Saturday, July 14, 2012

May: After War Ends: A Philosophical Perspective

Larry May (Vanderbilt Univ. - Philosophy) has published After War Ends: A Philosophical Perspective (Cambridge Univ. Press 2012). Here's the abstract:
There is extensive discussion in current Just War literature about the normative principles which should govern the initiation of war (jus ad bellum) and also the conduct of war (jus in bello), but this is the first book to treat the important and difficult issue of justice after the end of war. Larry May examines the normative principles which should govern post-war practices such as reparations, restitution, reconciliation, retribution, rebuilding, proportionality and the Responsibility to Protect. He discusses the emerging international law literature on transitional justice and the problem of moving from a position of war and possible mass atrocity to a position of peace and reconciliation. He questions the Just War tradition, arguing that contingent pacifism is most in keeping with normative principles after war ends. His discussion is richly illustrated with contemporary examples and will be of interest to students of political and legal philosophy, law and military studies.

Legg: The Margin of Appreciation in International Human Rights Law: Deference and Proportionality

Andrew Legg (Essex Court Chambers) has published The Margin of Appreciation in International Human Rights Law: Deference and Proportionality (Oxford Univ. Press 2012). Here's the abstract:

The margin of appreciation is a judicial doctrine whereby international courts allow states to have a measure of diversity in their interpretation of human rights treaty obligations. The doctrine is at the heart of some of the most important international human rights decisions. Does it undermine the universality of human rights? How should judges decide whether to give this margin of appreciation to states? How can lawyers make best use of arguments for or against the margin of appreciation?

This book answers these questions, and broadens the discussion on the margin of appreciation by including material beyond the ECHR system. It provides a comprehensive justification of the doctrine, and catalogues the key cases affecting the doctrine in practice.

Friday, July 13, 2012

Davis, Fisher, Kingsbury, & Merry: Governance by Indicators: Global Power through Classification and Rankings

Kevin Davis (New York Univ. - Law), Angelina Fisher (New York Univ. - Institute for International Law and Business), Benedict Kingsbury (New York Univ. - Law), & Sally Engle Merry (New York Univ. - Anthropology) have published Governance by Indicators: Global Power through Classification and Rankings (Oxford Univ. Press 2012). The table of contents is here. Here's the abstract:

The use of indicators as a technique of global governance is increasing rapidly. Major examples include the World Bank's Doing Business Indicators, the World Bank's Good Governance and Rule of Law indicators, the Millennium Development Goals, and the indicators produced by Transparency International. Human rights indicators are being developed in the UN and regional and advocacy organizations. The burgeoning production and use of indicators has not, however, been accompanied by systematic comparative study of, or reflection on, the implications, possibilities, and pitfalls of this practice.

This book furthers the study of these issues by examining the production and history of indicators, as well as relationships between the producers, users, subjects, and audiences of indicators. It also explores the creation, use, and effects of indicators as forms of knowledge and as mechanisms of making and implementing decisions in global governance. Using insights from case studies, empirical work, and theoretical approaches from several disciplines, the book identifies legal, policy, and normative implications of the production and use of indicators as a tool of global governance.

Kontorovich: The Penalties for Piracy: An Empirical Study of National Prosecution of International Crime

Eugene Kontorovich (Northwestern Univ. - Law) has posted The Penalties for Piracy: An Empirical Study of National Prosecution of International Crime. Here's the abstract:

This Article examines the sentences imposed by courts around the world in prosecutions of Somali pirates captured on the high seas. Somali piracy has become perhaps the highest-volume area of international criminal law by national courts. As with other international crimes, international law is silent on the subject of penalties. The large number of parallel prosecutions of offenders from a single international “situation” offers an empirical window into the interactions between international and national law in municipal courts; into factors affecting punishment for international crimes and the hierarchy of international offenses; and of course into potential concerns with the current model of punishing piracy.

Using a new data set of all Somali piracy sentences in foreign courts, the Article finds that the global average sentence for piracy is 16 years, equivalent to the average penalties for more serious human rights offenses in international courts. Yet few pirates receive the “average” sentence. The Article finds massive variance in sentences imposed in Somali pirate cases around the world, ranging from four years to life for substantively similar conduct. There are roughly two kinds of sentencing jurisdictions – lenient and strict. The former includes European countries, the latter primarily the United States and Asian states. The gulf in sentencing between these two rough groups is quite significant. Finally, regression analysis of particular sentencing factors shows that the particular characteristics of the offenses account for some, but not the majority of variation in sentences. Most variation that can be accounted for can be attributed the characteristics of the prosecuting state, not the prosecuting crime.

New Issue: Revista Española de Derecho Internacional

The latest issue of the Revista Española de Derecho Internacional (Vol. 64, no. 1, 2012) is out. Contents include:
  • Estudios
    • Björn Arp, La integración de los derechos humanos en la labor del Banco Mundial: el caso del Ombudsman y asesor en materia de observancia
    • Laura Carballo Piñeiro, Acción pauliana e integración europea: una propuesta de ley aplicable
    • Inmaculada Marrero Rocha, Los actores internacionales en el ámbito de la no proliferación y el desarme nuclear: características e impacto
    • Sagrario Morán Blanco, El largo camino de la protección medioambiental y la lucha contra el cambio climático

New Issue: Stanford Journal of International Law

The latest issue of the Stanford Journal of International Law (Vol. 48, no. 2, Summer 2012) is out. Contents include:
  • Symposium: The Right to Democracy in the Context of the Arab Spring
    • Matthew Lister, There Is No Human Right to Democracy. But May We Promote It Anyway?
    • Jon D. Michaels, Private Military Firms, the American Precedent, and the Arab Spring
    • Sara McLaughlin Mitchell & Paul F. Diehl, Caution in What You Wish For: The Consequences of a Right to Democracy
    • Saira Mohamed, Taking Stock of the Responsibility to Protect
    • Jamie O'Connell, Common Interests, Closer Allies: How Democracy in Arab States Can Benefit the West

New Issue: Global Society

The latest issue of Global Society (Vol. 26, no. 3, 2012) is out. Contents include:
  • Special Issue: Regional Powers and Global Redistribution
    • Philip Nel, Dirk Nabers & Melanie Hanif, Introduction: Regional Powers and Global Redistribution
    • Matthew D. Stephen, Rising Regional Powers and International Institutions: The Foreign Policy Orientations of India, Brazil and South Africa
    • Marco Vieira, Rising States and Distributive Justice: Reforming International Order in the Twenty-First Century
    • Janis van der Westhuizen, Falling on Fertile Ground? The Story of Emerging Powers' Claims for Redistribution and the Global Poverty Debate
    • Sean W. Burges, Strategies and Tactics for Global Change: Democratic Brazil in Comparative Perspective
    • Karen Smith, India's Identity and its Global Aspirations
    • Joachim Betz, India and the Redistribution of Power and Resources

Thursday, July 12, 2012

New Issue: Revista de Derecho Económico Internacional

The latest issue of the Revista de Derecho Económico Internacional (Vol. 2, no. 2, June 2012) is out. Contents include:
  • Artículos académicos
    • Daniel Ruiz Lares, Los criterios de definición de “orden público” como excepción a las obligaciones en el derecho de la OMC
    • Aldo González Melo, El Acuerdo MSF y su relación con el Artículo XX del GATT
    • Beatriz Huarte Melgar, Influencia del caso “Colombia – puertos de entrada” en la liberalización del tránsito energético
  • Artículos profesionales
    • Yvonne Stinson O., Iniciativa para modificar la Ley de Comercio Exterior en los Estados Unidos Mexicanos
  • Comentarios sobre casos
    • Bradly J. Condon, Comentario sobre China – Materias primas, Informe del Órgano de Apelación
    • José Manuel Vargas Menchaca, Comentario sobre República Dominicana – Medidas de salvaguardia, Informe del Grupo Especial
    • Yahir Acosta, Comentario sobre Estados Unidos – EPO, Informes del Grupo Especial

New Issue: Rivista di Diritto Internazionale

The latest issue of the Rivista di Diritto Internazionale (Vol. 95, no. 2, 2012) is out. Contents include:
  • Articoli
    • A. Adinolfi, La nozione di « abuso di diritto » nell’ordinamento dell’Unione Europea
    • P. Palchetti, Sulla responsabilità di uno Stato per il voto espresso in seno ad un’organizzazione internazionale
    • A. Cicampi, The International Court of Justice between « Reason of State » and Demands for Justice by Victims of Serious International Crimes
  • Note e commenti
    • F.M. Palombino, Sul potere della Corte europea dei diritti dell’uomo di cancellare un ricorso dal ruolo: in margine ai casi Greens e Pantusheva
    • A. Liguori, La Corte europea dei diritti dell’uomo condanna l’Italia per i respingimenti verso la Libia del 2009: il caso Hirsi
  • Panorama
    • M.L. Padelletti, L’esecuzione della sentenza della Corte internazionale di giustizia sulle immunità dalla giurisdizione nel caso Germania c. Italia: una strada in salita?
    • A. Adinolfi, Le istituzioni dell’Unione Europea devono conformarsi alle norme e ai principi dei quali esigono il rispetto da parte degli Stati membri?
    • N. Lazzerini, Gli effetti diretti orizzontali dei diritti fondamentali in materia sociale: la sentenza Dominguez della Corte di giustizia e la strada del silenzio
    • O. Feraci, Diffamazione internazionale a mezzo di Internet: quale foro competente? Alcune considerazioni sulla sentenza eDate
    • B. Ubertazzi, Una nuova condizione per l’iscrizione nelle Liste del patrimonio culturale intangibile

New Issue: International Community Law Review

The latest issue of the International Community Law Review (Vol. 14, no. 3, 2012) is out. Contents include:
  • Simonetta Stirling-Zanda, Preserving Tradition that is Necessary to Exercising Essential Rights: Some Reflections on the ICJ Decision on Navigational Rights on the San Juan River
  • Ivan Ingravallo, Kosovo after the ICJ Advisory Opinion: Towards a European Perspective?
  • Giuseppe Martinico, Chasing the European Court of Justice: On Some (Political) Attempts to Hijack the European Integration Process
  • Waliul Hasanat, Diverse Soft-Law Cooperation Forms in the Arctic - Do They Complement or Contradict Each Other?

New Issue: International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law

The latest issue of the International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law (Vol. 27, no. 3, 2012) is out. Contents include:
  • Robin Churchill, Dispute Settlement in the Law of the Sea: Survey for 2011
  • E.J. Molenaar, Current and Prospective Roles of the Arctic Council System within the Context of the Law of the Sea
  • Erika J. Techera, Fishing, Finning and Tourism: Trends in Pacific Shark Conservation and Management

New Issue: Cambridge Journal of International and Comparative Law

The latest issue of the Cambridge Journal of International and Comparative Law (Vol. 1, no. 2, 2012) is out. Contents include:
  • Special Issue: The UK Supreme Court Review
    • Part I: Commentary and Reflections
    • Rosa Greaves, Obituary, Alan Ferguson Rodger (1944–2011), Lord Rodger of Earlsferry
    • Nicholas Phillips, The Birth and First Steps of the UK Supreme Court
    • K. M. Hayne, The High Court of Australia and the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom: The Continued Evolution of Legal Relationships
    • John Bell, Comparative Law in the Supreme Court 2010–11
    • The Supreme Court and the New Judicial Independence Lorne Neudorf
    • Joshua Rozenberg, The Media and the UK Supreme Court
    • Julien du Vergier, Instruments of Law Reform: The Supreme Court and the Law Commissions of the United Kingdom
    • Part II: Thematic Analysis
    • Part III: The 2010–11 Legal Year in Overview
    • Part IV: Composition and Statistics

Wednesday, July 11, 2012

Schill: Deference in Investment Treaty Arbitration: Re-Conceptualizing the Standard of Review Through Comparative Public Law

Stephan W. Schill (Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law) has posted Deference in Investment Treaty Arbitration: Re-Conceptualizing the Standard of Review Through Comparative Public Law. Here's the abstract:
The standard of review to be applied by investment treaty tribunals when reviewing host state conduct is a crucial, but still insufficiently analyzed issue. Although tribunals frequently make reference to “deference” as the applicable standard, the criteria they apply to concretize that concept remain uncertain and little predictable. What is more, the conceptual foundations of granting deference to host states are opaque. The present paper focuses on these foundations and argues that they are intrinsically connected to how investment treaty arbitration is qualified as either a form of commercial arbitration, a means to settle disputes under public international law, or as an internationalized form of judicial review in public law disputes. Siding with the latter, the present paper proposes to conceptualize the standard of review within a separation of powers framework that fuses domestic and international legal considerations in allocating power between states and arbitral tribunals. Within this framework, considerations originating from both international dispute settlement and comparative public law interact to determine and concretize the standard of review.

Hsieh: APEC as a Trans-Regional Economic Governance Architecture: A Critical Assessment With Reform Proposals

Pasha L. Hsieh (Singapore Management Univ. - Law) has posted APEC as a Trans-Regional Economic Governance Architecture: A Critical Assessment With Reform Proposals. Here's the abstract:

The Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) is the world’s largest trans-regional governance framework, consisting of 21 economies in the Pacific Rim. APEC represents more than 53% of global gross domestic product (GDP) and 44% of world trade. Its growth amounts to 4.3%, which exceeded the world growth of 3.5% in 2012. Despite its economic significance, APEC is yet to be a free trade zone as defined by World Trade Organization (WTO) law. Lacking an establishment treaty that confers legal personality, APEC has functioned as a de facto institution that promotes economic integration through the non-binding or soft-law approach.

This article reassesses APEC’s 23-year efforts and argues that while the APEC approach has contributed to regional economies, its structure and operation should undergo reforms to create a Free Trade Area of the Asia-Pacific (FTAAP) and accelerate the Bogor Goals. These reforms are also essential to ensure APEC’s compliance with the WTO and to render the FTAAP an effective “Plan B” for the Doha impasse and the “spaghetti bowl” problem, which is aggravated by the proliferation of regional free trade agreements (FTA). Section II examines APEC’s evolution as a soft institution and how trade agendas of key APEC states affected APEC’s operations. It identifies APEC’s key achievements including the Information Technology Agreement, environmental goods liberalization and other frontier WTO-plus issues. Section III explores a comparative analysis of potential pathways to the FTAAP and illustrates the challenges of ongoing Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations faced by APEC member economies. Section IV provides institutional reform proposals for APEC. In particular, it calls for passing the APEC Charter and reforming the APEC Secretariat to reinvigorate the institution’s role as the pivotal driving force for Asia-Pacific integration.

Alvarez: Searching for Coherence in Trade and Investment Arbitration: Domestic Policies Under Siege

José Manuel Alvarez Zárate (Universidad Externado de Colombia - Law) has posted Searching for Coherence in Trade and Investment Arbitration: Domestic Policies Under Siege. Here's the abstract:
In this paper, I highlight that international investment law, as a subsystem, should evolve to accept rules from other subsystems of law, e.g., human rights, trade (WTO law and RTA law), and environmental. This proposed evolution would need to include the acceptance of new tools that would help to expand the traditional sources of international law when dealing with fragmentation problems. Those tools would be used as connecting rules (Drive-Chains) among the fragmented subsystems when reviewing justifications not provided in investment treaties, giving coherence, predictability and legitimacy to the investment subsystem with others subsystems of law.

Bodansky: The Durban Platform Negotiations: Goals and Options

Daniel Bodansky (Arizona State Univ. - Law) has posted The Durban Platform Negotiations: Goals and Options. Here's the abstract:
In December 2011, the parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change adopted the Durban Platform, which launched a new round of negotiations to develop "a protocol, another legal instrument, or an agreed outcome with legal force," to be effective from 2020. This essay for the Harvard Project on Climate Agreements analyzes the elements of the Durban Platform and the possible goals of the new round of negotiations. It then examines three possible models of how international law might address climate change: a contractual model, a prescriptive model, and a facilitative model. The essay questions both the contractual and prescriptive models, the contractual model because there does not appear to be a contract zone within which agreement by the major emitters is possible; the prescriptive model on grounds of effectiveness. This leaves the facilitative model, which is uncertain to deliver the level of emissions reductions believed necessary to prevent dangerous climate change, but might still be of significant value in slowing the rate of global warming. Until there is agreement among states about which general approach to pursue, the Durban Platform process will continue the pattern of the last decade, in which states are engaged, not in a negotiation of the text of an agreement, but rather a meta-negotiation about what to negotiate.

New Issue: Harvard International Law Journal

The latest issue of the Harvard International Law Journal (Vol. 53, no. 2, Summer 2012) is out. Contents include:
  • Ozan O. Varol, The Democratic Coup d'État
  • Michael P. Scharf, Universal Jurisdiction and the Crime of Aggression
  • Jason Webb Yackee, Controlling the International Investment Law Agency
  • Bart M.J. Szewczyk, Variable Multipolarity and U.N. Security Council Reform

Tuesday, July 10, 2012

Vadi: Public Health in International Investment Law and Arbitration

Valentina Vadi (Maastricht Univ.) has published Public Health in International Investment Law and Arbitration (Routledge 2012). Here's the abstract:

Is a State free to adopt measures to protect the public health of its citizens? If so, what are the limits, if any, to such regulatory powers? This book addresses these questions by focusing on the clash between the regulatory autonomy of the state and international investment governance. As a wide variety of state regulations allegedly aimed at protecting public health may interfere with foreign investments, a tension exists between the public health policies of the host state and investment treaty provisions. Under most investment treaties, States have waived their sovereign immunity, and have agreed to give arbitrators a comprehensive jurisdiction over what are essentially regulatory disputes. Some scholars and practitioners have expressed concern regarding the magnitude of decision-making power allocated to investment treaty tribunals.

This book contributes to the current understanding of international investment law and arbitration, addressing the fundamental question of whether public health has and/or should have any relevance in contemporary international investment law and policy. With a focus on the ‘clash of cultures’ between international investment law and public health, the author critically analyses the emerging case law of investment treaty arbitration and considers the theoretical interplay between public health and investor rights in international investment law. The book also explores the interplay between investment law and public health in practice, focusing on specific sectors such as pharmaceutical patents, tobacco regulation and environmental health. It then goes on to analyze the available means for promoting consideration of public health in international investment law and suggests new methods and approaches to better reconcile public health and investor rights.

Lewis: UNHCR and International Refugee Law: From Treaties to Innovation

Corinne Lewis (UNHCR) has published UNHCR and International Refugee Law: From Treaties to Innovation (Routledge 2012). Here's the abstract:
This book considers the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees’ contribution to international refugee law since the establishment of UNHCR by the United Nations General Assembly in 1951. The book explores the historical and statutory foundations that create an indelible link between UNHCR and international refugee law. This book charts the significant evolution that has occurred in the organisation’s role throughout the last sixty years, looking at both the formal means by which UNHCR’s mandate may be modified, and the techniques UNHCR has used to facilitate the changes in its role, thereby revealing a significant evolution in the organisation’s role since the onset of the crisis in refugee protection in the 1980’s. UNHCR, itself, has demonstrated its organizational autonomy as the primary agent for the adaptation of its responsibilities and work related to international refugee law. The author does suggest however that UNHCR needs to continue to extend and strengthen its role related to international refugee law if UNHCR is to ensure a stronger legal framework for the protection of refugees as well as a fuller respect for refugees’ rights in practice.

New Issue: World Trade Review

The latest issue of the World Trade Review (Vol. 11, no. 3, July 2012) is out. Contents include:
  • Symposium Issue: Standards and Non-Tariff Barriers in Trade
    • Thomas Heckelei & Johan Swinnen, Introduction to the Special Issue of the World Trade Review on ‘standards and non-tariff barriers in trade’
    • John Beghin, Anne-Célia Disdier, Stéphan Marette, & Frank van Tongeren, Welfare costs and benefits of non-tariff measures in trade: a conceptual framework and application
    • Ian Sheldon, North–South trade and standards: what can general equilibrium analysis tell us?
    • Johan Swinnen & Thijs Vandemoortele, Trade and the political economy of standards
    • Natalie Chen & Dennis Novy, On the measurement of trade costs: direct vs. indirect approaches to quantifying standards and technical regulations
    • Mauro Vigani, Valentina Raimondi, & Alessandro Olper, International trade and endogenous standards: the case of GMO regulations
    • Marie-Agnès Jouanjean, Standards, reputation, and trade: evidence from US horticultural import refusals
    • Roy Santana & Lee Ann Jackson, Identifying non-tariff barriers: evolution of multilateral instruments and evidence from the disputes (1948−2011)
    • Jan Wouters & Dylan Geraets, Private food standards and the World Trade Organization: some legal considerations
    • Melise Jaud & Olivier Cadot, A second look at the pesticides initiative program: evidence from Senegal
    • Asel Mangelsdorf, Alberto Portugal-Perez, & John S. Wilson, Food standards and exports: evidence for China
    • Edwin Vermulst & Brian Gatta, Concurrent trade defense investigations in the EU, the EU's new anti-subsidy practice against China, and the future of both

Call for Submissions: Legal Issues in Tobacco Control

Transnational Dispute Management has issued a call for submissions for a TDM special issue on "Legal Issues in Tobacco Control." Here's the call:

We are pleased to announce a forthcoming TDM special issue on Legal Issues in Tobacco Control.

This special issue will examine legal issues surrounding international related disputes arising from tobacco regulation and control. This is a particularly urgent topic for examination in view of the ongoing investment arbitration claims launched against Australia in relation to its plain tobacco packaging measure and against Uruguay in relation to its own tobacco packaging and labeling regulations, as well as the consultations commenced by Ukraine and Honduras with Australia in the World Trade Organization (WTO) — the first step towards a formal WTO dispute concerning plain packaging. The recent WTO Appellate Body decision concerning the United States' prohibition on characterizing flavors in cigarettes other than tobacco and menthol also provides relevant material for reflection.

Possible questions for consideration in this special issue include:

  • What challenges are States facing against health-directed tobacco control measures in domestic and international courts and tribunals?
  • How do the prospects of success in domestic claims compare with those in international claims?
  • Do current international trade and investment laws adequately protect States' regulatory sovereignty with respect to tobacco control and other public health measures?
  • What lessons should States draw for future international trade and investment negotiations from the current challenges to tobacco regulation?
  • What are the implications of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control for international challenges to tobacco regulation?
  • Does the problem of regulatory chill threaten the achievement of national and international health objectives?
  • What additional obstacles do developing countries face in responding to threatened or actual legal challenges to tobacco regulation, and how can these obstacles be best overcome?

This special issue will be edited by:

Professor Andrew Mitchell

Melbourne Law School

Associate Professor Tania Voon

Melbourne Law School

Please address all questions and paper proposals to the editors, see here for contact info.

Publication is planned for late 2012. Paper proposals of up to 300 words should be submitted as soon as possible. The Editors will select papers at their discretion. If selected, full papers of up to 6000 words including footnotes will be due by September 15, 2012.

As publisher we like to stress that all viewpoints are welcomed provided it is solid writing and authors disclose all relevant interests or their work on any relevant cases.

New Issue: European Journal of International Law

The latest issue of the European Journal of International Law (Vol. 23, no. 2, May 2012) is out. Contents include:
  • Editorial
    • JHHW, Peer Review in Crisis; From the Editor’s Mail Box: The Perils of Publishing – Living under a False Title; The European Law Institute; In this Issue
  • Europe and Democracy: An Exchange
    • Armin von Bogdandy, The European Lesson for International Democracy: The Significance of Articles 9 to 12 EU Treaty for International Organizations
    • Jürgen Habermas, The Crisis of the European Union in the Light of a Constitutionalization of International Law
  • Articles
    • Leora Bilsky, Transnational Holocaust Litigation
    • Virginie Barral, Sustainable Development in International Law: Nature and Operation of an Evolutive Legal Norm
    • Giuseppe Martinico, Is the European Convention Going to Be ‘Supreme’? A Comparative-Constitutional Overview of ECHR and EU Law before National Courts
  • Roaming Charges: Places of Entry – Tel Aviv Airport
  • Symposium: EU and Climate Change
    • Lorand Bartels, The WTO Legality of the Application of the EU’s Emission Trading System to Aviation
    • Joanne Scott & Lavanya Rajamani, EU Climate Change Unilateralism
  • Critical Review of International Jurisprudence
    • Alberto Alvarez-Jimenez, Boundary Agreements in the International Court of Justice’s Case Law, 2000–2010
  • Critical Review of International Governance
    • Jakob Cornides, Three Case Studies on ‘Anti-Discrimination’
  • A Life’s Work
    • Jorge E Viñuales, ‘The Secret of Tomorrow’: International Organization through the Eyes of Michel Virally
  • Review Essay
    • Gregory Shaffer, A Transnational Take on Krisch’s Pluralist Structure of Postnational Law

Monday, July 9, 2012

Ford: Measuring, Understanding, and Predicting Trial Complexity at the ICTY

Stuart Ford (The John Marshall Law School) has posted Measuring, Understanding, and Predicting Trial Complexity at the ICTY. Here's the abstract:
There has been relatively little empirical work done to understand or measure the complexity of international criminal trials. This Article seeks to remedy that lacuna. It does four things: (1) it proposes a methodology for measuring the complexity of international criminal trials; (2) it measures the complexity of trials conducted at the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and then compares them to the complexity of trials conducted at other international courts and to trials conducted in US courts; (3) it proposes and then tests a model of what factors cause complexity in international trials; and (4) finally it predicts the complexity of the ICTY’s remaining cases. The principal conclusion is that the length and cost of the ICTY are driven by the seriousness of the charges and the immense complexity of the trials, rather than by any inherent inefficiency in the international model of adjudication.

Sarfaty: Values in Translation: Human Rights and the Culture of the World Bank

Galit A. Sarfaty (Univ. of British Columbia - Law) has published Values in Translation: Human Rights and the Culture of the World Bank (Stanford Univ. Press 2012). Here's the abstract:

The World Bank is the largest lender to developing countries, making loans worth over $20 billion per year to finance development projects around the globe. To guide its investments, the Bank has adopted a number of social and environmental policies, yet it has never instituted any overarching policy on human rights. Despite the potential human rights impact of Bank projects—the forced displacement of indigenous peoples resulting from a Bank-financed dam project, for example—the issue of human rights remains marginal in the Bank's operational practices.

Values in Translation analyzes the organizational culture of the World Bank and addresses the question of why it has not adopted a human rights framework. Academics and social advocates have typically focused on legal restrictions in the Bank's Articles of Agreement. This work's anthropological analysis sheds light on internal obstacles including the employee incentive system and a clash of expertise between lawyers and economists over how to define human rights and justify their relevance to the Bank's mission.

New Volume: Japanese Yearbook of International Law

The latest volume of the Japanese Yearbook of International Law (Vol. 54, 2011) is out. Contents include:
  • The Contribution of International Environmental Law to International Law: Past Achievements and Future Expectation
    • Edith Brown Weiss, The Evolution of International Environmental Law
    • Akiho Shibta, International Environmental Lawmaking in the First Decade of the Twenty-First Century: The Form and Process
    • Daniel Bodansky, Implementation of International Environmental Law
    • Mari Koyano, The Significance of Procedural Obligations in International Environmental Law: Sovereignty and International Co-operation
    • Peter H. Sand, Environmental Dispute Settlement and the Experience of the UN Compensation Commission
    • Ellen Hey, The Interplay between Multilateral Environmental and Fisheries Law: A Struggle to Sustainably Regulate Economic Activity—Including a Case Study of the North Sea—
    • Erik Franckx & Koen Van den Bossche, The Influence of Environmental Law on the Development of the Law of the Sea: CITES and the International Law of Fisheries
  • New Japanese Rule on International Jurisdiction: Part One
    • Masato Dogauchi, New Japanese Rules on International Jurisdiction: General Observation
    • Shunichiro Nakano, Agreement on Jurisdiction
    • Akira Saito, International Civil Jurisdiction Based on the Place of Performance of Obligation Relating to A Contract
    • Kazuhiko Yamamoto, International Jurisdiction Based on the Location of Property
    • Yoshihisa Hayakawa, Lis Pendens
  • Public International Law
    • Yutaka Arai-Takahashi, The Principle of Humanity under International Humanitarian Law in the “Is/Ought” Dichotomy
  • Note
    • Tomohiko Kobayashi, Pinning Down the Circling Concept of Circumvention: A Comprehensive Approach to Anti-Circumvention Disciplines under the WTO Agreement on Agriculture
  • Special Lecture
    • Shigeru Oda, Taiwan as Sovereign and Independent State—Status of Taiwan under International Law

New Volume: Netherlands Yearbook of International Law

The latest volume of the Netherlands Yearbook of International Law (Vol. 42, 2011) is out. Contents include:
  • General Articles
    • Geert De Baere & Alex Mills, T.M.C. Asser and Public and Private International Law: The Life and Legacy of ‘a Practical Legal Statesman’
    • Terry D. Gill, Legal Aspects of the Transfer of Authority in UN Peace Operations
  • Agora: The Case of Iraq: International Law and Politics
    • Janne Nijman, After ‘Iraq’: Back to the International Rule of Law? An Introduction to the NYIL 2011 Agora
    • Kenneth M. Manusama, Between a Rock and a Hard Place: Providing Legal Advice on Military Action Against Iraq
    • Thomas Mertens & Janine van Dinther, Whose International Order? Which Law?
    • Tanja E. Aalberts, Forging International Order: Inquiring the Dutch Support of the Iraq Invasion
    • Philip Liste, ‘Public’ International Law? Democracy and Discourses of Legal Reality
    • Bertjan Verbeek, Does Might Still Make Right? International Relations Theory and the Use of International Law Regarding the 2003 Iraq War
    • Nigel D. White, Libya and Lessons from Iraq: International Law and the Use of Force by the United Kingdom

New Volume: Yearbook of International Environmental Law

The latest volume of the Yearbook of International Environmental Law (Vol. 21, 2010) is out. Contents include:
  • Elisa Morgera & Elsa Tsioumani, Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow: Looking Afresh at the Convention on Biological Diversity
  • Andrew Long, Developing Linkages to Preserve Biodiversity
  • Annalisa Savaresi, Reducing Emissions from Deforestation in Developing Countries under the UNFCCC: Caveats and Opportunities for Biodiversity
  • Alexander Gillespie, Noise Pollution, the Oceans, and the Limits of International Law
  • 2010: The Year in Review

Sunday, July 8, 2012

Cudennec: Ordre public et Mer

Annie Cudennec (Université de Brest - Law) has published Ordre public et Mer (Pedone 2012). The table of contents is here. Here's the abstract:
L’espace marin a toujours été confronté à des défis naturels (tempêtes, raz-demarée,…) ou humains (piraterie, trafics illicites…) mettant en péril à la fois le milieu et la sécurité des hommes qui naviguent ou tirent profit de ses ressources. Dans ce contexte, maintenir l’ordre public en mer constitue une tâche lourde et délicate. Or de manière apparemment paradoxale, alors que les technologies permettant de relever ces défis ont fait ces dernières années des progrès sans précédent (positionnement par satellite, construction de navire de plus en plus sûrs…), l’ordre public est loin d’être assuré en mer ; comme en témoigne l’actualité avec la recrudescence de la piraterie maritime. Ce paradoxe vient du fait que l’ordre public et la mer entretiennent des relations bien singulières, sans doute car l’Etat - premier garant de l’ordre public - dispose en mer de prérogatives bien spécifiques, prérogatives parfois restreintes mais également parfois exorbitantes du droit commun. Cet ouvrage, issu du colloque organisé à Brest les 12 et 13 mai 2011 par l’UMR AMURE – centre de droit et d’économie de la mer – et enrichie de contributions extérieures, fait tout d’abord le point sur les nouvelles exigences et les nouvelles dimensions – notamment environnementales – de l’ordre public en mer. Ceci avant d’analyser les mécanismes juridiques aujourd’hui garants du maintien de l’ordre public en mer.

Call for Papers: Varieties of Subsidiarity: Deference and Defiance in Global Public Authority

The European and Global Governance Cluster Workshop at the Hertie School of Governance has issued a call for papers for a workshop on "Varieties of Subsidiarity: Deference and Defiance in Global Public Authority." Here's the call:

Call for Papers

Varieties of Subsidiarity: Deference and Defiance in Global Public Authority

Hertie School of Governance, European and Global Governance Cluster Workshop, 26 November 2012, Berlin

Global governance is more influential than ever, but it is also under ever greater challenge. It reaches deep into domestic politics and law in a growing number of issue areas, and public discourses increasingly reflect this fact. As a result, the relationship of different layers of law and politics has gained greater salience; as domestic contestation of global governance is growing, questions about the appropriate site of decision-making on issues with transboundary impact have become central.

One of the most common frames for these questions, both analytically and normatively, is the notion of ‘subsidiarity’. Although frequently used only in Europe, it may denote a broader patterns of conflicing relationships between levels of political authority. In this workshop, we aim to better understand the value of this notion as a guiding line as well as its uses and meanings in discourses about global governance in politics and law. In particular, we are interested in the ways in which practices of deference to, or defiance of, global governance reflect, implicitly or explicitly, understandings of the distribution of powers among different levels of authority and its guiding principles.

For the workshop, we invite papers on this general problematique, and in particular on the following questions:

- What factors – normative and otherwise – drive processes of deference and defiance?

– What conceptions of subsidiarity are reflected in them?

– What institutional mechanisms have evolved to process the distribution of tasks among levels of authority (as well as contestation about it)?

– Is ‘subsidiarity’ a useful concept to understand and shape the relationship of different levels of authority in global governance? What limitations does it have?

In this endeavour, we expect significant variation in understandings of subsidiarity, both geographically and among issue areas. In order to capture this variation, we are particularly interested in papers that address processes beyond Europe, and especially in developing countries which are often most affected by global governance, but also often those to which least attention is paid. We also invite papers from all related disciplines, including political science, law, political theory, anthropology, and sociology.

The workshop builds on a previous workshop on ‘Global Governance as Public Authority’, held in Berlin in April 2011. It will gather around 20 scholars for an in-depth debate on the proposed topics at a day- long workshop on 26 November 2012. We will be happy to receive proposals from scholars at any level –PhD students at an advanced stage, postdoctoral and more senior researchers alike. Travel and accommodation expenses will be borne by the organizers. Papers discussed at the workshop should have 10-15 pp. and present a substantial argument about the issue without the need to be publication- ready. At the workshop, papers will not be presented individually but will be discussed by the organizers and by Michael Zürn (Science Center Berlin) and Joseph Weiler (NYU Law School) as well as by the conference participants.

Paper Application

Workshop Date and Venue


Abstracts (max 300 words) by 21 July 2012

Final Paper submission due by

11 November 2012

Research cluster website:

26 November 2012 European and Global Governance Cluster

Hertie School of Governance Berlin Hertie School of Governance

Quartier 110 – Friedrichstr. 180 10117 Berlin Germany

Tel.: +49 (0)30 – 259 219 – 334 Fax: +49 (0)30 – 259 219 -111 governance/

Please send your abstract (300 words maximum) to Christiane Kraft-Kasack ( until 21 July 2012.

Markus Jachtenfuchs & Nico Krisch