Ntovas: Fisheries Compatibility Disputes: Agreeing to Disagree, Committed to Conserve

Alexandros X.M. Ntovas (Univ. of Southampton - Law) has published Fisheries Compatibility Disputes: Agreeing to Disagree, Committed to Conserve (Edward Elgar Publishing 2026). Here's the abstract:

This book provides a fresh perspective on the enduring debate surrounding the sustainable regulation of straddling and highly migratory fish stocks. Alexandros X.M. Ntovas highlights how these vital fish stocks occupy a contested regulatory space where sovereignty, science and sustainability converge. Chapters explore the development of international fisheries law through key United Nations (UN) initiatives, including the 1958 UN Fishing and Conservation Convention, the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea and the 1995 UN Fish Stocks Agreement.

Ntovas emphasizes the need for consistent interpretation of the law and examines the role of peaceful dispute settlements in fostering international cooperation and achieving ocean sustainability. Fisheries Compatibility Disputes underscores the importance of resisting unilateralism and creeping jurisdictionalism, situating the analysis within the broader jurisprudence of treaty interpretation.

This is a vital resource for students and academics of environmental law, public international law and environmental governance and regulation, particularly the law of the sea and international dispute resolution. Legal practitioners handling compatibility-related fishery disputes will also benefit from the author’s rigorous analysis of the doctrinal complexities involved.

Call for Papers: ESIL Interest Groups Workshops Preceding 2026 ESIL Conference

In the context of the 2026 ESIL Annual Conference in Málaga, ESIL Interest Groups are inviting submissions for their pre-conference workshops. Here are the calls that are currently open:

• IG on International Courts and Tribunals: Conflicts before Courts: Revisiting ‘Uneven Judicialization in Global Order’ Fifteen Years On (deadline: 31 March 2026)
• IG on International Economic Law: International Economic Law and Conflict (deadline: 10 April 2026)
• IG on International Organisations: Conflict Unbound? Revisiting International Organizations and Contestation (deadline: 10 April 2026)
• IG on Migration and Refugee Law: Asylum in Times of Conflict: Unsettling the Boundaries of Refugee Protection (deadline: 10 April 2026)
• IG on International Law of Culture: The International Law of Culture at a Crossroads: Past Developments and Future Directions (deadline: 10 April 2026)
• IG on Social Sciences and International Law: Contestation in international law (deadline: 10 April 2026)

New Issue: International Review of the Red Cross

The latest issue of the International Review of the Red Cross (Vol. 107, no. 930, 2025) is out. The theme is: "Symposium on Colombia’s JEP & Selected Articles." Contents include:

• Juana Inés Acosta-López & Mariana Chacón Lozano, Symposium on Colombia’s special jurisdiction for peace
• Interview with Roberto Carlos Vidal López: President of the Special Jurisdiction for Peace in Colombia
• Marcela Giraldo Muñoz, Amnesties as a means of encouraging transition and strengthening the application of IHL in Colombia: The case of the Special Jurisdiction for Peace
• Julieta Lemaitre Ripoll, When is detention by non-State actors a war crime? The Special Jurisdiction for Peace's decision on hostage-taking by the FARC-EP
• Lucas Martinez-Villalba, Restoring dignity by granting rights: IHL and peacebuilding empowerment for Magdalena River fishing communities in Colombia
• Lily Rueda Guzmán & César Rojas-Orozco, Child recruitment and beyond: Prosecuting the broad spectrum of violence committed against recruited children within the former FARC-EP ranks
• Giulio Bartolini & Sofia Poulopoulou, Reporting activities under international humanitarian law
• Carmen Chas, Against the laws of humanity: Expanding bullets and the 1899 First Hague Peace Conference
• Jérôme de Hemptinne, Safeguarding rangers in conflict zones: Bridging humanitarian and environmental law
• Jessica Dorsey, The erosion of human(e) judgement in targeting? Quantification logics, AI-enabled decision support systems and proportionality assessments in IHL
• Aristide Evouna Evouna, Special agreements in non-international armed conflicts: Lessons from the practice
• Tania Ixchel Atilano, A painting and the exchange of Belgian prisoners of war during the French Intervention in Mexico (1862–1867)
• David Kaelin, Caroline Pellaton, & Tadesse Kebebew, Water and survival in war: Upholding IHL’s protective purpose and documenting the hidden toll
• Pauline Lesaffre, Analogies in the historical development of IHL (1864–2001)
• Camille Meyre, Cautious or zealous? The ICRC’s humanitarian action in Montenegro (1875–1876)
• Lisang Nyathi, When bullets threaten the pursuit of knowledge: Reclaiming children’s right to education in armed conflict through a human dignity-centred approach under IHRL and IHL
• Tilman Rodenhäuser, Civilian hackers in war: The limits that international humanitarian law imposes on volunteer IT armies, hacktivists, and other civilian hackers
• Sarah W. Spencer & Caroline Masboungi, Enabling access or automating empathy? Using chatbots to support GBV survivors in conflicts and humanitarian emergencies

Survey: How do scholars of public international law choose their research methods?

Researchers at Leiden University are conducting a new study to develop a better understanding of the methodological landscape in the field of public international law. Researchers in this field are invited to take a short survey (here). The survey takes less than ten minutes to complete and includes questions about your background, current position, research methods, and publication choices. Your participation in this study is voluntary and can be terminated at any time, for any reason. The research team consists of Cecily Rose, Misha Plagis, Johanna Trittenbach, and Nicholas McGuire, and they can be contacted at methodssurvey@law.leidenuniv.nl. Information regarding the study can be found here.

New Issue: Ethics & International Affairs

The latest issue of Ethics & International Affairs (Vol. 39, no. 4, Winter 2025) is out. Contents include:

• Essay
• Mathias Risse, Leadership on the Line: Gaslighting, Adaptive Leadership, and the Battle for the Soul of Democracy
• Feature
• Wendy H. Wong & David A. Lake, Governing Artificial Intelligence: Designing Professional Structures for the Predictive Age
• Filip J. Scherf, Responsible Peacemakers: Toward a Reframed Ethics of HUMINT
• Jamal Barnes, The Dark Side of International Cooperation: Indifference and the Psychosocial Dynamics of Cooperative Deterrence
• Review Essay
• Larissa Fast, Unfinished Critique and the Duality of Humanitarian Digital Technologies

Call for Papers: Third Transnational Criminal Law Review Conference

Saarland University’s Cluster for European Research and Faculty of Law, the Transnational Criminal Law Review, and the German national group of the International Association of Penal Law have issued a call for papers for the third Transnational Criminal Law Review Conference, to be held May 24-25, 2027, at Saarland University. The topic is: "The Borderlands of Criminal Law II." The call is here.

Job Opening: Teaching Fellow, International Economic Law, Business & Policy (Stanford)

Stanford Law School seeks to hire a teaching fellow for the LLM Program in International Economic Law, Business & Policy. The principal functions of the teaching fellow are to prepare and lead a colloquium on international business issues for the 15-20 students who enroll in the program annually, to advise students on their curricular choices, and to assist in the admissions and orientation process for the incoming class. The ideal candidate will be an aspiring academic with a strong interest in one or more of the core subject areas spanned by the program (including international trade, international investment law, international dispute resolution and arbitration, international business transactions and international antitrust). Details are here.

AJIL Unbound Symposium: Global Health at a Crossroads Part I

AJIL Unbound has posted a symposium on “Global Health at a Crossroads Part I.” The symposium includes an introduction by Matiangai Sirleaf, and contributions by Lisa Forman, K. M. Gopakumar and Nithin Ramakrishnan, Mark Eccleston-Turner, Gian Luca Burci, and Clare Wenham, Fifa A. Rahman, Luciano Bottini Filho, Deborah Gleeson, and Pedro A. Villarreal, Roojin Habibi, Omowamiwa Kolawole and Uchechukwu Ngwaba, and Kriti Sharma, Margherita Melillo, and Robert Eckford.

Anghie, Chimni, Fakhri, Mickelson, & Nesiah: Research Handbook on Third World Approaches to International Law (TWAIL)

Antony Anghie (National Univ. of Singapore & Univ. of Utah), B.S. Chimni (O.P. Jindal Global Univ.), Michael Fakhri (Univ. of Oregon), Karin Mickelson (Univ. of British Columbia), & Vasuki Nesiah (New York Univ.) have published Research Handbook on Third World Approaches to International Law (TWAIL) (Edward Elgar Publishing 2025). Here's the abstract:

This Research Handbook provides a comprehensive overview of Third World Approaches to International Law (TWAIL) with chapters exploring different facets of TWAIL scholarship. It covers major doctrines and topics of international law, as well as TWAIL perspectives on central historical and theoretical debates.

Expert authors present key insights into various themes that intersect with international law including economics, post-colonialism, religion, development, treaties, and human rights. The Research Handbook underscores the cornerstone concepts of TWAIL and examines their relationship with intellectual traditions such as Marxism and feminism. Contributing authors outline TWAIL’s perspectives on core areas of international law such as customary international law, treaties and human rights, as well as important contemporary issues, including debt, climate change, and public health. Ultimately, the Research Handbook showcases an expanded and enriched vision of international law, assessing how alternate methodologies can lead to a fairer legal system.

Ngangjoh Hodu & Ajibo: Regional Trade Agreements, Prosperity and the Global South: Normative Beliefs and Interests

Yenkong Ngangjoh Hodu (Univ. of Manchester) & Collins Chikodili Ajibo (Univ. of Nigeria) have published Regional Trade Agreements, Prosperity and the Global South: Normative Beliefs and Interests (Cambridge Univ. Press 2026). Here's the abstract:

This book provides a thought-provoking critical analysis of the functionality of regional trade regimes in the Global South. It examines four regional trade agreements (RTAs) - the African Continental Free Trade Agreement (AfCFTA), the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN), the Southern Common Market (Mercosur) and the United States-Mexico-Canada Free Trade Agreement (USMCA). Ngangjoh Hodu and Ajibo argue that while there has been immense enthusiasm amongst countries in the Global South to create RTAs, this has not translated into concerted efforts to make the RTAs work as envisaged, resulting in RTAs that are largely lacking in concreteness. In this innovative work, the authors invite international economic lawyers and other stakeholders to reflect on how normative beliefs and interests inform inter-state relations and thereby, the law of regional economic community. In so doing, it argues that the idea of prosperity underpinning RTAs as they currently exist is more of a mirage than reality.

Sanchez: Deference and Divergence in Regional Human Rights Courts

Maria A. Sanchez (Colorado College - Political Science) has published Deference and Divergence in Regional Human Rights Courts (Cornell Univ. Press 2026). Here's the abstract:

In Deference and Divergence in Regional Human Rights Courts, Maria A. Sanchez tackles a central tension in global governance: how international human rights courts balance their mandates with the imperative to respect national sovereignty. Despite having similar mandates, the world's three regional human rights courts—the European Court of Human Rights, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, and the African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights—interpret their authority differently, leading to uneven regional enforcement of global human rights principles.

Maria A. Sanchez traces how the geopolitical dynamics of each court's founding moments have manifested in contemporary disparities across the courts' jurisprudences—focusing on disputes involving freedom of expression, personal integrity rights, and LGBTQ+ rights. Her findings expose a paradox: the courts that were founded in the most inhospitable environments for human rights have ended up asserting the most expansive authority over governments.

Deeply researched and insightful, Deference and Divergence in Regional Human Rights Courts speaks to when and how international institutions can leverage authority to intervene in domestic affairs.

Vidigal: Adjudicating over Anarchy: Judicial Remedies, Compliance, and Enforcement in International Law

Geraldo Vidigal (Univ. of Amsterdam) has published Adjudicating over Anarchy: Judicial Remedies, Compliance, and Enforcement in International Law (Cambridge Univ. Press 2026). Here's the abstract:

Geraldo Vidigal thoroughly examines the judicial powers of international courts and tribunals and how these powers are used in practice. Without access to state-backed enforcement measures, international adjudicators must rely on their authority to influence real-world outcomes. The book reviews, and offers a comprehensive theory for, the various social mechanisms that explain why and how international judicial pronouncements affect the behaviour of states, influencing the views of individuals within states as well as changing states' mutual expectations of cooperative and sanction-worthy behaviour. The book considers how judicial remedies can induce compliance by targeting specific areas of disagreement, interpreting obligations, declaring violations, and establishing how wrongdoer states must offset unlawful injury. An often untapped type of remedy relies on the ability of courts to determine permissible responses to breach: what measures other actors may take to respond to violations, compelling wrongdoers to comply with their obligations and provide redress for injury.