- Erika Moreno & Richard Witmer, The Power of the Pen: Human Rights Ombudsmen and Personal Integrity Violations in Latin America, 1982-2006
- Rebecca Sanders, Norm Proxy War and Resistance Through Outsourcing: The Dynamics of Transnational Human Rights Contestation
- Zhiyuan Wang, Treaty Commitment as a Signaling Device: Explaining the Ratification of the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights
- Shannon Drysdale Walsh, Sex Trafficking and the State: Applying Domestic Abuse Interventions to Serve Victims of Sex Trafficking
- Jaakko Kuosmanen, Human Rights, Public Budgets, and Epistemic Challenges
Saturday, May 7, 2016
Friday, May 6, 2016
- Cosette D. Creamer & Zuzanna Godzimirska, (De)Legitimization at the WTO Dispute Settlement Mechanism
- Iryna Marchuk, Ukraine and the International Criminal Court: Implications of the Ad Hoc Jurisdiction Acceptance and Beyond
- Michael A. Newton, How the International Criminal Court Threatens Treaty Norms
- Yahli Shereshevsky, Politics by Other Means: The Battle over the Classification of Asymmetrical Conflicts
- Roger O'Keefe, "Quid," Not "Quantum": A Comment on "How the International Criminal Court Threatens Treaty Norms"
- Carsten Stahn, The ICC, Pre-Existing Jurisdictional Treaty Regimes, and the Limits of the Nemo Dat Quod Non Habet Doctrine - A Reply to Michael Newton
Le colloque annuel de la Société française pour le droit international se tiendra les 19, 20 et 21 mai 2016 à la Faculté de droit de l’Université de Saint-Denis. Ce colloque sera consacré au thème « L’entreprise multinationale et le droit international ».
La question du statut juridique des entreprises agissant à l’échelle internationale est souvent éludée par le droit international. Les entreprises multinationales sont ainsi volontiers appréhendées comme des acteurs transnationaux, capables de s’autoréguler tout en bénéficiant de droits d’origine internationale lorsqu’elles réalisent des opérations d’investissement direct étranger. En revanche, la possibilité pour elles d’être assujetties au droit international est souvent traitée de manière éclatée (responsabilité sociétale des entreprises conçue en marge d’une responsabilité juridique) et peu formelle du point de vue des techniques juridiques utilisées (soft law, régulation, accountability). Ainsi, bien que les entreprises participent de plus en plus, à l’élaboration et à l’application d’instruments internationaux destinés à responsabiliser leur comportement à l’échelle globale (notamment au regard des droits de l’homme ou de la protection de l’environnement) ou régir des domaines qui impactent leur activités (droits de propriété intellectuelle, facilitation des échanges …), elles ne sont guère envisagées, d’un point de vue externe, comme étant liées par des obligations provenant du droit international. En cela, l’appréhension de l’entreprise révèle sans doute que la globalisation, bien qu’elle bouscule les processus normatifs traditionnels en déplaçant les lieux de production de la norme des autorités publiques vers les acteurs privés, n’est pas (encore ?) devenue un paradigme permettant de renouveler le cercle des sujets du droit international créanciers de droits mais aussi débiteurs d’obligations internationales.
Nous proposons donc d’aborder les problèmes théoriques ainsi que les difficultés juridiques et pratiques qui gênent l’assujettissement des entreprises multinationales au droit international. Le face-à-face entre l’entreprise multinationale et le droit international impliquera de s’interroger sur la discipline même du droit international tant au regard de ses finalités que des contours épistémologiques qui permettent de la définir dans ses « branches » publique et privée. Mais, loin de vouloir dissocier droit international public et droit international privé, ce colloque se propose, au contraire, de comparer et d’articuler les méthodes avec lesquelles chacun appréhende (ou n’appréhende pas), construit (ou déconstruit) la réalité des entreprises multinationales. C’ est au final de la capacité du droit international à encadrer la liberté d’agir des entreprises multinationales et d’optimiser les systèmes juridiques dont chacune de leurs composantes relève dont il sera question et qui leur permet de jouer sur la scène mondialisée aux côtés (ou contre) les autorités publiques.
Le colloque repose sur une approche méthodologique qui associera à la réflexion théorique l’étude des cas concrets et emblématiques des défis que pose l’encadrement juridique des activités des entreprises multinationales. Les études de cas seront préparées et présentées par des jeunes chercheurs (docteurs en droit, doctorants) dans des sessions intégrées au colloque, après avoir été sélectionnés au terme d’un appel à projet international. Les entreprises seront également associées à la réflexion afin de mieux envisager, d’un point de vue interne, tant les contraintes juridiques qui s’imposent à elles que celles auxquelles elles acceptent volontairement de se soumettre pour encadrer les externalités positives et négatives que génèrent leurs activités internationales. Enfin, l’analyse académique menée sous l’angle du droit international des différents thèmes sélectionnés sera prolongée, autant que possible, par le point de vue de responsables de services juridiques d’organisations internationales, d’organisations non gouvernementales ou de cabinets d’avocats impliqués dans la pratique relative aux activités des entreprises multinationales et à leur encadrement juridique.
Hirsch: Identity Matters: The Enforcement of Global Human Rights Treaties by European Union's Trade Instruments
The EU employs certain trade instruments (mainly regional trade agreements and trade preferences granted to developing countries) to promote compliance with global human rights law. The use of these trade mechanisms to enforce global human rights law is significantly motivated by the collective identity and perceived social role of the EU in the international community as a promoter of human rights worldwide. These EU identity-driven measures may also affect the identity of international actors targeted by such measures.
Economic and political dimensions of international law are often overlain with a social identity dimension. While in reality, these dimensions are inseparable, this chapter is devoted to a social identity analysis of the EU’s employment of external trade instruments to promote human rights worldwide. This analysis sheds light on the enactment of EU trade policies in this sphere, their employment, and their potential to enhance compliance with international human rights law. These EU identity-driven trade measures present both benefits and limitations, and have different effects on in-group and out-group members. A social identity analysis of EU trade and human rights policy also offers some policy recommendations which may improve the prospects of EU measures in this field.
It is often argued that international criminal law (ICL) is designed to overcome deficiencies in national legal systems. When the state is incapable or unwilling to punish, it must be replaced by a reliable and impartial agent. Under this view, ICL is a pragmatic solution to the partiality and/or ineffectiveness of national legal systems.
This Article rejects such a view; ICL is not a pragmatic solution to the partiality, lack of accountability and/or ineffectiveness of national legal systems. Nor is ICL international by coincidence or due to contingent features such as the greater competence of international tribunals, their better accountability or impartiality. Rather, the goods of international criminal law and the values it promotes can only be provided by international entities. We call this view ‘robust internationalism’. According to robust internationalism, the international character of the tribunals tasked with applying international criminal law is necessary to successfully fulfill their mission. The article further argues that robust internationalism is implicitly recognized by the founders of ICL and is also reflected in some of its doctrines. Failing to account for it is therefore incongruous with the realities of ICL as practiced today.
This contribution to the Handbook presents and analyses history of Article 38 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice (the ‘ICJ’ or the ‘Court’). History of Article 38 is the starting point leading to reflections on how as it stands at present. Therefore, the main theme of this Chapter is to look at sources of international law through prism of their historical development. Such an approach also includes contenders to ‘new’ sources (acts of international organisations, unilateral acts of States, soft law) which have emerged long after the twelve ‘wise men’ (at times ‘angry twelve men’) of the Committee of Jurists have completed their task of drafting of this Article.
Thursday, May 5, 2016
- Special Issue: The Responsibility to Protect after the Arab Spring
- Aidan Hehir & James Pattison, Introduction: The Responsibility to Protect after the Arab Spring
- Jess Gifkins, R2P in the UN Security Council: Darfur, Libya and beyond
- Aidan Hehir, Assessing the influence of the Responsibility to Protect on the UN Security Council during the Arab Spring
- Luke Glanville, Does R2P matter? Interpreting the impact of a norm
- Justin Morris, The Responsibility to Protect and the use of force: Remaking the Procrustean bed?
- Jennifer Welsh, The responsibility to prevent: Assessing the gap between rhetoric and reality
- Philip Cunliffe, From ISIS to ICISS: A critical return to the Responsibility to Protect report
- The Global Forum
- Michael G. Smith, Review of the UN High-Level Independent Panel on Peace Operations, Uniting our Strengths For Peace: Politics, Partnership and People
- Arie M. Kacowicz & Mor Mitrani, Why Don’t We Have Coherent Theories of International Relations About Globalization?
- Alvaro de Soto & Graciana Castillo, Obstacles to Peacebuilding Revisited
- Valerie Freeland, How Not to Be Seen: Highly Vulnerable States and the International Politics of Invisibility
- Jennifer Hadden & Lucia A. Seyber, What’s in a Norm? Mapping the Norm Definition Process in the Debate on Sustainable Development
- Katharina Rietig, The Power of Strategy: Environmental NGO Influence in International Climate Negotiations
- Javier Treviño-Rangel, What Do We Mean When We Talk About the “Securitization” of International Migration in Mexico? A Critique
- Carlos Bellei Tagle, Consecuencias jurisdiccionales asociadas a la multiplicación de tribunales internacionales: ¿en qué consisten los potenciales riesgos?
- Juliette Robichez & André Lamartin Montes, A Corte Internacional de Justiça e o Brasil: uma necessária reconciliação
- Fernando Villamizar Lamus, Comentarios a la sentencia del caso “Whaling in the Antárctic”, Australia c. Japón
- Gonzalo Aguilar Cavallo, Constitucionalismo global, control de convencionalidad y el derecho a huelga en Chile
- César Yip & Mariana Yokoya, Direito Internacional dos Direitos Humanos e direito à água: uma perspectiva brasileira
- Fernando Arlettaz, Perspectiva interamericana sobre la afectación de la libertad de menores en procedimientos migratorios
- María Carmelina Londoño Lázaro & Juana Inés Acosta, La protección internacional de la objeción de conciencia:análisis comparado entre sistemas de derechos humanos y perspectivas en el sistema interamericano
- Nicolás M. Perrone, Los derechos de los inversores extranjeros sobre la tierra según los tratados de protección de inversiones:una visión desde Latinoamérica
- Andrés Felipe Esteban Tovar, El concepto de “productos similares” bajo el artículo 2.1 del Acuerdo OTC: una mirada desde los criterios de interpretación de la OMC
- Santiago Díaz-Cediel, La Alianza del Pacífico: Un escrutinio jurídico al tenor del Derecho de las organizaciones internacionales
- Jeremmy Okonjo, Assessing the Impact of the Extraterritorial Provisions of the European Markes Infrastructure Regulation (EMIR) on Emerging Economies' OTC Derivatives Markets: A Doctrine of Proportionality Perspective
- Donatella Alessandrini, Suhraiya Jivraj & Asta Zokaityte, Indian and Chinese FDI in Developing Asia: The Standards Battle Beyond Trade
- Leïla Choukroune, Recognition and Responsibility: A Legislative Role for Transnational Corporations in Public International Law - Thoughts from the Perspective of Human Rights
- Devarshi Mukhopadhyay, Debunking 'Choices' in International Trade: Contextualising National Treatment Through the Tort Law Paradigm
- Rishika Lekhadia, Can the West Justify Its Sanctions Against Russia under the World Trade Law?
Party-Appointed Arbitrators in International Commercial Arbitration presents a detailed examination, long overdue, of how the agreement of disputing parties to each make a unilateral agreed-upon appointment of an arbitrator affects the actual process of arbitration. The topic of unilateral nominations itself is of general interest to everyone in the arbitration community. Three-member arbitral tribunals with two party-appointed arbitrators are the most frequent tribunals in international arbitration and, therefore, virtually all arbitration practitioners are often confronted with questions about the system of unilateral nominations. This book takes a step forward by offering a comprehensive study of the system of party-appointed arbitrators in international commercial arbitration. The study takes a three-pronged approach: historical analysis of unilateral nominations, a theoretical critical assessment of how the system of unilateral nominations currently works and a comparative empirical study of challenges of arbitrators depending on the method of appointment.
- Chirs Bullen, Regulatory Policy and Practical Issues Arising from a Disruptive Innovation: A Public Health Perspective on E-Cigarettes
- MArk A. Levin, Puffing Precedents: The Impact of the WHO FCTC on Tobacco Product Liability Litigation in Japan
- Mitsuo Matsushita, Sharing the Responsibility in Combating Protectionism in Trade
- Vivian Kube & Ernst-Ulrich Petersmann, Human Rights Law in International Investment Arbitration
- Heng Wang, The Features of China’s Recent FTA and Their Implications: An Anatomy of the China-Korea FTA
- Weihuan Zhou, Fifteen Years On: Has China Implemented WTO Rulings? – A Perspective on “Trade in Goods” Disputes
- Mao-Wei Lo, Making the Fair and Equitable Treatment Healthier for Tobacco Control? A Systemic View on the Possible Tension Between the FCTC and Investment Regime
- Nadia Darwazeh & Adrien Leleuon, Disclosure and Security for Costs or How to Address Imbalances Created by Third-Party Funding
- Melis Özdeln, Enforcement of Arbitration Clauses in Bills of Lading: Where Are We Now?
- Iain Sheridan, Qualitative Analytical Models for Arbitration
- Mateus Aimoré Carreteiro, Appellate Arbitral Rules in International Commercial Arbitration
- Nduka Ikeyi & Jirinwayo Jude Odinkonigbo, Statoil v. NNPC: A Question of Absence of Jurisdiction or Exercise of Discretion Not to Exercise Jurisdiction
Pazartzis & Gavouneli: Reconceptualising the Rule of Law in Global Governance, Resources, Investment and Trade
- Anne Peters, The Transparency of Global Governance
- Chiara Giorgetti, Between Flexibility and Stability: Ad Hoc Procedures and/or Judicial Institutions?
- Tomonori Mizushima, Domestic Courts as Compliance Enforcers
- Myriam Senn, Towards Reinforcing or Contesting the Vision of the Rule of Law?
- George D Kyriakopoulos, Formation of International Custom and the Role of Non-State Actors
- Gabriella Venturini, Disaster Relief in International Law
- Tamás Molnár, After 60 Years: The International Legal Regime Protecting stateless Persons—Stocktaking and New Tendencies
- Vassilios Grammatikas, Responsibility to Protect (R2P) and Minorities
- Lorenza Mola, Governance of Financial Crises: A Role for the International Protection of Economic and Social Rights?
- Emmanuel P Mastromanolis, Recent Regulatory Initiatives in the Ratings Industry: CRA III and the ESMA Proposals on Structured Finance, the Performance of Agencies and their Fee Arrangements
- Georgios Nikolaides-Krassas, The Odious Debt Doctrine: The Past and the Challenges of the Present
- Irini Stamatoudi, ‘Return of Cultural Treasures to their Countries of Origin’: Principle or Trend in Cultural Property Law?
- Antonia Zervaki, The Cultural Heritage of Mankind beyond UNESCO: The Case of International Financial Institutions
- Rosemary Rayfuse, Something Fishy about Fisheries: High Seas Fisheries and the Common Resource Conundrum
- Antonios Antonopoulos, Biodiversity, Marine Protected Areas and Areas beyond National Jurisdiction
- Erik Franckx & Marco Benatar, Turkish Objections to Exclusive Economic Zone Agreements Concluded by Cyprus
- Maria Xiouri, Towards the Acceptance of the Equidistance Rule in the Delimitation of the Continental Shelf and the Exclusive Economic Zone: The Role of International Jurisprudence
- Mindia Vashakmadze, Collective Responsibility for Water in Central Asia
- Andreia Costa Vieira, International Law, Governance and Trade of Water Services
- August Reinisch, The Rule of Law in International Investment Arbitration
- Georgios Petrochilos, Three Pillars of International Public Policy
- Stratis G Georgilas, Abuse of Rights in Modern International Investment Arbitration: The Rule of Law Revisited? The Practitioner’s View
- Friedrich Rosenfeld, Abstract Interpretations in International Investment Law
- Dencho Georgiev, Regionalism and the Constitutionalization of the WTO
- Paolo Davide Farah & Elena Cima, OPEC Production Quotas and the World Trade Organization
- Ilaria Espa, The Role of the WTO in Addressing Regulatory Pricing Policies in the Energy Sector
- Junianto James Losari & Michael Ewing-Chow, Legitimate Countermeasures in International Trade Law and their Illegality in International Investment Law
- Wolfgang Alschner, Duplicating the Trade Law ‘Spaghetti Bowl’? Increasing Regionalization and Overlap of Investment Treaties—a Review of State Practice
- Magdalena Slok-Wodkowska. Most-Favoured Nation and National Treatment in the EU and US Regional Trade Agreements—Tools for Equal or Discriminatory Treatment?
- Chiara Cellerino, Recent Trends of Common Commercial Policy of the European Union: From Global to Regional (and Back?) in the Governance of International Economic Order
Wednesday, May 4, 2016
- Aline de Oliveira Moreira & Luciana Diniz Durães Pereira, O Alto Comissariado das Nações Unidas para Direitos Humanos
- André de Carvalho Ramos, Recent Transformations of the Brazilian State and the Obligations' Regime in Private International Law: Are Current Changes Enough?
- Arno Dal Ri Júnior & Lucas Carlos Lima, A Flexibilização da Doutrina Clássica de Fontes e o Papel das Decisões Judiciais no Ordenamento Internacional
- Caio Pizetta Torres, Les Nouveuax Défis du Jus Ad Bellum et la Pratique Contemporaine des États: de la Légitime Défense Préventive à l'Intervention Humanitaire
- Érika Louise Bastos Calazans, Regulating the Business Activities of Private Military and Security Companies under International Law
- José H. Fischel de Andrade, Aspectos Históricos, Jurídicos e Políticos da Proteção de Refugiados no Brasil (1951-1997)
- Júlia Soares Amaral, O Pré-Sal e as Especificidades da Pretensão Brasileira de Extensão da Plataforma Continental
- Bruno de Oliveira Biazatti & Leonardo Nemer Caldeira Brant, O Papel das Recomendações da Assembléia Geral das Nações Unidas na Formação do Direito Internacional
- Luis A. López Zamora, História del Derecho Internacional y Orden Público Internacional
- Mathias Audit, La Dette Souveraine Devant les Tribunaux Arbitraux Internacionaux
- Orlando Daniel Pulvirenti, El Cumplimiento de las Sentencias de la CIDH. Un Sistema en Consolidación
- Paolo Palchetti, The Law of Responsibility of International Organizations: General Rules, Special Regimes or Alternative Mechanisms of Accountability?
- Rafaela Ribeiro Zauli Lessa & Daniela Muradas Reis, Submissão das Corporações à Sanções Internacionais e Meios Não- Estatais de Reparação: Possíveis Soluções à Ineficácia Social do Direito ao Trabalho
- Rodrigo Szuecs de Oliveira, O Processo de Integração Supranacional como Resolução dos Conflitos entre os Estados Europeus
- Valério de Oliveira Mazzuoli & Dilton Ribeiro, Indigenous Rights Before the Inter-American Court of Court of Human Rights: a Call for a Pro Individual Interpretation
Since the 9/11 attacks, international organizations have become actively engaged in devising counterterrorism strategies and frameworks. This monograph examines the role UN organs can play in implementing the law of State responsibility in global security contexts, using transnational terrorism as its principal case study. The institutional mechanisms utilized by the UN in implementing State responsibility are assessed in detail, shedding light on how the ICJ, the General Assembly and the Security Council contribute to the implementation of State responsibility in the context of global security. By acknowledging the Security Council's role as a post-9/11 legislator, this book argues that the Council can play an important and sometimes determinant role in implementing a State's legal responsibility for failing to prevent terrorism, both inside and outside the Chapter VII framework.
Featuring a discussion of the more controversial consequences flowing from State responsibility, this monograph also explores the prospect of injured States adopting forcible measures against responsible States for their failures to prevent terrorism. The book investigates whether self-defence and other forcible reactions, envisaged both inside and outside the Council, can be reconciled with State responsibility principles.
The aim of this 1½ day conference is to bring together academics, representatives of Small States, as well as lawyers litigating in or for Small States (defined as those states with a population of 1.5m or less), to discuss the particular issues these jurisdictions face in regard to international dispute resolution and regional integration.
Small States are a micro-cosmos and allow the study of some legal phenomena more easily. On the other hand, Small States face specific issues due to their demographical, geographical size, and the size of their economies. Of particular interest are the commercial relations between large economies and Small States, the role of Small States as financial centres as well as B2B and State to State dispute resolution involving Small States.
Bannelier: Military Interventions Against ISIL in Iraq, Syria and Libya and the Legal Basis of Consent
The legal argument of intervention by invitation has been used by all eleven States intervening in Iraq (nine members of the US-led coalition, Russia and Iran), by Egypt for its airstrikes against ISIL in Libya and by Iran and Russia for their interventions in Syria. To the extent that these consensual military interventions targeted ISIL and other UN-designated terrorist groups, their legality has not been challenged by any State. Strong criticisms marked nonetheless military operations undertaken by invitation but not targeting “terrorist groups”, such as the alleged Russian strikes against the “Syrian moderate opposition”. The arguments advanced by intervening States seem to confirm the “purpose-based approach” of intervention by invitation. Intervening States did not claim a “right to intervene in a civil war” but argued that what justifies their intervention is the existence of both a request by the government and a legitimate purpose: fighting ISIL and other terrorist groups. The different reactions also show an unwillingness of the international community to recognize a general right of intervention in a civil war. Turning to the strikes of the US-led coalition in Syria, it is impossible to rely on the legal basis of “intervention by invitation”. The controversial theory of “passive consent” could be used to some extent – but not after September 2015, when Syria denounced these strikes as a “flagrant violation” of its sovereignty. The current efforts of the international community to find consensual solutions to the dramatic conflicts in Syria, Libya and Iraq could offer new possibilities of consensual interventions against ISIL and other terrorist groups.
Since the 1980s a number of countries have established truth commissions to come to terms with the legacy of past human rights violations, yet little is known about the achievements and shortcomings of this popular transitional justice tool. Drawing on research on Chile's National Truth and Reconciliation Commission and Peru's Truth and Reconciliation Commission, and exploring the scholarship on thirteen other transitional contexts, Onur Bakiner evaluates the success of truth commissions in promoting policy reform, human rights accountability, and the public recognition of human rights violations. He argues that although political elites often see a truth commission as a convenient way to address past atrocities, the findings, historical narratives, and recommendations of such commissions often surprise, upset, and discredit influential political actors. Even when commissions produce only modest change as a result of political constraints, Bakiner contends, they open up new avenues for human rights activism by triggering the creation of new victims' organizations, facilitating public debates over social memory, and inducing civil society actors to monitor the country's human rights policy.
Bakiner demonstrates how truth commissions have recovered basic facts about human rights violations, forced societies to rethink the violence and exclusion of nation building, and produced a new dynamic whereby the state seeks to legitimize its central position between history and politics by accepting a high degree of societal penetration into the production and diffusion of official national history. By doing so, truth commissions have challenged and transformed public discourses on memory, truth, justice, reconciliation, recognition, nationalism, and political legitimacy in the contemporary world.
In the aftermath of the disputed presidential election on 27 December 2007, Kenya descended into its worst crisis since independence. The 2007-08 post-election crisis in Kenya was among the first situations in which there was an appeal to both the responsibility to protect and a responsibility to prosecute. Despite efforts to ensure compatibility between R2P and the ICC, the two were far from coherent in this case, as the measures designed to protect the population in Kenya undermined the efforts to prosecute perpetrators. This book will highlight how the African Union-sponsored mediation process effectively brought an end to eight weeks of bloodshed, while simultaneously entrenching those involved in orchestrating the violence. Having secured positions of power, politicians bearing responsibility for the violence set out to block prosecutions at both the domestic and international levels, eventually leading the cases against them to unravel. As this book will reveal, by utilising the machinery of the state as a shield against prosecution, the Government of Kenya reverted to an approach to sovereignty that both R2P and the ICC were specifically designed to counteract.
In the last decade the United Nations and the African Union have forged a close partnership in matters of international peace and security. This paper attempts to shed light to the multifaceted role of the UN on the strategic and operational planning and evolution, as well as the funding, of regional (AU) peace support operations. Such involvement goes well beyond a simple authorization by the UN Security Council and raises crucial questions in respect of the allocation of responsibility between the UN and the AU. The analysis of the relevant responsibility allocation clauses showcases that a holistic approach should be adopted that does not micromanage the different aspects of the UN involvement in regional missions, but treats them as an aggregate that should be taken into account as a whole when allocating responsibility. Otherwise, the soft or indirect (but crucial) influence exercised by the UN will inevitably escape responsibility.
Tuesday, May 3, 2016
The Paris Agreement seeks a Goldilocks solution to the climate change problem that is neither too strong (and hence unacceptable to key states) nor too weak (and hence ineffective). To safeguard national decision-making, it adopts a bottom-up approach, in which the agreement “reflects rather than drives national policy.” But to promote stronger action, states’ “nationally-determined contributions” (or NDCs, for short) are complemented by international norms to ensure transparency and accountability and to prod states to progressively ratchet up their efforts. Eight features of the Paris Agreement stand out: (1) It is a legally binding instrument (albeit with many non-binding elements). (2) It applies not only to developed countries, like the Kyoto Protocol, but also to developing countries, which account for a growing share of global emissions. (3) It establishes the same core obligations for all countries. In doing so, it abandons the static, annex-based approach to differentiation in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Kyoto Protocol, in favor a more flexible, calibrated approach, which takes into account changes in a country’s circumstances and capacities and is operationalized differently for different elements of the regime; (4) It establishes a long-term, durable architecture. (5) It institutionalizes an iterative process, in which parties come back to the table every five years to take stock of their collective progress and put forward emission reduction plans for the next five-year period. (6) It sets an expectation of progressively stronger action over time. (7) It establishes a common transparency and accountability framework. (8) It appears to command universal, or near universal, acceptance. The Paris Agreement falls short of putting the world on a pathway to avoiding dangerous climate change. But, given current political realities, it produced as much as could reasonably have been expected, and perhaps more. That may or may not make Paris historic, but it is certainly cause for celebration.
Arena: Exercise of EU Competences and Pre-emption of Member States’ Powers in the Internal and the External Sphere
The exercise of EU competences imposes constraints on Member States’ law-making powers (‘internal-sphere pre-emption’) and on their treaty-making powers (‘external sphere pre-emption’). Legal scholarship has extensively analysed external sphere pre-emption and has paid increasing attention to internal-sphere pre-emption. Can a ‘Grand Unification’ theory account for the pre-emption phenomenon in both spheres? To answer that question, the article examines, in each sphere, the function, nature, and scope of pre-emption, as well as the framework the ECJ applies for pre-emption analysis. The examination reveals similarities and differences, discussed in the article’s conclusion.
Yee: A Reply to Sir Michael Wood's Response to AALCOIEG's Work and My Report on the ILC Project on Identification of CIL
This is a reply to Sir Michael Wood’s response to AALCOIEG’s work and my report on the ILC project on identification of customary international law: AALCO informal expert group, chairman’s report, comments of the group and Mr. Sienho Yee’s report on the ILC project on identification of customary international law.
What happens after an international court finds a state violated international law? Many realize today that states often fail to comply with such judgments. International courts like the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) have to rely on the help of Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) to shame states into compliance. In 2011, the body charged with enforcing judgments of the ECHR launched a new website dedicated to publishing reports by NGOs that criticize states for noncompliance with ECHR judgments. This website published hundreds of reports, as well as the responses of some accused states. The paper analyzes all the reports published in the first four years since the website was created. This analysis, together with interviews with many of the NGO lawyers involved, sheds light on the way reputational sanctions work in international law. It reveals that NGOs focus most of their attention on legally important cases and on cases that address severe violations. It also shows that NGOs focus on states that usually comply with their international obligations instead of on states that regularly fail to comply with international law.
International rule of law fixes should take into full account the special features of the existing international legal system, including, as noted, its reliance on contested, iterative interactions among diverse political and legal forums. Those arguing that the rule of law requires the Security Council to replace its ombudsperson mechanism with a full scale international court to implement its smart sanctions need to consider whether this is the best prescription, as opposed to, for example, insisting that an ombudsperson procedure apply to all Security Council sanctions committees and not just to those sanctions committees that deal with ISIL and Al-Qaida. Sober reflection on whether a full scale judicial process is truly needed is a good idea not only because insistence on the perfect rule of law ideal may be the enemy of the good. It is a good idea because nuance is needed when examining what the national rule of law truly requires and when exporting national rule of law recipes to the international realm.
Over the last ten years, there have been numerous cases of ECHR-state party complicity in torture by foreign states. Some of these cases have been entirely extraterritorial – that is, the victim is never within the territory of the complicit state. Applying the orthodox rules of attribution in international law and the current understanding of the jurisdiction under Article 1 ECHR, these cases of extraterritorial complicity would seem not to lead to the responsibility of the complicit state under the Convention. In other words, the ECHR allows states to facilitate acts of torture abroad where they could not do so at home. This is an unprincipled gap in the protections provided by the Convention.
This article argues (i) that this unprincipled gap may be overcome by re-imagining the rule in Soering as a preventive complicity rule and extending it to other forms of complicity in torture, and (ii) that such a re-imagination is supported by doctrine and principles deeply embedded in the case law of the European Court. An expansive interpretation of Article 1 ECHR to capture cases of state complicity in extraterritorial torture would be justified.
- Abhijit Das, James J. Nedumpara & Shailja Singh, Introduction: WTO Dispute Settlement at Twenty: Insiders’ Reflections on India’s Participation
- Rajeev Kher, India’s Trade Disputes: Implications for Public Policy
- V.S. Seshadri, WTO and Its Dispute Settlement Mechanism
- Scott D. Andersen & Deepak Raju, India’s Initial WTO Disputes—An Analysis in Retrospect
- Abhijit Das & Jayant Raghuram, One Too Many: Significant Contributions of India to the WTO Dispute Settlement Jurisprudence
- Arthur E. Appleton, The US—Shrimp Appeal: 20 Years on
- Siddhartha Rajagopal, Recollections and Reflections of a Stakeholder in WTO Disputes
- Folkert Graafsma & Siddhartha Rajagopal, An Overview of WT/DS141: EC—Anti-dumping Duties on Imports of Cotton-Type Bed Linen from India
- Atul Kaushik, WTO Dispute on EC—Tariff Preferences: Systemic Implications
- Jayant Dasgupta, India—Additional Import Duties: Tax Reforms via WTO
- Mukesh Bhatnagar, Turkey’s Safeguard Measures on Cotton Yarn: Resolution by Consultations
- James J. Nedumpara, Ashish Chandra & Garima S. Deepak, India—Agricultural Products: Defending India’s First SPS Dispute
- Adarsh Ramanujan, Atul Sharma & S. Seetharaman, US—Carbon Steel (India): A Major Leap in Trade Remedy Jurisprudence
- Abhijit Das & James J. Nedumpara, Conclusions
- Natalino Ronzitti, Foreword
- Natalino Ronzitti, Sanctions as Instruments of Coercive Diplomacy: an International Law Perspective
- Michael Bothe, Compatibility and Legitimacy of Sanctions Regimes
- Bryan R. Early, Confronting the Implementation and Enforcement Challenges Involved in Imposing Economic Sanctions
- Marco Gestri, Sanctions Imposed by the European Union: Legal and Institutional Aspects
- Charlotte Beaucillon, Practice Makes Perfect, Eventually? Unilateral State Sanctions and the Extraterritorial Effects of National Legislation
- Nigel D. White, Sanctions Against Non-State Actors
- Thilo Marauhn & Ignaz Stegmiller, Sanctions and the Protection of Human Rights: The Role of Sanctions Committees
- Monica Lugato, Sanctions and Individual Rights
- Daniel H. Joyner, International Legal Limits on the Ability of States to Lawfully Impose International Economic/Financial Sanctions Andrea Atteritano & Maria Beatrice Deli, An Overview of International Sanctions’ Impact on Treaties and Contract
- Marina Mancini, UN Sanctions Targeting Individuals and ICC Proceedings: How to Achieve a Mutually Reinforcing Interaction
- Francesco Giumelli, From Effective to Useful Sanctions: Lessons Learned from the Experience of the European Union
- Joachim Krause, Western Economic and Political Sanctions as Instruments of Strategic Competition with Russia – Opportunities and Risks
- Natalino Ronzitti, Conclusion
Monday, May 2, 2016
Tzanakopoulos & Ventouratou: Nicaragua in the International Court of Justice and the Law of Treaties
This essay assesses the impact of the 'Nicaraguan' cases, ie cases in which Nicaragua has been involved before the International Court of Justice, on the law of treaties. It focuses on two main aspects: the first is the relationship between various principles and (or) maxims of interpretation and the customary rules of interpretation reflected in Articles 31-32 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. The second is the relationship between treaty and customary law, considered against the background of the quintessential Nicaraguan case, the Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua.
Die Gründungsverträge Internationaler Organisationen unterliegen im Lauf der Zeit erheblichem Wandel, auch wenn ihr Wortlaut nicht geändert wird. Eine wesentliche Rolle kommt dabei der Praxis der Organisationen zu. Dieser Umstand lässt sich völkerrechtlich auf die Auslegung durch die spätere Übung der Vertragsparteien zurückführen - es sei denn, die Grenzen der Interpretation werden überschritten. Die Organe Internationaler Organisationen sind dabei mehr als bloße Versammlungen der Mitgliedstaaten: Die Voraussetzungen und Rechtsfolgen ihrer Praxis hängen von Zusammensetzung, Kompetenzen und Entscheidungsverfahren ab. Auf eine Analyse des einschlägigen Völkerrechts folgen Fallstudien aus der Praxis der Vereinten Nationen, ihrer Sonderorganisationen und regionaler Organisationen. So wird der Ordnungsrahmen für die Fortentwicklung Internationaler Organisationen durch Praxis systematisch dargestellt - ohne Gefahren für Legitimation und rule of law auszublenden.
European Society of International Law
Interest Group The European Union as a Global Actor
Riga, 7-10 September 2016
The Contribution of the European Union
to the International Legal Order
La contribution de l’Union européenne
à l’ordre juridique international
CALL FOR PAPERS
The coming of age of the EU as a global actor slowly turns the EU from a recipient into a contributor to the further development of international law. Since the Treaty of Lisbon in particular, the EU treaties reveal the EU’s global ambitions in this area, which basically boil down to the idea that the EU should – at least partly – shift its focus from its own Member States to third states – thereby even limiting the possibilities for the Member States to contribute to international law-making.
The relationship between EU law and international law has been studied extensively. Yet, this workshop is not about the effects of international law, but rather about the effects on international law. So, where the question of the ‘Europeanisation of international law’ is usually understood as dealing with the way in which international law is ‘Europeanised’ when it becomes part of the EU legal order (leading to questions on the emergence of a distinct European system of international law or the consequences of this ‘Europeanisation’ for the unity and coherence of public international law), this workshop aims to assess the way in which international law is ‘Europeanised’ outside the EU.
By now the EU has a legal relationship with almost all states in the world and it is an active participant in many international organizations (either directly or through its Member States). It has been held that the EU is a global normative actor, in particular in the promotion of its own values and by influencing global policy-making. Yet, influencing policies is not the same as influencing legal norms. International law is known for its quite strict rules on what it considers to be a legitimate source. The question is to which extend EU practice may indeed contribute to international law-making.
Article 3(5) TEU is quite clear on the notion that the EU’s role is not limited to internal lawmaking: “In its relations with the wider world, the Union shall uphold and promote its values and interests and contribute to the protection of its citizens. It shall contribute to peace, security, the sustainable development of the Earth, solidarity and mutual respect among peoples, free and fair trade, eradication of poverty and the protection of human rights, in particular the rights of the child, as well as to the strict observance and the development of international law, including respect for the principles of the United Nations Charter.”
In doing so, the European Union seeks inspiration in its own development. Article 21(1) TEU provides: “The Union’s action on the international scene shall be guided by the principles which have inspired its own creation, development and enlargement, and which it seeks to advance in the wider world: democracy, the rule of law, the universality and indivisibility of human rights and fundamental freedoms, respect for human dignity, the principles of equality and solidarity, and respect for the principles of the United Nations Charter and international law.”
References to international law can be found throughout the Treaties. The same holds true for the United Nations. In fact, the attention to the United Nations and its principles in the EU treaties is overwhelming; the United Nations is referred to 19 times in the current EU treaties (including the Protocols and Declarations). The EU obviously regards many of its actions as being part of a global governance programme.
Going back in time, ‘Europe’ has of course always played a large role in international law-making. The question whether international law is a European invention forms the source of extensive academic debates. These debates, however, focus on the role of European states in international law-making, whereas the present workshop aims to look at the role of the European Union. Over the years, this distinct level of governance and law-making not only obtained its own internal dynamic, but equally put its mark on the development of key areas of international law, such as international trade law and environmental law.
The key question leading the workshop will be to which extend the European Union is able to have an effect on the development of international law, both in a doctrinal and a practical manner.
Papers may be in both English and French. Please mail your title and short abstract as soon as possible to firstname.lastname@example.org Proposals will be selected by the IG Coordinators. Please feel free to distribute this call to others. More information on the ESIL Annual Conference can be found here.
The Interest Group Coordinators
Piet Eeckhout, Christine Kaddous, Anne Thies, Ramses A. Wessel
- Eric De Brabandere & Ingo Venzke, The Activities of the Leiden Journal of International Law: Past, Present, and Future
- International Legal Theory
- Samantha Besson, State Consent and Disagreement in International Law-Making. Dissolving the Paradox
- Danielle Hanna Rached, The Concept(s) of Accountability: Form in Search of Substance
- Vassilis P. Tzevelekos & Lucas Lixinski, Towards a Humanized International “Constitution”?
- Emmanuel Voyiakis, A Disaggregative View of Customary International Law-Making
- International Law and Practice
- Neil Boister, Waltzing on the Vienna Consensus on Drug Control? Tensions in the International System for the Control of Drugs
- Wenwei Guan, IPRs, Public Health, and International Trade: An International Law Perspective on the TRIPS Amendment
- Massimo Lando, The Advisory Jurisdiction of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea: Comments on the Request for an Advisory Opinion Submitted by the Sub-Regional Fisheries Commission
- Salvatore Fabio Nicolosi, Disconnecting Humanitarian Law from EU Subsidiary Protection: A Hypothesis of Defragmentation of International Law
- Alessandra Pietrobon, Challenges in Implementing the European Convention against Trafficking in Human Organs
- Anne Saab, Climate-Resilient Crops and International Climate Change Adaptation Law
- Hague International Tribunals: International Court of Justice
- Makane Moïse Mbengue, Scientific Fact-finding at the International Court of Justice: An Appraisal in the Aftermath of the Whaling Case
- International Criminal Courts and Tribunals
- Kerstin Blome & Nora Markard, ‘Contested Collisions’: Conditions for a Successful Collision Management – The Example of Article 16 of the Rome Statute
- Elinor Fry, Legal Recharacterization and the Materiality of Facts at the International Criminal Court: Which Changes Are Permissible?
Sunday, May 1, 2016
- Old rules for new problems? Assessing Roscini’s take on the cyberspace between jus ad bellum and jus in bello
- Introduced by Giulio Bartolini and Marco Pertile
- Emanuele Sommario, Applying the Jus in Bello in the Cyber Domain: Navigating between lex lata and lex ferenda
- Christian Henderson, The use of cyber force: Is the jus ad bellum ready?