The threat of “blowback” from foreign fighters, unaffiliated volunteers who join an insurgency in a distant land, has led states to explore a variety of normative mechanisms. Among these is the international legal regime applicable to mercenaries. This short article considers the evolution of mercenarism and the efforts to regulate it. Attempts to fit foreign fighters into that normative category are unlikely to succeed. In part this is due to the question of motivation, which is central to most definitions of mercenary and focuses on private gain. But it is also linked to the reasons for regulation in the first place: mercenaries are seen as threats in the states to which they travel, while foreign fighters are primarily deemed threats by the states to which they might return.
Saturday, July 30, 2016
Friday, July 29, 2016
- Arnoud Willems & Nikolaos Theodorakis, Customs Sanctions Harmonization in Europe: Why the Commission Is Taking the Wrong Approach
- Stepanie Noel, Why the European Union Must Dump So-called ‘Non-market Economy’ Methodologies and Adjustments in Its Anti-dumping Investigations
- Jorge Miranda, A Comment on Vermulst’s Article on China in Anti-dumping Proceedings after December 2016
- Nashat Mahmoud Abdalla Jaradt, A Short Guide to Contracting in International Trade
- Frank Altemöller, Perspectives for the World Trade System: From Multilateral Integration to Free Trade Agreements?
- Legesse Tigabu Mengie, Global Trade Governance: WTO Accountability to Local Stakeholders
- Abdul Wahid Mohamed Azam, Muneeb M. Musthafa, Faiz MMT Marikar, & KMG Gehan Jayasuriya, 'Illegal Transnational Trading of Biodiversity and Wildlife Materials from Sri Lanka and the Countermeasures
- Pratyush Nath Upreti, Litigating Intellectual Property Issues in Investor-State Dispute Settlement: A Jurisdictional Conflict
- Special Issue: The International Court of Justice at 70
- Amelia Keene (editor), Outcome Paper for the Seminar on the International Court of Justice at 70: In Retrospect and in Prospect / Actes Du Seminaire Tenu À L’Occasion Du Soixante-dixième Anniversaire De La Cour Internationale De Justice: Bilan Et Perspectives
- Ronny Abraham, Presentation of the International Court of Justice over the Last Ten Years / Présentation des dix dernières années d’activité de la Cour internationale de Justice
- Dapo Akande, Selection of the International Court of Justice as a Forum for Contentious and Advisory Proceedings (Including Jurisdiction) / Le choix de recourir à la Cour internationale de Justice en matières contentieuses et consultatives (y compris la question de la compétence)
- Dr. Alina Miron, Working Methods of the Court / Les méthodes de travail de la Cour
- Loretta Malintoppi, Fact Finding and Evidence Before the International Court of Justice (Notably in Scientific-Related Disputes) / Etablissement des faits et question de la preuve devant la cour internationale de justice (notamment dans le cadre de différends liés à des questions scientifiques)
- Sienho Yee, Article 38 of the ICJ Statute and Applicable Law: Selected Issues in Recent Cases / L’article 38 du Statut de la Cour internationale de Justice et le régime de droit applicable: Questions choisies et affaires récentes
Thursday, July 28, 2016
- Special Issue: The Paris Agreement
- Daniel Bodansky, The Legal Character of the Paris Agreement
- Sandrine Maljean-Dubois, The Paris Agreement: A New Step in the Gradual Evolution of Differential Treatment in the Climate Regime?
- Christina Voigt, The Compliance and Implementation Mechanism of the Paris Agreement
- Yulia Yamineva, Climate Finance in the Paris Outcome: Why Do Today What You Can Put Off Till Tomorrow?
- Annalisa Savaresi, A Glimpse into the Future of the Climate Regime: Lessons from the REDD+ Architecture
- M.J. Mace & Roda Verheyen, Loss, Damage and Responsibility after COP21: All Options Open for the Paris Agreement
- Beatriz Martinez Romera, The Paris Agreement and the Regulation of International Bunker Fuels
- Nicholas Chan, The ‘New’ Impacts of the Implementation of Climate Change Response Measures
- Sander Chan, Clara Brandi & Steffen Bauer, Aligning Transnational Climate Action with International Climate Governance: The Road from Paris
- Regular Article
- Sabaa Ahmad Khan, E-products, E-waste and the Basel Convention: Regulatory Challenges and Impossibilities of International Environmental Law
- Case Note
- Nicolas de Sadeleer, Court of Justice of the European Union Preliminary Ruling – Excise Duty on Certain Beverage Packaging: Case C-198/14 (Valev Visnapuu)
Climate change is exacerbating the frequency and severity of catastrophic weather events around the world. The economic impact of these events on developing countries can be severe, and roll back years of development gains. To help face this growing challenge, the governments of developing countries need improved access to insurance and alternative risk transfer mechanisms to manage their exposure to climate risk. Multilateral development banks, such as the World Bank, can help. For example, they can catalyze the creation of sovereign risk pools and facilitate access for developing country governments to the substantial reinsurance capacity of the capital markets.
The World Bank’s role in creating the Caribbean Catastrophe Risk Insurance Facility, and the World Bank catastrophe bond issue in 2014 for that Facility, serve as models for this kind of assistance. In order to maximize the developmental impact of these kinds of interventions, donor governments, acting through multilateral development banks, should encourage beneficiary countries to invest in ex ante climate risk preparedness and resilience as a condition of receiving this kind of development assistance.
In this contribution to the AJIL agora on the legacy of the Yugoslavia and Rwanda Tribunals, we examine the Tribunals’ impact on substantive international criminal law. We highlight three themes permeating the Tribunals’ transformative influence on the law: updating the law to reflect contemporary values and context; adapting to collective dimensions of the crimes; and engaging with fundamental principles.
In our conclusion, we situate the Tribunals within the overall trajectory of international criminal law, and show how their design left a distinctive imprimatur on the law. While questions have been raised about some expansive doctrines and the legality principle, it may also be true that some element of rupture was essential for the revitalization of international criminal law.
Wednesday, July 27, 2016
- Mohamed Elewa Badar, The Road to Genocide: The Propaganda Machine of the Self-declared Islamic State (IS)
- Mark A. Drumbl, Extracurricular International Criminal Law
- Celestine Nchekwube Ezennia, The Modus Operandi of the International Criminal Court System: An Impartial or a Selective Justice Regime?
- Sheryn Omeri, Guilty Pleas and Plea Bargaining at the ICC: Prosecutor v. Ongwen and Beyond
- Luke Moffett, Complementarity’s Monopoly on Justice in Uganda: The International Criminal Court, Victims and Thomas Kwoyelo
- Caleb H. Wheeler, No Longer Just a Victim: The Impact of Victim Participation on Trial Proceedings at the International Criminal Court
- I. Haenen, Justifying a Dichotomy in Defences. The Added Value of a Distinction between Justifications and Excuses in International Criminal Law
- Special Issue: Southeast Asia-Africa Dialogue: Regionalism, Norm Promotion and Capacity Building in Human Protection
- Charles T. Hunt & Noel M. Morada, Human Protection across Regions: Learning from Norm Promotion and Capacity Building in Southeast Asia and Africa
- Noel M. Morada, Southeast Asian Regionalism, Norm Promotion and Capacity Building for Human Protection: An Overview
- Sriprapha Petcharamesree, ASEAN Human Rights Regime and Mainstreaming the Responsibility to Protect: Challenges and Prospects
- Ma. Lourdes Veneracion-Rallonza, Building the Women, Peace and Security Agenda in the ASEAN through Multi-Focal Norm Entrepreneurship
- Alex J. Bellamy, Atrocity Prevention: From Promise to Practice in the Asia Pacific
- Charles T. Hunt, African Regionalism & Human Protection Norms: An Overview
- Tim Murithi, The African Union as a Norm Entrepreneur: The Limits of Human Protection and Mass Atrocities Prevention
- Chukwuemeka B. Eze, The Role of CSOs in Promoting Human Rights Protection, Mass Atrocities Prevention, and Civilian Protection in Armed Conflicts
- Obinna Franklin Ifediora, A Regional Responsibility to Protect? Towards ‘Enhancing Regional Action’ in Africa
- Phil Orchard, Regionalizing Protection: AU and ASEAN Responses to Mass Atrocity Crimes against Internally Displaced Persons
- Laurence Boisson de Chazournes, One Swallow Does Not a Summer Make, but Might the Paris Agreement on Climate Change a Better Future Create?
- JHHW, EJIL on Your Tablet or Smartphone; In this Issue
- Monica Hakimi & Jacob Katz Cogan, The Two Codes on the Use of Force
- Karen J. Alter, James T. Gathii & Laurence R. Helfer, Backlash against International Courts in West, East and Southern Africa: Causes and Consequences
- Nicole Roughan, Mind the Gaps: Authority and Legality in International Law
- Elisa Morgera, The Need for an International Legal Concept of Fair and Equitable Benefit Sharing
- David McGrogan, Human Rights Indicators and the Sovereignty of Technique
- The European Tradition in International Law: James Lorimer
- Stephen Tierney & Neil Walker, Through a Glass, Darkly: Reflections on James Lorimer’s International Law
- Martti Koskenniemi, Race, Hierarchy and International Law: Lorimer’s Legal Science
- Gerry Simpson, James Lorimer and the Character of Sovereigns: The Institutes as 21st Century Treatise
- Karen Knop, Lorimer’s Private Citizens of the World
- Stephen C. Neff, Heresy in Action: James Lorimer’s Dissident Views on War and Neutrality
- Roaming Charges: Moments of Dignity: Pupils at the Jean Paul II High School, Kibera, Nairobi, Kenya
- Critical Review of International Jurisprudence
- Katie Sykes, The Appeal to Science and the Formation of Global Animal Law
- Review Essay
- Cait Storr, Islands and the South: Framing the Relationship between International Law and Environmental Crisis
Tuesday, July 26, 2016
Monday, July 25, 2016
The history of modern weaponry involves the construction of the technological capacity to produce lethal results while exposing the operator to the least amount of risk of death or injury. The most recent examples of this phenomenon are three new weapon categories: remotely piloted vehicles (drones), cyber-weapons, and Autonomous Weapons Systems (AWS). Each of these categories of weapons allows the attacking force to inflict military damage while the operators of the weapon remain safely shielded from the theater of operations. The overall strategy is to create a system that grants the operator total immunity from risk but still inflicts maximum damage to the enemy.
This chapter will propose, explain, and critically examine the concept of reciprocal risk. It will seek to determine whether there is, in fact, a historical norm in favor of reciprocal risk in warfare, and how the advent of drones, cyber-weapons, and AWS have impacted this putative norm. After evaluating the alleged and often assumed rupture to reciprocal risk caused by technological innovation in weapons design, this chapter will then examine two familiar objections to these technologies. The first is whether the weapons will, by creating a severe asymmetry in risk, allow states to exercise force cavalierly, and remove an important check on warfare that helps limit the number of jus ad bellum violations across the globe. Having examined that anxiety, the final part of this chapter will ask whether reciprocal risk is an essential ethical component of basic norms of chivalry. This latter analysis will require an examination of legal principles under the Law of Armed Conflict (LOAC) and ethical principles embodied in just war theory.
Sunday, July 24, 2016
Public unrest, terrorist attacks, natural disasters and events of equal severity have in recent years prompted states to declare state of emergency. Sometimes, the proclamation of a public emergency is necessary or at least defendable, for example a natural disaster may call for special measures which could not be taken with full respect to the rights for all the obligations under human rights treaties. In other cases, public emergencies can be used as a smokescreen for repressive government policies. Once the necessity for derogation is conceded, it becomes difficult to control whether the suspension of rights amounts to abuse use of power. Serious violations of human rights often accompany emergency situations.
This study first sets out an analytical framework which seeks to answer two questions: what is the role of the sovereign, i.e. the legislative and executive branches of Government? What do states perceive as threats and what consequences will that have for their policies. Next the legislative framework as provided for in human rights regimes is described. The analytical and legal framework is applied to four recent cases: September 11, 2001; Arab Spring; Ebola outbreak in Western Africa and France 2015.
- In Memoriam: John R.W.D. Jones
- Andreas Zimmermann, Finally … Or Would Rather Less Have Been More?: The Recent Amendment on the Deletion of Article 124 of the Rome Statute and the Continued Quest for the Universality of the International Criminal Court
- Richard Ashby Wilson, Propaganda and History in International Criminal Trials
- Leila Ullrich, Beyond the ‘Global–Local Divide’: Local Intermediaries, Victims and the Justice Contestations of the International Criminal Court
- Symposium: The Italian Constitutional Court Judgment 238/2014: On State Immunity and Fundamental Principles of the Constitutional Order
- Valentina Spiga, Foreword
- Riccardo Pavoni, How Broad is the Principle Upheld by the Italian Constitutional Court in Judgment No. 238?
- Micaela Frulli, ‘Time Will Tell Who Just Fell and Who’s Been Left Behind’: On the Clash between the International Court of Justice and the Italian Constitutional Court
- Massimo Iovane, The Italian Constitutional Court Judgment No. 238 and the Myth of the ‘Constitutionalization’ of International Law
- Gianluigi Palombella, German War Crimes and the Rule of International Law
- Martin Scheinin, The Italian Constitutional Court’s Judgment 238 of 2014 Is Not Another Kadi Case
- Raffaela Kunz, The Italian Constitutional Court and ‘Constructive Contestation’: A Miscarried Attempt?
- Francesco Francioni, Access to Justice and Its Pitfalls: Reparation for War Crimes and the Italian Constitutional Court
- Cases before International Courts and Tribunals
- Kevin Jon Heller, Radical Complementarity
- Janine Natalya Clark, The First Rape Conviction at the ICC: An Analysis of the Bemba Judgment
- Fergal Gaynor, Katerina I. Kappos, & Patrick Hayden, Current Developments at the International Criminal Court