- Notes and Comments
- Sergey Sayapin, The Implementation of Crimes Against the Peace and Security of Mankind in the Penal Legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan
- Victor Kattan, The Chagos Advisory Opinion and the Law of Self-Determination
- Yejoon Rim, Reflections on the Role of the International Law Commission in Consideration of the Final Form of Its Work
- Aman Kumar, Resolving the “Dispute” Under Article 119(1) of the Rome Statute
- Invited Article
- Sundaresh Menon, The Rule of Law, the International Legal Order, and the Foreign Policy of Small States
- Li Chen, Tracing Chinese Scholar Chen Tiqiang's Pursuit of International Law Education and His Major Contribution to the Doctrine of Recognition
- Bin Zhao, The Curious Case of Ghana/Côte d'Ivoire: A Consistent Approach to Hydrocarbon Activities in the Disputed Area?
- Dita Liliansa, The Necessity of Indonesia's Measures to Sink Vessels for IUU Fishing in the Exclusive Economic Zone
- Benjamin Wong, Data Localization and ASEAN Economic Community
Saturday, February 15, 2020
- Gabriel Gari, Recent Preferential Trade Agreements’ Disciplines for Tackling Regulatory Divergence in Services: How Far beyond GATS?
- Jan Karlas & Michal Parízek, Supply of Policy Information in the World Trade Organization: Cross-National Compliance with One-Time and Regular Notification Obligations, 1995–2014
- Yusuf Kenan Bagir, Impact of the Presence of Embassies on Trade: Evidence from Turkey
- Yong-Jae Choi, Chung-ki Min, & Chanyul Park, Effects of Trade Barriers and Cultural Distance on the Domestic Market Share in the Film Industry
- Maurício Benedeti Rosa, Rosane Nunes de Faria, & Eduardo Rodrigues de Castro, Political and Economic Determinants of Asynchronous Approval of New GM Events
- Alberto Alvarez-Jimenez, International Investment Law, Time, and Economics: Fixing the Length of Economic Crises as a Costs-Allocation Tool between Host States and Foreign Investors
- Jean-Frédéric Morin & Jenny Surbeck, Mapping the New Frontier of International IP Law: Introducing a TRIPs-plus Dataset
- Daria Boklan & Amrita Bahri, The First WTO's Ruling on National Security Exception: Balancing Interests or Opening Pandora's Box?
- Tatiana Lacerda Prazeres, Trade and National Security: Rising Risks for the WTO
Thursday, February 13, 2020
- Karl Gustafsson, International reconciliation on the Internet? Ontological security, attribution and the construction of war memory narratives in Wikipedia
- Christian Wirth, Emotions, international hierarchy, and the problem of solipsism in Sino-US South China Sea politics
- Francesco Giumelli & Filippo Costa Buranelli, When states and individuals meet: The UN Ombudsperson as a ‘contact point’ between international and world society
- Michael P. A. Murphy, The securitization audience in theologico-political perspective: Giorgio Agamben, doxological acclamations, and paraconsistent logic
- Nemanja Džuverović & Goran Tepšić, Neoliberal co-optation, power relations and informality in the Balkan International Relations profession
- Lucrecia García Iommi, Whose justice? The ICC ‘Africa problem’
Call for Papers: « More equal than others »? Il principio di uguaglianza nel diritto internazionale ed europeo
Wednesday, February 12, 2020
Tuesday, February 11, 2020
- Freya Baetens & Pierre Bodeau-Livinec, Face à Face: Interview with President Yusuf – President of the International Court of Justice
- Callista Harris, Claims with an Ulterior Purpose: Characterising Disputes Concerning the “Interpretation or Application” of a Treaty
- Special Issue: Reforming International Investment Arbitration
- Chiara Giorgetti, Laura Létourneau-Tremblay, Daniel Behn & Malcolm Langford, Reforming International Investment Arbitration: An Introduction
- Stephan W. Schill & Geraldo Vidigal, Designing Investment Dispute Settlement à la Carte: Insights from Comparative Institutional Design Analysis
- Wolfgang Alschner, Correctness of Investment Awards: Why Wrong Decisions Don’t Die
- James Devaney, An Independent Panel for the Scrutiny of Investment Arbitrators: an Idea Whose Time Has Come?
- Szilárd Gáspár-Szilágyi, Let Us Not Forget about the Role of Domestic Courts in Settling Investor-State Disputes
- Georgios Dimitropoulos, The Conditions for Reform: a Typology of “Backlash” and Lessons for Reform in International Investment Law and Arbitration
- René Songole S, L’intervention armée consécutive aux allégations d’usage d’armes chimiques en Syrie : brèves remarques sur une opération controversée
- Sophie Grosbon, General Comment no. 24 on State Obligations under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in the Context of Business Activities: The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights Has Played Its Part
- Brusil Miranda-Metou, La médiation de l’Union africaine dans la résolution des crises internes de ses États membres
- Nora Ait-Aissi Paillon, Le Pacte mondial pour l’environnement : un appui à la gouvernance mondiale de l’environnement?
- Justine Monette-Tremblay, La Commission de vérité et réconciliation du Canada : une étude de la sublimation de la violence coloniale canadienne
- Aurélie Debuisson, CETA et mobilité de la main-d’œuvre hautement qualifiée : une réelle innovation dans la gestion migratoire transatlantique?
- Alexandre Lodie, La participation des entités contestées aux compétitions mondiales de football organisées par la FIFA et la CONIFA : quelles conséquences sur la (non-)reconnaissance du statut d’État ?
- Notes et commentaires
- Bernard Duhaime, Multilateral Human Rights in a Shifting World Order: Perspectives from a UN Special Procedure Mandate
Monday, February 10, 2020
- Ashley Binetti Armstrong, You Shall Not Pass! How the Dublin System Fueled Fortress Europe
- Elena Pribytkova, What Global Human Rights Obligations Do We Have?
Sunday, February 9, 2020
- C. Charriere-Bourzanel, Hommage à Robert Badinter
- Y. Oschinsky, Hommage à Georges de Kerchove
- E. Decaux, In memoriam – Louis Joinet (1934-2019)
- D. Rousseau, Propos introductifs
- I. Gomez Fernandez, La création d’un standard européen ou l’époque des « arrêts fondateurs »
- J. Garcia Roca, Déférence internationale, imprécision de la marge nationale d’appréciation et procédure raisonnable de décision
- M. De Salvia, La révolution annoncée des Protocoles nos 11, 14, 15 et 16 ou la métamorphose judiciaire espérée
- P. Dourneau-Josette, Les adaptations procédurales ou l’accélération du traitement des requêtes
- J. Dalleres, Rétrospective sur la reconnaissance internationale de l’État andorran. Des conséquences de l’arrêt Drozd et Janousek c. France et Espagne
- J. Arlettaz, La prise en compte de la jurisprudence européenne par le Tribunal constitutionnel d’Andorre
- P-Y. Le Borgn', L’interaction parlementaire ou le dialogue institutionnel entre l’Assemblée parlementaire et les parlements nationaux
- D. Ludet, L’interaction judiciaire ou l’institutionnalisation du dialogue avec le Protocole no 16 (analyse de la première saisine par la Cour de cassation de France)
- M. Carrillo, La contestation épisodique de la jurisprudence de la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme : le cas espagnol
- F. Krenc, L’acceptabilité des arrêts de la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme par les États parties : un « défi permanent »
- L. Burgorgue-Larsen, Conclusions générales - Brèves réflexions sur l’histoire du processus de la protection européenne des droits de l’homme
In NATO Rules of Engagement, Camilla Guldahl Cooper offers clarity on a topic prone to confusion and misunderstanding. NATO rules of engagement (ROE) are of considerable political, strategic and operational importance, yet many of its concepts lack clarity. The resulting ambiguity may be detrimental for people involved and for mission accomplishment.
Through a thorough analysis of the concept, purpose, development and use of NATO ROE, Cooper contributes to improved understanding and implementation of NATO ROE. The book covers all use of force categories and relevant law relating to the use of force during armed conflicts, including the complex concepts of hostile act and hostile intent, direct participation in hostilities, and the increasing reliance on self-defence during armed conflict.
Black-Branch & Fleck: Nuclear Non-Proliferation in International Law - Volume V Legal Challenges for Nuclear Security and Deterrence
Føllesdal: International Human Rights Courts and the (International) Rule of Law: Part of the Solution, Part of the Problem, or Both?
Regional human rights courts (RHRC) are often tasked to promote not only states’ human rights obligations, but also rule of law standards including predictability, legality, and the independence, impartiality and high quality of the judiciary. Critics challenge these international judiciaries for their interference with domestic democratic processes and violation of rule of law standards: these guardians are not themselves well guarded. What are we to make of such complaints? These concerns should not be dismissed too quickly as mere disgruntled venting by populist politicians. At least two arguments for dismissing the concerns are found wanting. One objection of a more theoretical nature holds that it is a category mistake (Ryle 1949) to apply domestic rule of law standards to such international institutions. Against this, the article first grants in section II that there are conflicting conceptions of the rule of law standards. Section III argues that the same values that justify the domestic rule of law standards of impartiality, independence and accountability support similar standards for RHRCs. Their independence from the state parties may indeed render RHRCs unpredictable sources of arbitrary discretion. A second more practical defense against the criticism of IHRCs is that their practices can avoid such dilemmas by showing more deference toward the states. Section IV considers a prime example of such strategies by one of the most likely culprits, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), arguably the most powerful regional human rights court. The ECtHR has developed a doctrine of a ‘margin of appreciation’ which arguably promotes human rights and domestic rule of law, and reduces the risk of domination by state authorities, without imposing new risks to those standards. Section V challenges this claim, to argue that even this doctrine of a margin of appreciation as currently developed by the ECtHR does create new risks of arbitrary discretion, contrary to the rule of law values it is tasked to guard. The critics’ concerns can thus not be ignored, but should spur changes to the doctrine of a margin of appreciation to satisfy the rule of law standards and the value they promote: predictability and protection against arbitrary discretion.
Inconsistency in legal interpretation is among the most salient problems in investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) and it is one of the key issues being addressed by the reform efforts in the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) Working Group III. While some degree of interpretive inconsistency is endemic to any legal order, systemic inconsistency tends to undermine the basic purposes of the investment treaty regime – namely protecting and promoting foreign direct investment through predictable international legal rules and institutions. This article seeks to parse the problem of inconsistency at a more granular level, in order to distinguish between types of norms where a degree of inconsistency is (relatively) manageable and (potentially) tolerable, and those where inconsistency is unacceptable. We argue that it is with regard to structural “rules of the game” where inconsistency is most destructive.
In the last twenty years, the international investment regime has attracted wide attention. Academics, policymakers and civil society have studied this regime using different analytical and normative frameworks, defending as much as criticizing international investment treaties and arbitration. Interestingly, however, there is not much literature analyzing international investment law through the lenses of transnational law. This limited interest is surprising given the transnational law origin of the regime – as shown by Sornarajah and Anghie – and the relevance of transnational law to understand the relationship between public and private law and international and domestic law in global economic relations. This chapter relies on a transnational law framework to show that these legal categories are contingent and only explain certain aspects of the international investment regime. A transnational law framework provides a valuable vantage point to assess the political economy of this regime, in particular, how it affects the relationship between states, foreign investors and local communities. The analysis begins from arbitrators’ ability to interpret the law or, as Michaels suggests, to dream of delocalized law.
Every international war crimes court has attracted controversy, but none more than the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC). Now in its twilight years, the ECCC has sparked robust debate since the late 1990s, before it was even launched. During negotiations aimed at creating the court, governments, United Nations (UN) officials, and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) debated whether a tribunal acceptable to Cambodia would be worthy of UN support. More than thirteen years after it began operating, the fulcrum of debate today is whether the ECCC was ‘worth the effort’ it has required. There is scant debate about its flaws, above all the Cambodian government’s brazen interference in case selection. More difficult to assess — and the focus of this Article — is whether the ECCC’s performance has justified the risks the UN knowingly assumed when it agreed to create the tribunal in partnership with Cambodia.
Data-driven algorithmic tools allow their users to process large amounts of data quickly, extract patterns from the data that humans cannot otherwise detect, and make reliable predictions. These tools have proven valuable in domestic legal practice, negotiations, and other fields closely related to international law. Yet governments and their international lawyers have ignored this new wave of tools as they conduct international relations.
This article argues that governments should begin to use these tools to their advantage in creating and implementing international law. These capabilities could support states’ decision-making as they negotiate treaties, adjudicate international legal disputes, and evaluate the status of customary rules. Even if international lawyers for governments in the United States and Europe are skeptical about the benefits of machine learning and big data, they must consider the possibility that states such as China will begin to deploy these tools in power-enhancing ways.
High-tech international lawyering will have important implications for international law and relations. Tools that are readily available and easy to use will serve as important equalizers for less powerful states, but more advanced technologies are likely to exacerbate existing power differentials. The article therefore offers ways that less powerful states and outside actors can counterbalance technology-driven power shifts that may undercut the enduring ambitions of international law.
Conventional wisdom has it that the successful functioning of the UN Security Council almost completely depends on the role played by its five permanent members and the extent to which they can agree—or avoid to fundamentally disagree—on the many issues on the Council’s agenda. But the Council also consists of ten non-permanent or elected members who represent five different regions of the world, and who, though not vested with the right of veto, play an indispensable role in Council decision-making.
This book aims to take a closer look at that role. It considers what role is foreseen for the elected members in the UN Charter, how this evolved in practice, and what “tools” they can deploy. It also considers whether there are particular “niches” for the elected members on the Security Council, such as engaging in conflict prevention, taking initiatives on rule of law issues and debating the potential effects of climate change on peace and security. Can elected members serve as agents of the international community and norm entrepreneurs? Should their position be strengthened, and if so, how? This collection was born out of a dynamic research seminar held at Leiden University, which also drew on the experiences of former elected members.
- Mark Bray, Beyond And Against The State: Anarchist Contributions To Human Rights History And Theory
- Vibhuti Ramachandran, Saving The Slaving Child: Domestic Work, Labor Trafficking, And The Politics Of Rescue In India
- Dossier: Human Rights And Economic Inequality
- Daniel Brinks, Julia Dehm, & Karen Engle, Introduction: Human Rights And Economic Inequality
- Rodrigo Uprimny Yepes & Sergio Chaparro Hernandez, Inequality, Human Rights, And Social Rights: Tensions And Complementarities
- Radhika Balakrishnan & James Heintz, Human Rights In An Unequal World: Structural Inequalities And The Imperative For Global Cooperation
- Richard Falk, Global Inequality And Human Rights: An Odd Couple
- Jason Hickel, The Imperative Of Redistribution In An Age Of Ecological Overshoot: Human Rights And Global Inequality
- Antony Anghie, Inequality, Human Rights, And The New International Economic Order
- Julia Dehm, Righting Inequality: Human Rights Responses To Economic Inequality In The United Nations
- James K. Galbraith, Inequality, Debt, And Human Rights: What Can We Learn From The Data?
- Dennis Davis, Taxation And Equality: The Implications For Redressing Inequality And The Promotion Of Human Rights
- Neville Hoad, “I Don’t Want To Live In A World Where People Die Every Day Simply Because They Are Poor”: From The Treatment Action Campaign To Equal Education, From Stories Of Human Rights To The Poetics Of Inequality
This major new commentary on the ICSID Convention, Regulations and Rules offers a new, forward-looking and highly practical interpretation of the convention and its associated documents. It is the first commentary to provide systematic article-by-article coverage not only of the Convention itself, but also of the institution rules, the ICSID arbitration rules and the ICSID administrative and financial regulations.
In Governance of Offshore Freshwater Resources Renée Martin-Nagle presents the scientific proof for vast quantities of freshwater in the seabeds, explains the socio-economic factors that will lead to development of the resource, and examines the international law principles and regimes that would guide policymakers in designing a governance system for offshore freshwater. Pursuant to the law of the sea, coastal states have sovereign rights to seabed resources within their exclusive economic zones. Offshore hydrocarbon development has produced customary practices for cooperation that were inspired by international water law and that could serve as a template for governing transboundary offshore freshwater. Given the vital nature of freshwater, equitable distribution of this new resource and its benefits should be considered.
This book proposes that fundamental concepts of institutional law need to be rethought and revised. Contrary to conventional wisdom, international organizations do not need to have members, and the members do not need to be states and international organizations. Private sector entities may, for instance, also be full members. Furthermore, international organizations do not need to possess international legal personality, nor is their autonomy a corollary of their personality. Moreover, the notion of “subject of international law” also needs to be reconsidered and the very concepts and definitions of “intergovernmental organization” and “international organization” need to change and be defined in a wider manner. In this publication the legal implications of membership are analyzed and a new analytical framework for international organizations is proposed. The argument is propounded that the power of creation of new organizations has passed over to inter
Graf-Brugère: La « menace contre la paix » dans la pratique du conseil de sécurité des Nations Unies
L’ouvrage analyse en profondeur la notion de « menace contre la paix » de l’article 39 de la Charte des Nations Unies, depuis sa naissance conceptuelle - longtemps avant la Charte - jusqu’à sa mise en œuvre par le Conseil de sécurité. L’ouvrage aborde ainsi des questions fondamentales du droit international public contemporain, telles que, par exemple : dans quelle mesure une situation interne à un Etat peut-elle être qualifiée de menace contre la paix par le Conseil de sécurité ? Est-ce que les résolutions relatives à la lutte contre le terrorisme et à la prolifération des armes de destruction massive, adoptées par le Conseil de sécurité dans le cadre du Chapitre VII de la Charte, modifient la compréhension juridique de la notion de menace de contre la paix ?