente, em uma sociedade que sobrevive às mazelas da natureza e aos seus semelhantes, mas continua a acreditar em um aparente conforto trazido pela atividade corporativa. É neste cenário que se situa a presente obra: diante da conivência estatal para com as empresas e da estrutura do Direito Internacional que ainda prioriza os Estados como os principais sujeitos de sua disciplina, a teoria da Transterritorialidade busca responsabilizar empresas e proteger as vítimas destas violações.
Safety. Humanity has always used its instincts and efforts in the search for circumstances that would make it safe. The guarantee of comfort was also the ideal that allowed social progress. At this moment, society is faced with the promise of guaranteeing greater comfort and security for itself through the acquisition of goods. Economic prosperity, investments, consumption of goods, guarantee of comfort and convenience. Apparent fortune of a society that conditioned its identity and happiness to the acquisition of products, forgetting to evaluate the human efforts used to build this imaginary. The result of this equation is verified in the same proportion in which the goods are produced: violations of human rights and the environment, in a society that survives the ailments of nature and its neighbors but continues to believe in an apparent comfort brought by the corporate activity. It is in this scenario that this book is published: in view of the state collusion with companies and the structure of international law that still prioritizes States as the main subjects of its discipline, the theory of Transterritoriality seeks to hold corporations accountable and protect the victims of the abovementioned violations . Based on multidisciplinary literature, deriving from Sociology, International Relations, International Law, International Law of Human Rights, Sociology of Law and from International Constitutional Law, it was built a theory with the objective of confirming the applicability of the rules of Private International Law, Public International Law and International Human Rights Law by the States and the national judges in a heterarchical and transversal manner, resulting in a true dialogue between the national jurisdictions and International Courts in holding corporations accountable for human rights violations.
Symposium: The Law and Logics of Attribution: Constructing the Identity and Responsibility of States and Firms
The Cambridge International Law Journal (CILJ) publishes two issues per year: one open-call issue published in June and one Annual Conference issue published in December.
The Editorial Board of the Cambridge International Law Journal is pleased to invite submissions for its tenth anniversary volume (issues to be published in June and December 2021.)
The Board welcomes long articles, short articles and case notes that engage with current themes in international law.
To celebrate the journal’s tenth anniversary, Issue 1 will include a special section that reflects on seminal changes and developments in international law over the last decade.
The Board is particularly interested in contributions on this theme, which will be published as part of the special section. Other contributions will be published as part of the general section of Issue 1.
Submissions are to be made by 11:59 pm (BST) on Sunday, 25 October 2020 via our online platform accessible here. For full submission instructions for authors, please visit www.elgaronline.com/cilj. Further information can be obtained from the Editors-in-Chief at firstname.lastname@example.org.
All submissions are subject to double-blind peer review by the Journal’s Editorial Board. In addition, long articles are sent to the Academic Review Board, which consists of distinguished international law scholars and practitioners. Submissions can be made at any time. Articles submitted by 25 October 2020 will be considered for Volume 10 Issue 1.
Zhou: New WTO Ruling on National Security in Qatar-Saudi Arabia Case and its Impact on South Korea-Japan Dispute
Wednesday, September 2, 2020
- Special Issue: New Technologies and Global Environmental Politics
- Simon Nicholson & Jesse L. Reynolds, Taking Technology Seriously: Introduction to the Special Issue on New Technologies and Global Environmental Politics
- Leslie Paul Thiele, Nature 4.0: Assisted Evolution, De-extinction, and Ecological Restoration Technologies
- Jesse L. Reynolds, Governing New Biotechnologies for Biodiversity Conservation: Gene Drives, International Law, and Emerging Politics
- Jennifer Clapp & Sarah-Louise Ruder, Precision Technologies for Agriculture: Digital Farming, Gene-Edited Crops, and the Politics of Sustainability
- Edward A. Parson & Holly J. Buck, Large-Scale Carbon Dioxide Removal: The Problem of Phasedown
- Joshua B. Horton & Barbara Koremenos, Steering and Influence in Transnational Climate Governance: Nonstate Engagement in Solar Geoengineering Research
Shereshevsky: Are All Soldiers Created Equal? – On the Equal Application of the Law to Enhanced Soldiers
Enhanced soldiers will soon become an integral part of armed conflicts. The deployment of soldiers with superior battlefield abilities raises important legal questions that are only now emerging as we begin to understand the implications of such technological advancements. One of the most pressing issues regarding enhanced soldiers is whether the existing legal framework, designed to regulate and safeguard the needs of conventional soldiers, can — and should — be applied differently when the subjects have qualitatively different capabilities than previously understood or considered. In this comprehensive analysis of the ability to treat enhanced soldiers differently, various international law issues are considered, such as the use of weapons in armed conflict, the treatment of detainees, and the prohibition against torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. This paper argues that, in most cases, enhanced soldiers should not be treated differently than unenhanced soldiers, even if their capabilities are significantly advanced when compared to conventional soldiers. More broadly, the case of enhanced soldiers brings new insights to the notions of formal and substantive equality in international law. This paper offers a one-directional approach to the subjective application of international law, especially in the context of the prohibition against torture. Under this approach, subjective factors may not be used to treat individuals and groups with better capabilities more harshly but can be used to improve the protection of vulnerable individuals and groups. Applying a one-directional approach is an important tool to prevent the abuse of legal rules by states and other international actors while enabling the protection of those who need it the most. This is a critical point in time where legal scholarship has a unique opportunity to shape the legal regulation of a transformative technological change as it occurs.
- Ndjodi Ndeunyema, Unmuddying the Waters: Evaluating the Legal Basis of the Human Right to Water under Treaty Law, Customary International Law, and the General Principles of Law
- Donna Minha, The Possibility of Prosecuting Corporations for Climate Crimes before the International Criminal Court: All Roads Lead to the Rome Statute?
Saturday, August 29, 2020
Fraser: Social Institutions and International Human Rights Law Implementation: Every Organ of Society
Having articulated numerous human rights norms and standards in international treaties, the pressing challenge today is their realisation in States' parties around the world. Domestic implementation has proven a difficult task for national authorities as well as international supervisory bodies. This book examines the traditional State-centric and legalistic approach to implementation, critiquing its limited efficacy in practice and failure to connect with local cultures. The book therefore explores the permissibility of other measures of implementation, and advocates more culturally sensitive approaches involving social institutions. Through an interdisciplinary case study of Islam in Indonesia, the book demonstrates the power of social institutions like religion to promote rights compliant positions and behaviours. Like the preamble of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the book reiterates the role not just of the State but indeed 'every organ of society' in realising rights.
This article examines a series of paradoxes that have rendered the international legal order’s mechanisms for collective action powerless precisely when they are most needed to fight COVID-19. The “patriotism paradox” is that disengagement from the international legal order weakens rather than strengthens state sovereignty. The “border paradox” is that securing domestic populations by excluding non-citizens, in the absence of accompanying regulatory mechanisms to secure adherence to internal health measures, accelerates viral spread among citizens. The “equality paradox” is that while pandemics pose an equal threat to all people, their impacts compound existing inequalities.
This book examines the role of the European Court of Human Rights in promoting standards of effective civil justice in Europe. It defines judicial effectiveness as composed of three main components, namely the length, cost and predictability of proceedings. Following a comprehensive review of the relevant case law, the book argues that the legal standards established by the Court in these areas are rather modest, and that the legal reasoning behind them is predominantly formalist. Rather than developing an understanding of the relevant policy choices that determine the institutional framework of civil justice, the Court bases its decisions on abstract concepts like 'reasonable time', 'access to court' and 'legal certainty'. By sidelining the key institutional issues such as resource allocation and incentives, the Court has produced a largely theoretical case law that actually has little value for persons who wish to enforce their rights in courts.
Schützen die Grundrechte des Grundgesetzes Individuen auch vor belastenden Wirkungen, die von Kooperationen der Bundesrepublik Deutschland mit anderen Staaten ausgehen? Daniel Wolff beantwortet diese Frage mit einem differenzierten Ja und entwickelt eine allgemeine Grundrechtsdogmatik für die zwischenstaatliche Zusammenarbeit, die den dogmatischen status quo fundamental in Frage stellt.
In The Shipmaster's Duty to Render Assistance at Sea under International Law, Felicity G. Attard examines the web of applicable international rules regulating one of the most fundamental obligations at sea. The study explores the shipmaster's duty to render assistance at sea under treaty law, customary international law, and other international instruments. It focuses on an assessment of the duty in light of contemporary challenges posed by the phenomenon of irregular migration by sea, a problem which has intensified in recent years. Whilst Article 98 of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea provides the basis for the regime regulating the duty, the study addresses other relevant rules adopted by the International Maritime Organization and the International Labour Organization. Due to the humanitarian ramifications of the rendering of assistance at sea, the book considers further obligations imposed under human rights law and refugee law. The study presents a comprehensive analysis of shipmaster's responsibilities in rescue operations, and their role in the fulfilment of States' international obligations in the rendering of assistance.
As a conflict ends and the parties begin working towards a durable peace, practitioners and peacebuilders are faced with the possibilities and challenges of building new or reformed political, security, judicial, social, and economic structures. This Handbook analyzes these elements of post-conflict state building through the lens of international law, which provides a framework through which the authors contextualize and examine the many facets of state building in relation to the legal norms, processes, and procedures that guide such efforts across the globe. The volume aims to provide not only an introduction to and explanation of prominent topics in state building, but also a perceptive analysis that augments ongoing conversations among researchers, lawyers, and advocates engaged in the field.
In Defense of Politicization of Human Rights: The UN Special Procedures constitutes the first comprehensive study of the United Nations Special Procedures, covering their history, methods of work, institutional status, relationship with other politically driven organs, and processes affecting their development. Special Procedures have existed since 1967, nearly as long as United Nations Treaty Bodies, but have received only fragmented analysis, normally focused on a few thematic mandates, until the creation of the Human Rights Council in 2006.
In seeking to debunk commonly held views about the role of politics in human rights at international level, In Defense of Politicization of Human Rights constitutes the first comprehensive study of the United Nations Special Procedures as a system covering their history, methods of work, institutional status, relationship with other politically driven organs, and processes affecting their development. The perspective chosen to analyze the human rights mechanisms most vulnerable to political decisions determining their creation, renewal and operationalization, casts a new light on the extent to which these remain the cornerstone of global accountability in protecting the inherent dignity and worth of individuals as well as groups.
International human rights mechanisms' efficiency is normally linked to the work of independent experts keen to push the boundaries of accountability against recalcitrant States determined to defend their sovereignty. As a corollary, progress in this field is associated to the creation and maintenance of political free spaces. Another common presumption is a belief in a differentiated 'North' versus 'South' approach to the promotion and protection of human rights, that find common ground within the prevalent human rights discourses repeated by governmental and non-governmental actors. Through the lenses of the United Nations Special Procedures, In Defense of Politicization of Human Rights challenges these and other presumptions informing doctrinal studies, policies and strategies to advance international human rights. Because of the Special Procedures' growing salience and impact in the world of international human rights, this book is likely to become required reading for any student or practitioner of international human rights.
- Case 004/2 Involving AO An: Considerations on Appeals Against Closing Orders (Extraordinary Chambers Cts. Cambodia), with introductory note by David J. Scheffer
- The Situation in the People's Republic of Bangladesh/Republic of the Union of Myanmar Decision to Authorize Investigation (I.C.C.) and the Gambia V. Myanmar Order for Provisional Measures (I.C.J.), with introductory note by Alessandra Spadaro
- Case C-233/18 Zubair Haqbin v. Federaal Agentschap Voor de Opvang van Asielzoekers (C.J.E.U.), with introductory note by Justine N. Stefanelli
- Advisory Opinion of the Caribbean Court of Justice in Response to a Request from the Caribbean Community (Caribbean Ct. J.), with introductory note by Stephen Vasciannie
Friday, August 28, 2020
Eslava: The teaching of (another) international law: critical realism and the question of agency and structure
In this article I explore the potential of a critical realist approach to the teaching of international law. Critical realist scholars have advanced a compelling account of the importance of paying attention – in designing educational curricula, delivering materials and classroom interactions – to the close relationship between agency and structure, a relationship that has also come to preoccupy international legal scholars. Recent academic work, especially that developed by critical international legal scholars, has revealed and insisted upon the structural dimension of the international legal order. According to these scholars, this dimension should be taken into account in order to explain and challenge some of the ways in which international law has historically constituted, and continues to constitute, our persistently violent and unequal material and social world at all levels, from international to local spaces, and from collective to individual subjectivities. If the aim is to generate another global order, and another international law, teaching international law today requires us to learn how to negotiate the structure and agency divide. The work of critical realists has the potential to help teachers of international law create a more emancipatory learning experience for their students in order to face this crucial task.