- Julia Gray, Life, Death, or Zombie? The Vitality of International Organizations
- William Spaniel, Only Here to Help? Bargaining and the Perverse Incentives of International Institutions
- Mark Copelovitch, Christopher Gandrud, & Mark Hallerberg, Financial Data Transparency, International Institutions, and Sovereign Borrowing Costs
- Steven Beard & Joshua A Strayhorn, When Will States Strike First? Battlefield Advantages and Rationalist War
- Yasutaka Tominaga, Killing Two Birds with One Stone? Examining the Diffusion Effect of Militant Leadership Decapitation
- Andrew R Hom, Timing is Everything: Toward a Better Understanding of Time and International Politics
- Peter J Katzenstein & Lucia A Seybert, Protean Power and Uncertainty: Exploring the Unexpected in World Politics
- Geoffrey Gertz, Commercial Diplomacy and Political Risk
- Yasuhiro Izumikawa, Binding Strategies in Alliance Politics: The Soviet-Japanese-US Diplomatic Tug of War in the Mid-1950s
- Pablo Barberá & Thomas Zeitzoff, The New Public Address System: Why Do World Leaders Adopt Social Media?
- Jonathan M DiCicco & Benjamin O Fordham, The Things They Carried: Generational Effects of the Vietnam War on Elite Opinion
- Jun Koga Sudduth & Curtis Bell, The Rise Predicts the Fall: How the Method of Leader Entry Affects the Method of Leader Removal in Dictatorships
- Erica Frantz, Elections and Capital Flight: Evidence from Africa
- José Alemán & Dwayne Woods, A Comparative Analysis of Inequality and Redistribution in Democracies
- Axel Dreher, Andreas Fuchs, Brad Parks, Austin M Strange, & Michael J Tierney, Apples and Dragon Fruits: The Determinants of Aid and Other Forms of State Financing from China to Africa
- Tobias Heinrich, Yoshiharu Kobayashi, & Leah Long, Voters Get What They Want (When They Pay Attention): Human Rights, Policy Benefits, and Foreign Aid
- Matthew DiLorenzo, Bypass Aid and Unrest in Autocracies
Saturday, March 24, 2018
- L. Pineschi, Tutela internazionale del patrimonio culturale e missioni di pace delle Nazioni Unite: un binomio possibile? Il caso MINUSMA
- L. Magi, L’obbligo di disarmo nucleare quale obbligo a realizzazione progressiva
- E. Fasoli, State Responsibility and the Reparation of Non-Economic Losses Related to Climate Change under the Paris Agreement
- Note e Commenti
- A. Marchesi, Delitto di tortura e obblighi internazionali di punizione
- F. Lattanzi, La nozione di tortura nel codice penale italiano a confronto con le norme internazionali in materia
- M. Sossai, Il rapporto tra il Trattato sul divieto di armi nucleari e gli altri accordi in materia di non-proliferazione e disarmo
- S. Marchisio, Il Trattato sullo spazio del 1967: passato, presente e futuro
- M. Ramacciotti, Sulla utilità di un codice di condotta per le organizzazioni non governative impegnate in attività di search and rescue (SAR)
- A. Saccucci, La giurisdizione esclusiva dello Stato della bandiera sulle imbarcazioni impegnate in operazioni di soccorso umanitario in alto mare: il caso della Iuventa
- N. Lazzerini, Il rapporto tra primato del diritto dell’Unione e tutela costituzionale dei diritti fondamentali nella sentenza Taricco-bis: buona la seconda?
In response to a climate in which respect for international law and the law of the European Union is rapidly losing ground, Paul Gragl advocates for the revival of legal monism as a solution to potentially irresolvable normative conflicts between different bodies of law. In this first comprehensive monograph on the theory as envisaged by the Pure Theory of Law of the Vienna School of Jurisprudence, the author defends legal monism against the competing theories of dualism and pluralism.
Drawing on philosophical, epistemological, legal, moral, and political arguments, this book argues that only monism under the primacy of international law takes the law and the concept of legal validity seriously. On a practical level, it offers policy-makers and decision-makers methods of dealing with current problems and a means to restore respect for international law and peaceful international relations. While having the potential to revive and elicit further interest and research in monism and the Pure Theory of Law, the comprehensiveness and scope of the book also make it a choice text for inter-disciplinary scholars.
Thursday, March 22, 2018
Practice reifies and animates international law, shaping what it means, how it is applied, and how effectively it achieves the diverse goals of those who invoke it. Practice is constitutive and contentious. It looks both backward and forward.
The 2018 Annual Meeting will focus on international law in action: how and by whom international law is made, shaped, and carried out, both formally and informally; how it is taught; how the practices of international institutions, law firms, companies, not-for-profit organizations, government offices, and militaries generate international rules; how and in what ways states and other actors interact; and how participants deploy international legal arguments. The meeting will consider how international legal practice has changed and is continuing to change in response to geopolitical shifts and contemporary challenges, including demands for greater transparency, accountability, legitimacy, and inclusion.
At its 112th Annual Meeting, the American Society of International Law invites policymakers, practitioners, academics across the disciplinary spectrum, and students to reflect on the broad manifestations, sources, and implications of international legal practice.
Gertza, Jandhyalab, & Poulsen: Legalization, diplomacy, and development: Do investment treaties de-politicize investment disputes?
Empirical research on the impact of investment treaties has focused almost exclusively on their effect on foreign investment, with mixed results. Yet, another important promise of the treaties has been ignored altogether. Architects of the investment treaty regime, as well as many current proponents, have suggested that the treaties allow developing countries to de-politicize investor-state disputes; i.e. shield commercial disputes from broader political and diplomatic considerations with developed states. While this argument is widely accepted by legal scholars and practitioners and explicitly promoted by capital-exporting states, it has never been subjected to empirical investigation. We provide the first such test, using an original dataset of US diplomatic actions in 219 individual investment disputes across 73 countries as well as detailed case studies drawing on internal US State Department diplomatic cables. We find no evidence for the de-politicization hypothesis: diplomatic engagement remains important for investor-state dispute settlement, and the US government is just as likely to intervene in developing countries that have ratified investment treaties with the US as those that have not. Coercive American intervention in investment disputes is rare, but this is a general feature of American investment diplomacy after the Cold War, rather than one limited to investors with recourse to legalized dispute settlement procedures. These findings provide a critical corrective to our understanding of the investment treaty regime, and have important implications for understanding the effects of international legalization on developing countries.
The act of fighting or being a fighter has certain consequences in international law. The most obvious example can be found in international humanitarian law, where a distinction is drawn between fighters and civilians, with fighters being military objectives and civilians being protected from attack. Another example is from international human rights law, where it has been held that the particular characteristics of military life have to be taken into account when interpreting the human rights of members of state armed forces. This volume focuses on the field of international criminal law and asks the question: what relevance does fighting have to victimhood in international criminal law?
Among the topics which are explored are: how have international criminal courts and tribunals untangled lawful casualties of war from victims of war crimes? How have they determined who is a member of an organised armed group and who is not? What crimes can those who fight be victims of during hostilities? When does it become relevant in international criminal law that an alleged victim of a crime was a person hors de combat rather than a civilian? Can war crimes be committed against members of non-opposing forces? Can persons hors de combat be victims of crimes against humanity and genocide? What special considerations surround peacekeepers and child soldiers as victims of international crimes?
The author carries out an in-depth exploration of case law from international criminal courts and tribunals to assess how they have dealt with these questions. She concludes that the import of fighting upon victimhood in the context of international criminal law has not always been appreciated to the extent it should have been.
Wednesday, March 21, 2018
China’s free trade agreements (FTAs) reveal malleability as the most striking feature. The paper analyzes the following questions: what is the trend of China’s FTA approach to investment concerning malleability? Is China a rule follower, shaker or maker? How may China approach the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) regarding investment? It argues first that the malleability will probably expand from investment protection to investment liberalization. China converges with deep FTAs regarding investment protection and may incrementally move to investment liberal- ization. Second, increased malleability of China’s FTAs exists in regulatory autonomy and investor-state dispute settlement. Third, China is likely to be a rule shaker in the short to medium term, and become a rule maker later if challenges are addressed. Its approach may evolve from selective adaption to selective innovation. Finally, the RCEP may adopt low-level investment rules and an early harvest approach due to, inter alia, existing agreements and the nature of mega FTA.
Aust & du Plessis: Good Urban Governance as a Global Aspiration: On the Potential and Limits of Sustainable Development Goal 11
Goal 11 of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) sets out to make cities inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable by 2030. Together with the New Urban Agenda adopted at the Habitat III conference in Quito in 2016, SDG 11 is the latest emanation of the thickening layer of international normative guidance on questions of sustainable development and urban governance. This chapter argues that Goal 11 of the SDGs is a clear expression of the urban turn, as it were, in global governance. The contribution contextualizes the setting in which SDG 11 is inserted as well as the aspirations of Goal 11. The chapter also unearths the inherent contradictions of SDG 11 since not all of its sub-goals will be attainable at the same time and without negatively impacting on some of the other SDGs. For instance, the notions of ‘safety’ and ‘inclusiveness’ might well conflict with each other. The chapter concludes with a critical view on some of the general implementation risks and challenges associated with SDG 11.
- Anthony Lucky, Diversity in Judgments: The Role of the Courts in Promoting Biodiversity
- Abhishek Kumar, Economic Development and Environmental Justice: Cruel Conundrum or Symbiotic Relationship? (We Can Have Plan B, but No Planet B!)
- Neelotpalam Tiwari & Himanshu Pabreja, India's Protected Areas: Are They Really Protected or at the Mercy of Wildlife Boards?
- Alifya Vora, Legal and Ethical Implications of Using Trophy Hunting as a Conservation Tool
- Stephen Leitheiser, The Politics of “Better Than Nothing” in National Wetland Protection Law
- Jordi Feo, La respuesta de la comunidad internacional ante la vulneración continuada de los derechos humanos en Haití (1993-2016)
- Emilie Fortin, Prohibition prescrite au sous-paragraphe B de l’article premier de la Convention sur les armes chimiques: sommes-nous en présence d’un effet générateur d’une règle du droit international coutumier?
- Emmanuel Guematcha, La réglementation internationale du commerce international des armes classiques : le Traité du 2 avril 2013 et la protection de la personne
- Lynda Hubert Ta, Réflexions sur les enjeux d’équité dans la gouvernance des ressources naturelles à Madagascar
- Tristan Lemelle, L’accès au marché pour les produits agricoles du sud dans le droit de l’OMC
- Konstantinos Magliveras & Gino Naldi, The Arab Court of Human Rights: A Study in Impotence
- Olivier Dismas Ndayambaje, La contribution de la reconnaissance des droits des peuples autochtones à la protection de l’environnement à la lumière de l’affaire Endorois c Kenya
- Touwendé Roland Ouédraogo, La distinction entre la participation directe aux hostilités par les civils et la légitime défense des civils
- Elisabeth Madeleine Patterson, Reconciling Indigenous Peoples with the Judicial Process: An Examination of the Recent Genocide and Sexual Slavery Trials in Guatemala and Their Integration of Mayan Culture and Customs
- Nawwar Wannous, Le principe de la liberté d’investir : l’exemple des législations tunisienne, égyptienne et saoudienne
- C. Houki, La fiscalité et la nature de l’État en Islam
- J-B. Kossi Galley, Le différend maritime entre la Bolivie et le Chili devant la Cour internationale de justice
- D. Pavot & C. Chevalier, Réflexions sur l’interprétation des actes unilatéraux des États à la lueur de la décision de la Cour africaine des droits de l’homme et des peuples du 3 juin 2016 dans l’affaire Victoire Ingabire ...
- F. Quilleré-Majzoub, La protection internationale de l’environnement par le droit : en marche vers un pacte mondial ?
- G. Grégoire, Crise des dettes souveraines et risque de conflit juridictionnel : retour sur l’affaire Outright Monetary Transactions
- Arianna Broggiato, Thomas Vanagt, Laura E. Lallier, Marcel Jaspars, Geoff Burton & Dominic Muyldermans, Mare Geneticum: Balancing Governance of Marine Genetic Resources in International Waters
- Froukje Maria Platjouw, Marine Spatial Planning in the North Sea—Are National Policies and Legal Structures Compatible Enough? The Case of Norway and the Netherlands
- Xuexia Liao, Is There a Hierarchical Relationship between Natural Prolongation and Distance in the Continental Shelf Delimitation?
- Josh B. Martin, Protecting Outstanding Underwater Cultural Heritage through the World Heritage Convention: The Titanic and Lusitania as World Heritage Sites
- Zoe Scanlon, Upsetting the Balance? The Legality of Vessel Confiscation under the LOSC after the M/V Virginia G Case
- Richard Caddell, Precautionary Management and the Development of Future Fishing Opportunities: The International Regulation of New and Exploratory Fisheries
- Marja Lehto, The Fight against ISIL in Syria. Comments on the Recent Discussion of the Right of Self-defence against Non-state Actors
- Dorothée Cambou, Enhancing the Participation of Indigenous Peoples at the Intergovernmental Level to Strengthen Self-Determination: Lessons from the Arctic
- Giulio Calcara, Preventing the Misuse of INTERPOL: A Study on the Legal Safeguards of the Organization
This article explores the European roots of the post-war development discourse. Specifically, it shows how British hegemonic plans for post-war reconstruction of Eastern and Central Europe became central elements of post-war development economics. The Soviet takeover of Eastern Europe made those plans obsolete, but their theoretical insights remained valuable. Indeed, they were applied to plans for the development of the Italian South, in a Cold War, anti-Communist framework, with the support of the US government and the World Bank. During the 1950s-60s the Italian case was internationally recognized as a development laboratory, and social scientists and development scholars studied it at length. This article discusses the emergence of visions of development in Europe, which occurred not in some intellectual vacuum, but rather through the pressures of political imperatives and the Cold War, the emergence of post-war international institutions, and the practice of technical missions.
Tuesday, March 20, 2018
- B.S. Chimni, Customary International Law: A Third World Perspective
- Editorial Comment
- Harlan Grant Cohen, Multilateralism's Life Cycle
- Notes and Comments
- Anne van Aaken, Behavioral Aspects of the International Law of Global Public Goods and Common Pool Resources
- International Decisions
- Asier Garrido-Muñoz, Prime Minister v. Parliament of Catalonia
- Nuwan Peiris, Ghana v. Ivory Coast
- Manuel J. Ventura, Prosecutor v. Al-Bashir
- Contemporary Practice of the United States Relating to International Law
- Jean Galbraith, Contemporary Practice of the United States Relating to International Law
- Recent Books on International Law
- Ian Johnstone, reviewing The Impact of International Organizations on International Law, by José E. Alvarez
- Stephen M. Schwebel, reviewing Rosenne's Law and Practice of the International Court 1920–2015 (5th ed.), Vols. I–IV, by Malcolm N. Shaw; and The International Court of Justice, by Hugh Thirlway
- Jochen A. Frowein, reviewing The Betrayal: The Nuremberg Trials and German Divergence, by Kim Christian Priemel
- Meredith Kolsky Lewis, reviewing A History of Law and Lawyers in the GATT/WTO, edited by Gabrielle Marceau
- Beth Van Schaack, reviewing Historical Origins of International Criminal Law: Volumes 1–5.- Historical Origins of International Criminal Law: Volume 1, edited by Morten Bergsmo, Cheah Wui Ling and Yi Ping; Historical Origins of International Criminal Law: Volume 2, edited by Morten Bergsmo, Cheah Wui Ling and Yi Ping; Historical Origins of International Criminal Law: Volume 3, edited by Morten Bergsmo, Cheah Wui Ling, Song Tianying and Yi Ping; Historical Origins of International Criminal Law: Volume 4, edited by Morten Bergsmo, Cheah Wui Ling, Song Tianying and Yi Ping; and Historical Origins of International Criminal Law: Volume 5, edited by Morten Bergsmo, Klaus Rackwitz and Song Tianying
Call for Papers: Gender, Health & Sustainable Development- The Role for International Human Rights Law
- Steven R Ratner, International Investment Law through the Lens of Global Justice
- Facundo Pérez-Aznar, The Use of Most-Favoured-Nation Clauses to Import Substantive Treaty Provisions in International Investment Agreements
- Jelena Bäumler, Implementing the No Harm Principle in International Economic Law: A Comparison Between Measure-Based Rules and Effect-Based Rules
- Enrico Partiti, What use is an unloaded gun? The substantive discipline of the WTO TBT Code of Good Practice and its application to private standards pursuing public objectives
- Naoto Nelson Saika, Seeds, Trade, Trust: Regionalization Commitments under the SPS Agreement
- Matthew Kennedy, Export Restrictions in Plant Breeder's Rights
- Giorgio Sacerdoti, The United Kingdom’s Post-Brexit Trade Regime with the European Union and the Rest of the World: Perspectives and Constraints
- Geraldo Vidigal, Why Is There So Little Litigation under Free Trade Agreements? Retaliation and Adjudication in International Dispute Settlement
- Andrei Suse, Old Wine in a New Bottle: The EU’s Response to the Expiry of Section 15(a)(ii) of China’s WTO Protocol of Accession
The Italian Ministry for Education, University, and Research (Ministero dell’Istruzione, dell’Università e della Ricerca, MIUR) has issued a public call for 24 researcher positions.
The call is open to scholars of all nationalities who have spent three years working at a non-Italian research center or university and have been awarded a PhD degree, or equivalent, after 31 October 2011 and by 31 October 2014.
The winner of the call will work as a Senior Researcher with an initial 3-year working contract (Ricercatore a tempo determinato, tipologia B) that leads to Associate Tenured Track Professorship subject to National Scientific Habilitation (Abilitazione Scientifica Nazionale, «ASN»).
The English translation of the Ministerial Decree is available here.
The deadline to submit the application is 28 March 2018, h. 24.00 (Italian local time).
In the context of this call, the University of Milan, Department of International, Legal, Historical and Political Studies wishes to express its interest to welcome outstanding researchers in the areas of International Law and Comparative Law who would like to apply.
For additional information please contact Dr. Stefano Dominelli (firstname.lastname@example.org).
Call for Papers: Private International Law and Intellectual Property: Jurisdiction, Choice of Law, and Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments/Arbitral Awards
This article concerns the permissibility of amnesties for torture under the ECHR. It argues that when an amnesty case comes to Strasbourg, as it likely will, there is a good chance that the Court will make a serious error. That error will be to hold that the Convention requires the prosecution of torture in all circumstances – it will be to invalidate the amnesty. In part, such an approach will be informed by an assumption that each of the set of duties that flows from an absolute right is itself absolute. That assumption, combined with the way that the Court has specified the duty to prosecute violations of Article 3, would prevent the Court from taking into account powerful countervailing interests in play during peace negotiations. These countervailing interests mean that any claim that amnesties for the gravest wrongs are always impermissible is unsustainable.
- Renato Antonini, A ‘MES’ to be adjusted: past and future treatment of Chinese imports in EU anti-dumping investigations
- Pallavi Kishore, India’s Experience with the WTO Agreement on Textiles and Clothing
- Cemal Atici, Use of the Dispute Settlement Mechanism of the WTO by Developing Countries in the Context of Food Safety
- Thomas Cantens, The Political Arithmetic of Borders: Towards an Enlightened Form of Criticism
- Jim Della-Giacoma, The case of East Timor: Ancient history or the shape of things to come?
- Mark Malan, Action adapted to circumstance: Peacekeeping doctrine and the use of force
- Carlos Chagas Vianna Braga, Between absolute war and absolute peacekeeping
- Cedric de Coning, Implications of stabilisation mandates for the use of force in UN peace operations
- Stian Kjeksrud & Alexander Beadle, Understanding the utility of the UN military component to protect civilians in different scenarios
- Walter Dorn, Protecting civilians with force: Lessons and dilemmas from the UN Stabilisation Mission in Haiti
- Charles Hunt, The ‘All necessary means’, to what ends? The unintended consequences of the use of force by UN Peacekeepers
- Peter Nadin, The logic of force in UN peacekeeping: A policy primer
- Tim Ford, Leadership in UN Missions
- David Curran, The use of force and the civil-military dimension
- Darryl Watters, Generating the ability: The challenges of force generation
- James Sloan, UN peacekeeping and international law
Monday, March 19, 2018
- V.G. Butkevych, The International-Legal Ideology of Pre-Slavic Chiefdoms of the Ukrainian Ethnos (Part Four)
- Mark Somos, Boston in the State of Nature, 1761-1765: The Birth of an American Constitutional Trope
- Christopher Rossi, The Gulf of Fonseca and International Law: Condominium or Anti-Colonial Imperialism?
- Amy Kellam, Suzerainty and the 1914 Simla Agreement
- V. Popovski, Raphael Lemkin: Inventing and Codifying Genocide
- Notes and Comments
- M. Mulligan, The Status of Egypt After the 1840 Convention of London
- V. S. Ivanenko, Private International Law in Russia: The Earliest Work
- L. Anufrieva, Myths and Facts of the Russian Science of Private International Law: The Legacy of M. I. Brun
- V.V. Veeder, Looking for Professor B. E. Nolde
- International Legal Doctrine
- W.E. Butler, The Abbé Ferdinando Galiani and Neutrality
- Abbé Galiani, On the Reciprocal Rights of Belligerents and Neutrals
Today, investor-state arbitration embodies the worst fears of those concerned about runaway globalization - a far cry from its framers' intentions. Why did governments create a special legal system in which foreign investors can bring cases directly against states? This book takes readers through the key decisions that created investor-state arbitration, drawing on internal documents from several governments and extensive interviews to illustrate the politics behind this new legal system.
The corporations and law firms that dominate investor-state arbitration today were not present at its creation. In fact, there was almost no lobbying from investors. Nor did powerful states have a strong preference for it. Nor was it created because there was evidence that it facilitates investment - there was no such evidence.
International officials with peacebuilding and development aims drove the rise of investor-state arbitration. This book puts forward a new historical institutionalist explanation to illuminate how the actions of these officials kicked off a process of gradual institutional development. While these officials anticipated many developments, including an enormous caseload from investment treaties, over time this institutional framework they created has been put to new purposes by different actors. Institutions do not determine the purposes to which they may be put, and this book's analysis illustrates how unintended consequences emerge and why institutions persist regardless.
- Matthew Hilton, Oxfam and the Problem of NGO Aid Appraisal in the 1960s
- Joël Glasman, Measuring Malnutrition: The History of the MUAC Tape and the Commensurability of Human Needs
- Paul Morrow, A Theory of Atrocity Propaganda
- Dossier on Human Rights Rituals
- Benjamin Authers, Hilary Charlesworth, Marie-Bénédicte Dembour, & Emma Larking, Introduction
- Zachary Manfredi, Sharpening the Vigilance of the World: Reconsidering the Russell Tribunal as Ritual
- Tobias Kelly, Two Cheers for Ritual: The UN Committee Against Torture
- Shane Chalmers, The Beginning of Human Rights: The Ritual of the Preamble to Law
- Roland Burke, The Rites of Human Rights at the United Nations
- Essay Review
- Joshua Busby, Beyond Good Intentions: Responsible and Effective Advocacy in the Digital Age
Call For Papers: Infrastructures as Regulation (InfraReg)
Conference Dates: September 28-29, 2018
Deadline for Submissions: April 15, 2018
Infrastructures—whether physical, informational, digital—can have regulatory-type effects. These include requiring, preventing, channeling, enabling, and nudging particular human and social behavior. Infrastructures also help to shape second-order regulatory-type actions and structures. When stable, these infrastructures exert substantial power in social ordering. They interact or compete with law. In these ways, infrastructures have major effects on social relations, identities, roles, capabilities, and possibilities. We label these phenomena collectively by the moniker “Infrastructures as Regulation” (InfraReg). In our project we focus on regulatory effects of transnationally-connected infrastructures on social orders— e.g. effects on social relations, status, classes and class formation, social mobility, social time, and capabilities—and the interactions between social order and political, economic, and other infrastructure-based orders. More information about the project is available at www.iilj.org/infrareg
The Institute for International Law and Justice seeks submissions for both theoretical and empirical work on themes outlined above. Theoretical lines of inquiry could include:
- conceptualizations of the combined effects of physical, informational and digital infrastructures as a form of regulation that complements or even replaces law in ordering certain social relations;
- theorizing about how legal technologies and legal practices interact with, enable, shape, or regulate the constitution and operation of infrastructures-as-regulation, and vice versa;
- theorizing and developing propositions for the relationships between regulation by infrastructure and other forms of transnationally-influenced order (such as legal order and political order), including in major ordering projects (such as the Belt and Road Initiative).
Empirical work and case studies could address:
- how infrastructures combine at different scales and in different orders, including cases that illustrate and examine ways in which the interaction between physical, informational, and digital infrastructures operate together as regulation;
- how specific instances of infrastructure projects are designed or used to require or induce social actors into particular behavior or pathways;
- the inter-relationship between infrastructures and legal technologies, including cases of infrastructures working in tandem with law, displacing law, or even undermining law as a means to regulate social life;
- the interactions of activities and systems and people (including human capabilities and rights) with the infrastructure, and the ability of the regulated to influence and contest the design of infrastructures and the legal technologies they use.
Junior and senior scholars as well as experienced practitioners are invited to submit extended abstracts (300-500 words) or full papers, ideally in the range 15-35 pages (in PDF or Word format) to email@example.com by April 15, 2018. Please also provide contact details and a CV or link to an author bio. All applicants will be informed of the selection decisions quickly thereafter. Selection will be based on relevance to the theme, originality of research, innovative perspectives and arguments, and the overall blend and coherence of the conference. Authors invited who choose to take part will be asked to send final papers (ideally in the range of 8000-10000 words) by August 31, 2018.
For those selected from this Call for Papers, the IILJ will provide conference meals, and accommodation for those based outside the New York area. The IILJ also hopes to be able to assist with economy class travel funding in a limited number of cases where needed, subject to budget constraints.
Call for Papers: Rethinking Reparations in International Law
What role do reparations play in international law today? What is the theory behind reparations in different areas/systems of international law? Do reparations play a different role in different areas of international law (human rights, investment law)? How are reparations chosen by judges and arbitrators and how are damages calculated? What is the link between efficiency and reparations? How can reparations be made more efficient? How do judges/arbitrators understand their role in relation to reparations?
These questions will be at the centre of an ESIL-sponsored workshop held at the Lauterpacht Centre, University of Cambridge in November 2018. The workshop will seek to address the recent developments and scholarship in the area of reparations (remedies) in international law. It will bring together scholars writing on theory of reparations, those conducting empirical or comparative research, as well as practitioners, judges and arbitrators. The aim is to provide a platform for discussion of new ideas about efficiency of reparations in international law.
At this point, we would like to invite scholars and practitioners working in the area, to submit a max. 400-word abstract to Dr Veronika Fikfak at firstname.lastname@example.org. The deadline for submission is 30 April 2018. Abstracts will be selected by early June. Papers for the workshop will have to be submitted by mid-September.
The workshop is part of a larger project on Damages for Human Rights Violations funded by the ESRC. It is organised by Dr Veronika Fikfak, Lauterpacht Centre, University of Cambridge and Professor Photini Pazartzis, Athens Public International Law Centre, National & Kapodistrian University of Athens. The aim is to publish suitable contributions as an edited collection or special edition of an international journal. Papers with an empirical or comparative approach are particularly welcome.