Saturday, March 17, 2012

Call for Papers: International Law Weekend 2012

The American Branch of the International Law Association and the International Law Students Association have issued a call for papers for International Law Weekend 2012, which will take place October 25-27, 2012, in New York City. The theme is "Ideas, Institutions, and Interests – Dynamics of Change in International Law." Here's the call:

In anticipation of International Law Weekend 2012 – the premier international law event of the fall season, to be held on October 25-27, 2012, in New York City – the sponsors would like to invite you and your colleagues to submit proposals for panels, roundtables, and lectures at International Law Weekend (ILW) 2012.

The overall theme of ILW 2012 is Ideas, Institutions, and Interests – Dynamics of Change in International Law. International Law Weekend is sponsored and organized by the American Branch of the International Law Association (“ABILA”) – which welcomes new members from academia, the practicing bar, and the diplomatic world – and the International Law Students Association (“ILSA”). ILW 2012 will be held in conjunction with the 91st annual meeting of the American Branch.

We expect an audience that will include practitioners, professors, UN diplomats, business leaders, federal and state government officials, NGO leaders, writers, journalists, and interested citizens. This year, we plan to have a broad array of public international law topics, but will also have dedicated tracks of private international law topics in each program slot. Thus, we welcome suggestions of cutting-edge issues in the international aspects of corporate, tax, securities, and investment law, as well as international arbitration and other forms of international dispute resolution. Equally welcome are topics in public international law and institutions, including issues regarding the United Nations, human rights, peacekeeping, humanitarian intervention, arms control, the development of regional and sub-regional organizations, etc. We also encourage suggestions of varied formats, such as debates, roundtables, lectures, and break-out groups, as well as the usual practice of panel presentations.

The unifying theme for this year’s meeting is to explore the mechanisms of change in international law. Panels may focus on key regions undergoing particularly dramatic change, for instance in the Middle East or China, and subject matter areas undergoing rapid change, such as tariffs and trade, human rights and humanitarian intervention, immigration, labor, public health, sustainable development and the environment. The meeting will be held in Manhattan at the Association of the Bar of the City of New York at 42 West 44th Street on Thursday evening, October 25, and at the Fordham Law School at Lincoln Center on October 26-27. ILW 2012 is expected to attract an audience of more than one thousand practitioners, academics, diplomats, members of the governmental and nongovernmental sectors, and most importantly, foreign policy and law students who are learning about the range of practice and career opportunities.

The program chairs invite proposals to be submitted on-line via the 2012 ILW Panel Proposal Submission Form on or before Friday, April 13, 2012. Please provide a title, brief description of the topic, and the names, titles, and affiliations of the chair and likely speakers – but also describe what you think would be the most engaging and exciting format, including ways to enhance participation by the audience.

One of the objectives of ILW 2012 is to promote new dialogues among scholars and practicing lawyers; so formats should include presenters with diverse experiences and perspectives. Additionally, extra consideration will be given to proposals including at least one law student or recent graduate. The 2012 ILW Program Committee Members are: Steve Hammond, Hughes Hubbard & Reed LLP,; Nikolai B. Krylov, Winston & Strawn LLP,; Vivian Shen, International Law Students Association,; Mark R. Shulman, Pace Law School,; Michael Shewchuk, United Nations Office of Legal Affairs,; and Ruth Wedgwood, ABILA, (Ex officio).

The online Proposal Submission form can be found on the ILSA website, here:

2012 International Law Weekend Panel Proposal Submission Form

Friday, March 16, 2012

New Issue: Journal of International Trade Law and Policy

The latest issue of the Journal of International Trade Law and Policy (Vol. 11, no. 1, 2012) is out. Contents include:
  • Qiao Liu & Xiang Ren, Transfer of funds in China-US BIT negotiations: comparing the Articles of Agreement of the IMF
  • Larry A. DiMatteo, False dichotomies in commercial contract interpretation
  • Sean Thomas, The right to reject for short delivery and termination
  • Weifeng Zhou & Ludo Cuyvers, The effectiveness of EU's Generalised System of Preferences: Evidence from ASEAN countries
  • Claus D. Zimmermann, Strengthening the WTO by replacing trade retaliation with stronger informal remedies?

Shany's 2011/2012 Lauterpacht Memorial Lectures (Audio/Video)

Recently, Yuval Shany, the Hersch Lauterpacht Chair in International Law at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, delivered the 2011/2012 Sir Hersch Lauterpacht Memorial Lectures at the University of Cambridge. His topic was "Jurisdiction and Admissibility of Cases before International Courts and Tribunals." The lectures are now available in both audio and video format here (part 1), here (part 2), and here (part 3).

Shany: The Israeli Unlawful Combatants Law: Old Wine in a New Bottle?

Yuval Shany (Hebrew Univ. of Jerusalem - Law) has posted The Israeli Unlawful Combatants Law: Old Wine in a New Bottle? Here's the abstract:
The Israeli Incarceration of Unlawful Combatants Law of 2002 (the “2002 Law”) is arguably a legal instrument of controversial origins and limited practical utility. Still, its history presents an interesting case study of the way in which legal systems struggle to adapt themselves to new challenges presented by terror groups, and how the dialectic between the legislature and courts can contribute to the fine-tuning of legislation dealing with such issues. Furthermore, the cumulative experience acquired by Israel in applying the law may be of general interest to countries seeking to introduce a preventive detention schemes in the context of their counter-terrorism policies. Part One of this article briefly surveys the background to the enactment of the 2002 Law. Part Two introduces the main features of the 2002 Law and offers a few critical observations thereon. Part Three discusses a 2008 Supreme Court judgment in which a constitutional challenge to the validity of the 2002 Law was discussed and rejected. Part Four summarizes the principal changes introduced by a 2008 amendment to the Law, and Part Five takes stock of the application of the 2002 Law in practice. A few concluding observations are then be offered.

New Issue: Revue Québécoise de Droit International

The latest issue of the Revue Québécoise de Droit International (Vol. 23, no. 1, 2010) is out. Contents include:
  • Ridha Boukhari, La protection de l'enfant en droit international privé tunisien : l'exemple de la garde (ou hadhana)
  • Dandi Gnamou-Petauton, Le nouveau partenariat pour le développement de l'Afrique dans l'architecture institutionnelle de l'Union africaine
  • Van Trien Lam, Les enjeux juridiques de l'intégration des pays en développement dans le régime climatique post-Kyoto
  • Patricia Galindo da Fonseca, Le dynamisme du droit brésilien de la protection du consommateur

Neumann & Salomon: Fishing in Troubled Waters - Somalia's Maritime Zones and the Case for Reinterpretation

Thilo Neumann (International Max Planck Research School for Maritime Affairs) & Tim René Salomon (International Max Planck Research School for Maritime Affairs) have posted an ASIL Insight on Fishing in Troubled Waters - Somalia's Maritime Zones and the Case for Reinterpretation.

New Issue: Schweizerische Zeitschrift für internationales und europäisches Recht

The latest issue of the Schweizerische Zeitschrift für internationales und europäisches Recht (Vol. 21, no. 4, 2011) is out. Contents include:
  • Aufsätze
    • Matthias Oesch, Niederlassungsfreiheit und Ausübung öffentlicher Gewalt im EU-Recht und im Freizügigkeitsabkommen
    • Nikolas Stürchler, Der Begriff des Krieges im Völkerrecht: Spezifisch unter dem Gesichtspunkt des Neutralitätsrechts
    • Myriam Nicoulaz, Les armes à sous-munitions: Le conflit israélo-libanais de l'été 2006 et la genèse d'un traité
    • Romana Weber, Is There a Right of Human Rights Organsiations to Protect Their Sources?
  • Vortrag
    • Micheline Calmy-Rey, La globalisation et la démocratie

Thursday, March 15, 2012

Trimble: Global Patents: Limits of Transnational Enforcement

Marketa Trimble (Univ. of Nevada - Law) has published Global Patents: Limits of Transnational Enforcement (Oxford Univ. Press 2012). Here's the abstract:

In today's globalized economy, many inventors, investors and businesses want their inventions to be protected in many, if not most, countries. However, there currently exists no single patent that will protect an invention globally, and despite the attempts in international treaties to simplify patenting, the process remains complicated, lengthy, and expensive. Furthermore, the necessity of enforcing patents in multiple countries exists without any possibility of concentrating in one location any parallel proceedings that concern the same invention and the same parties, thus making the maintenance of parallel patents infeasible.

Global Patents: Limits of Transnational Enforcement, by Marketa Trimble, explains why the absence of a "global patent" persists, and discusses the events in the 140-year history of patent law internationalization that have shaped the solutions. The author analyzes the ways in which patent holders attempt to mitigate the problems that arise from the lack of global patent protection. One way is to concentrate enforcement in one court of patents granted in multiple countries, which makes the enforcement of the patents less costly and more consistent. Another way is to attempt to use the litigation of a single country patent to reach acts that occur outside the country, which can mitigate the lack of patent protection outside the country. However, both the concentration of proceedings and extraterritorial enforcement suffer from significant limitations. Global Patents explains these limitations and presents the solutions that have been proposed to address them. The book includes a thorough comparative analysis of the extraterritorial features of U.S. and German patent laws, and original statistics on U.S. patent litigation. Based on a comprehensive treatment of the various facets of transnational enforcement challenges, the author proposes the next stage of patent law internationalization.

New Issue: Journal of International Wildlife Law & Policy

The latest issue of the Journal of International Wildlife Law & Policy (Vol. 15, no. 1, January-March 2012) is out. Contents include:
  • Special Issue: Protected Areas, Climate Change, and International Wildlife NGO Strategies
    • Andrew Dodd, Gwyn Williams, Richard Bradbury, Alice Hardiman, Aidan Lonergan, & Olly Watts, Protected Areas and Wildlife in Changing Landscapes: The Law and Policy Context for NGO Responses to Climate Change in the UK
    • Elizabeth M. De Santo, From Paper Parks to Private Conservation: The Role of NGOs in Adapting Marine Protected Area Strategies to Climate Change
    • Pamela S. Chasek, Rethinking the Law and Policy of Protected Areas in a Warming World: Evolving Approaches of American Conservation Organizations
  • Article
    • Gabriela Kütting, Nature Conservation Law in Context: The Limited Influence of European Union and Greek Designations on the Future of Cavo Sidero, Crete

Klump & Vec: Völkerrecht und Weltwirtschaft im 19. Jahrhundert

Rainer Klump (Goethe Universität Frankfurt am Main) & Miloš Vec (Max-Planck-Institut für europäische Rechtsgeschichte) have published Völkerrecht und Weltwirtschaft im 19. Jahrhundert (Nomos 2012). Contents include:
  • Rainer Klump & Miloš Vec, Große Erwartungen. Völkerrecht und Weltwirtschaft im 19. Jahrhundert
  • Bertram Schefold, Die Bedeutung des Freihandels in wirtschaftstheoretischen Debatten in Deutschland während des 19. Jahrhunderts
  • Lauri Mälksoo, The History of International Trade Law in the Work of Russian International Lawyer, Friedrich Martens (1845-1909): from Unequal Relations to Protectionism and Free Trade
  • Niels P. Petersson, Normative Grundlagen überstaatlicher Handels- und Finanzintegration um 1900
  • Cornelius Torp, Im Zangengriff der Globalisierung: Deutsche Handelspolitik vor 1914
  • Olivier Accominotti, Marc Flandreau, Bilateral Treaties And The Most-Favoured Nation Clause. The Myth of Trade Liberalization in the Nineteenth Century
  • Toshihiro Atsumi & Daniel M. Bernhofen, The Effects of the Unequal Treaties on Normative, Economic and Institutional Changes in 19th Century Japan
  • Stefan Kroll, Chinas Schulden und internationales Finanzrecht im ausgehenden 19. Jahrhundert. Überlegungen zu Weltgesellschaft und Rechtspluralismus
  • Thomas Duve, Friendship, Trade and Navigation Treaties with the La Plata States in the Middle of the 19th Century
  • Oliver Eberl, Dialektik des Abolitionismus. Die völkerrechtliche Ächtung des Sklavenhandels und die europäische Expansion im 19. Jahrhundert
  • Johannes Berchtold, Exterritorialität im Zeitalter der ungleichen Verträge
  • Andreas Fahrmeir, Und was passiert im Ausnahmezustand? Grenzüberschreitende Besitzrechte in internationalen Krisenjahren

New Issue: Journal of World Intellectual Property

The latest issue of the Journal of World Intellectual Property (Vol. 15, no. 2, March 2012) is out. Contents include:
  • Ahmed Driouchi & Nada Zouag, Pharmaceutical Patents and Prices of Generics in Morocco and Neighboring Economies
  • Geoffroy Filoche, Biodiversity Fetishism and Biotechnology Promises in Brazil: From Policy Contradictions to Legal Adjustments
  • Aurobinda Panda & Atul Patel, Role of Collective Management Organizations for Protection of Performers' Right in Music Industry: In the Era of Digitalization

Wednesday, March 14, 2012

New Issue: Arbitration International

The latest issue of Arbitration International (Vol. 28, no. 1, 2012) is out. Contents include:
  • Paul Friedland & Kate Brown de Vejar, Discoverability of Communications between Counsel and Party-Appointed Experts in International Arbitration
  • Luke Nottage & J. Romesh Weeramantry, Investment Arbitration in Asia: Five Perspectives on Law and Practice
  • Ola O. Olatawura, Nigeria’s Appellate Courts, Arbitration and Extra-Legal Jurisdiction: Facts, Problems, and Solutions
  • Shahla Ali, Hui Huang, Financial Dispute Resolution in China: Arbitration or Court Litigation?
  • Emilia Onyema, The New Ghana ADR Act 2010: A Critical Overview
  • Guido Carducci, The Arbitration Reform in France: Domestic and International Arbitration Law

Cassese: Realizing Utopia: The Future of International Law

The late Antonio Cassese has published Realizing Utopia: The Future of International Law (Oxford Univ. Press 2012). The table of contents is here. Here's the abstract:

Realizing Utopia is a collection of essays by a group of innovative international jurists. Its contributors reflect on some of the major legal problems facing the international community and analyse the inconsistencies or inadequacies of current law. They highlight the elements - even if minor, hidden, or emerging - that are likely to lead to future changes or improvements. Finally, they suggest how these elements can be developed, enhanced, and brought to fruition in the next two or three decades, with a view to achieving an improved architecture of world society or, at a minimum, to reshaping some major aspects of international dealings. Contributions to the book thus try to discern the potential, in the present legal construct of world society, that might one day be brought to light in a better world.

As the impact of international law on national legal orders continues to increase, this volume takes stock of how far international law has come and how it should continue to develop.

Call for Papers: Le colloque annuel de la Société française pour le droit international (Ateliers de jeunes chercheurs)

The Société française pour le droit international has issued a call for papers directed at young researchers for its annual conference, May 31-June 2, 2012, at the Université de Lorraine in Nancy. The conference theme is "L'Etat dans la mondialisation." Here's the call:

Colloque SFDI de Nancy

31 mai – 2 juin 2012



Le colloque annuel de la SFDI organisé cette année par l’Université de Nancy s’interrogera sur L’Etat dans la mondialisation.

Suivant la pratique établie maintenant depuis plusieurs années, la troisième demi-journée du colloque sera réservée aux Ateliers de jeunes chercheurs.

Quatre ateliers se tiendront, consacrés respectivement aux quatre thèmes suivants :

- Souveraineté et Internet

- Souveraineté en matière économique, financière et monétaire

- Souveraineté en matière migratoire

- Souveraineté en matière pénale

Dans ce cadre, un appel à contributions est lancé à l’adresse des doctorants, docteurs, post-doctorants et jeunes maîtres de conférences.

Les propositions de contributions (4 pages maximum, accompagnées d’un CV) devront être envoyées le 31 mars 2012 au plus tard, à l’adresse suivante : Les personnes dont la candidature aura été retenue en seront informées d’ici au 15 avril 2012.

Les propositions devront correspondre aux indications données ci-dessous pour chacun des ateliers.



Souveraineté et Internet

Présidence : Evelyne LAGRANGE, Professeur de droit public à l’Université Paris I Panthéon-Sorbonne

Rapporteur : André MOINE, Maître de Conférences de droit public à l’Université de Lorraine

Le « cyberespace », forme particulière de mondialisation, contrarie les instruments d’exercice de la souveraineté par sa « virtualité » ; il échappe par nature à l’exclusivité d’une compétence étatique. La réglementation nationale des activités présente les risques de la vanité et d’un caractère potentiellement liberticide. Toutefois, l’Etat souverain peut réglementer cet espace et ces activités avec ses pairs. Prima facie, les Etats ont un intérêt collectif à adopter une réglementation internationale d’un Internet sans frontières. Les progrès de la coopération en la matière appellent toutefois une évaluation.

L’atelier « Souveraineté et internet » nous permettra de nous interroger sur le rôle du droit international dans la régulation de ce réseau informatique transnational et de ses usages. En complément d’un rapport synthétique sur l’incidence d’Internet et des différentes modalités de sa régulation sur la souveraineté étatique et ses conditions d’exercice, seront abordés :

- « l’inégale souveraineté » des Etats face à Internet,

- les cybermenaces et les cyberattaques contre la sécurité des Etats ou leurs intérêts essentiels,

- les modalités et spécificités de la lutte contre la cybercriminalité et la cyberdélinquance sous toutes leurs formes,

- le rôle des différents organismes internationaux en matière de régulation ou de concertation/coopération entre Etats,

- la confrontation entre la communauté interétatique et les acteurs privés de l’Internet (opérateurs, communautés virtuelles…),

- les relations internationales à l’ère de la transparence (notamment l’affaire « Wikileaks »),

- le développement de la « cyberingérence » (blocage de sites, hébergement de sites censurés, manipulation des contenus disponibles par des moteurs de recherche, en accord avec des gouvernements…).,

- la mise à l’épreuve des standards de protection des droits de l’homme.

Cette liste de thèmes susceptibles de faire l’objet de communications n’est qu’indicative. Toutes les propositions de contribution liées au thème de l’atelier seront examinées avec soin.



Souveraineté en matière économique, financière et monétaire

Présidence : Habib GHERARI, Professeur de droit public à Aix-Marseille Université

Rapporteur : Batyah SIERPINSKI, Maître de Conférences de droit public à l’Université de Lorraine

Thème 1/ La souveraineté aux prises avec les marchés

Devant la financiarisation croissante de l’économie et la puissance grandissante des marchés, quel rôle pour les Etats s’agissant notamment de l’encadrement juridique et du contrôle desdits marchés ?

Rapport : Quelle régulation des marchés financiers ? (15 mn)

Thème 2/ La souveraineté face à l’asymétrie de puissance économique

Qu’il s’agisse d’investissements ou d’échanges de biens et de services et des questions qui leur sont liées, Etats du Sud, marqués par la fragilité que l’on sait, et grandes puissances économiques négocient souvent d’importants accords. Quels problèmes naissent de la confrontation de ces souverainetés dans ce type de négociations et d’engagements et quelles solutions y a-t-on apporté alors qu’il s’agit de règles qui vont peser lourdement, engager les uns et les autres durablement et souvent signifier pour chaque partie le renoncement à d’importants pouvoirs économiques ?

Rapport : - Modélisation conventionnelle et étendue du pouvoir de négociation (15 mn)


- Quel bilan pour le traitement spécial et différencié ? (15 mn)

Thème 3/ La souveraineté sous surveillance

A côté des procédures contentieuses qui, lorsqu’elles existent, constituent une pression discrète mais réelle sur les Etats pour les inciter à se conformer à leurs engagements, ceux-ci se trouvent désormais sous le feu continu d’un suivi de plus en plus dense les soumettant à une obligation accrue de transparence et de reddition des comptes.

Rapport : Les techniques de surveillance des accords économiques internationaux (15 mn)



Souveraineté en matière migratoire

Présidence : Théodore CHRISTAKIS, Professeur de droit international à l’Université Grenoble II, Directeur du CESICE

Rapporteur : Mélanie DUBUY, Maître de Conférences de droit public à l’Université de Lorraine

Les mouvements internationaux de populations comptent désormais parmi les grandes préoccupations des Etats et focalisent l’attention de leurs opinions publiques. Confrontés à un accroissement spectaculaire des flux migratoires, les pays d’accueil tentent par différents moyens (y compris la construction de murs…) d’imperméabiliser leurs frontières tout en développant le recours à des mesures « d’externalisation ». Ces mesures peuvent ainsi consister dans : le durcissement des politiques de visas ; la mise en place de techniques de « biométrisation » des migrants ; la conclusion d’accords avec des pays tiers pour établir sur le sol de ces derniers des contrôles (y compris des patrouilles communes) afin d’empêcher l’embarcation des immigrants potentiels ; l’intervention en haute mer pour empêcher l’accès des embarcations des migrants à la mer territoriale ; le recours à des mesures de détention « extraterritoriale » soit sur des bases du pays à l’étranger soit sur le sol de pays tiers, et bien d’autres mesures encore.

L’accroissement de ces flux migratoires non voulus peut être à l’origine de tensions entre les pays d’émigration (qui regrettent souvent la fuite de matière grise parmi leur population), les pays d’immigration et les pays de transit, mais il peut aussi pousser ces pays à imaginer de nouvelles formes de coopération.

Ces mesures de lutte contre l’immigration irrégulière soulèvent d’importantes et délicates questions de droit international en touchant différentes branches de celui-ci comme par exemple le droit d’asile et le droit des réfugiés ; les droits de l’homme ; le droit de la mer ; ou encore le droit de la sécurité internationale.

L’objectif de cet atelier sera ainsi d’examiner plus précisément de quelle manière les flux migratoires et les mesures de lutte contre l’immigration irrégulière affectent la souveraineté des Etats et d’analyser les principales questions que la lutte contre l’immigration irrégulière soulève en droit international.



Souveraineté en matière pénale

Présidence : Rafaëlle MAISON, Professeur de droit public à l’Université Paris XI

Rapporteur : Mohamed S. HELALI, Maître de Conférence de droit public à l’Université de Lorraine

L’évolution des relations internationales, du droit international et du droit européen témoigne de l’importance qu’y prennent les dimensions pénales. Le présent atelier vise à interroger les incidences de cette évolution sur un pouvoir relevant traditionnellement de l’Etat. Les contributions pourront s’organiser autour de trois thèmes.

Thème 1 / La volonté pénale étatique et les pouvoirs de la Cour pénale internationale

Le sens et l'interprétation de la "complémentarité" de la Cour pénale internationale pourront être examinés, à partir de la pratique contemporaine.

Thème 2/ L’outil pénal du Conseil de sécurité

Les aspects pénaux des décisions du Conseil de sécurité - parmi lesquelles la saisine de la CPI - seront interrogés, au regard de leur influence sur la "compétence nationale des États".

Thème 3/ La compétence pénale des Etats membres de l’Union Européenne

Il s'agira de penser l'effet de la loi de l'Union sur le pouvoir pénal des Etats membres et la confiance pénale qu'exige le mandat d'arrêt européen. L'œuvre de la Cour européenne des droits de l'homme sur le pouvoir de punir pourra également être évoquée.

Ces thèmes donneront lieu chacun à une contribution qui ne devra pas excéder 15 minutes, qui seront précédés par une introduction et suivies par un débat et par une conclusion.

Call for Papers: A Comparative Institutional Framework for Global Governance Analysis

The Global Governance Programme at the European University Institute has issued a call for papers for a workshop on "A Comparative Institutional Framework for Global Governance Analysis," to take place May 3, 2012. Here's the call:

A Comparative Institutional Framework for Global Governance Analysis

European University Institute, Florence, 3 May 2012

Call For Papers

Scientific Coordinators: Neil Komesar (Wisconsin University) and Miguel Poiares Maduro (Global Governance Programme, Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies, European University Institute)

This workshop focuses on constructing an analytical framework to understand and discuss different proposals regarding global governance. The framework we will employ is Comparative Institutional Analysis (CIA).

CIA is at once an obvious and yet challenging approach to global governance. It seems obvious that analyzing global governance means analyzing the available and proposed governance mechanisms-- institutions in our sense of the word. This task is challenging because these institutional mechanisms are all highly imperfect and their imperfections tend to parallel one another.

It is common to find one-sided critiques of existing governance as though such insights provide a sufficient case for the substitution of some often idealized alternative. This is single institutional analysis. Although single institutional analysis makes for attractive if superficial rhetorical argument it is largely analytically empty. It is absolutely necessary to address the real functioning of all the relevant institutional alternatives. This is comparative institutional analysis.

We seek papers willing to address this central issue in the context of global governance. The papers may deal with the general questions of global governance or with specific case studies. The essential requirement is that they engage both with Global Governance and Comparative Institutional Analysis.

Important Dates

Selection of participants will be based on either a 2-3 pages outline of their proposed paper (with details on the methodology and empirics) or (better) a first draft of their paper. An up-to date CV should also be provided.

Proposals and the CVs should be sent in pdf format to no later than

2 April 2012

Please name your file according to the following format: SURNAME_CIA_Draft.pdf and SURNAME_CIA_CV.pdf

Selection results will be notified by 12 April.

Draft papers will have to be delivered no later than 30 April 2012.

The workshop will take place on 3 May 2012.

The Global Governance Programme

The goals of the Global Governance Programme (GGP) are to share knowledge, develop new ideas on issues of global governance, and serve as a bridge between research and policy-making. Research, Policy and Training are the three dimensions of the GGP. The GGP is part of the Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies of the European University Institute, a world-renowned and truly European academic institution uniquely placed to contribute the European perspective to the global governance debate.

Global Governance Programme

European University Institute

Villa Schifanoia

Via Boccaccio 121

I-50133 Firenze

Tel. +39 055 4685 973

Fax. +39 055 4685 458

Conference: The Indian Society of International Law's 41st Annual Conference

On April 13-14, 2012, the Indian Society of International Law will hold its 41st Annual Conference, in New Delhi. The following themes will be discussed: (1) Piracy under International Law: New Challenges; (2) WTO Doha Round: An Appraisal; (3) Impact of Globalization on Private International Law. The program is not yet available.

Tuesday, March 13, 2012

New Issue: Zeitschrift für ausländisches öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht

The latest issue of the Zeitschrift für ausländisches öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht (Vol. 72, no. 1, 2012) is out. Contents include:
  • Abhandlungen
    • Jürgen Habermas, Die Krise der Europäischen Union im Lichte einer Konstitutionalisierung des Völkerrechts – Ein Essay zur Verfassung Europas
    • Armin von Bogdandy, Matthias Kottmann, Carlino Antpöhler, Johanna Dickschen, Simon Hentrei, & Maja Smrkolj, Ein Rettungsschirm für europäische Grundrechte - Grundlagen einer unionsrechtlichen Solange-Doktrin gegenüber Mitgliedstaaten
    • András Jakab & Pál Sonnevend, Kontinuität mit Mängeln: Das neue ungarische Grundgesetz
    • Gerd Winter, Zur Architektur globaler Governance des Klimaschutzes
    • Markus Krajewski, Schadensersatz wegen Verletzungen des Gewaltverbots als ius post bellum am Beispiel der Eritrea-Ethiopia Claims Commission
    • Maja Walter, Integrationsgrenze Verfassungsidentität – - Konzept und Kontrolle aus europäischer, deutscher und französischer Perspektive

New Issue: Review of European Community & International Environmental Law

The latest issue of the Review of European Community & International Environmental Law (Vol. 20, no. 3, November 2011) is out. Contents include:
  • Articles on Transboundary Environmental Impact Assessment
    • Alan Boyle, Developments in the International Law of Environmental Impact Assessments and their Relation to the Espoo Convention
    • Jan De Mulder, The Protocol on Strategic Environmental Assessment: A Matter of Good Governance
    • Jonas Ebbesson, A Modest Contribution to Environmental Democracy and Justice in Transboundary Contexts: The Combined Impact of the Espoo Convention and Aarhus Convention
    • Neil Craik & Timo Koivurova, Subsidiary Decision Making under the Espoo Convention: Legal Status and Legitimacy
    • Simon Marsden, The Espoo Convention and Strategic Environmental Assessment Protocol in the European Union: Implementation, Compliance, Enforcement and Reform
  • General Articles
    • Gerd Winter, Climate Engineering and International Law: Last Resort or the End of Humanity?
    • Yulia Levashova, How Effective is the New EU Timber Regulation in the Fight against Illegal Logging?
    • Leonie Reins, The Shale Gas Extraction Process and Its Impacts on Water Resources
  • Case Note
    • Sophia Kopela, Civil and Criminal Liability as Mechanisms for the Prevention of Oil Marine Pollution: The Erika Case

Call for Papers: The Law and Practice of the International Criminal Court: Achievements, Impact and Challenges

The Grotius Centre for International Legal Studies has issued a call for papers for a conference to coincide with the ten-year anniversary of the International Criminal Court. The conference theme is: "The Law and Practice of the International Criminal Court: Achievements, Impact and Challenges." Here's the call:


The Law and Practice of the International Criminal Court:

Achievements, Impact and Challenges

Organized by the Grotius Centre for International Legal Studies

with the support of the Open Society Justice Initiative

September 27 – 28, 2012

Peace Palace, The Hague, The Netherlands

In 2012, the International Criminal Court (ICC) will celebrate the ten-year anniversary of its entry into force. This anniversary presents an occasion to reflect on the world’s first permanent institution designed to hold individuals accountable for violations of serious international crimes. It is an opportunity to examine the law and practice of the Court, its contribution to international criminal law and policy, and its potential role in countries where such crimes have been committed. The conference will bring together scholars from a variety of disciplines and practitioners from within the broader international law community to reflect on the ICC as an institution, its jurisprudence, the impact of its activities and to critically assess future possibilities for the Court.

The conference organizers are currently seeking submissions for panel discussants. Interested participants should send a draft title and abstract of their proposal (500 words), written in English, together with a CV to Proposals are due no later than Monday, April 16, 2012. Submissions should be related to one of the themes listed below, and should indicate under which theme their proposal is to be considered. Accepted submissions may be considered for publication in a volume on the Conference theme with a leading international publisher.

Law and Practice of the ICC

The Conference is open to submissions on important developments in the ICC’s jurisprudence and applicable law, including crimes, sources of law, modes of liability, procedure and interaction with other courts and tribunals or systems of international law. The Rome Statute and jurisprudence of the ICC demonstrates a development of, and at times, departure from concepts and authorities addressed by other international criminal tribunals. The Conference will address ways in which ICC practice has emerged and ways in which this practice could be refined or improved in future cases. Potential questions for discussion might include: To what extent have ICC Judges taken a progressive or a narrow approach to interpreting the Rome Statute? What impact, if any, does this have on the legitimacy of the ICC? How can the Court increase the fairness and expeditiousness of its proceedings? What lessons can be learned from the early law and practice regarding arrest, disclosure, evidentiary issues, representation, interim release or detention? To what extent is the Court able to deal successfully with its unprecedented regime for victim participation and reparations, and what lessons can be drawn from other international or domestic mechanisms?

Roles and Responsibilities of ICC Actors

This theme will focus on topics related to the roles, responsibilities, interactions and performance of various actors at the ICC. Judges, the Prosecutor, defense, victims, witnesses, intermediaries and others working with the ICC often have competing interests and goals. How these differences are resolved, whether in the courtroom or behind the scenes, can have a significant impact on the outcome of the trial and the effects of the Court. Potential questions to be discussed might include: What is the impact of the Office of the Prosecutor’s (OTP’s) policies in light of the Rome Statute and their application in practice? To what extent are the rights of defendants effectively protected in ICC proceedings? What is the role of the Office of Public Counsel for the Defense, and what is its relationship to external counsel? How can defense-related issues of State cooperation (e.g., cooperation in relation to defense witnesses or disclosure of exculpatory evidence) be managed in a fair and effective way? How have various Court organs interpreted their relationships to and responsibilities for witnesses and victims?

Complementarity and Domestic Jurisdictions

The notion of complementarity has been widely discussed in ICC discourse, with competing minimalist and maximalist definitions. Ten years into its work, after a variety of situations with different jurisdictional triggers, how is the ICC to define its relationship to domestic legal contexts? To what extent has complementarity served as a ‘catalyst’ for compliance? Has it been applied coherently in different circumstances? Is there a need for different or new policies or approaches? To what extent should the ICC’s relationship with domestic jurisdictions be context-specific? How should the Court deal with ‘parallel proceedings’?

The ICC in Context: Impact and ‘Legacy’

In most situations, the ICC is only one amongst many actors. One of the main challenges of the ICC is to define its space in the broader situational context and to meet the needs and expectations of different constituencies, including local actors and affected communities. Submissions on this theme might discuss: How can the Court’s impact be assessed? What are the most effective means and methods of reaching and targeting affected communities? How do differences in perceptions of the Court amongst States and non-State actors effect the operation and legitimacy of the Court? How has prosecutorial independence and impartiality, OTP case selection criteria and the OTP charging policy effected the efficiency, legitimacy and ‘success’ of the court? How does ICC intervention interrelate with other initiatives, such as peace negotiations, domestic reform efforts, donor-backed capacity building projects or other transitional justice mechanisms? What happens when the ICC closes preliminary examinations, investigations or cases in a specific situation, or when it terminates its engagement in a situation de facto or de jure? What follow-up issues need to be addressed, and what strategy should be pursued? Is the term ‘legacy’—as it has been used for other international courts—an appropriate notion to apply in the ICC context? What kind of ‘legacy’ can the ICC be reasonably expected to leave behind in a given situation?

Garnett: Substance and Procedure in Private International Law

Richard Garnett (Univ. of Melbourne - Law) has published Substance and Procedure in Private International Law (Oxford Univ. Press 2012). Here's the abstract:

When the law of a foreign country is selected or pleaded by a claimant or defendant, a question arises as to whether the issue pertains to substance, in which case it may be resolved by foreign law, or procedure, in which case it will be governed by the law of forum. This book examines the distinction between substance and procedure questions in private international law, and analyses where and whether each is appropriate. To do so, it examines previous attempts to define the scope of procedure in private international law, considers alternative choice of law methods for referring matters to the law of forum, and examines the influence of the doctrine of characterization on procedure.

Substance and Procedure in Private International Law also provides detailed analysis of the decisional law in which the substance-procedure distinction has been employed, creating a clear assessment of its application in various practical situations and providing valuable guidance for practitioners on how the distinction should be applied. The book also considers 'procedural' topics such as service of process and the taking of evidence abroad, in order to show how the application of forum law may further be limited by foreign laws.

Symposium: Enforcement of Foreign Judgments

Later today, March 13, 2012, the Berkeley Journal of International Law will host the 2012 Stefan A. Riesenfeld Symposium. The topic is: "Enforcement of Foreign Judgments." The program is here. Here's the idea:

The enforcement of foreign judgments is an increasingly problematic issue. Recognition of foreign private judgments occurs when the courts of one country recognize a judgment issued by the courts of another. Such recognition allows the successful party in one country to pursue relief in the other without the cost of having to re-litigate the issue in the new jurisdiction. This benefit is of great value to private parties involved in international business and litigation.

The 2012 Riesenfeld Symposium will focus on the enforcement of foreign judgments and will feature two panels, one concerning foreign judgments in the context of the internet and media, and another concerning the legal disputes over judgments issued buy Latin American courts.

Monday, March 12, 2012

Weeramantry: Treaty Interpretation in Investment Arbitration

J. Romesh Weeramantry (City Univ. of Hong Kong - Law) has published Treaty Interpretation in Investment Arbitration (Oxford Univ. Press 2012). Here's the abstract:

The rise of investment arbitration in the last decade has generated an unprecedented body of arbitral case law. The work of these arbitral tribunals has provided scholars and practitioners with public international law jurisprudence, including materials on treaty interpretation which has not yet been thoroughly analysed.

This book evaluates the contribution of investment arbitration treaty interpretation jurisprudence to international law, covering all key aspects of treaty interpretation. Included in the book's coverage are awards which feature in prominent discussions or in applications of treaty interpretation rules. Among the significant portion of arbitral awards analysed, which deal with investment treaties, are ICSID awards, ad hoc investment arbitration awards, NAFTA awards, and Energy Charter Treaty awards.

The extensive analysis of investment arbitration awards and decisions has also been used to create a table highlighting both the references to principles of treaty interpretation and instances in which they were rejected. This invaluable insight into the practice of investment tribunals will be of interest to both practitioners and academics alike.

New Issue: Journal of East Asia and International Law

The latest issue of the Journal of East Asia and International Law (Vol. 4, no. 2, Autumn 2011) is out. Contents include:
  • Issue Focus: Outer Space Development and International Law
    • Yan Ling, Prevention of Outer Space Weaponization under International Law: A Chinese Lawyer's Perspective
    • Lalin Kovudhikulrungsr & Duangden Nakseeharach, Liability Regime of International Space Law:Some Lessons from International Nuclear Law
    • Yu Takeuchi, Space Traffic Management as a Guiding Principle of the International Regime of Sustainable Space Activities
    • Yun Zhao, The Way Forward for Promoting Awareness of Space Law in Asia:A Proposal for Institutional Capacity Building
  • Articles
    • Zezen Z. Mutaqin, Indonesian Customary Law and European Colonialism: A Comparative Analysis on Adat Law
  • Notes & Comments
    • Michael S.T. Gau, Problems and Practices in Maritime Delimitation in East Asia: With Special Reference to Taiwan
    • Seryon Lee, The Feasibility of Reforming the UN Security Council:Too Much Talk, Too Little Action?
  • Regional Focus & Controversies: The Whaling Dispute in the South Pacific
    • Australia: Ruth Davis
    • Japan: Ad hoc Editorial Chamber

New Issue: Global Trade and Customs Journal

The latest issue of Global Trade and Customs Journal (Vol. 7, no. 3, 2012) is out. Contents include:
  • Tim Hesselink, EU Customs Valuation: Wake-Up Call for MNE
  • Eugenia Laurenza & Paolo R. Vergano, Fossil Fuel ‘Grading’ and Sustainability Criteria for Biofuels and Bioliquids under the EU Fuel Quality and Renewable Energy Directives: Implications for International Trade
  • Enrique Valerdi Rodríguez, Free Trade and Empty Coffers: The Fiscal Impact of Trade Liberalization for Developing Countries

Roundtable: Leiden Journal of International Law 25th Anniversary at the ASIL Annual Meeting

On Friday, March 30, 2012, during the Annual Meeting of the American Society of International Law, the Leiden Journal of International Law will celebrate its 25th anniversary with a casual roundtable discussion featuring two of its latest articles, followed by Q&A and a cocktail reception. The event will take place at the Park Hyatt Washington, across from the ASIL venue, from 6:15 p.m. until 8 p.m. The program will feature articles by James Stewart ("The End of ‘Modes of Liability’ for International Crimes") and Jaye Ellis ("Shades of Grey - Soft Law and the Validity of Public International Law"), with comments by Diane Marie Amann and Lauri Mälksoo.

Call for Applications: Venice Academy of Human Rights

The European Inter-University Centre for Human Rights and Democratisation's Venice Academy of Human Rights is accepting applications for its summer program, to take place July 9-18. The theme of this year’s Academy is "The Limits of Human Rights." The call for applications and further information is available here.

Conference: Contemporary Issues in Statehood and Recognition

On April 30, 2012, the Society of Legal Scholars and the British Institute of International and Comparative Law will co-host a conference on "Contemporary Issues in Statehood and Recognition," in London. The program is here. Here's the idea:

Panels will explore both contemporary situations in which international disputes have given rise to questions of recognition of Statehood, governments and other entities, and situations, and new issues applicable horizontally in such contexts. Relevant differences between different types of recogntion will be sought. The role of international institutions and of normative factors will be considered.

Issues discussed will include European practice on recognition, the effect of collective non-recognition, and the legal effects of recognition. Speakers will address examples of state practice in relation to Abkhazia and South Ossetia, Kosovo, Palestine and Western Sahara, and there will be a panel devoted to the issue of recognition of governments and other entities in the light of recent (and developing) practice.

Sunday, March 11, 2012

Trachtman: The Anti-Globalization Paradox

Joel P. Trachtman (Tufts Univ. - Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy) has posted The Anti-Globalization Paradox. Here's the abstract:
In The Globalization Paradox, Dani Rodrik sets up what he calls a policy trilemma among hyperglobalization, democracy and autonomy. This trilemma is best understood as a tradeoff between national autonomy and rules that promote globalization. However, a contractual perspective on international law - recognizing that states use international law to make exchanges of policy autonomy in ways that enhance each consenting state’s welfare - suggests that there is no real tradeoff between national autonomy and international legal rules that promote globalization. Instead, these rules may be seen as an expression of national autonomy. Furthermore, international law does not necessarily need the same types of democratic credentials that national law requires, because states consent to international law through their national democratic processes. While there may indeed be an argument that there exists a democracy deficit in the formation of international law, this is a more subtle argument than the one Rodrik makes to the effect that international law can never have democratic credentials unless global democratic government is established. Globalization can take place through international legal rules that have appropriate democratic credentials, and that leave in place appropriate national autonomy.