This article offers chaos, a theory drawn from the physical sciences, as an explanatory model for international economic law which consists of the law of the WTO, international investment law, and the policies of the IMF and World Bank. The laws promulgated by these institutions as the central pillars of global economic governance are both indeterminate and susceptible to external influences, leading to unpredictable outcomes in the longer term, even if they appear deterministic on the small scale for individual states or firms. The observed chaotic nature of international economic law should be viewed as a benevolent feature of the system, as its inescapable unpredictability engenders flexibility and adaptability. These are traits which are valuable for both governments and firms operating in the dynamic global economy. The utility of international economic law should therefore not be judged by reference to macroeconomic benchmarks. The article concludes by suggesting that chaos theory may be seen as universal model that conceptually unifies the four disciplines of international economic law.
Saturday, October 18, 2014
Friday, October 17, 2014
- Fowsia Abdulkadir & Rahma Abdulkadir, Introduction: Transitional Justice Mechanisms for Somalia
- Abdurahman M. Abdullahi (Baadiyow), Conceptions of Transitional Justice in Somalia: Findings of Field Research in Mogadishu
- Abou Jeng, Transitional Justice and Postconflict Reconstruction in Somalia: The Role of the African Union and Pointers Provided by It
- Padraig McAuliffe, The Prospects for Transitional Justice in Catalyzing Socioeconomic Justice in Postconflict States: A Critical Assessment in Light of Somalia’s Transition
- Caroline Ackley & Rahma Abdulkadir, The Role of Shari’a-Based Restorative Justice in the Transition from Armed Conflict to Peacebuilding: Do Somalis Hold the View That the Restorative Justice Aspects within Qisas Offer a Solution?
- Fowsia Abdulkadir & Lidwien Kapteijns, Transitional Justice and Speaking Truth to Somali History: A Dialogue
This essay seeks to examine some of the under–discussed questions in the debate regarding human rights and the law of armed conflict. What are the implications of the classification of a conflict in mapping this relationship? This is principally a technical matter. More incisively, and more conceptually, to what extent does the State bear responsibility to protect the human rights of its combatants? Could this question be a test case, or breaking point, in this debate?
- Thomas Pogge, International Law Between Two Futures
- Juan Carlos Boué, Enforcing Pacta Sunt Servanda? Conoco-Phillips and Exxon-Mobil Versus the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela
- Ioannis Glinavos, Haircut Undone? The Greek Drama and Prospects for Investment Arbitration
- Jason Haynes, The Emergence of a Doctrine of de jure horizontal stare decisis at the Caribbean Court of Justice: Fragmentation or Pluralism of International Law?
- Jarrod Hepburn, In Accordance with Which Host State Laws? Restoring the ‘Defence’ of Investor Illegality in Investment Arbitration
- Matina Papadaki, Compromissory Clauses as the Gatekeepers of the Law to be ‘Used’ in the ICJ and the PCIJ
- Magdalene D’Silva, Dealing in Power: Gatekeepers in Arbitrator Appointment in International Commercial Arbitration
Giorgetti: Caratube v. Kazakhstan: For the First Time Two ICSID Arbitrators Uphold Disqualification of Third Arbitrator
- The “Arctic Sunrise” Case (Netherlands/Russia) (ITLOS), with introductory note by Eva Rieter
- X and Others v. Austria (Eur. Ct. H.R.), with introductory note by Kathleen A. Doty
- Judgment TC/0168/13 (Const. Ct. Dom. Rep.) & Statement of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights on Judgment TC/0168/13, with introductory note by Christina M. Cerna
- United Nations General Assembly Resolution on the Right to Privacy in the Digital Age, with introductory note by Anupam Chander and Molly Land
- Joint Plan of Action on Iran’s Nuclear Program, with introductory note by Hirad Abtahi
- The Seventh Annual Chautauqua Declaration, with introductory note by Leila Sadat
Over the last decade, a growing body of empirical scholarship has emerged that tries to test whether international human rights treaties have helped to improve human rights practices. Although this line of research has produced some evidence suggesting that human rights treaties may have made a difference in specific circumstances, the balance of the evidence has not found a consistent relationship between ratification of human rights treaties and improved human rights practices. This evidence raises the question that is the topic of the conference: has international human rights law failed? This conference will bring together prominent political scientists, historians, philosophers, and legal scholars to discuss this question.
Thursday, October 16, 2014
- Parallel treaties, (un)parallel commitments? The struggle between universalism and regionalism in international water law
- Introduced by Maurizio Arcari and Enrico Milano
- Alistair Rieu-Clarke, A cure or a curse? Entry into force of the UN Watercourses Convention and the Global Opening of the UNECE Water Convention
- Attila Tanzi, Comparing the 1992 UNECE Helsinki Water Convention with the 1997 UN New York Convention on international water-course: harmonization over conflict
Call for Abstracts: Corporate Responsibility to Respect Human Rights: The Emerging European Union Regime
Call for Abstracts
"Corporate Responsibility to Respect Human Rights: The Emerging European Union Regime"
Human Rights & International Legal Discourse focuses on the interplay between human rights law and other specific domains of international law. The 2015 Fall issue will focus on recent and ongoing developments concerning the regulation of corporate human rights responsibility at the EU level.
Articles' length will be between 5.000 to 8.000 words. The deadline for submission of abstracts is 1 November 2014. By 1 December 2014, a limited number of abstracts will be selected for the submission of full papers. A further round of double blind peer review will follow after submission of the final paper, which is due on 1 May 2015. Publication of the special issue is planned for October 2015.
Authors are kindly invited to send their paper proposals by 1 November 2014 to the editors of this special issue: Ass. Prof. Dr. Karin Buhman (Roskilde University and Copenhagen Business School; firstname.lastname@example.org), Prof. Dr. Carmen Márquez Carrasco (Universidad de Sevilla; email@example.com) and Dr. Luis Rodríguez-Piñero (Universidad de Sevilla; firstname.lastname@example.org).
- Paul Gready & Simon Robins, From Transitional to Transformative Justice: A New Agenda for Practice
- Evelyne Schmid & Aoife Nolan, ‘Do No Harm’? Exploring the Scope of Economic and Social Rights in Transitional Justice
- Changrok Soh & Daniel Connolly, Cosmopolitan Memories in East Asia: Revisiting and Reinventing the Second World War
- Shari Eppel, ‘Bones in the Forest’ in Matabeleland, Zimbabwe: Exhumations as a Tool for Transformation
- Shanee Stepakoff, G. Shawn Reynolds, Simon Charters, & Nicola Henry, Why Testify? Witnesses’ Motivations for Giving Evidence in a War Crimes Tribunal in Sierra Leone
- Simon Zschirnt & Mark Menaldo, International Insurance? Democratic Consolidation and Support for International Human Rights Regimes
- Roman David, International Criminal Tribunals and the Perception of Justice: The Effect of the ICTY in Croatia
- Cynthia M. Horne, The Impact of Lustration on Democratization in Postcommunist Countries
OGEL & TDM Call for Papers: Special Issue on Renewable Energy Disputes
Renewable energy production is nothing new: windmills have been used to produce wind-based energy and dams have been used to produce mechanical energy for centuries past. However, the scale of investment in this area and the increased subsidies, regulation of and drive towards this type of electricity generation are unprecedented. Given the surge in activity in renewable energy production, it is no surprise that disputes in this area have started to arise.
Issues that have led to disputes within the EU, the US and globally have, for example, related to the national governments’ objective of ensuring maximum national or regional benefit from governmental measures in this area (similar to what is done in oil and gas-producing countries through local content requirements), miscalculations of subsidies in the planning stages and excessive costs for the state from such subsidies, especially when economic circumstances have changed. Furthermore, the scale of activities has in itself contributed to all kinds of disputes arising at various levels and various forums. These disputes may involve issues of public international law, EU and US law (at the supranational, national and subnational levels), private law and contractual arrangements. The Special Issue examines these types of disputes and analyses their backgrounds and the reasons why they arose. Recent and ongoing renewable energy disputes under international law have concerned international investment law and WTO law. However, recent renewable energy disputes at European level have mostly related to the free movement provisions of EU Treaty law. Contractual arrangements and connection issues serve as illustrations of private and contractual disputes in these areas.
This OGEL/TDM Special Issue on Renewable Energy Disputes will examine all kinds of renewable energy disputes. The basic structure of the special issue is:
Introduction: Renewable energy disputes: an overview - Professor Kim Talus (UEF Law School)
I) Public International Law Disputes
- WTO cases: an overview (already in preparation)
- WTO case against Canada (Ontario local content requirement) (already in preparation)
- Investment Disputes in Renewable Energy (already in preparation)
- Further proposals welcome!
II) EU Law Disputes
- Judgment Ålands Vindkraft (already in preparation)
- Judgment Essent (already in preparation)
- Further proposals welcome!
III) National and Subnational Law and Commercial or Contractual Law Disputes
- Spain: Spanish Supreme Court and ICSID cases against Spain (already in preparation)
- UK Renewable Disputes (already in preparation)
- Further proposals welcome!
OGEL and TDM encourage submission of relevant papers, studies, and comments on various aspects of this subject, including International, regional and national disputes on various aspects of renewable energy disputes. Contributions discussing a particular topic within this area, such as need to reform the ISDS with regards renewable energy and climate change, are also welcome.
Papers should be submitted by the 15 January 2015 deadline to Professor Kim Talus - email@example.com - as well as a copy to firstname.lastname@example.org
Barcelo: Substantive and Procedural Arbitrability in Ad Hoc Investor-State Arbitration — BG Group v. Argentina
The U.S. Supreme Court has developed a conceptual framework for deciding how much deference an award-enforcing U.S. court must give to the arbitral tribunal’s conclusion that the dispute was properly arbitrable, that is, that the award was based on an existing and valid arbitration agreement and that the claim was admissible. In BG Group v. Argentina, the Court has now developed that framework further and has applied it for the first time to an ad hoc investor state arbitration case seated in the U.S. In BG Group the British investor failed to litigate its claim first in an Argentinian court, as required in the U.K.-Argentina Bilateral Investment Treaty [BIT], but the arbitral tribunal found the local litigation requirement inapplicable and ruled for the investor on the merits. The U.S. Supreme Court concluded that the local litigation requirement was a “procedural arbitrability” question, concerning which an enforcing U.S. court must give deference to the tribunal’s ruling that the claim was admissible. This piece explains and analyzes the Supreme Court’s “substantive” and “procedural” arbitrability concepts and the significance for ad hoc investor-state arbitration, and more broadly for international commercial arbitration in general, of this new Supreme Court decision.
- Gabriel Álvarez Undurraga, Aproximaciones históricas acerca de la crisis en Venezuela
- Oded Balaban, Las dos caras de la política nuclear israelí
- Jaime Eduardo Gajardo Falcón, Nuevas perspectivas de los derechos de los grupos a partir del análisis de la jurisprudencia de la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos sobre los derechos de los pueblos indígenas
- Eduardo Ortiz, Una perspectiva histórica de la política exterior de los Estados Unidos hacia América Latina en los siglos XIX y XX
- Luigi Ferrari Bravo, La risposta della Comunità internazionale al fenomeno del terrorismo
- Articoli e Saggi
- Ugo Villani, La funzione giudiziaria nell’ordinamento internazionale e la sua incidenza sul diritto sostanziale
- Angela Di Stasi, Le soft international organizations: una sfida per le nostre categorie giuridiche
- Osservatorio Diritti Umani
- Elena Carpanelli, Alcune riflessioni sull'esperienza della Comissione di Verità, Giustizia e Riconciliazione in Kenya
- Note e Commenti
- Claudia Masoni, Hugo Grotius: The Father of International Law and His Contribution to Modern Thought
The chapter describes the evolution of transparency obligations within the multilateral trading system. Beginning as obligations that were ancillary and subsidiary to the substantive provisions of market access and non-discrimination under the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT 1947), transparency obligations became central and substantive obligations under the World Trade Organization (WTO). The transparency obligations of the WTO have had a profound impact on the internal governance of Member States in three key ways. First, transparency has facilitated trade disputes by identifying measures whose application and administration are inconsistent with the provisions of the covered agreements. Second, transparency has promoted the power of the central governments within Member States over local and provincial governments. Last, transparency requires uniformity in administration of measures within and among states to the extent possible. In conclusion, the authors ask whether transparency, in the context of the WTO, has any goal broader than that of protecting and promoting the interests of private traders, and whether increased litigation, increasing centralization and increasing uniformity promoted in the name of transparency also contribute to broader goals of good governance or development.
Wednesday, October 15, 2014
Oxford Historical Treaties is a comprehensive online resource of nearly 16,000 global treaties concluded between 1648 and 1919 (between the Peace of Westphalia and the establishment of the League of Nations). The source for these treaties is The Consolidated Treaty Series, compiled by the late distinguished scholar Clive Parry of Downing College, Cambridge University, and published by OUP in 231 print volumes. Already established as the primary resource for research on historical treaties, the series will be available online for the first time through OHT. On OHT, individual treaties from The Consolidated Treaty Series will be available as faithful PDF reproductions, and the data set will be searchable and browsable by Treaty Party, by Consolidated Treaty Series (CTS) citation, and by date.
British Influences on International Law 1915-2015
The British Institute of International and Comparative Law (BIICL) is publishing a series of books to commemorate the centenary of the establishment in London of the Grotius Society (a forerunner of BIICL) in 1915. One of these books is on British Influences on International Law in the period from 1915 until today.
We invite anyone who has an interest in writing a chapter on an aspect of this topic to submit an abstract for consideration. This invitation extends to established academics, early career researchers, doctoral researchers, those with experience in government and other practice, and anyone else with relevant expertise, whether based in the UK or elsewhere. The authors of the selected papers may be chosen for presentation as part of a seminar series which is likely to be held in the first half of 2015.
About the book
The book considers the influence of British contributions on the development of international law. These influences range from the negotiation and drafting of treaties, to roles in the creation, development and enforcement of international law, by individuals and groups, as well as by institutions. The perspective to be taken is from 2014/2015 reviewing various international legal issues from 1915 retrospectively and examining the impact these have had on international law today.
This is a novel and edifying perspective in that it surveys and appraises the contributions of British people and institutions (both broadly and inclusively defined) in domestic and international legal forums and their role in the development, interpretation, and application of international law. This includes domestic, regional and international influences.
The book is edited by Professor Robert McCorquodale, BIICL Director, together with Jill Barrett, Dr Andraž Zidar, Anna Riddell and Dr Jean-Pierre Gauci. It is scheduled to be published by BRILL/Martinus Nijhoff. The book is part of a larger project looking at British Contributions to International Law in commemoration of the 100th anniversary of the setting up of the Grotius Society.
Submission of Proposals
Proposals are welcome for papers assessing any aspect of British influences on international law. Your proposal may focus on a particular substantive area of international law, one or more individuals or institutions, or a theme, or any other approach/field of examination you may wish to develop.
Proposals should include an abstract of the proposed contribution (not exceeding 400 words) and a short bio note about the author(s) (not exceeding 250 words). They should be sent to Dr Jean-Pierre Gauci, project coordinator, at email@example.com by 29 October 2014. Notification of the outcome of the selection process will be sent by the end of November 2014. For those accepted, the deadline for submission of the finished papers will be March 2015. Authors should be available to present their paper at a seminar series in London in the first half of 2015.
Papers proposed for inclusion in the edited volume should be original and previously unpublished. In a few instances, a previously published paper may be accepted, provided that this is explicitly stated in the proposal, with information about where and when it was published. Responsibility for securing the rights to reprint the piece rests with the author and such permissions should be sought before the proposal is submitted.
For any further information or clarification, please contact the project co-ordinator Dr Jean-Pierre Gauci on firstname.lastname@example.org
- Paolo Fois, Le organizzazioni internazionali e la formazione del diritto internazionale contemporaneo. Il ruolo degli Stati membri
- Lorenzo Gradoni, La Commissione del diritto internazionale riflette sulla rivelazione della consuetudine
- Annalisa Ciampi, Identifying an Effectively Protecting cultural Heritage
- Note e Commenti
- Chiara Ragni, Interpretazione dei trattati9 e "standard of review" nella giurisprudenza della Corte internazionale di giustizia: riflessioni sull'affare della "Caccia alla balena nell'Antartico"
- Loris Marotti, "Plausabilità" dei diritti e autonomia del regime di responsabilità nella recente giurisprudenza della Corte internazionale di giustizia in tema di misure cautelari
- Claudia Cinelli, Corte europea dei diritti dell'uomo, Corte costituzionale italiana e margine di apprezzamento
- Antonio Leandro, Regolamento preventivo di giurisdizione e arbitrato estero:: riflessioni sul nuovo orientamento della Cassazione italiana
- Giorgio Gaja, Le conseguenze di una riserva inammissibile: la sentenza nel caso "Grande Stevens c. Italia"
- Nicole Lazzerini, Il ruolo del Parlamento europeo e della Corte di guistizia nella conclusione degli accordi PESC
- La crise ukrainienne et le droit international
- Régis Bismut, Odyssée dans le conundrum des réactions décentralisées à l’illicite
- Théodore Christakis, Les conflits de sécession en Crimée et dans l’est de l’Ukraine et le droit international
- Francesco Martucci, La réaction multidimensionnelle de l’Union européenne dans la crise ukrainienne
- Charlotte Beaucillon, Crise ukrainienne et mesures restrictives de l’Union européenne : quelle contribution aux sanctions internationales à l’égard de la Russie ?
- Catherine Kessedjian, Propos conclusifs, L’interférence des sanctions à l’égard de la Russie sur les contrats de droit privé
- Pascal De vareilles-sommières, La sentence arbitrale étrangère contraire à une loi d’ordre public du for (remarques en marge des solutions françaises envisagées sous le rapport de l’ordre public substantiel)
Tuesday, October 14, 2014
The issue of indigenous peoples and treaties is one of the most interesting and intriguing questions of international law. The 2007 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples mentions in several places of its Preamble and in Article 37 rights granted by ‘treaties, agreements and other constructive arrangements between States and indigenous peoples are, in some situations, matters of international concern, interest, responsibility and character.’ The workshop will analyse the legacy of these historical treaties with indigenous peoples. It will also assess whether these instruments can play a role in fostering the rights of indigenous peoples within States at a present time.
- Jean d'Aspremont & Jörg Kammerhofer, Introduction: the future of international legal positivism
- Richard Collins, Classical positivism in international law revisited
- Jochen von Bernstorff, German intellectual historical origins of international legal positivism
- Jörg Kammerhofer, Hans Kelsen in today's international legal scholarship
- Jean d'Aspremont, Herbert Hart in today's international legal scholarship
- Alexander Somek, Beyond Kelsen and Hart
- Ingo Venzke, Post-modern perspectives on orthodox positivism
- Patrick Capps, International legal positivism and modern natural law
- Jeremy Telman, International legal positivism and legal realism
- Jan Klabbers, International legal positivism and constitutionalism
- Sahib Singh, International legal positivism and new approaches to international law
- Gleider Hernández, Interpretation
- Florian Hoffmann, Teaching general public international law
- Beatrice Bonafé, International law in domestic and supranational settings
- Dennis Patterson, Transnational governance regimes
- Théodore Christakis, Human rights from a neo-voluntarist perspective
- Dov Jacobs, International criminal law
- Yael Ronen, International humanitarian law
- Christian Tams & Antonios Tzanakopoulos, Use of force
The paper provides a broadly sketched argument about the importance of state-law and its limits, and the way current developments in international relations and international law tend to transform it without displacing its key position among legal systems in general. It argues that state law is (at least until present time) the most comprehensive law-based social organization within its domain. A standing which is manifested by acknowledged legitimacy by those subject to it (or many of them) and sovereignty, namely independence or external bodies. The paper argues that globalisation (broadly conceived) and attending developments in international greatly reduce the sovereignty of states, and transform its legitimate authority within its domain. None of this heralds the elimination of the state, but it does affect the character of states, and poses theories of law with new challenges, including the need to take more seriously legal systems that are not systems of state-law.
- Lukasz Gruszczynski & Wouter Werner, Introduction
- Ernst-Ulrich Petersmann, Judicial standards of review and administration of justice in trade and investment law and adjudication
- Ilona Cheyne, Deference and the use of the public policy exception in international courts
- Benedikt Pirker, Democracy and distrust in international law: The procedural democracy doctrine and the standard of review used by international courts and tribunals
- Andrei Mamolea, Good faith review
- Michael Ioannidis, Beyond the standard of review: Deference criteria in WTO law and the case for procedural approach
- Caroline Henckels, The role of the standard of review and the importance of deference in investor-state arbitration
- Erlend Leonhardsen, Treaty change, arbitral practice and the search for a balance: Standards of review and the margin of appreciation in international investment law
- Valentina Vadi & Lukasz Gruszczynski, Standard of review and scientific evidence in WTO law and international investment arbitration: Converging parallels?
- Pieter Van Cleynenbreugel, National procedural choices before the Court of Justice of the European Union
- Patrycja Dabrowska-Klosinska, Risk, precaution and scientific complexity before the Court of Justice of the European Union
- Alexia Herwig & Asja Serdarevic, Standard of review for necessity and proportionality analysis in EU and WTO law: Why differences in standards of review are legitimate?
- Mónika Ambrus, The European Court of Human Rights and standards of proof: An evidential approach toward the margin of appreciation
- Uladzislau Belavusau, Experts in hate speech cases: Towards a higher standard of proof in Strasbourg?
- Veronika Bílková, The standard of equivalent protection as a standard of review
- Bernard Duhaime, Subsidiarity in the Americas: what room is there for deference in the Inter-American System?
- Chiara Ragni, Standard of review and the margin of appreciation before the International Court of Justice
- Rosemary Rayfuse, Standard of review and the International Tribunal on the Law of the Sea
- Karolina Wierczynska, Deference in the International Criminal Court practice concerning admissibility challenges lodged by States
- Diane Bernard, Beyond hierarchy: Standards of review and complementarity of the International Criminal Court
- Dan Sarooshi, International Organizations: Personality, Immunities and Responsibility — Report of the Director of Studies
- Yifeng Chen, Attribution, Causation and Responsibility of International Organizations
- Giulia Pinzauti, It Takes Two to Tango: States’ Conferral of Powers on International Organizations and Its Implications for the Responsibility of the Organization and Its Members
- Irène Couzigou, La Relation de Mandat Entre États et Organisations Internationales et Ses Conséquences sur la Responsabilité des Organisations Internationales
- Martina Šmuclerová, The Differing Legal Relationships Between States and International Organizations and Their Implications for International Organizations’ Responsibility: Delegation of Powers to States
- Marjorie Beulay, Les Limitations Portées aux Actes des Organisations Internationales: Le Cas des Administrations Internationales de Territoires Contrôlées par les Nations Unies et de Leurs Hauts Représentants
- Svetlana Zasova, La Responsabilité Pénale des Agents des Organisations Internationales
- Joana Abrisketa Uriarte, The Responsibility of International Organizations and International and European Courts and Tribunals: Judicial Review of Security Council Resolutions
- Simone Vezzani, Le Règlement par Voie D’arbitrage des Différends Portant sur la Responsabilité des Organisations Internationales
- Vaios Koutroulis, Entre La Non-Interférence et le Contrôle Judicaire : L’équilibrisme des Juridictions Nationales Face aux Actes des Organisations Internationales
- Tobias H. Irmscher, Immunities and the Right of Access to Court— Conflict and Convergence
- Matthieu Aldjima Namountougou, La Renonciation des Organisations Internationales à Leurs Immunités
- Christiane Ahlborn, Remedies Against International Organizations — A Relational Account Of International Responsibility
Public International Law
- Jean-Pierre Cot (Judge, International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea), Inaugural Lecture: The Ethics of International Litigation
- Tullio Treves (State Univ. of Milan), General Course: The Expansion of International Law
- Jaime Ruiz de Santiago (former UNHCR representative), Forced Movements of Persons
- Christine Chinkin (formerly, London School of Economics), United Nations Accountability for Human Rights Violations
- Pieter Jan Kuiper (Univ. of Amsterdam), The Delegation of Powers by International Organisations
- Rafâa Ben Achour (Judge, African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights), Unconstitutional Changes of Government and International Law
- Masahiko Asada (Kyoto Univ.), Treaties on Nuclear Non-Proliferation, Recent Developments
- Pierre d’Argent (Univ. of Louvain), International Obligations
Private International Law
- Hans van Loon (formerly, Secretary-General of the Hague Conference on Private International Law), Inaugural Lecture: The Global Horizon of Private International Law
- George A. Bermann (Columbia Univ.), General Course: Arbitration and Private International Law
- Yves Lequette (Paris II Panthéon Assas Univ.), General Course: Mutations in Private International Law, Towards a Paradigm Shift?
- Daniel Cooper (Covington & Burling LLP) & Christopher Kuner (Univ. of Copenhagen), Data Protection Law and International Commercial Arbitration
- Götz Schulze (Univ. of Potsdam), International Sport Law
- Javier Carrascosa González (Univ. of Murcia), Internet - Privacy and Rights Relating to Personality
- Cecilia Fresnedo de Aguirre (Univ. of the Republic and the Catholic Univ., Uruguay), Public Policy: Common Principles in the American States
- Luigi Fumagalli (State Univ. of Milan), International Commercial Arbitration and Third Parties
- Paul-Gérard Pougoue (Yaoundé II Univ.), The Arbitral Practice of the Organisation for the Harmonisation of Business Law in Africa
- Ralf Michaels (Duke Univ.), Non-State Law in Private International Law
- General Articles
- Frances Nguyen, Untangling Sex, Marriage, and Other Criminalities in Forced Marriage
- Forms of Responsibility of States in International Law
- Otto Spijkers, Bystander Obligations at the Domestic and International Level Compared
- Raphaël van Steenberghe, The Notions of Responsibility to Protect and the Protection of Civilians in Armed Conflict: Detecting Their Association and Its Impact Upon International Law
- Developing Countries‘ Stakes in WTO Law
- Claudia Manrique Carpio & Jaume Comas Mir, The Least-Developed Countries Service Waiver: Any Alternative Under the GATS?
- Pananya Larbprasertporn, The Interaction between WTO Law and the Principle of Common but Differentiated Responsibilities in the Case of Climate-Related Border Tax Adjustments
Monday, October 13, 2014
- Oscar Widerberg & Frank van Laerhoven, Measuring the autonomous influence of an international bureaucracy: the Division for Sustainable Development
- Coco C. A. Smits, Jan P. M. van Tatenhove, & Judith van Leeuwen, Authority in Arctic governance: changing spheres of authority in Greenlandic offshore oil and gas developments
- Johannes Kruse, Women’s representation in the UN climate change negotiations: a quantitative analysis of state delegations, 1995–2011
- Katharina Rietig, Reinforcement of multilevel governance dynamics: creating momentum for increasing ambitions in international climate negotiations
- Joanne Chong, Ecosystem-based approaches to climate change adaptation: progress and challenges
The 1999 intervention in Kosovo raised the question of whether international law allows for the use of force, beyond the right to self-defence, if the Security Council fails to meet its primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security. At the time, Germany, under the leadership of Chancellor Gerhard Schröder, took the position that “the NATO air operations were permissible in international law.” In March 2014, however, Schröder revealed during a discussion forum that he knew all along that NATO’s bombardment of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia constituted “a violation of international law.”
This short paper contrasts Schröder’s 2014 statement with the German Government’s official position in 1999 and examines the role statements of former high-ranking government officials can play in the identification of rules of customary international law. It suggests that they may shed light on the State’s opinion on matters of international law, but may not be considered as evidence of a State’s opinion juris unless the government of the day endorses, either expressly or implicitly, the legal opinion enunciated by the former government official. When evaluating such statements, account must be taken of the manner, timing, form and forum in which these statements are made.
The standard account today of customary international law (CIL) is that it arises from the widespread and consistent practice of states followed out of a sense of legal obligation. Although commonly recited, this account is plagued by evidentiary, normative, and conceptual difficulties, and it has been subjected to increasing criticism in recent years. This paper posits a different account of CIL, considered from the perspective of international adjudication. A fundamental problem with much of the theorizing about CIL, the paper contends, is that it fails to identify which decisionmaker it has in mind. Instead, the discussion proceeds as if CIL existed in the abstract without any particular human entity to interpret and apply it. The application of CIL by an international adjudicator is best understood, this chapter contends, as an effort to determine the preferences of the relevant community of states concerning the norms that should apply in the absence of a controlling treaty. Unlike the standard view of CIL, this state preferences account recognizes an element of judgment and creativity in determining the content of CIL, somewhat akin to the judicial development of Anglo-American common law. Understanding the adjudication of CIL in this way, the paper contends, avoids many of the difficulties surrounding the standard account of CIL.
- October 16, 2014: Patricia O'Brien (Ambassador, Permanent Mission of Ireland to the United Nations and other International Organisations at Geneva; formerly, Legal Counsel, United Nations), Rule of Law at the international level - still relevant?
- October 23, 2014: Kirsty Brimelow (Doughty Street Chambers), Whose Convention is it anyway? Addressing the facts and myths around the Human Rights Act
- October 30, 2014: Martins Paparinskis (Univ. College London), A Sceptic's Guide to Legitimate Expectations in International Investment Law: Revisiting the Sources
- November 6, 2014: Reuven Ziegler (Univ. of Reading), Independence referendums and putative citizenship - the Scottish referendum in a global perspective
- November 13, 2014: Peter Quayle (Univ. of Notre Dame - London Law Centre), 'A Problem of Interpretation’: The ICJ’s Approach to the Constituent Instruments of International Organizations
- November 20, 2014: Chanaka Wickremasinghe (Foreign and Commonwealth Office, United Kingdom), tba
- November 27, 2014: Christine Chinkin (London School of Economics), tba
- December 4, 2014: Andrew Clapham (Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies), Guantanamo Bay: Some Public International Law Issues Arising in the 9/11 Trials
In November 2013, the South African-German Centre for Transnational Criminal Justice hosted a conference on Africa and the International Criminal Court, in Cape Town, South Africa. The theme of the Conference was the strained relationship between African states, represented by the African Union (AU), and the International Criminal Court (ICC). This relationship started promisingly but has been in crisis in recent years.
This book sheds light on the present frictions between the AU, the ICC and the UN Security Council. Eminent experts in the field of international criminal justice, including judges and prosecutors of the ICC and other African judicial bodies, as well as international criminal law scholars, analyze and debate the achievements and shortcomings of interventions by the ICC in Africa. They propose ways in which international courts and domestic courts within and outside of Africa can cooperate and address fundamental issues of international criminal law, such as the implementation of the Rome Statute, deferrals of cases before the International Criminal Court and the prosecution of crimes by third states on the basis of universal jurisdiction.
- Special Issue: Changing the European Debate: Focus on Climate Change
- Helmut K. Anheier, Marie Julie Chenard & O. Arne Westad, Executive Summary: Changing the European Debate–Focus on Climate Change
- Günther H. Oettinger, Secure our Future: Towards a European Energy Strategy
- Felix Creutzig, Marcus Hedahl, James Rydge & Kacper Szulecki, Challenging the European Climate Debate: Can Universal Climate Justice and Economics be Reconciled with Particularistic Politics?
- Ottmar Edenhofer, Jan Christoph Steckel & Michael Jakob, Does Environmental Sustainability Contradict Prosperity?
- Ernst Ulrich von Weizsäcker, Overcoming the Mikado Situation
- Andrzej Ancygier & Anna Serzysko, Possible ‘Contributions’ of European Energy Intensive Industries to the Global Climate Agreement
- Norbert Röttgen, Governing Climate Change: A Case for Europe
- Kacper Szulecki & Kirsten Westphal, The Cardinal Sins of European Energy Policy: Nongovernance in an Uncertain Global Landscape
- Cem Özdemir, The Need for Momentum in Europe's Climate Change Policies: Experiences from Germany's Energiewende
- Markus Steigenberger & Lars Grotewold, Why Germany's Energiewende Reminds Us of the Virtues of Cooperation
- Alexander Ruser & Helmut K. Anheier, The EU's Future Role on the Global Stage
- Stéphanie Novak, Single Representative, Single Voice: Magical Thinking and the Representation of the EU on the World Stage
- David Cadier, Eastern Partnership vs Eurasian Union? The EU–Russia Competition in the Shared Neighbourhood and the Ukraine Crisis
- Marie Julie Chenard & O. Arne Westad, The EU's Engagement with Asia
- Lord William Wallace of Saltaire, Europe's Role in Global Governance: Changing the European Debate
Sunday, October 12, 2014
- Special Issue: Biodiversity Conservation and Protected Areas in China
- Geoffrey Wandesforde-Smith, Kristen Denninger Snyder & Lynette A. Hart, Biodiversity Conservation and Protected Areas in China: Science, Law, and the Obdurate Party-State
- Jiliang Xu, Gongqi Sun & Ying Liu, Diversity and Complexity in the Forms and Functions of Protected Areas in China
- Yan Xie, Xiaojing Gan & Weihe Yang, Strengthening the Legal Basis for Designating and Managing Protected Areas in China
- J. Marc Foggin, Managing Shared Natural Heritages: Towards More Participatory Models of Protected Area Management in Western China
- David A. Sonnenfeld & Kristen Denninger Snyder, Wildlife Conservation and Protected Areas in China: A Law and Policy Bibliography