- Ore Koren, Food Resources and Strategic Conflict
- Michael Freedman, Fighting from the Pulpit: Religious Leaders and Violent Conflict in Israel
- Laura Huber, When Civilians Are Attacked: Gender Equality and Terrorist Targeting
- Peter Schram, Managing Insurgency
- Forum – Do Democratic Protests Diffuse?
- Dawn Brancati & Adrián Lucardi, Why Democracy Protests Do Not Diffuse
- Kurt Weyland, Why Some Democracy Protests Do Diffuse
- Henry E. Hale, How Should We Now Conceptualize Protest, Diffusion, and Regime Change?
- Valerie Bunce & Sharon L. Wolchik, Findings in Search of a Controversy and in Need of More Data
- Christian Houle & Mark A. Kayser, The Two-step Model of Clustered Democratization
- Dawn Brancati & Adrián Lucardi, What We (Do Not) Know about the Diffusion of Democracy Protests
Saturday, October 19, 2019
Friday, October 18, 2019
Foreign investors often sustain injuries during violent situations, such as riots, revolutions, civil wars, and international armed conflicts. There is a great deal of uncertainty about how effective investment treaty protections are in volatile times, how they relate to other applicable legal frameworks, and how they affect the state security policy and the post-conflict transition to peace.
This book explores how foreign investment is protected in times of armed conflict under the investment treaty regime. It does so by combining insights from different areas of international law, including international investment law, international humanitarian law, international human rights law, the law of state responsibility, and the law of treaties. While the protections have evolved over time, with the investment treaty regime providing the strongest legal framework for protecting investors yet, there has been an apparent shift in treaty practice towards safeguarding a state's security interests.
Jure Zrilic identifies and analyses the flaws in the existent normative framework, but also highlights the potential that investment treaties have for minimising the devastating effects of armed conflict. The book offers an analytical framework for assessing the investment treaty regime in times of armed conflict, distinguishing between different paradigms and different types of conflicts. Crucially, he argues that a new approach is needed to appropriately balance the competing interests of host states and investors when it comes to investment protection in armed conflicts.
Sparks & Somos: The Humanisation of Provisional Measures? Plausibility and the Interim Protection of Rights before the ICJ
In order for an international court to grant interim protection (provisional measures), it should first satisfy that the party seeking protection has at least a plausible claim to the rights in question. So says, at least, the doctrine of plausibility, a relatively modern development in the criteria for the granting of provisional measures, but nonetheless one that now appears to be well-entrenched. But what standard does plausibility denote? This paper will trace the introduction and development of plausibility as a key criterion in provisional measures cases, and will discuss its various interpretations. Although plausibility was first introduced as a low standard intended only to exclude weak or speculative requests for interim protection, it evolved to require a meaningful—albeit provisional—analysis of the applicant party’s claim. Recent developments, however, have seen a retreat from the higher standard, and in some recent cases the plausibility assessment could better be characterised as a possibility assessment. This paper will consider the rationale of plausibility, and its changing use over time. In particular, it will ask whether plausibility is bifurcating, creating a situation in which one—strict—version of the plausibility assessment is applied where most categories of States’ rights are concerned (plausibility as a reasonable prospect of success and substantive link to the merits), and another—refocussed—standard is applied to situations where individual and group rights are at risk (plausibility as human vulnerability). The paper will focus on the case-law of the ICJ, where plausibility has been extensively discussed in orders and separate/dissenting opinions, and where some of the most exciting recent developments have taken place.
Conventionally, customary international law is developed through the actions and beliefs of nations. International treaties are interpreted, in part, by assessing how the parties to the treaty behave. This Article observes that these forms of uncodified international law—custom and subsequent treaty practice—are also developed through a nation’s reactions, or failures to react, to acts and beliefs that can be attributed to it. I call this “attributed lawmaking.”
Consider the new commercial space race. Innovators like SpaceX and Blue Origin seek a permissive legal environment. A Cold-War-era treaty does not seem adequately to address contemporary plans for space. The treaty does, however, attribute private sector activity to nations. The theory of attributed lawmaking suggests that the attribution renders the activity of private actors in space relevant to the development of binding international legal rules. As a doctrinal matter, private activity that is attributed to the state becomes “state practice” for the purpose of treaty interpretation or customary international law formation. Moreover, as a matter of realpolitik, private actors standing in the shoes of the state can force states into a reactive posture, easing the commercially preferred rules into law through the power of inertia and changes to the status quo. Attributed lawmaking is not a new phenomenon but it may have increasing significance at a time when multilateral lawmaking is at an ebb, lines between public and private entities are blurring, and the question of attribution becomes both more complex and more urgent.
Thursday, October 17, 2019
Members of racial groups are protected under international law against genocide, persecution, and apartheid. But what is race – and why was this contentious term not discussed when drafting the Statute of the International Criminal Court? Although the law uses this term, is it legitimate to talk about race today, let alone convict anyone for committing a crime against a racial group?
This book is the first comprehensive study of the concept of race in international criminal law. It explores the theoretical underpinnings for the crimes of genocide, apartheid, and persecution, and analyses all the relevant legal instruments, case law, and scholarship. It exposes how the international criminal tribunals have largely circumvented the topic of race, and how incoherent jurisprudence has resulted in inconsistent protection. The book provides important new interpretations of a problematic concept by subjecting it to a multifaceted and interdisciplinary analysis. The study argues that race in international criminal law should be constructed according to the perpetrator's perception of the victims’ ostensible racial otherness. The perpetrator’s imagination as manifested through his behaviour defines the victims’ racial group membership.
This article proceeds in three parts. The first section reviews the ‘permissive conditions’ that prompted the revival of the World Court of Human Rights project in the late 2000s and provides a legal analysis of the design choices involved in its Draft Statute. This is followed by an examination of the project’s lack of progress through the stages during which its drafters sought it to be established and of the critical reception given to it by legal academics. The arguments of the critics of the World Court are divided into two intertwined yet distinct categories. The first category contains five general fronts of opposition and scepticism about the idea of establishing a World Court. These range from attacks on the project at the fundamental level to doubts about its effectiveness, legitimacy and political feasibility. The other category includes criticisms aimed at the ‘maximalist’ character of the Draft Statute in the light of existing alternatives. The conclusion examines the prospects for the establishment of a judicial system of universal review of international human rights treaties in the light of the contemporary crisis of the liberal international order.
- Lawrence Hill-Cawthorne, International Litigation and the Disaggregation of Disputes: Ukraine/Russia as a Case Study
- Miles Jackson, Virtuous Accomplices in International Criminal Law
- Uglješa Grušić, Unjust Enrichment and the Brussels I Regulation
- Wei Cai & Andrew Godwin, Challenges and Opportunities for the China International Commercial Court
- Zhengxin Huo & Man Yip, Comparing the International Commercial Courts of China with the Singapore International Commercial Court
- Cóman Kenny & Yvonne McDermott, The Expanding Protection of Members of a Party's Own Armed Forces Under International Criminal Law
- Weihuan Zhou, Henry Gao, & Xue Bai, Building a Market Economy Through WTO-Inspired Reform of State-Owned Enterprises in China
- Shorter Articles
- Lavanya Rajamani & Daniel Bodansky, The Paris Rulebook: Balancing International Prescriptiveness with National Discretion
- Neil Mcdonald, The Role of Due Diligence In International Law
Call for Papers/IG Panel Proposals: 16th Annual Conference of the European Society of International Law
Wednesday, October 16, 2019
- Anna Grear, Technifications, appropriations, and environmental risk and damage: the search for responsibility
- Alain Pottage, Holocene jurisprudence
- Justin Donhauser, Environmental robot virtues and ecological justice
- Dina Lupin Townsend, Silencing, consultation and indigenous descriptions of the world
- Rosemary Mutheu Mwanza, Harnessing the transformative potential of the constitutional human right to a clean and healthy environment in the context of corporate environmental damage in Kenya: a critical perspective
- Yves Melin, Customs Origin: A Review of Non-Preferential Rules of Origin in International Trades
- Marc Wegnez, The Origin of Goods in International Trade, an Often Misunderstood Concept Which Is However an Important Trade Issue
- Yves Melin & Dan Arnold, Non-preferential Customs Origin Under EU Law
- Tiziana Satta, Non-Preferential Origin and ‘Made in Italy’
- Christophe Coulie & Martin van der Weide, The Digitalization of the Issuing Process of Certificates of Origin in the Netherlands and Belgium: Is a 100% Digitalization Rate Possible and How? Why Issuing Certificates of Origin Electronically Does Not Equal Electronic Certificates of Origin?
- Mette Werdelin Azzam, Harmonization of Non-Preferential Rules of Origin
- Mette Werdelin Azzam, Certification of Origin
- Mohamed Abdallah, Radioscopy of the Non-Preferential Origin in the Tunisian Customs Legislation
- Sherif Erfan, The Practical Implications of AEO on Preferential Origin Certification
- Dina Francesca Haynes, Sacrificing Women and Immigrants on the Altar of Regressive Politics
- Benjamin Gregg, Indigeneity as Social Construct and Political Tool
- Anna Su, Rise and Fall of Universal Civil Jurisdiction
- Nick Cheesman, Routine Impunity as Practice (in Myanmar)
- Caroline Fehl, Bombs, Trials, and Rights: Norm Complexity and the Evolution of Liberal Intervention Practices
- Michael Tiboris, Against the Human Right to Water?
- Lorena Sosa, Johanna Niemi, & Suzan van der Aa, Protection Against Violence: The Challenges of Incorporating Human Rights' Standards to Procedural Law
- Erna Ulloa Castillo & Cristian Medina Valverde, Outline of a Diplomatic Leader in the International Community: Hernán Santa Cruz and his Works at the United Nations
- Pinghua Sun, Pengchun Chang's Contributions to International Human Rights in Global Governance
This article examines the historical experience with and understanding of plurilateral trade agreements throughout the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) and World Trade Organization (WTO) to better contextualise assessments of the continued viability of the single undertaking and the recent resurgence of plurilateralism in international trade law. Plurilateral agreements have been playing a significant role in international trade relations for the past fifty years. As such, the current wave of plurilateral agreements does not represent a seachange in approach to trade liberalisation, but rather a continuation of a process that originated many decades ago. Further, while the WTO agreements are multilateral in thatthey apply to all members, they can also l be seen as plurilateral in that not all WTO members have identical responsibilities under such agreements. The article concludes that plurilateralism and multilateralism have much in common, and hence may be mutually supportive rather than binary choices.
- Special Symposium – UK-India post-Brexit: Trade and Power Democracy
- Leïla Choukroune & Amitendu Palit, Introduction
- Lisa Mardikian & Clair Gammage, Brexit as Differentiated Integration: The Diverging Imaginaries of Future Trade Relationships
- Amitendu Palit, Brexit and India-UK Free Trade Agreement: Context, Prospects and Challenges
- James J. Nedumpara & Sandeep Thomas Chandy, Brexit and the UK’s Commitments at the World Trade Organization: The Challenges in Effecting a Legal Divorce from the European Union
- AFM Maniruzzaman & Ijaz Ali Chishti, International Arbitration and Public Policy Issues in the Indian Subcontinent: A Look through the English Common Law and International Lenses
- Sai Ramani Garimella, Interrogating Third Party Funding in Investment Arbitration: The Need for Regulation in the UK and India
- Leïla Choukroune, UK-India – Beyond Trade: Power Democracy
- General Articles
- Regis Y. Simo, Once upon a Time: The Origins of the Public Morals Defence in World Trade Law
- Ismaelline Eba Nguema, The Implications of the New US Trade Policy for the World Trade Organization
- David P. Fidler, To Declare or Not to Declare: The Controversy over Declaring a Public Health Emergency of International Concern for the Ebola Outbreak in the Democratic Republic of the Congo
- Chang-fa Lo, A Milder but Effective WTO Reform—Possible Plurilateral FTAs and Plurilateral DSU Within the WTO
- Qingjiang Kong & Shuai Guo, WTO Reform: Will There Be a Third Option Other than a U.S. Withdrawal and a China Expulsion?
- Yu Yessi Lesmana & Joseph Wira Koesnaidi, Particular Market Situation: A Newly Arising Problem or a New Stage in the Anti-Dumping Investigation?
- Liping Huang, WTO Jurisprudence on All Others Rate and Residual Rate of Dumping and Subsidy: Confusion and Reflection
- Tsai-fang Chen, Risk Assessment Review Under the WTO Disputes Settlement System
- Chaoyi Jiang, Who Is the God of Medicine?—Deciphering China’s Stance on Pharmaceutical Compulsory Licensing
Tuesday, October 15, 2019
Many an international law scholar has traced a route for her readers from ignorance, via debunking, to contingency, and onwards to possibility. Carrying scholars along this route is a presumed connection between awareness and agency. If only people recalled (with guidance from sophisticated scholars of international law) how chancy and open-ended international legal history has been, they might have the wherewithal to take their presents and futures in another direction – or so it is often assumed. This chapter will consider some possible perils of work so oriented, both in the sense of the kinds of operations that it leaves untouched and the circuit of humanist expectation that it helps to maintain (specifically, the idea that political capacity is a likely by-product of insight). Amid the increasingly self-organising streams of digits and ‘stuff’ shaping global affairs, this circuit may be especially dangerous for the distractions and disassociations it engenders. What, this chapter will ask, if international legal scholars were to identify possibility with pattern and formula, storage and transmission, rather than irregularity and insight? Perhaps this may spawn a politics better attuned to the now.