- Anne-Marie Carstens, The Hostilities-Occupation Dichotomy and Cultural Property in Non-International Armed Conflicts
- Julien Chaisse & Lisa Zhuoyue Li, Shareholder Protection Reloaded-- Redesigning the Matrix of Shareholder Claims for Reflective Loss
- Michael G. Faure, In the Aftermath of Disaster: Liability and Compensation Mechanisms as Tools to Reduce Disaster Risks
- Anastasia Telesetsky, Overlapping International Disaster Law Approaches with International Environmental Law Regimes to Address Latent Ecological Disaster
Saturday, June 4, 2016
- Geert De Baere, Anna-Luise Chané, & Jan Wouters, International Courts as Keepers of the Rule of Law: Achievements, Challenges, and Opportunities
- James D. Fry & Odysseas G. Repousis, Towards a New World for Investor-State Arbitration Through Transparency
- Vera Korzun, Arbitrating Antitrust Claims: From Suspicion to Trust
Friday, June 3, 2016
The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) is rare of its kind: while it possesses most of the attributes traditionally ascribed to an International Organization, it lacks a constitutive act under international law and an established international legal personality. Despite long-lasting attempts to formalise its institutional structure, the legal status of the OSCE remains an open issue until today.
This leads to a patchwork of legal regimes under which the organization operates in the participating States. The organization’s sui generis legal status is the result of a unique legal and political process, which has started as an effort to build an East-West forum for political dialogue in the framework of the Conference for Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE), and which was formalised by the Helsinki Final Act of 1975 and later renamed into the OSCE (1995). Today, the OSCE is the world’s largest regional security organization with 57 participating States, covering a security, economic and environmental as well as human dimension and constituting a key institution in the field of early warning, conflict prevention, crisis management, and post-conflict rehabilitation. Given the role of the OSCE, it is remarkable that questions surrounding its legal framework remain unresolved.
Against this backdrop, the Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law convenes a one-day international conference, which will take place on 13 July 2016 at the Harnack-Haus in Berlin. Under the heading “Between Aspirations and Realities: Strengthening the Legal Framework of the OSCE”, the conference aims to provide a new impetus to the debate on strengthening the legal framework of the OSCE.
Past attempts have shown that strengthening legal framework of the OSCE faces a number of competing demands. On the one hand, formalisation efforts have been pursued in a belief that endowing the organization with legal personality, privileges and immunities would ensure a uniform legal status and the necessary legal protection for the organization and its staff, both in the Vienna Headquarters and in field missions. Legal personality is also expected to facilitate the OSCE relations with both domestic and international public and private actors, therefore improving the organization’s effectiveness and contributing towards greater legal certainty. On the other hand, the less formal nature of the OSCE is appreciated for the flexibility and promptness it offers in decision-making and crisis response, thus likewise contributing towards the organization’s effectiveness.
The question is therefore whether and to what extent formalising the OSCE status could alter the existing arrangements and undermine the organization’s significance as a platform for political dialogue. Moreover, the possible adoption of a constitutive act (Charter) raises concerns as to the maintenance of the OSCE acquis and the sensitive power relations within the organization. Furthermore, a modified legal framework would necessarily affect the distribution of legal responsibility between the participating States and the organization, and would require the establishment of appropriate accountability mechanism, which all opens up questions that have not yet been properly addressed.
So far, the discussions have been framed by political considerations brought forward by the OSCE participating States at the high political level, and drafted by expert bodies and working groups within the organization. The aim of this conference is to complement these efforts by opening up the debate to a broader international audience.
Taking the proposals as drafted in the past years as a common starting point, the discussions will focus on legal and political implications of these proposals as well as envisage possible further options for strengthening the OSCE framework. In order to ensure an open and discursive format of the conference, international scholars and practitioners with expertise in legal, political and related fields, civil society organizations and media representatives are all welcome as panellists and participants.
The Art-Law Centre and the UNESCO Chair in the International Law of the Protection of Cultural Heritage are proud to invite you to participate in the second “All Art and Cultural Heritage Law” conference, which will be dealing with the two following highly relevant themes: cultural heritage in the crossfire and the relationship between law and ethics in the field of cultural heritage. It will also present some national and regional experiences regarding the implementation of cultural heritage law. Once again Geneva hopes to be for these two days the “capital of the world” of art and cultural heritage law.
Call for Papers: International Tribunals and the Interpretation of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea
VIème Colloque Ordinaire
Association Internationale du Droit de la Mer
Les tribunaux internationaux et l’interprétation
de la Convention des Nations Unies sur le Droit de la Mer
Università degli Studi del Sannio
3-4 novembre 2016 – Benevento, Italie
Appel à contribution
À l’occasion du VI Colloque Ordinaire pourtant sur « Les tribunaux internationaux et l’interprétation de la Convention des Nations Unies sur le Droit de la Mer », qui se déroulera les 3 et 4 novembre prochaines à l’Université du Sannio, l’Association Internationale du Droit de la Mer invite les spécialistes en la matière, âgés de moins de 40 ans, à soumettre leur proposition de contribution.
Les intéressés sont invités à soumettre un résumée de la contribution (500 mots environ), rédigé en anglais, français ou italien. Le texte préliminaire devra être envoyé à la Association International du Droit de la Mer par courriel en format PDF à l’adresse email@example.com, avant la date limite du 17 juillet 2016 et devra indiquer le titre de l’intervention, le nom, la date de naissance et l’adresse postale de l’auteur ainsi que son institution d’affiliation.
Les contributions sélectionnées seront présentées au Colloque par leurs auteurs. Les frais de séjour et voyage à Benevento des rapporteurs sélectionnés seront couverts par l’organisation du Colloque.
Le résultat de la sélection sera communiqué aux candidats avant le 31 juillet 2016.
* * *
VI Ordinary Meeting
Association Internationale du Droit de la Mer
International Tribunals and the Interpretation of the
United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea
Università degli Studi del Sannio
3-4 November 2016 – Benevento, Italy
Call for Papers
The VI Ordinary Meeting of the Association Internationale du Droit de la Mer will be held at the University of Sannio (Benevento, Italy) on 3rd and 4th November 2016. The Topic of the Conference will be “International Tribunals and the Interpretation of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea”. On this occasion, the Association invites experts in the field younger than 40 to submit a proposal of contribution on a topic related to the theme of the Conference.
Authors are invited to submit an abstract of their proposal of 500 words in French, English or Italian. Abstracts, together with the name, surname, date of birth, postal address and affiliation of the author, must be submitted in PDF format to firstname.lastname@example.org by 17 July 2016.
The authors of the best papers will be invited to present their contribution at the Conference. The organizers will cover travel and accommodation expenses of the selected speakers.
The selected participants will be notified by 31st July 2016.
The modern jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) involving questions of foreign State immunity is usually informed by the premise that such questions are governed by customary international law, ‘the codification of which is enshrined’ in the 2004 UN Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property (UNCSI), a multilateral treaty which is not yet in force. This paper takes the view that the alleged customary nature of the UNCSI largely constitutes a myth. A primary illustration is offered by Article 11 on the employment exception to State immunity, which is at the heart of most ECtHR’s decisions relating to the UNCSI. The multiple reasons why the UNCSI, and that provision in particular, cannot be regarded as a reflection of customary law are outlined.
Yet the paper considers that in its UNCSI decisions the ECtHR may have favoured a consequentialist posture, according to which the ultimate end of safeguarding human rights impaired by measures taken by ECHR Parties pursuant to controversial immunity rules would justify every legal means, however questionable, espoused for that purpose. However, it is not to be taken for granted that the ECtHR’s calculus has been accurate in this area, ie, that the Court has carefully pondered the pros and cons of its UNCSI jurisprudence. The dilemma remains as to whether the end justifies the means.
Thursday, June 2, 2016
The Australian International Law Journal, published by the International Law Association (Australian Branch), is calling for papers of between 6,000 and 12,000 words on topics of public or private international law. Casenotes (2,000-3,000 words) and book reviews (1,000 words) within the area of public or private international law are also welcome.
Papers should be submitted by email to the Editor, c/o the Treasurer at email@example.com. The deadline for submissions is 31 July 2016. Accepted submissions will be published in Volume 22 of the Journal.
If you are interested in submitting a paper for consideration, please refer to the AILJ Guidelines for Authors.
For more information about the Journal, click here.
The paper analyzes the following questions from a Chinese perspective: what are the characteristics of the China-Korea FTA? And what are their underlying considerations and implications? It argues, first, that the China-Korea FTA is characterized by expanded coverage, highlighted focus on services and investment, increased non-trade concerns of competition and environment, and enhanced good governance norms. Generally the features are not fully developed largely due to the gentle pace of the China-Korea FTA. Among the features, good governance is more salient than others. Second, these features may be attributable to a variety of factors, particularly the response to trade practice and disputes, the impact of other trade agreements, and the need of economic transformation of China. Third, these characteristics may face challenges particularly those regarding the implementation and interpretation of relevant obligations. Finally, these traits may represent some of the future direction of China’s FTAs, and the goal of a high-level FTA will remain a guiding force. New development will be made in areas such as services and investment. Besides relevant initiatives of China, mega FTAs may have more impact.
- Special Issue: In Memory of Professor Krzysztof Skubiszewski
- Michał Kowalski, The Use of Armed Force: Contemporary Challenges in Light of Professor Skubiszewski’s Legacy
- Bartłomiej Krzan, Fiat iustitia . . . Professor Krzysztof Skubiszewski and His Vision of the Relations Between the International Court of Justice and the Security Council
- Maciej Żenkiewicz, Judge Skubiszewski at the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal
This chapter analyses the concept of investor diligence and its practical and policy implications for investment arbitration proceedings. It proceeds in two stages. Firstly, the sources of investor diligence are identified and discussed. In this process, I discuss not only (i) the main CSR and SRI instruments but also (ii) the legal techniques to give legal grounding to these and other standards of investor behaviour and, perhaps most importantly, (iii) how investor diligence has featured in investment proceedings at the jurisdictional, admissibility, merits and quantum levels. Secondly, I analyse the implications of mainstreaming investor diligence for three policy questions, namely (i) the debate over investor-State asymmetry in investment protection frameworks, (ii) the distinction between commercial and political risk, and (iii) the use of the legitimate expectations doctrine.
- Richard English, The future study of terrorism
- Frank Foley, Why inter-agency operations break down: US counterterrorism in comparative perspective
- Thierry Balzacq & Myriam Dunn Cavelty, A theory of actor-network for cyber-security
- Tarak Barkawi, Decolonising war
- Fernando G. Nuñez-Mietz, Lawyering compliance with international law: Legal advisers in the ‘War on Terror’
- Patrick Porter, Taking uncertainty seriously: Classical realism and national security
- John H. Jackson: A Tribute
- L. Alan Winters
- Pieter Jan Kuijper
- Steve Charnovitz
- William J. Davey
- Alan Sykes
- Debra P. Steger
- Thomas Cottier
- Alan V. Deardorff
- Jagdish Bhagwati
- Mitsuo Matsushita
- Lee Ann Jackson
- Emily Lydgate, Sorting Out Mixed Messages under the WTO National Treatment Principle: A Proposed Approach
- Jean-François Arvis, Yann Duval, Ben Shepherd, Chorthip Utoktham, & Anasuya Raj, Trade Costs in the Developing World: 1996–2010
- Haneul Jung & Jeongmeen Suh, Preventing Systematic Circumvention of the SCM Agreement: Beyond the Mandatory/Discretionary Distinction
- Weihuan Zhou, Circumvention and Anti-Circumvention: Rising Protectionism in Australia
- Kirsten Schmalenbach, Ideological Warfare against Cultural Property: UN Strategies and Dilemmas
- Alexander Orakhelashvili, UN Security Council Resolutions before UK Courts
- Priya Urs, The Role of the Security Council in the Use of Force against the ‘Islamic State’
- Diana Kearney, The Slippery Slope of UN Peacekeeping: Offensive Peacekeeping in Congo and Beyond
- Alexandre Skander Galand, Security Council Referrals to the International Criminal Court as Quasi-Legislative Acts
- Meagan S. Wong, Ratifying the Amendments to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court on the Crime of Aggression
- A. Katarina Weilert, United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC) – After Ten Years of Being in Force
- Alena F. Douhan, United Nations and Regional Organizations: Complementarity v. Subsidiarity
- Katrin Tiroch, Modernizing the Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners – A Human Rights Perspective
- Ahmed Abou-El-Wafa, The Right to Asylum between Islamic Shari’ah and International Refugee Law: Consequences for the Present Refugee Crisis
- Charles Briefel & Ignacio Tredici, The United Nations Prosecution Support Cell Programme in the Democratic Republic of Congo – A Strategy to Combat Impunity for Serious Crimes
- Elvira Pushkareva, Concepts of the Legal Status of the Arctic
- Thomas Fleiner, Discrepancies between Civil Law and Common Law Federations
- Victor Kattan, Self-Determination during the Cold War: UN General Assembly Resolution 1514 (1960), the Prohibition of Partition, and the Establishment of the British Indian Ocean Territory (1965)
- Siddharth Peter de Souza, Evaluating ‘Access to Justice’ in Informal Justice Systems: A Suggestive Framework
- Tilmann J. Röder & Maximilian Spohr, Key Legal and Political Developments at the United Nations in 2015
Wednesday, June 1, 2016
- Jean-Sylvestre Bergé & Geneviève Helleringer, Operating International Law in a Global Context: Presentation of a Three Steps Method
- Justin Paul Cook, Declining Jurisdiction in the Hague’s Proposed Judgments Convention: Amalgamating the ‘More Appropriate Forum’ and the ‘Clearly Inappropriate Forum’ Tests to Provide the Optimal Forum Non Conveniens Clause
- Stefano Dominelli, Evolutionary Trends in Maritime Piracy: A Possible Assessment of Eco-Activists’ Conduct
- Chloe Gall, Coming to Terms with a New Role: The Approach of the International Court of Justice to the Interpretation of Human Rights Treaties
- Sophocles Kitharidis, The Unknown Territories of the National Security Exception: the Importance and Interpretation of Art XXI of the GATT
- Shane Monks, Flight MH370: International Law and How We Use It
- É.-A. T. Gatsi, Coopération judiciaire entre les États de la CEMAC : vers un espace judiciaire commun ?
- B. Akpoué, L’autonomie du juge judiciaire ivoirien
- M. Sinkondo, Daech est-il un État ? Retour critique sur la théorie néopositiviste des éléments constitutifs de l’État à l’épreuve de l’actualité internationale
- Matthew Craven, Theorizing the Turn to History in International Law
- Randall Lesaffer, Roman Law and the Intellectual History of International Law
- Martti Koskenniemi, Transformations of Natural Law: Germany 1648-1815
- Martine Julia Van Ittersum, Hugo Grotius: The Making of a Founding Father of International Law
- Emmanuelle Tourme-Jouannet, The Critique of Classical Thought During the Interwar Period: Vattel and Van Vollenhoven
- Umut Özsu, The Ottoman Empire, the Origins of Extraterritoriality, and International Legal Theory
- Teemu Ruskola, China in the Age of the World Picture
- Antony Anghie, Imperialism and International Legal Theory
- Mónica García-Salmones, Early Twentieth Century Positivism Revisited
- Jochen von Bersnstorff, Hans Kelsen and the Return of Universalism
- Robert Howse, Schmitt, Schmitteanism and contemporary International Legal Theory
- Deborah Whitehall, Hannah Arendt and International Legal Theory
- Lauri Mälksoo, International Legal Theory in Russia: A Civilizational Perspective, or can Individuals be Subjects of International Law?
- Geoff Gordon, Natural Law in International Legal Theory: Linear and Dialectical Presentations
- Robert Knox, Marxist Approaches to International Law
- Oliver Jütersonke, Realist Approaches to International Law
- Oliver Kessler, Constructivism and the Politics of International Law
- Peter Goodrich, The International Signs Law
- Samantha Besson, Moral Philosophy and International Law
- Jörg Kammerhofer, International Legal Positivism
- Hengameh Saberi, Yale's Policy Science and International Law: Between Legal Formalism and the Policy Conceptualism
- Dan Danielsen, International Law and Economics: Letting Go of 'The Normal' in Pursuit of an Ever-Elusive Real
- Daniel Joyce, Liberal Internationalism
- Dianne Otto, Feminist Approaches to International Law
- Wouter Werner & Geoff Gordon, Kant, Cosmopolitanism, and International Law
- Benedict Kingsbury, Megan Donaldson & Rodrigo Vallejo, Global Administrative Law and Deliberative Democracy
- Jean d'Aspremont, Towards a New Theory of Sources in International Law
- Gerry Simpson, Something to do With States
- Rose Parfitt, Theorizing Recognition and International Personality
- Gregor Noll, Theorizing Jurisdiction
- Jan Klabbers, Theorizing International Organizations
- Fleur Johns, Theorizing the Corporation in International Law
- Dino Kritsiotis, Theorizing International Law on force and intervention
- Ben Golder, Theorizing Human Rights
- Anne Orford, Theorizing Free Trade
- Sarah Nouwen, International Criminal Law: Theory All Over the Place
- Frédéric Mégret, Theorizing the Laws of War
- Vasuki Nesiah, Theorizing Transitional Justice: Cashing in the Blue Chips
- Stephen Humphreys & Yoriko Otomo, Theorizing International Environmental Law
- Kerry Rittich, Theorizing International Law and Development
- Outi Korhonen & Toni Selkälä, Theorizing Responsibility
- Horatia Muir Watt, Theorizing Private International Law
- Chantal Thomas, Transnational Migration, Globalization, and Governance: Theorizing a Crisis
- Reut Paz, Religion, Secularism, and International Law
- Thomas Skouterist, The Idea of Progress
- Florian Hoffmann, International Legalism and International Politics
- Jason Beckett, Creating Poverty
- Anne Peters, Fragmentation and Constitutionalization
- When is a criminal prohibition of genocide denial justified? The Perinçek Case and the risk of a double standard
- Introduced by Gabriele Della Morte
- Claudia Morgana Cascione, Genocide denial and freedom of expression in the Perinçek Case: A European overruling or a new approach to negationism?
- Ariana Macaya, Focus sur Perinçek c Suisse. La question de la limitation à la liberté d’expression nécessaire dans une société démocratique
- Carmelo Domenico Leotta, Brief remarks on the balancing method ‘truly’ adopted by the ECtHR Grand Chamber in Perinçek c Switzerland
Tuesday, May 31, 2016
- Pamela R. Ferguson, The Presumption of Innocence and its Role in the Criminal Process
- Suzannah Linton, Women Accused of International Crimes: A Trans-Disciplinary Inquiry and Methodology
- ’Mampolokeng ’Mathuso Mary-Elizabeth Monyakane, The South African Drugs and Drug Trafficking Act 140 of 1992 Read with the South African Criminal Law Amendment Act 105 of 1997: An Example of a One Size Fits All Punishment?
- Alejandro Chehtman, Tribunales de ocupación, jus ad bellum y grupos no estatales: revisando la ética de la ocupación militar
- Roberto Gargarella, Tribunales internacionales y democracia: enfoques deferentes o de interferencia
- Juan Pablo Scarfi, Excepcionalismo estadounidense y hegemonía legal hemisférica: La Corte Suprema de Estados Unidos como modelo imperial de justicia internacional para Centroamérica y América Latina, y su influjo en el sistema interamericano (1906-1938)
- Santiago Rojas Molina, Derechos contra la realidad: Poder y Derecho Internacional en la consolidación temprana de los Estados en Latinoamérica
- Margarita Robles Carrillo, Amenaza y uso de la fuerza a través del ciberespacio: un cambio de paradigma
- Florencia Delia Lebensohn, Los principios básicos de los procesos de reestructuración de la deuda soberana: análisis a la luz del derecho internacional
- William A. Schabas, La banalidad de la justicia internacional
- Nicolás Carrillo Santarelli, “Sanciones” alternativas y justicia transicional con las FARC en Colombia ¿eufemismo o modelo legítimo?
- Entrevista a Máximo Langer
Understanding the geographical and temporal scope of international humanitarian law (also known as IHL, or the law of armed conflict) is a vital component in the process of applying IHL norms to situations of armed conflict. Knowing where and when the provisions of the law of armed conflict start – and cease – to apply is vital to ensuring that the rules are respected, and where other rules of international and domestic law are more relevant or pertinent. This chapter canvasses both the temporal and geographical scope of application of the law of armed conflict, charting where and when the law applies and where and when it is deemed to cease applying. In doing so, this chapter examines some of the more complex issues raised by the temporal and geographical aspects of the law of armed conflict, such as the changing level of intensity of hostilities and the geographical location of participants in armed conflict.
A danger, an opportunity, passé, a cliché, destabilizing, empowering, destructive, creative: Depending on whom you ask, fragmentation has meant any and all of these for international law. The concept of fragmentation has been a mirror reflecting international lawyers’ perception of themselves, their field, and its prospects for the future.
This chapter chronicles fragmentation’s meanings over the past few decades. In particular, it focuses on the spreading fears of fragmentation around the millennium, how the fears were eventually repurposed, where, speculatively, those fear may have gone, and how and to what extent faith in international law was restored.
Au cours de 2 décennies passées, le TIDM a su trouver sa place dans le concert des juridictions internationales. Sa procédure sur plusieurs aspects est innovante. Il a par ailleurs réglé de nombreux différends dans le domaine du droit de la mer et a apporté une contribution significative au développement de celui-ci. Le colloque sera l’occasion de revenir sur ces différents aspects et d’envisager l’avenir. Le TDIM a un potentiel qui n’est très certainement pas encore totalement exploité. Le colloque sera ainsi l’occasion de confronter le point de vue de spécialistes de la question sous un angle à la fois théorique et pratique.
Monday, May 30, 2016
- Duane Swank, The new political economy of taxation in the developing world
- Laura Seelkopf, Hanna Lierse & Carina Schmitt, Trade liberalization and the global expansion of modern taxes
- Quan Li, Fiscal decentralization and tax incentives in the developing world
- Ida Bastiaens & Nita Rudra, Trade liberalization and the challenges of revenue mobilization: can international financial institutions make a difference?
- Philipp Genschel, Hanna Lierse & Laura Seelkopf, Dictators don't compete: autocracy, democracy, and tax competition
- Philipp Genschel & Laura Seelkopf, Did they learn to tax? Taxation trends outside the OECD
Tous les deux ans, la Société française pour le droit international (SFDI) et Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationales Recht (DGIR) tiennent un colloque conjoint. Les journées conjointes de 2014 ont eu lieu en Belgique, à l’Université de Louvain (UCL), sur le thème du « Droit des frontières internationales ». Bien qu’il s’agisse d’une thématique classique en droit international public, sinon fondatrice de la discipline, elle présente un intérêt renouvelé à l’heure de la globalisation et mérite une réappropriation contemporaine. L’explosion du contentieux de la délimitation maritime, le tracé de nouvelles frontières en Afrique à la suite de l’émergence de nouveaux Etats (Erythrée, Sud Soudan), la multiplication de situations territoriales controversées (Abkhazie, Ossétie du Sud, Kosovo, Transnistrie, Haut Karabakh, Crimée…), la consolidation de zones contrôlées par des groupes non-étatiques (EIIL), l’émergence d’un régime d’application extraterritoriale des droits de l’homme, les questions migratoires, l’impact des délimitations territoriales sur le droit des investissements, et, enfin, la transformation profonde de la signification des frontières au sein de l’Union européenne – autant de questions qui justifient une réflexion d’ensemble sur le droit des frontières internationales et qui ont été abordées au cours de ces journées conjointes.
- Anthony Tirado Chase, Human rights contestations: sexual orientation and gender identity
- Anita Sophia Horn, Moral and political conceptions of human rights: rethinking the distinction
- Fionnuala Waldron & Rowan Oberman, Responsible citizens? How children are conceptualised as rights holders in Irish primary schools
- Gearóid Ó Cuinn & Sigrun Skogly, Understanding human rights obligations of states engaged in public activity overseas: the case of transnational education
- Thomas MacManus, The denial industry: public relations, ‘crisis management’ and corporate crime
- Mutaz M. Qafisheh, Palestinian prisoners in Israel versus Namibian prisoners under apartheid: a potential role for the International Criminal Court
- Alexandra Xanthaki, Against integration, for human rights
- Marco Odello & Róisín Burke, Between immunity and impunity: peacekeeping and sexual abuses and violence
This paper is a contribution to a book on obligations to collectively protect common goods in international law. It explores the procedural aspects of international environmental law’s evolution towards the protection of ‘community’ interests.
The paper first examines the interplay between procedural and substantive obligations, focusing on efforts to flesh out the standard of due diligence that is at the core of the harm prevention obligation in customary law. The recent decisions of the International Court of Justice in the Costa Rica v Nicaragua / Nicaragua v Costa Rica cases suggest that the specifics of the connections between procedure and substance may be less well settled than one may have assumed. Next, the paper surveys the rich array of procedural approaches to promoting and protecting community interests that has evolved in this setting, including law-making, implementation and oversight, and compliance and dispute settlement processes, as well as the range of ways in which non-state actors can be involved in these processes. Special attention is paid to the global climate regime that has evolved under the umbrella of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, including through the Paris Agreement adopted in December 2015.
The central argument of the paper is that, both under general international law and in the context of treaty-based regimes, the procedural dimensions of international environmental law hold the key to its ability to serve community interests. Procedure can promote the protection of community interests in concrete ways. For example, procedural requirements can step into the breach when substantive requirements lack specificity or when states are reluctant to invoke them. In the context of treaty-based regimes, procedural elements play crucial roles when participants hold divergent positions, work towards shared understandings of community interests and collective action, or work to develop, apply, or revise, substantive requirements. But the procedural aspects of international environmental law also are important in their own right. Procedure serves to enable, guide and at times even compel interaction between states and other international actors, including non-state actors. In so doing, procedural norms and practices contribute to the legitimacy and resilience of international law.
- Thalia Kruger, The Disorderly Infiltration of EU Law in Civil Procedure
- Adamantia Rachovitsa, General Principles of Public Order and Morality and the Domain Name System: Whither Public International Law?
- Alexandre Andrade Sampaio & Matthew McEvoy, Little Weapons of War: Reasons for and Consequences of Treating Child Soldiers as Victims
Sunday, May 29, 2016
- Gareth Dale, In search of Karl Polanyi’s International Relations theory
- Jeremy Green, Anglo-American development, the Euromarkets, and the deeper origins of neoliberal deregulation
- Julia Costa Lopez, Beyond Eurocentrism and Orientalism: Revisiting the Othering of Jews and Muslims through medieval canon law
- Joseph Mackay, The nomadic other: Ontological security and the Inner Asian steppe in historical East Asian international politics
- Cemal Burak Tansel, Geopolitics, social forces, and the international: Revisiting the ‘Eastern Question’
- Jonas Wolff & Lisbeth Zimmermann, Between Banyans and battle scenes: Liberal norms, contestation, and the limits of critique
- Jennifer Gronau & Henning Schmidtke, The quest for legitimacy in world politics – international institutions’ legitimation strategies
- Lee Jarvis & Tim Legrand, Legislating for Otherness: Proscription powers and parliamentary discourse
- Marcus Schulzke, War by other means: Mobile gaming and the 2014 Israel-Gaza Conflict
Sovereignty in the Age of Global Terrorism: The Role of International Organisations analyses the role of international organisations in adopting counterterrorism measures after 9/11 and the impact of these measures on the sovereignty of their Member States. The book examines the counterterrorism regimes of the UN and four regional organisations (with a special focus on the EU), as well as their implementation by their Member States. It includes the 2008 Kadi case of the European Court of Justice as case study of the conflicts between legal regimes that have competing mandates to fight terrorism. The relevance of the book lies in both comprehending the rationale for international actions against terrorism and the consequences on international law and State sovereignty.
Le précédent en droit international fait sans doute partie des notions les plus étudiées, mais aussi les plus controversées. Il est conçu pour les besoins de ce colloque dans une acception très large : il ne s’identifie en effet ni au seul précédent jurisprudentiel, ni à la pratique à proprement parler mais vise à englober tout comportement passé – en opposition précisément à l’ensemble des comportements formant une pratique – susceptible de produire des effets de droit. Le colloque a ainsi pour ambition d’analyser tout type d’action ou réaction juridique, quel que soit son auteur et quelle que soit son autorité, qui puisse être considérée comme un précédent lato sensu : comportement de chaque sujet du droit international apte à le lier en tant que tel ou à participer dans la formation d’une pratique générale, décisions des juridictions internationales judiciaires ou arbitrales qu’elles fassent ou non partie d’une « jurisprudence constante », voire encore opinions séparées des juges ou arbitres … Ainsi, outre la jurisprudence internationale, les comportements isolés ou répétés des organisations internationales et des États notamment (y compris la jurisprudence interne en tant que révélatrice de la pratique étatique en la matière) sont étudiés comme faisant partie de la notion de précédent.
In recent years, the negotiation and conclusion of international investment agreements (IIAs) in Latin America has gone hand-in-hand with a rethinking of investment standards and the elaboration of new IIA models. This is evident, among others, in Brazil’s cooperation and facilitation investment agreements (CFIAs), the continuing negotiations on the creation of a regional dispute settlement centre under the aegis of the Union of South American Nations (UNASUR), some recently-released investment policy documents and amendments to national arbitration laws for disputes involving the State. The article highlights such developments emphasising the broad spectrum of local approaches that vary from convergence to divergence in order to interpret Latin American countries’ position in the existing investor-State dispute settlement (ISDS) system and reveal the role that the sub-continent can play in the future design of ISDS.