- Jadhav Case (India v. Pakistan) (I.C.J.), with introductory note by Freya Baetens
- The Nicolas Maduro Regime (O.A.S.), with introductory note by Christina M. Cerna
- U.S. v. Assa Co. Ltd. (2d Cir.), with introductory note by Theodore J. Folkman
- In re del Valle Ruiz (2d Cir.), with introductory note by Jared Hubbard
- United Nations Security Council Resolution 2462, with introductory note by William Casey King and Richard Gordon
- Georgia v. Russia (Eur. Ct. H.R.), with introductory note by Milena Sterio
- Decision Pursuant to Article 15 of the Rome Statute on the Authorisation of an Investigation into the Situation in the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan (Int'l Crim. Ct.), with introductory note by Jonathan P. Worboys
- Views Adopted by the Committee Under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, Concerning Sanila-aikio v. Finland, Communication No. 2668/2015, and Klemetti Käkkäläjärvi et al., Communication No. 2950/2017 (H.R. Comm'n), with introductory note by CJ Iorns Magallanes
Saturday, May 9, 2020
De Vos: Complementarity, Catalysts, Compliance: The International Criminal Court in Uganda, Kenya, and the Democratic Republic of Congo
Since its establishment at the turn of the century, a central preoccupation of the International Criminal Court (ICC) has been to catalyse the pursuit of criminal accountability at the domestic level. Drawing on ten years of research, this book theorizes the ICC's principle of complementarity as a transnational site and adaptive strategy for realizing an array of ambitious governance goals. Through a grounded, inter-disciplinary approach, it illustrates how complementarity came to be framed as a 'catalyst for compliance' and its unexpected effects on the legal frameworks and institutions of three different ICC 'situation countries' in Africa: Uganda, Kenya, and the Democratic Republic of Congo. Linking complementarity's law and practice to contemporary debates in international law and relations, the book unsettles international law's dominant progressive narrative. It urges a critical rethinking of the ICC's politics and a reorientation towards international criminal justice as a project of global legal pluralism.
Hillebrecht: International Criminal Accountability and the Domestic Politics of Resistance: Case Studies from Kenya and Lebanon
Contemporary international criminal law suggests that head of state immunity does not extend to atrocity crimes, but the executive's office continues to be the safest place for suspected perpetrators. Moreover, indicted suspects can use the threat of international accountability to win democratically contested elections. This article asks how suspects and their surrogates translate an indictment from an international criminal tribunal into an electoral victory and suggests that the path between an indictment and electoral victory unfolds in one of two ways: (1) the consolidation of existing coalitions around the indicted suspects and their allies; or (2) the creation of new coalitions that span existing cleavages. The article evaluates these assumptions through two cases: Lebanon and the Special Tribunal for Lebanon and Kenya and the International Criminal Court. These two decidedly different cases exemplify the ways in which coalitional politics shield suspects international accountability and reward them with high office.
Friday, May 8, 2020
Labuda: Institutional Design and Non-Complementarity: Regulating Relations Between Hybrid Tribunals and other Judicial and Non-Judicial Institutions
Hybrid tribunals usually operate alongside other judicial and non-judicial bodies with similar accountability functions. In particular, a hybrid tribunal can share jurisdictional powers with (ordinary) national courts, one or more international (criminal) tribunal(s), a truth commission, or other investigative and prosecutorial bodies. When the mandates of different institutions overlap, there is a need to identify and regulate relations between them. Ideally, legal rules embedded within each institution’s mandate minimize a duplication of tasks, prevent unnecessary conflict, encourage cooperation, and maximize cross-fertilization. This chapter argues that the term ‘complementarity’, which is often invoked to describe questions of institutional design, is an unhelpful way of conceptualizing relations between hybrid tribunals and other judicial and non-judicial institutions. Drawing on examples from the Democratic Republic of Congo, the Central African Republic and South Sudan, it explains why the International Criminal Court’s jurisdictional framework generates confusion and uncertainty over who enjoys priority and who has decision-making power. Other concepts and rules, for instance primacy, deferral, and subsidiarity, delineate the powers and functions of different institutions more clearly, generating healthier interactions between different transitional justice mechanisms in the long run.
Thursday, May 7, 2020
- Chang-fa Lo, The Missing Operational Components of the IHR (2005) from the Experience of Handling the Outbreak of COVID-19: Precaution, Independence, Transparency and Universality
- Tsung-Ling Lee, Global Health in a Turbulence Time: A Commentary
- Tolulope Anthony Adekola, Regional Mechanism Under Doha Paragraph 6 System—The Largely Untested Alternative Route for Access to Patented Medicines
- Debashis Chakraborty & Julien Chaisse, Tightrope Walk Between Faith and Scepticism: India’s “Contingency Plan” for Free Trade
- Juan He, Imported Seafood Traceability Regulations: A Mishap for the WTO’s Disregard for Non-Product Related Processes and Production Methods?
- Marcia Don Harpaz & Hadas Peled, The Stalemate in China’s GPA Accession Negotiations—Is There a Way Out?
- Zhong Lei, The Applicability of GATT Rules to Gas Transit Against the Backdrop of the “Belt and Road Initiative”: China’s Pipeline Transit Transport
- Collins C. Ajibo, Miriam C. Anozie, Timothy O. Umahi & Samuel I. Nwatu, Africa-China Investment Partnership for Development: The Downside, the Promises and a Roadmap for the Future
- Asif H Qureshi, The Americanization of the International Economic Order and Its Normative Boundaries
Sullivan: The Law of the List: UN Counterterrorism Sanctions and the Politics of Global Security Law
The spread of violent extremism, 9/11, the rise of ISIL and movement of 'foreign terrorist fighters' are dramatically expanding the powers of the UN Security Council to govern risky cross-border flows and threats by non-state actors. New security measures and data infrastructures are being built that threaten to erode human rights and transform the world order in far-reaching ways. The Law of the List is an interdisciplinary study of global security law in motion. It follows the ISIL and Al-Qaida sanctions list, created by the UN Security Council to counter global terrorism, to different sites around the world mapping its effects as an assemblage. Drawing on interviews with Council officials, diplomats, security experts, judges, secret diplomatic cables and the author's experiences as a lawyer representing listed people, The Law of the List shows how governing through the list is reconfiguring global security, international law and the powers of international organisations.
- Renato Antonini, Fair Comparison, Objective Examination and Positive Evidence in Undercutting Margins Computed in EU Trade Defence Investigation? No, Thanks
- Gorka Echevarría, In the Name of Free Trade: WTO against the Brazilian Tax Incentives
- Genevieve Dufour & David Pavot, WTO Negotiations: The Unfinished Doha Development Agenda and the Emergence of New Topics
- Reina Ichii & Rajesh Sharma, What Are the Gender Impacts of the WTO on Local Communities?: South Korea’s Import Restriction on Sea-Squirts from Nuclear Affected Areas in Japan
- Maria R.U.D. Tambunan, Transfer Mispricing on Intra-group Trading Performed by Multinational Manufacturing in Indonesia: Evidence from Indonesian Tax Court 2015–2019
- Lena Schøning, More or Less Integrated Ocean Management: Multiple Integrated Approaches and Two Norms
- Jianjun Gao, The Delimitation Method for the Continental Shelf Beyond 200 Nautical Miles: A Reflection on the Judicial and Arbitral Decisions
- Dorottya Bognar-Lahr, In the Same Boat? A Comparative Analysis of the Approaches of Russia and Canada in the Negotiation of the IMO’s Mandatory Polar Code
- Jee-hyun Choi, Korea–Japan JDZ to End in Deadlock?: The Potential for Unilateral Korean Exploration and Exploitation
- Klaas Willaert, Effective Protection of the Marine Environment and Equitable Benefit Sharing in the Area: Empty Promises or Feasible Goals?
Hirsch: Soviet Judgment at Nuremberg: A New History of the International Military Tribunal after World War II
Organized in the immediate aftermath of World War II to try the former Nazi leaders for war crimes, the Nuremberg trials, known as the International Military Tribunal (IMT), paved the way for global conversations about genocide, justice, and human rights that continue to this day. As Francine Hirsch reveals in this immersive new history of the trials, a central piece of the story has been routinely omitted from standard accounts: the critical role that the Soviet Union played in making Nuremberg happen in the first place. Hirsch's book reveals how the Soviets shaped the trials--only to be written out of their story as Western allies became bitter Cold War rivals.
Soviet Judgment at Nuremberg offers the first full picture of the war trials, illuminating the many ironies brought to bear as the Soviets did their part to bring the Nazis to justice. Everyone knew that Stalin had originally allied with Hitler before the Nazi invasion of the Soviet Union. The Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact of 1939 hung heavy over the courtroom, as did the suspicion among the Western prosecutors and judges that the Soviets had falsified evidence in an attempt to pin one of their own war crimes, the Katyn massacre of Polish officers, on the Nazis. It did not help that key members of the Soviet delegation, including the Soviet judge and chief prosecutor, had played critical roles in Stalin's infamous show trials of the 1930s. For the lead American prosecutor Robert H. Jackson and his colleagues, Soviet participation in the Nuremberg Trials undermined their overall credibility and possibly even the moral righteousness of the Allied victory.
Yet Soviet jurists had been the first to conceive of a legal framework that treated war as an international crime. Without it, the IMT would have had no basis for judgment. The Soviets had borne the brunt of the fighting against Germany--enduring the horrors of the Nazi occupation and experiencing almost unimaginable human losses and devastation. There would be no denying their place on the tribunal, nor their determination to make the most of it. Once the trials were set in motion, however, little went as the Soviets had planned. Soviet Judgment at Nuremberg shows how Stalin's efforts to direct the Soviet delegation and to steer the trials from afar backfired, and how Soviet war crimes became exposed in open court.
Hirsch's book offers readers both a front-row seat in the courtroom and a behind-the-scenes look at the meetings in which the prosecutors shared secrets and forged alliances. It reveals the shifting relationships among the four countries of the prosecution (the U.S., Great Britain, France, and the USSR), uncovering how and why the Palace of Justice in Nuremberg became a Cold War battleground. In the process Soviet Judgment at Nuremberg offers a new understanding of the trials and a fresh perspective on the post-war movement for human rights.
Wednesday, May 6, 2020
- Celebrating Peer Review: EJIL’s Roll of Honour and Announcement of the first EJIL Peer Review Prize; Brexit – Apportioning the Blame; Once Upon a Time in Catalonia…; 10 Good Reads; In This Issue
- Afterword: Martti Koskenniemi and His Critics
- Janne E. Nijman, Grotius’ ‘Rule of Law’ and the Human Sense of Justice: An Afterword to Martti Koskenniemi’s Foreword
- Francesca Iurlaro, International Legal Histories as Orders: An Afterword to Martti Koskenniemi’s Foreword
- Benjamin Straumann, The Rule of Law: Sociology or Normative Theory? An Afterword to Martti Koskenniemi’s Foreword
- Raffaela Kunz, Judging International Judgments Anew? The Human Rights Courts before Domestic Courts
- Michelle Burgis-Kasthala, Entrepreneurial Justice: Syria, the Commission for International Justice and Accountability and the Renewal of International Criminal Justice
- Francisco de Abreu Duarte, ‘But the Last Word Is Ours’: The Monopoly of Jurisdiction of the Court of Justice of the European Union in Light of the Investment Court System
- Roaming Charges: Kaleidoscope
- Symposium: The Psychology of International Law
- Anne van Aaken & Tomer Broude, The Psychology of International Law: An Introduction
- Anne van Aaken, Experimental Insights for International Legal Theory
- Doron Teichman and Eyal Zamir, Nudge Goes International
- Anton Strezhnev, Beth A. Simmons & Matthew D. Kim, Rulers or Rules? International Law, Elite Cues and Public Opinion
- Tomer Broude & Inbar Levy, Outcome Bias and Expertise in Investigations under International Humanitarian Law
- Moshe Hirsch, Cognitive Sociology, Social Cognition and Coping with Racial Discrimination in International Law
- Sergio Puig, Debiasing International Economic Law
- EJIL: Debate!
- Nicolas Lamp, How Should We Think about the Winners and Losers from Globalization? Three Narratives and Their Implications for the Redesign of International Economic Agreements
- Bernard Hoekman & Douglas Nelson, How Should We Think about the Winners and Losers from Globalization? A Reply to Nicolas Lamp
- EJIL: Debate!
- Wendy Ng, Changing Global Dynamics and International Competition Law: Considering China’s Potential Impact
- Eleanor Fox, Changing Global Dynamics and International Competition Law: A Reply to Wendy Ng
- Impressions: Reviving a Tradition
- Pierre-Marie Dupuy, Michel Virally, L’organisation mondiale
- Books Reviews
- Gian Luca Burci, reviewing Benjamin Mason Meier and Lawrence O. Gostin (eds). Human Rights in Global Health: Rights-Based Governance for a Globalizing World/li>
- Mark A. Drumbl, reviewing Marcos Zunino. Justice Framed: A Genealogy of Transitional Justice
- Sari Kouvo, reviewing Ratna Kapur. Gender, Alterity and Human Rights: Freedom in a Fishbowl
- Tania Voon, reviewing Emily Sipiorski. Good Faith in International Investment Arbitration
- The Last Page
- Kalypso Nicolaidis, What kind of Brit shall I be?
Call for Papers: 15 years of the Convention for the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions and Lessons for New Ways of International Law-Making: Actors, Processes, Impact
Huang: Can Trade Dispute Resolution Mechanisms Enhance State Compliance with International Health Regulations? Insights from MARPOL 73/78
Niemi, Peroni, & Stoyanova: International Law and Violence Against Women: Europe and the Istanbul Convention
This book offers an in-depth and critical analysis of the Istanbul Convention, along with discussions on its impact and implications. The work highlights the place of the Convention in the landscape of international law and policies on violence against women and equality. The authors argue that the Convention with its emphasis on integrated and comprehensive policies has an important role in promoting equality, but they also note the debates on “genderism” that the Convention has triggered in some member states. The book analyses central concepts of the Convention, including violence, gender and due diligence. It takes up major commitments of the parties to the Convention, including support and services to victims, criminal law provisions and protection of migrant women against violence. The book thus makes a major contribution to the development of national laws, policies and practice.
The article presents three main arguments in favour of an interdisciplinary opening of international law. The first emerges from the transition from traditional international law to transnational law, as a result of which specialized legal subsystems increasingly overcome the boundaries of nation states and, by making themselves independent of the pyramidal structure of the constitutional order, tend to overlap one another. Consequently, the transnational sphere is characterized by a significant intersection of competences, so that contemporary international law cannot be understood properly without a substantial expertise in fields that transcend its usual understanding. The second argument in favour of interdisciplinarity is related to the content of law in general and of international law in particular. Because a set of norms fulfils the task of stabilizing the normative expectations that are generated within a specific social subsystem, it inevitably incorporates the kind of rationality that characterizes the functioning of that same social subsystem. Thus, to understand how a legal subsystem works, it is necessary to take into account the fundamental constituents of that kind of rationality which makes up the rules of interaction within the social subsystem related to that particular set of norms. The third argument for interdisciplinarity derives, finally, from the overall rationale of law. In fact, beyond the functional rationality that the legal norms acquire insofar as they fulfil the task of stabilizing the normative expectations generated within specialized social subsystems, the law also enshrines a more inclusive understanding of a metasystemic rationality, namely a comprehensive idea of social order. Therefore, law is to be interpreted as the system of formal propositions that lay down the rules and principles that govern human interaction according to a specific view of how the “well-ordered society” should be defined. While law’s relation to the specialized subsystems is the expression of its functional rationale, its link to the idea of how the “well-ordered society” is understood manifests its more encompassing social rationality and, by reflecting what we can define as the paradigms of order, incorporates the knowledge developed within extra-legal discourses.
Peters & Askin: Der internationale Menschenrechtsschutz in Zeiten von Postglobalismus und Populismus
Der internationale Menschenrechtsschutz ist in der Ära des Postglobalismus von gegenläufigen Trends gekennzeichnet. Einerseits steigen die Ratifikationen der Menschenrechtsverträge und die völkerrechtlichen Instrumente und Verfahren werden ausgebaut. Laufend werden neuartige Menschenrechte formuliert, für neue Gruppen von Betroffenen beansprucht und gegenüber neuen Menschenrechtsverpflichteten zur Geltung gebracht. Auf der anderen Seite werden Menschenrechte in allen Regionen der Welt verletzt, und wir beobachten einen „backlash“ gegen die Idee der Menschenrechte, nicht zuletzt durch populistische Strömungen. Unser Beitrag plädiert gegen Doppelmoral und inflationäre Rechtsbehauptungen und für immer wieder neu und „bottom-up“ zu definierende universelle Rechte des Menschen.
In the era of postglobalism, international human rights protection is marked by antagonist trends. On the one hand, the ratification of human rights treaties is on the rise, and the international legal instruments and procedures are constantly refined. New rights are being pronounced, claimed for new groups of victims and enforced against new human rights obligors. On the other hand, human rights are violated in all regions of the world, and we witness a backlash against the idea of human rights, not the least in populist rhetorics. Our contribution argues against double standards and inflationary claims and in favour of an ongoing re-definition of universal rights of humans, in a bottom-up discourse.
Tuesday, May 5, 2020
The New Zealand Yearbook of International Law (Brill), launched in June 2004, is an annual, internationally refereed publication intended to stand as a reference point for legal materials and critical commentary on issues of public and private international law. The Yearbook serves as a valuable tool in the determination of trends, state practice and policies in the development of international law with particular regard to New Zealand, the Pacific region, the Southern Ocean and Antarctica.
Editors call for both short notes and commentaries, and longer in-depth articles, for publication in next volume of the Yearbook, which will be published in early 2021.
Notes and commentaries should be between 3,000 to 7,000 words. Articles may be from 8,000 to 15,000 words.
The Editors seek contributions on any current topic in public or private international law. The Editors particularly encourage submissions that are relevant to the Pacific, the Southern Ocean and Antarctica, and New Zealand.
Submissions will be considered on a rolling basis. However, the *closing date for submissions for Volume 17 is 15 June 2020.
Contributions must be original unpublished works and submission of contributions will be held to imply this. Manuscripts must be word-processed and accepted papers should comply with the fourth edition of the Australian Guide to Legal Citation. The Guide is available online here.
Submissions should be provided in English, using MS Word-compatible word processing software, and delivered by email to the General Editor at email@example.com
CALL FOR PAPERS
The German Yearbook of International Law is Germany’s oldest yearbook in the field of public international law. The GYIL is published annually by the Walther Schücking Institute for International Law at the University of Kiel and contains contributions on topics addressing all aspects of public international law. We aim to provide a platform for scholars of international law – both inside and outside Germany – to publish new research advancing public international legal discourse as well as analysis of current issues. The Yearbook features a ‘Forum’ section wherein prominent scholars are invited to enter into discussion on newly developing topics in international law, and a ‘Focus’ section for which a group of experts are invited to write articles examining in-depth various aspects of a topic chosen in advance by the editors.
The General Articles section of the GYIL is open to submissions from the entire academic community and is independently peer-reviewed by a board of renowned experts. All work submitted will be scrutinised based on its intellectual quality and its advancement of academic discourse. The Editors welcome submissions for volume 63 (2020) of the GYIL, inviting interested parties to submit contributions for consideration for inclusion in the forthcoming edition.
The paper should be 10,000-12,500 words inclusive of footnotes and conform with the house style of the GYIL (which is available on our website). Submissions, including a brief abstract, statement of affiliation, and confirmation of exclusive submission, should be sent by 1 September 2020 to the Assistant Editor of the GYIL via e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org.
Monday, May 4, 2020
Louka: The Global Economic Order: The International Law and Politics of the Financial and Monetary System
Exploring in depth the institutions that underpin the global economy, this study provides invaluable insights into why a minimum economic order has endured for so long and why states are unwilling to establish a maximum order, a global safety net for all. The author investigates how debt – a critical component of states’ economic infrastructure – leads to debilitating crises, and how these crises undermine the economic autonomy and political independence of states.
- Sundaresh Menon, Technology and the Changing Face of Justice
- Eric Leikin & Moritz Keller, A Taxing Endeavour: Addressing the Tax Consequences of Investment Arbitration Awards
- Yasin Alperen Karaşahin, Contractual Time Limits to Commence Arbitration
- Eloïse Glucksmann & Rüdiger Morbach, Hot-Button Issues in International Arbitration: A Survey Among Arbitrators
- Oluwafikunayo D. Taiwo, The Restrictive Approach to Legal Representation in Arbitration Proceedings and Its Unintended Consequences in Nigeria
Sunday, May 3, 2020
- Symposium: Africa’s Participation in International Economic Law in the 21st Century
- Olabisi D. Akinkugbe, Ohio Omiunu, Amaka Vanni, Regis Y. Simo and Luwam Dirar, Introduction
- Okechukwu Ejims, African Regional Investment Agreements: Neutralising a Threat to Non-communicable Disease Control Policies
- Gudrun Monika Zagel, International Investment Agreements (IIAs) and Sustainable Development: Are the African Reform Approaches a Possible Way out of the Global IIA Crisis?
- Chidebe M. Nwankwo, Balancing International Investment Law and Climate Change in Africa: Assessing Vertical and Horizontal Norms
- Adebayo Majekolagbe, Africa’s Sustainability Transition in a Post-Fossil World: Posture, Negotiation and Agreements
- Suzzie Onyeka Oyakhire, Re-Strategising the Position of International Economic Law within the Legal Education Curriculum in Africa
- Vellah Kedogo Kigwiru, The Cooperation on Competition Policy under the African Continental Free Trade Area
- Caroline Kago, Tomasz Milej, Fidel Mwaki & Saweria Mwangi, International Public Policy, Corruption and Investor to State Arbitration
- Flora Huang & Horace Yeung, Sino-African Trade: A Multi-layered Appraisal
- Adamantia Rachovitsa & Marlies Hesselman, Introduction
- Daniëlla Dam de Jong, ‘A Rough Trade’? Towards A More Sustainable Minerals Supply Chain
- Laure-Elise Mayard, Can A Transnational Law Approach Offer A Better Understanding of International Law’s Contribution to Sustainable Hydropower Projects? A Test Case from the Mekong River Basin
- Stellina Jolly & Abhishek Trivedi, Implementing the SDG-13 Through the Adoption of Hybrid Law: Addressing Climate-induced Displacement
- Cees Verburg and Jaap Waverijn, Liberalising the Global Supply Chain of Renewable Energy Technology: The Role of International Investment Law in Facilitating Flows of Foreign Direct Investment and Trade
- Maryna Rabinovych, Where Economic Development Meets the Rule of Law? Promoting Sustainable Development Goals Through the European Neighbourhood Policy
- Articoli e Saggi
- Alessandra Sardu, L’international cybersecurity law: lo stato dell’arte
- Francesco Emanuele Celentano, Il sistema internazionale di contrasto al cambiamento climatico tra inefficacia e astrattezza. Il necessario coinvolgimento dei privati
- Osservatorio Europeo
- Laura Montanari, Il rispetto del principio di rule of law come sfida per il futuro dell’Unione europea
- Osservatorio Diritti Umani
- Gian Maria Farnelli, Proporzionalità ed emergenza sanitaria da COVID-19 nei parametri CEDU