- Guénaël Mettraux, John Dugard & Max du Plessis, Heads of State Immunities, International Crimes and President Bashir’s Visit to South Africa
- Robert Muharremi, The Concept of Hybrid Courts Revisited: The Case of the Kosovo Specialist Chambers
- Scott Graham, The Non-combatant Casualty Cut-off Value: Assessment of a Novel Targeting Technique in Operation Inherent Resolve
- Mohammad Hadi Zakerhossein, A Concept without Consensus: Conceptualisation of the ‘Situation’ Notion in the Rome Statute
- James Meernik & Josue Barron, Fairness in National Courts Prosecuting International Crimes: The Case of the War Crimes Chamber of Bosnia-Herzegovina
Friday, August 24, 2018
- The Global Forum
- Simon Chesterman, How “Public” Is Public International Law? Toward a Typology of NGOs and Civil Society Actors
- Carlos A. Pérez Ricart, The Role of the DEA in the Emergence of the Field of Anti-narcotics Policing in Latin America
- Thomas G. Weiss & Rorden Wilkinson, The Globally Governed—Everyday Global Governance
- Kamila Szczepanska, Toward Inclusive Global Governance? Japanese Civil Society, the State, and G7/8 Summitry, 2000–2016
- Lena Partzsch, Take Action Now: The Legitimacy of Celebrity Power in International Relations
- Bernard Hoekman, Reducing Home Bias in Public Procurement: Trade Agreements and Good Governance
- Simon Rushton, Promoting Pro-health Policies Across Regimes: Global AIDS Institutions and the Harm Reduction Debate
- Oisín Tansey, Lowest Common Denominator Norm Institutionalization: The Anti-coup Norm at the United Nations
Thursday, August 23, 2018
- Sreenivasa Rao Pemmaraju, The identification of Customary International Law: a process that defies prescription
- Helmut Tuerk, The common heritage of mankind after 50 years
- Graham Melling & Anne Dennett, The Security Council veto and Syria: responding to mass atrocities through the “Uniting for Peace” resolution
- Sai Ramani Garimella & Poomintr Sooksripaisarnkit, Jurisdiction under the Hague Convention on choice of court agreements: a critique
- Sujith Xavier, Top heavy: beyond the Global North and the justification for global administrative law
- Anurag Dubey, The Jadhav Case Before the International Court of Justice
- Michael James Polak, The Jadhav case and the right to consular assistance: ‘confessions’, spies, and remedies in international law
- Haris Jamil, Critical evaluation of India’s position on the Rome Statute
- Abhimanyu George Jain, Indian practice relating to international law
Casey-Maslen, Homayounnejad, Stauffer, & Weizmann: Drones and Other Unmanned Weapons Systems under International Law
Drone strikes have become a key feature of counterterrorism operations in an increasing number of countries. This work explores the different domestic and international legal regimes that govern the manufacture, transfer, and use of armed drones. Chapters assess the legality of armed drones under jus ad bellum, the law of armed conflict, the law of law enforcement, international human rights law, international criminal law and domestic civil and criminal law. The book also discusses the application of law to fully autonomous weapons systems where computer algorithms decide who or what to target and when to fire.
Wednesday, August 22, 2018
The UN was founded, in 1945, to rid the world of the scourge of war but also to recognize and to vindicate the rights of every human in virtue of their humanity. At the time of the organization’s founding, “Jim Crow” -- a scheme designed to repress African Americans -- reigned throughout the American South. Jim Crow was especially characterized by the act of lynching, the extrajudicial killing, often, of African American males. Frequently the lynching was committed by hanging its subject from a tree. Some came to know the persons hanged from the tree as “strange fruit.” During the UN’s early years, the civil rights organizations the National Negro Congress, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People and the Civil Rights Congress sought UN assistance in vindicating African Americans’ fundamental rights. But even during some of the worst days of Jim Crow, the UN was largely silent on matters expressly related to African Americans. In 1946, four African Americans were shot execution-style by Caucasian men after one of the African Americans alleged rape against one of the soon-to-be executioners. This event received substantial international attention. In 1955, Emmett Till. This 14-year-old boy was shot, mutilated and drowned, after reportedly whistling at a Caucasian woman. This case, too, was broadcast internationally. The world was well-aware of events in the United States regarding its largest racial minority. This article explores and evaluates the opportunities taken -- and not -- by each relevant UN organ to address Jim Crow practices, during the period 1945 to 1965. Part I, “the United Nations,” discusses the UN’s founding. It also explores the reasons for creating this body and how the Charter reflects the interests of powerful stakeholders. Additionally, it discusses the functions, powers and limitations of each of its principal organs. Part II, “the United States,” discusses African American history and the laws designed to circumscribe African American life. Part III, “Strange Fruit at the United Nations,” considers the efforts within some UN entities to combat racial segregation and discrimination. It also considers the avenues that the UN might have taken to specifically address Jim Crow. This section especially focuses on the opportunities posed by the International Court of Justice.
Janik: How Many Divisions Does the European Court of Human Rights Have? Compliance and Legitimacy in Times of Crisis
This paper is a response to Karl Zemanek's article on "Court-Generated State practice" and his elaborations on the dogmatic questions arising from instances when the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) goes beyond states' actual interpretation and application of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). After all, the Court may thereby itself induce state practice. The relationship between state practice and jurisprudential application of the ECHR is thus turned upside down. Apart from the examples identified by professor Zemanek, this article elaborates on the tension between the ECtHR's judicial powers and the states' willingness to adhere to its judgments in sensitive matters. While the court has emphasized the absoluteness of Article 3 on torture, inhumane or degrading treatment and the resulting non-refoulement obligations, it has been more reluctant to interfere with states' rights to regulate Islamic clothing or invoke a state of emergency. Oscillating between non-compliance and overstretching its powers, the impact of the current political crises on European human rights standards will keep lawyers busy for the unforeseeable future.
Pillai: The African Union, the International Criminal Court, and the International Court of Justice: At the Fault Lines of International Accountability
Tuesday, August 21, 2018
- Marie-Clotilde Runavot, Rapport introductif
- Pierre-Marie Raynal, Préliminaire conceptuel : à propos de la démocratie (nationale)
- Michèle André, L’Union interparlementaire, instrument de la diplomatie parlementaire
- Marie-Clotilde Runavot, L’Union interparlementaire et la parlementarisation de l’ONU
- Martin Quesnel, Les parlements internationaux et l’exercice du pouvoir normatif international
- Patrick Jacob, Démocratie et participation aux institutions internationales
- Olivier de Frouville, Vers une théorie démocratique du droit international
- Makane Moïse Mbengue, La démocratie comme outil de réforme des organisations internationales ?
- Niki Aloupi, Une rhétorique de la mondialisation ?
- Syméon Karagiannis, À propos des droits de l’homme dans la Charte des Nations Unies
- Renan Le Mestre, Des îles dans les plis de la Bannière étoilée : les territoires et États associés de l’Océan Pacifique dépendant des États-Unis
- Ludovic Pailler, L’applicabilité spatiale du Règlement général sur la protection des données (RGPD) - Commentaire de l’article 3
- Nicolas Nord, L’aéroport de Bâle – Mulhouse et le contrat de travail international. La mise en évidence d’une nécessaire refonte des solutions de droit international privé
- Maurice Kamto, La question de la responsabilité de l’Etat dans les contentieux frontaliers et territoriaux
- Benjamin Juratowitch & Alejandra Del Portillo, Les réserves aux clauses restircitives
- Delphine Burriez, Sahara occidental : internationalisation et institutionnalisation du conflit
- Reuven S. Avi-Yonah & Haiyan Xu, A Global Treaty Override? The New OECD Multilateral Tax Instrument and Its Limits
- Shai Dothan, International Courts Improve Public Deliberation
- Yahli Shereshevsky, Targeting the Targeted Killings Case - International Lawmaking in Domestic Contexts
This review essay examines three intellectual histories focused on fundamental transformations of international law in the early twentieth century. The transformations reflect power shifts in the international system, and the change from a colonial to a multilateral international legal order. I use the histories (authored by Juan Pablo Scarf, Arnulf Becker Lorca, and Oona Hathaway/Scott Shapiro) to investigate four fundamental issues of both historical and contemporary relevance.
1) How does one construct a global history of international law, and in particular how do intellectual histories help us understand international legal transformations?
2) How do legal scholars and communities of practice contribute to international legal change?
3) How is power encoded into international law?
4) Can great powers escape imperial dominance, or the charge that their actions and their invocations of international law are imperial?
In addition to critically engaging the three books, the essay also examines how contestation over international law by powerful and weaker actors is often overlooked, yet this contestation shapes international law’s trajectory.
Monday, August 20, 2018
This article examines the question of who will be subject to ICC jurisdiction with respect to the crime of aggression. One of the most contentious questions in the negotiations regarding the crime of aggression was whether the Court would have jurisdiction over nationals of a state that does not ratify the aggression amendments, but which is alleged to have committed an act of aggression on the territory of a state has accepted the aggression amendments. The question is examined here against the background of the rules in the law of treaties regarding amendments and treaty interpretation. The article considers the legal effect that the resolution of the ICC Assembly of States Parties (ASP), adopted in New York in December 2017 and activating ICC jurisdiction over aggression, will have in determining this jurisdictional question. A resolution of an international conference adopted by consensus can, in principle, be regarded as subsequent practice or a subsequent agreement of the parties to the Rome Statute that establishes the authentic interpretation of the Statute within the meaning of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. It is argued however that this particular resolution does not, in itself, provide the definitive answer as to the correct interpretation of the Rome Statute. Despite being adopted by consensus, and despite being highly relevant for the interpretation of the Rome Statute and Kampala Amendments, this resolution does not necessarily amount to a subsequent agreement or subsequent practice that the Court is legally bound to follow. Nevertheless, it is further argued that the position adopted in New York with regard to the jurisdiction of the Court over nationals of states parties that do not ratify the aggression amendments is the correct legal position and the one that the Court, including the Office of the Prosecutor, ought to adopt. The answer to the question over whom the Court will have jurisdiction with respect to aggression is to be found in Rome rather than in Kampala. We argue that the key to addressing this issue is to understand how the amendment provisions of the Rome Statute work in conjunction with basic principles of the law of treaties.
Sunday, August 19, 2018
The announcement by China that it will implement a national emissions trading scheme confirms the status of this instrument as the pre-eminent policy choice for mitigating climate change. China will join the dozens of existing and emerging schemes around the world - from the EU to California, South Korea to New Zealand - that use carbon units (otherwise known as emissions permits or carbon credits) to trade in greenhouse gas emissions in a multi-billion dollar global carbon market.
However, to date, there has been no consensus about this pre-eminent policy instrument being regulated by international economic law through the World Trade Organization, international investment agreements, and free trade agreements. Munro addresses this issue by evaluating whether carbon units qualify as 'goods', 'services', 'financial services', and 'investments' under international economic law and showing how international economic law applies to emissions trading scheme in diverse and unexpected ways. Further, by engaging in a comparative assessment of schemes around the world, his book illustrates how and why all emissions trading schemes engage in various forms of violations of international economic law which would not, in most instances, be justified by environmental or other exceptions. In doing so, he demonstrates how such schemes can be designed or reformed in ways to ensure their future compliance.
- Joanna Nicholson, Introduction
- Marieke de Hoon, The Future of the International Criminal Court. On Critique, Legalism and Strengthening the icc’s Legitimacy
- Geoff Dancy, Searching for Deterrence at the International Criminal Court
- Mikkel Jarle Christensen, The Symbolic Economy of International Criminal Justice: Shaping the Discourse of a New Field of Law
- Joanna Nicholson, Strengthening the Effectiveness of International Criminal Law through the Principle of Legality
- Carola Lingaas, Enhancing the Effectiveness of the Law of Genocide
- Franziska Oehm, From Nuremberg to Malabo: A Re-evaluation of the Tradition of Impunity of Economic Actors in International Criminal Law
- Yvonne McDermott, Strengthening the Evaluation of Evidence in International Criminal Trials
- Hemi Mistry, The Significance of Institutional Culture in Enhancing the Validity of International Criminal Tribunals
- Avidan Kent & Jamie Trinidad, The Management of Third-party Amicus Participation before International Criminal Tribunals: Juggling Efficiency and Legitimacy
- Kïrsten Bowman, The International Criminal Court and the Security Council: The Power of Politics and the Undermining of Justice
- Marialejandra Moreno Mantilla, Do too Many Cooks Spoil the Broth? A Proposal for a Joint Strategy between the Office of the Prosecutor and the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights
- Mandiaye Niang, Africa and the Legitimacy of the icc in Question
- Dorothy Makaza, African States and International Criminal Law: Rethinking the Narrative and Contextualising the Discourse
- Kerstin Bree Carlson, Trying Hissène Habré ‘On Behalf of Africa’: Remaking Hybrid International Criminal Justice at the Chambres Africaines Extraordinaires