2012 ASIL Certificates of Merit for Scholarship

The American Society of International Law has announced its 2012 Certificates of Merit for Scholarship. They are:

Certificate of Merit - Preeminent Contribution to Creative Scholarship: Nico Krisch, Beyond Constitutionalism: The Pluralist Structure of Postnational Law (Oxford Univ. Press 2010)

Certificate of Merit - High Technical Craftsmanship and Utility to Practicing Lawyers and Scholars: David L. Sloss, Michael D. Ramsey, & William S. Dodge, International Law in the U.S. Supreme Court: Continuity and Change (Cambridge Univ. Press 2011)

Certificate of Merit - Specialized Area of International Law: Sundhya Pahuja, Decolonizing International Law: Development, Economic Growth and the Politics of Universality (Cambridge Univ. Press 2011)

Honorable Mention - Specialized Field of International Law: Ruti Teitel, Humanity's Law (Oxford Univ. Press 2011)

New Issue: Human Rights & International Legal Discourse

The latest issue of Human Rights & International Legal Discourse (Vol. 5, no. 2, 2011) is out. Contents include:

• D. Vanheule, Foreword: Human Rights and Immigration in Europe – A Bridge over Troubled Water?
• A. Wiesbrock, The Right to Family Reunification of Third-Country Nationals under EU Law – Is Directive 2003/86/EC in Compliance with the ECHR?
• V. Moreno-Lax, Beyond Saadi v UK: Why the ‘Unnecessary’ Detention of Asylum Seekers is Inadmissible under EU Law
• J. Chevalier-Watts, Military Operations and the Right to Life: The Uneasy Bedfellows
• N. McMurry, Water Privatisation: Diminished Accountability
• J. Krommendijk, The Impact and effectiveness of Non-Judicial Mechanisms for the Implementation of Human Rights

New Issue: European Journal of International Law

The latest issue of the European Journal of International Law (Vol. 23, no. 1, February 2012) is out. Contents include:

• Editorial
• JHHW, Integration Through Fear
• Articles
• Armin von Bogdandy & Ingo Venzke, In Whose Name? An Investigation of International Courts’ Public Authority and Its Democratic Justification
• Marlies Glasius, Do International Criminal Courts Require Democratic Legitimacy?
• Nicolás Carrillo-Santarelli & Carlos Espósito, The Protection of Humanitarian Legal Goods by National Judges
• David Koller, … and New York and The Hague and Tokyo and Geneva and Nuremberg and …: The Geographies of International Law
• Critical Review of International Jurisprudence
• Marko Milanovic, Al-Skeini and Al-Jedda in Strasbourg
• Matthew Parish, International Courts and the European Legal Order
• Agnieszka Szpak, National, Ethnic, Racial, and Religious Groups Protected against Genocide in the Jurisprudence of the ad hoc International Criminal Tribunals
• Roaming Charges
• Moments of Dignity: Bicycle Repair Man, Peking
• EJIL: Debate!
• Jose Alejandro Carballo Leyda, The Laws of Occupation and Commercial Law Reform in Occupied Territories: Clarifying a Widespread Misunderstanding
• Eyal Benvenisti, The Laws of Occupation and Commercial Law Reform in Occupied Territories: A Reply to Jose Alejandro Carballo Leyda
• Jose Alejandro Carballo Leyda, The Laws of Occupation and Commercial Law Reform in Occupied Territories: A Rejoinder to Eyal Benvenisti
• The European Tradition in International Law: Nicolas Politis
• Linos-Alexander Sicilianos & Thomas Skouteris, Editorial Note
• Marilena Papadaki, The ‘Government Intellectuals’: Nicolas Politis – An Intellectual Portrait
• Robert Kolb, Politis and Sociological Jurisprudence of Inter-War International Law
• Umut Özsu, Politis and the Limits of Legal Form
• Nicholas Tsagourias, Nicolas Politis’ Initiatives to Outlaw War and Define Aggression, and the Narrative of Progress in International Law
• Maria Gavouneli, Neutrality – A Survivor?

Vermeulen: Enforced Disappearance: Determining State Responsibility under the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance

Marthe Lot Vermeulen has published Enforced Disappearance: Determining State Responsibility under the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance (Intersentia 2012). Here's the abstract:

In late 2010, the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance (ICPPED) entered into force. The present study addresses the question of determining state responsibility under the ICPPED, based on a framework that harmonises the protection afforded by this convention with the experiences of victims of enforced disappearance. The premise is that such an approach enhances the protection from this grave human rights violation.

The book consists of two parts. The first part sets the parameters for the evaluative framework. This part examines the norms laid down in the ICPPED and identifies room for interpretation. The first part also examines the effects of an enforced disappearance on its victims and discerns the main causes of their suffering. Lastly, this part examines the state obligations that give effect to the protection from enforced disappearance. This framework provides the basis for the comparative case law analysis in the second part of the book. The second part primarily scrutinises the case law of the Human Rights Committee, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and the European Court of Human Rights. It compares the case law on the various state obligations that are relevant to the interpretation and application of the ICPPED. Subsequently, this part evaluates the case law and provides, where necessary, alternative approaches in light of the identified main causes of victims’ suffering.

This study concludes with recommendations for the interpretation and application of the norms laid down in the ICPPED by its supervisory committee. Although primarily directed towards the ICPPED, the study addresses general issues concerned with the protection from enforced disappearance. Thereby, it is hoped that the book is of value to a wide range of human rights bodies and experts dealing with this human rights violation.

Burgorgue-Larsen et al.: Les interactions normatives - Droit de l'Union européenne et droit international

Laurence Burgorgue-Larsen, Edouard Dubout, Alexandre Maitrot de la Motte, & Sébastien Touzé have published Les interactions normatives - Droit de l'Union européenne et droit international (Pedone 2012). The table of contents is here. Here's the abstract:

Les rapports entre le droit de l'Union européenne et le droit international requièrent une attention permanente. C'est que leur nature continue d'être indécise. Entre émancipation contestée et fertilisation croisée, se dessine une relation particulière entre les deux ordres juridiques qui se nourrit de rebondissements et de développements constants. Plus particulièrement les interactions entre les normes issues des ordres juridiques de l'Union européenne et international méritent d'être observées attentivement. D'une part et de manière générale, le principe même d'une distinction entre ces deux types de normes continue de soulever certaines difficultés. Les raisonnements et catégories juridiques peinent à rendre compte de ce phénomène. Si la singularisation des normes européennes par rapport aux normes internationales semble de plus en plus fréquemment reconnue, leur positionnement respectif est loin d'être clairement identifié que ce soit sous un angle vertical (conciliation de normes contraires) ou horizontal (combinaison de normes convergentes). D'autre part et de façon particulière, la fréquence des interactions entre normes du droit de l'Union européenne et du droit international s'intensifie au fur et à mesure que l'Union européenne étend ses compétences : si le champ économique reste un domaine d'interaction privilégié, ceux relatifs à la régulation sociale et environnementale, et au statut ou à la protection des personnes, en constituent désormais des illustrations nouvelles. La question est de savoir comment les spécificités des problématiques en cause peuvent influencer le contenu des interactions normatives et la manière de les concevoir. Cette étude collective des rapports normatifs est déclinée sous une pluralité d'angles différents, soit rationae personae selon la situation de celui qui porte un regard sur la relation qu'entretiennent ces deux types de normes (1ère Partie), soit rationae materiae selon le domaine substantiel envisagé dans lequel l'inter-action des normes a lieu (2ème Partie).

Baban: La mise en œuvre de la responsabilité pénale du chef d'État

Bryar Baban has published La mise en œuvre de la responsabilité pénale du chef d'État (Larcier 2012). Here's the abstract:

Depuis le procès de Nuremberg, l’institution de la protection des chefs d’État et de gouvernement apparaît de plus en plus comme une forteresse menacée.

Cette institution repose sur des concepts traditionnels comme l’immunité historique des chefs d’État, l’égalité souveraine des États, le principe de non- intervention, la protection de la fonction représentative. À l’époque actuelle, en revanche, on assiste à l’apparition d’un courant doctrinal en faveur d’une liberté de poursuite, qui entre en concurrence avec l’institution de la protection des chefs d’État relative aux crimes internationaux.

Dès lors, exposer les moyens au service de cette liberté de poursuite apparaît nécessaire, afin de mieux appréhender la logique qui la sous-tend, et d’éclaircir par ailleurs les nombreuses zones d’ombre que recèle le statut des chefs d’État. Il importe ainsi de mesurer l’impact de leur statut sur la répression internationale en général, et sur leur poursuite en particulier. La revendication en faveur de cette liberté de poursuite s’accentue dans l’ordre juridique international. Elle se matérialise notamment par la création de tribunaux pénaux internationaux ou internationalisés, ainsi que de la Cour pénale internationale, tous étant chargés de lutter contre l’impunité, avec la participation des instances judiciaires nationales mobilisées pour réaliser cet objectif.

C’est la raison pour laquelle l’idée a été renversée pour se concentrer davantage sur l’incidence de la répression internationale sur le statut des chefs d’État. Si ce statut empêchait historiquement les poursuites à leur égard, la justice internationale cherche désormais à réduire son impact en développant des méthodes et des principes, qui soulèvent également de nombreuses questions.

Ohlin: Second-Order Linking Principles: Combining Vertical and Horizontal Modes of Liability

Jens David Ohlin (Cornell Univ. - Law) has posted Second-Order Linking Principles: Combining Vertical and Horizontal Modes of Liability (Leiden Journal of International Law, forthcoming). Here's the abstract:

Both the ICTY and the ICC have struggled to combine vertical and horizontal modes of liability. At the ICTY, the question has primarily arisen within the context of ‘leadership-level’ JCEs and how to express their relationship with the Relevant Physical Perpetrators of the crimes. The ICC addressed the is-sue by combining indirect perpetration with co-perpetration to form a new mode of liability known as indirect co-perpetration. The following article argues that these novel combinations — vertical and horizontal modes of liability — cannot be simply asserted; they must be defended at the level of criminal law theory. Unfortunately, courts that have applied indirect co-perpetration have generally failed to offer this defense and have simply assumed that modes of liability can be combined at will. In an attempt to offer the needed justification, this article starts with the premise that modes of liability are ‘linking principles’ that link defendants with particular actions, and that combining these underlying linking principles requires a second-order linking principle. The most plausible candidate is the personality principle — a basic principle that recognizes the inherently collective nature of leadership-level groups dedicated to committing international crimes. Like Roxin’s theories describing the collective organizations that can be used as a form of indirect perpetration, the personality principle treats the horizontal leadership group as an organization or group agent whose collective nature potentially justifies the attribution of vertical modes of liability to all members of the horizontal group. Although this article does not defend the doctrine of indirect co-perpetration, it does conclude that combined vertical and horizontal modes of liability, whether at the ICTY or ICC, implicitly or covertly rely on something like the personality principle in order to justify collective attribution to the horizontal collective.

New Issue: Columbia Journal of Transnational Law

The latest issue of the Columbia Journal of Transnational Law (Vol. 50, no. 1, 2011) is out. Contents include:

• Kyle Hatton & Katharina Pistor, Maximizing Autonomy in the Shadow of Great Powers: The Political Economy of Sovereign Wealth Funds
• Noah Weisbord, Judging Aggression

Keitner: The Reargument Order in Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum and Its Potential Implications for Transnational Human Rights Cases

Chimène I. Keitner (Univ. of California - Hastings College of the Law) has posted an ASIL Insight on The Reargument Order in Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum and Its Potential Implications for Transnational Human Rights Cases.

New Issue: Journal of International Economic Law

The latest issue of the Journal of International Economic Law (Vol. 15, no. 1, March 2012) is out. Contents include:

• Norbert Seiler & Jelena Madir, Fight Against Corruption: Sanctions Regimes of Multilateral Development Banks
• Chi Manjiao, China’s Participation in WTO Dispute Settlement Over the Past Decade: Experiences and Impacts
• Julien Chaisse, Promises and Pitfalls of the European Union Policy on Foreign Investment—How will the New EU Competence on FDI affect the Emerging Global Regime?
• Jan Kleinheisterkamp, Investment Protection and EU Law: The Intra- and Extra-EU Dimension of the Energy Charter Treaty
• Joshua Meltzer, Climate Change and Trade—The EU Aviation Directive and the WTO
• Emily Barrett Lydgate, Biofuels, Sustainability, and Trade-Related Regulatory Chill
• Marek Martyniszyn, Export Cartels: Is it Legal to Target your Neighbour? Analysis in Light of Recent Case Law
• Caroline Henckels, Indirect Expropriation and the Right to Regulate: Revisiting Proportionality Analysis and the Standard of Review in Investor-State Arbitration
• Ma Qian, ‘Reasonable Period of Time’ in the WTO Dispute Settlement System
• Sangeeta Khorana & Sujitha Subramanian, Potential Accession to the WTO Government Procurement Agreement: A Case-Study on India

Fauchald & Nollkaemper: The Practice of International and National Courts and the (De-)Fragmentation of International Law

Ole Kristian Fauchald (Univ. of Oslo - Law) & André Nollkaemper (Univ. of Amsterdam - Law) have published The Practice of International and National Courts and the (De-)Fragmentation of International Law (Hart Publishing 2012). The table of contents is here. Here's the abstract:

In recent decades there has been a considerable growth in the activities of international tribunals and the establishment of new tribunals. Furthermore, supervisory bodies established to control compliance with treaty obligations have adopted decisions in an increasing number of cases. National courts further add to the practice of adjudication of claims based on international law.

While this increasing practice of courts and supervisory bodies strengthens the adjudicatory process in international law, it also poses challenges to the unity of international law. Most of these courts operate within their own special regime (functional, regional, or national) and will primarily interpret and apply international law within the framework of that particular regime. The role of domestic courts poses special challenges, as the powers of such courts to give effect to international law, as well as their actual practice in applying such law, largely will be determined by national law. At the same time, both international and national courts have recognised that they do not operate in isolation from the larger international legal system, and have found various ways to counteract the process of fragmentation that may result from their jurisdictional limitations.

This book explores how international and national courts can, and do, mitigate fragmentation of international law. It contains case studies from international regimes (including the WTO, the IMF, investment arbitration and the ECtHR) and from various national jurisdictions (including Japan, Norway, Switzerland and the UK), providing a basis for conclusions to be drawn in the final chapter.

Steingruber: Consent in International Arbitration

Andrea M. Steingruber has published Consent in International Arbitration (Oxford Univ. Press 2012). Here's the abstract:

Examining the notion, nature, and extent of consent in both commercial arbitration and investment arbitration, this book provides practitioners and academics with a thorough, case-related analysis of an issue which raises many questions.

Whilst considering the evolution of arbitration and its consensual nature - enlargement of the parties' freedom to consent to arbitration, and development from commercial arbitration to investment arbitration - it addresses important theoretical questions to offer practical solutions.

These include: how consent to arbitrate is expressed and when mutual consent to arbitration is reached; which law shall govern the arbitration agreement or, more particularly, consent as an element of the substantive validity of it; and, conversely, according to which law will a possible lack of consent be judged; how consent should be interpreted; which relationship exists between consent as part of the substantive validity of an arbitration agreement and its formal validity; which, if any, are the implied terms when consenting to arbitration; how consent to arbitrate influences procedural aspects (counterclaims, joinder, consolidation), and which solutions adopted by treaties, national laws or arbitration rules are, or would be, the most respectful of parties' consent in this respect; what in investment arbitration is the relationship between consent and most-favoured-nation clauses or the influence of umbrella clauses.

The book includes original arguments and puts forward new suggestions with regard to the changeable consensual character of arbitration. It also provides a particular focus on problems that frequently arise in practice of international arbitration, for example issues related to complex multiparty arbitration and to jurisdictional questions in investment arbitration.

Prost: The Concept of Unity in Public International Law

Mario Prost (Keele Univ. - Law) has published The Concept of Unity in Public International Law (Hart Publishing 2012). Here's the abstract:

'Fragmentation' has become a defining, albeit controversial, metaphor of international law scholarship in the era of globalisation. Some scholars see it as a new development, others as history repeating itself; some approach it as a technical issue and some as the reflection of deeper political struggles. But there is near-consensus about the fact that the established vision of international law as a unitary whole is under threat. At the core of the fragmentation debate lies the concept of unity, but this is hardly ever rationalised and is more assumed than explained. Its meaning remains vague and intuitive. 'The Concept of Unity in Public International Law' attempts to dispel that vagueness by exploring the various possible meanings of the concept of unity in international law. However, eschewing one grand theory of unity, it identifies and compares five candidates. Intentionally pluralistic in its outlook, the book does not engage in normative arguments about whether international law is or should be unitary but seeks to show instead that the concept of unity is contested and that discourses on fragmentation are necessarily contingent.

Talmon: A Primer on ICJ Procedure: A Commentary on Article 43 ICJ Statute

Stefan A.G. Talmon (Univ. of Bonn - Law) has posted A Primer on ICJ Procedure: A Commentary on Article 43 ICJ Statute. Here's the abstract:

The procedure before the International Court of Justice is governed, first and foremost, by Article 43 of the Court`s Statute, the Rules of Court, the Practice Directions and by the practice of the Court. The term ‘procedure’ describes the mode of conducting proceedings before the Court. In combining both oral and written phases of procedure the Court ‘marries the key features of the common and civil law systems’ thus allowing States, according to their own legal traditions, to lay greater emphasis on either of the two phases of the proceedings. The combination of the two phases is the basis for the sound administration of international justice. The Court’s procedure in contentious cases is characterized by the equality of the parties, the duality of the proceedings, the simplicity of the procedural rule and the flexibility in its application. The paper provides a detailed commentary on the rules governing the written and oral phase of the proceedings in contentious cases and the incidental proceedings on preliminary objections.

New Issue: Revue Québécoise de Droit International

The latest issue of the Revue Québécoise de Droit International (Vol. 23, no. 2, 2010) is out. Contents include:

• Anne-Claire Gayet, La conformité des conditions de travail des travailleurs agricoles migrants au Québec avec l'article 46 de la Charte des droits et libertés de la personne interprété à la lumière du droit international
• Maroine Bendaoud, Le droit au logement tel que vu par le Pacte international relatif aux droits économiques, sociaux et culturels : sa mise en œuvre québécoise est-elle conforme ?
• Fannie Lafontaine, The Unbearable Lightness of International Obligations: When and How to Exercise Jurisdiction under Canada's Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes Act
• Étienne Giroux, Bioprospection en Antarctique : juridiction des États et libre disposition des résultats
• Sylvestre-José-Tidiane Manga, International Environmental Governance Reform within the United Nations: Seeking for more Sustainability Towards and Beyond Rio + 20 Earth Environment Summit

BIICL: The Special Procedures of the UN Human Rights Council and the Human Rights Situation in Iran

On March 26, 2012, Ahmed Shaheed (UN Special Rapporteur for Iran) and Scott Sheeran (Univ. of Essex - Law) will speak at the British Institute of International and Comparative Law on "The Special Procedures of the UN Human Rights Council and the Human Rights Situation in Iran."

Call for Papers: ESIL Interest Group on International Economic Law

The Interest Group on International Economic Law of the European Society of International Law has issued a call for papers for a workshop to be held on the occasion of the Society's Fifth Biennial Conference. Here's the call:

European Society of International Law Interest Group on International Economic Law

Workshop held on the occasion of the Fifth ESIL Conference on “Regionalism and International Law”

University of Valencia, 13-15 September 2012

Call for Papers

Deadline 23 April 2012

The IG on International Economic Law Interest Group invites all members of the ESIL to submit works for presentation in either of the two panels of our workshop: “The Regulatory Answers to the Sovereign Debt Crisis” and “The reach and impact of bilateralism as a tool for fragmentation or de-fragmentation in IEL”. The first panel will deal with the different legal instruments created both in the European Union and at the international level to solve the financial problems brought about by the sovereign debt crisis. On the second subject we will deal with fragmentation in a very wide sense, including trade, investment law, or even natural resources law. Proposals for papers may address either of the two topics. The deadline for the submission of abstracts is 23 April 2012. The ESIL IEL IG workshop takes place on Thursday 13 September 2012, 9:30-12:30 am.

In addition, there will be a joint workshop of the IG on International Economic Law and the IG on International Environmental Law on the topic of the United Nations ‘Rio+20’ Conference taking place on Wednesday, 12 September 2012, 6-8 pm.

For the full Call for Papers, please follow this link.

New Issue: Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

The latest issue of the Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law (Vol. 45, no. 1, January 2012) is out. Contents include:

• Dan W. Puchniak & Masafumi Nakahigashi, Japan's Love for Derivative Actions: Irrational Behavior and Non-Economic Motives as Rational Explanations for Shareholder Litigation
• Sheldon Bernard Lyke, Brown Abroad: An Empiricial Analysis of Foreign Judicial Citation and the Metaphor of Cosmopolitan Conversation
• Philip M. Nichols, The Psychic Costs of Violating Corruption Laws

New Issue: Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights

The latest issue of the Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights (Vol. 30, no. 1, 2012) is out. Contents include:

• S. E. Berry, A tale of two Instruments: Religious Minorities and The Council of Europe’s Rights Regime
• E. Craig, From security to Justice? The Development of A More Justice-oriented Approach to the Realisation of european Minority Rights
• F. Prina, Power, Politics and Participation: The Russian Federation’s National Minorities and their Participatory Rights

Conference: Agents of Change: The Individual as a Participant in the Legal Process

On May 19-20, 2012, the Cambridge Journal of International and Comparative Law will host a conference on "Agents of Change: The Individual as a Participant in the Legal Process." The program is here.

New Issue: Revue de Droit International et de Droit Comparé

The latest issue of the Revue de Droit International et de Droit Comparé (Vol. 89, no. 1, 2012) is out. Contents include:

• G. Caceres, L'aménagement raisonnable en matière religieuse: lorsque les concepts franchissent l'atlantique
• R. Njeufack Temgwa, Le droit d'évocation de la Cour suprême camerounaise en matière civile en question: une contribution à l'évolution des cours suprêmes
• L.D. Muka Tshibende, Y. Queinnec, & I. Tchotourian, Articles 224 et s. de la loi grenelle II: vers un droit de la gouvernance d'entreprise (enfin?) responsable
• G. De Foestraets, Le contrôle de la contradiction des motifs d'une sentence arbitrale: vers une solution plus mesurée?

Call for Participation: Measuring the Immeasurable? The Fairness Discourse in Investment Treaty Arbitration

Daniel Behn, a PhD Candidate at the University of Dundee's Centre for Energy, Petroleum, and Mineral Law and Policy (CEPMLP), is conducting a study on the fairness discourse in investment treaty arbitration. This study is not a typical questionnaire; rather, it asks the participant to sort through a number of subjective statements (a process called Q sorting) on issues of fairness in investment treaty arbitration and to rank order them in relation to each other. The study seeks to improve our understanding on how values shape and influence the way that we approach legal problems in investment treaty arbitration. Participation should take about 20-30 minutes and will be conducted in the strictest of confidence. Those interested in participating should go to the study's website and use the access code "HLC."

Call for Papers: Collective Redress in the Cross-Border Context

A call for papers has been issued for a works-in-progress conference on "Collective Redress in the Cross-Border Context." Here's the call:

Collective Redress in the Cross-Border Context

Large-scale international legal injuries are becoming increasingly prevalent in today’s globalized economy, whether they arise in the context of consumer, commercial, contract, tort or securities law, and countries are struggling to find appropriate means of providing collective redress, particularly in the cross-border context. The Hague Institute for the Internationalisation of Law (HiiL), along with the Netherlands Institute for Advanced Study in the Humanities and Social Sciences (NIAS), will be responding to this new and developing challenge by convening a two-day event on the theme “Collective Redress in the Cross-Border Context: Arbitration, Litigation, Settlement and Beyond.” The event includes two different elements – a workshop on 21-22 June 2012 comprised of invited speakers from all over the world as well as a works-in-progress conference on 20-21 June 2012 designed to allow practitioners and scholars who are interested in the area of collective redress to discuss their work and ideas in the company of other experts in the field. Both events are organized by the Henry G. Schermers Fellow for 2012, Professor S.I. Strong of the University of Missouri School of Law.

Persons interested in being considered as presenters for the works-in-progress conference should submit an abstract of no more than 500 words to Professor S.I. Strong at strongsi@missouri.edu on or before 1 May 2012. Decisions regarding accepted proposals will be made in early May, and those whose proposals are accepted for the works-in-progress conference will need to submit a draft paper by 4 June 2012 for discussion at the conference. All works-in-progress submissions should explore one or more of the various means of resolving collective injuries, including class and collective arbitration, mass arbitration and mass claims processes, class and collective litigation, and large-scale settlement and mediation, preferably in a cross-border context. Junior scholars in particular are encouraged to submit proposals for consideration.

Persons presenting at the works-in-progress conference will have to bear their own costs, since there is no funding available to assist with travel and other expenses. The works-in-progress conference will be held on 20 and 21 June 2012 at NIAS, Meijboomlaan 1, 2242 PR Wassenaar, The Netherlands. Wassenaar is approximately 20 minutes from The Hague by car. The workshop of invited speakers will be held on 21 and 22 June, also at NIAS.

Both the Schermers workshop and the works-in-progress conference are open to the public, although advance registration is required. More information on both events is available at the HiiL website (www.hiil.org) or from Professor Strong at strongsi@missouri.edu.

Contact: Prof. S.I. Strong at strongsi@missouri.edu

Deadline for proposals: 1 May 2012

For more on the Henry G. Schermers Fellowship at HiiL/NIAS, see: http://www.hiil.org/organ-bios/prof-s-i-strong

Mills: Towards a Public International Perspective on Private International Law: Variable Geometry and Peer Governance

Alex Mills (Univ. College London - Law) has posted Towards a Public International Perspective on Private International Law: Variable Geometry and Peer Governance. Here's the abstract:

This paper argues that private international law rules constitute a form of international ‘public’ ordering or global governance, and it explores some of the implications of this argument for the international development of private international law. It begins by examining the theoretical foundations for this perspective as well as its historical context and justification, arguing that it is more coherent and more consistent with pre-modern conceptions of the subject. It then turns to examine recent developments in federal systems – the European Union, Canada and Australia – which demonstrate the emergence of a similar ‘public’ perspective on private international law at a regional level. The paper then considers two major problems with the idea that developments within federal systems can be transplanted or applied by analogy at the international level, as well as the potential of two ideas which present responses to these problems. The first problem is that of hierarchy – the complexity of the relationship between federal and international developments – and the idea examined in response is that of variable geometry. The second problem is that of heterarchy – the absence of institutional structures comparable to those in federal systems to support international developments – and the idea of peer governance is examined as a response to this issue. The paper concludes that these ideas have a potentially important impact on a range of international law questions, and that they should form a key part of the research agenda for studies of global governance both within and beyond the context of private international law.

Talmon: The Absent Judge: A Commentary on Article 23 ICJ Statute

Stefan A.G. Talmon (Univ. of Bonn - Law) has posted The Absent Judge: A Commentary on Article 23 ICJ Statute. Here's the abstract:

The Members of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) are obliged to hold themselves permanently at the disposal of the Court except during judicial vacations and if they are on leave or prevented from attending by illness or other serious reasons. The Judges of the ICJ are, however, frequently absent from the Court. In several cases up to three members of the Court were absent at the same public sitting; in two cases, due to absence, the number of judges on the bench was reduced to 11; and in one recent case there were only 10 judges left on the bench. The paper examines provision of the Court’s Statute dealing with the absence of judges, the meaning of ‘absence’, the duty of judges to explain their absence, justifications for absence and the consequences of the absence of judges. Although the record of the judges’ presence in The Hague seems to have improved over last couple of years, their frequent presence at academic conferences, their public speaking engagements, and their work as arbitrators indicates some further room for improvement.