- Jess Gifkins, Beyond the Veto: Roles in UN Security Council Decision-Making
- Javier A. Vadell & Clarisa Giaccaglia, Brazil’s Role in Latin America’s Regionalism: Unilateral and Lonely International Engagement
- Michelle Morais de Sa e Silva, An Intrastate Approach to the Withdrawal from International Organizations: The Case of Brazil and the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights
- Thurid Bahr, Anna Holzscheiter, and Laura Pantzerhielm, Understanding Regime Complexes through a Practice Lens: Repertoires of Interorganizational Practices in Global Health
- Irene Langran, Challenges to Global Health Governance from the International Trade in Organ Transplants Time for a New Model?
- Rebecca Ray, Who Controls Multilateral Development Finance?
- Justin Alger, Jane Lister, & Peter Dauvergne, Corporate Governance and the Environmental Politics of Shipping
Saturday, February 20, 2021
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 advancement of academic discourse. The Editors welcome submissions for volume 64 (2021) of the GYIL, inviting interested parties to submit contributions for consideration for inclusion in the forthcoming edition.
Papers should be 10,000-12,500 words inclusive of footnotes and must conform with the house style guide 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 2021 to the Assistant Editor of the GYIL via e-mail: email@example.com.
- Forum: The Uighur Population in China and R2P
- Cecilia Jacob, Adrian Gallagher, & Charles T. Hunt, Pursuing Accountability and Protection for the Uighur and Muslim Minorities in China
- Michael Clarke, Settler Colonialism and the Path toward Cultural Genocide in Xinjiang
- Sophie Ryan, Atrocity Crimes in Xinjiang: Moving beyond Legal Labels
- Andrew Garwood-Gowers, China and the Uighurs: Options for Legal Accountability
- Rosemary Foot, R2P Sidelined: The International Response to China’s Repression of Muslim Minorities in Xinjiang
- Nadira Kourt, United Nations’ Response to Mass Atrocities in China
- Thomas Peak, Rescuing Humanitarian Intervention from Liberal Hegemony
- Alexandra Bohm & Garrett Wallace Brown, R2P and Prevention: The International Community and Its Role in the Determinants of Mass Atrocity
Friday, February 19, 2021
- Juan Pablo Bohoslavsky, The Explosion of Household Debt: Curse or Blessing for Human Rights?
- Katharine M.A.Fortin, To be or not to be?: Legal Identity in Crisis in Non-International Armed Conflicts
- Ricardo D. Martinez-Schuldt & Jacqueline Hagan, Abusing Immigrants: An Analysis of Immigrant Enforcement and Mexican Migrant Claims of Human Rights Violations by Agents of the United States
- Zvika Orr, Shifra Unger, & Adi Finkelstein, Localization of Human Rights of People with Disabilities: The Case of Jewish Ultra-Orthodox People in Israel
- Ilias Bantekas, The Linkages Between Business and Human Rights and Their Underlying Root Causes
- William Paul Simmons, Janyce Boynton, & Todd Landman, Facilitated Communication, Neurodiversity, and Human Rights
- Baekkwan Park, Amanda Murddie, & David R. Davis, Turning up the Volume: The Amplification of Shame
The question of why states comply with international law has long been at the forefront of international law and international relations scholarship. The compliance discussion has largely focused on negative incentives for states to comply. We argue that there is another, undertheorized mechanism: rewarding. We provide a typology as well as illustrations of how rewards can be applied. Furthermore, we explore the rationale, the potential, and the limitations of rewarding, drawing on rationalist as well as psychological approaches. Both give ample arguments to make more use of rewarding in international law.
Thursday, February 18, 2021
International Law and Peace Settlements provides a systematic and comprehensive assessment of the relationship between international law and peace settlement practice across core settlement issues, e.g. transitional justice, human rights, refugees, self-determination, power-sharing, and wealth-sharing. The contributions address key cross-cutting questions on the legal status of peace agreements, the potential for developing international law, and the role of key actors – such as non-state armed groups, third-state witnesses and guarantors, and the UN Security Council – in the legalisation and internationalisation of settlement commitments. In recent years, significant scholarly work has examined facets of the relationship between international law and peace settlements, through concepts such as jus post bellum and lex pacificatoria. International Law and Peace Settlements drives forward the debate on the legalisation and internationalisation of peace agreements with diverse contributions from leading academics and practitioners in international law and conflict resolution.
Wednesday, February 17, 2021
McCall-Smith, Birdsall, & Casanas Adam: Human Rights in Times of Transition: Liberal Democracies and Challenges of National Security
This timely book explores the extent to which national security has affected the intersection between human rights and the exercise of state power. It examines how liberal democracies, long viewed as the proponents and protectors of human rights, have transformed their use of human rights on the global stage, externalizing their own internal agendas.
Contextualizing human rights goals, structures and challenges in the immediate post-UDHR era, key chapters analyse the role that national security has played in driving competition between individual rights and rhetoric-laden, democracy-reinforcing approaches to collective rights of security. Internationally diverse authors offer evocative insights into the ways in which law is used to manipulate both intra and interstate relationships, and demonstrate the constant tensions raised by a human rights system that is fundamentally state-centric though defined by individuals’ needs and demands. Acknowledging the challenges in contemporary human rights practice, policy and discourse as features of transitional eras in human rights, this forward-thinking book identifies opportunities to correct past inadequacies and promote a stronger system for the future.
Tuesday, February 16, 2021
- Carlos Fernández de Casadevante Romani, Secession et succession en matière de traités de frontières et de régimes de frontière : hypothèse d’étude sur la frontière franco-espagnole
- Giuseppe Palmisano, La procédure de réclamations collectives en tant qu’instrument de protection internationale des droits sociaux
- Delphine Burriez, La nature équivoque des engagements internationaux des Etats en matière de réinstallation des réfugiés : l’exemple français
With the importance of non-State actors ever increasing, the traditional State-centric approach of international law is being put to the test. In particular, significant accountability lacunae have emerged in the field of human rights protection. To address these challenges, this book makes a case for extraterritorial due diligence obligations of States in international human rights law. It traces back how due diligence obligations evolved on the international plane and develops a general analytical framework making the broad and vague notion of due diligence more approachable. The framework is applied to different fields of international law which provides guidance on how due diligence obligations can be better conceptualized. Drawing inspiration from these developments, the book analyses how extraterritorial human rights due diligence obligations could operate in practice and foster global human rights protection.
- Yann Prisner-Levyne, Trophy Hunting, Canned Hunting, Tiger Farming, and the Questionable Relevance of the Conservation Narrative Grounding International Wildlife Law
- Robert W. B. Greeley, Conservation Territorialization and Sport Hunting in Lebanon’s Shouf Biosphere Reserve
- Claire Saladin, International Environmental Law and Sea Turtles: Anatomy of the Legal Framework and Trade of Sea Turtles in the Lesser Antilles
Burri & Trinidad: The International Court of Justice and Decolonisation: New Directions from the Chagos Advisory Opinion
The 2019 Chagos Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice is a decision of profound legal and political significance. Presented with a rare opportunity to pronounce on the right to self-determination and the rules governing decolonization, the ICJ responded with remarkable directness. The contributions to this book examine the Court's reasoning, the importance of the decision for the international system, and its consequences for the situation in the Chagos Archipelago in particular. Apart from bringing the Chagossians closer to the prospect of returning to the islands from which they were covertly expelled half a century ago, the decision and its political context may be understood as part of a broader shift in North/South relations, in which formerly dominant powers like the UK must come to terms with their waning influence on the world stage, and in which voices from former colonies are increasingly shaping the institutional and normative landscape.
Monday, February 15, 2021
Shirlow: Judging at the Interface: Deference to State Decision-Making Authority in International Adjudication
This book explores how the Permanent Court of International Justice, the International Court of Justice, the European Court of Human Rights, and investment treaty tribunals have used deference to recognise the decision making authority of States. It analyses the approaches to deference taken by these four international courts and tribunals in 1,714 decisions produced between 1924 and 2019 concerning alleged State interferences with private property. The book identifies a large number of techniques capable of achieving deference to domestic decision-making in international adjudication. It groups these techniques to identify seven distinct 'modes' of deference reflecting differently structured relationships between international adjudicators and domestic decision-makers. These differing approaches to deference are shown to hold systemic significance. They reveal the shifting nature and structure of adjudication under international law and its relationship to domestic decision making authority.
- Claus Kreß, An Unusual and Extraordinary Assault on International Justice
- Carsten Stahn, Confronting Colonial Amnesia: Towards New Relational Engagement with Colonial Injustice and Cultural Colonial Objects
- Annika Jones, Measuring Performance and Shaping Identity: Performance Indicators and the International Criminal Court
- Priya Urs, Judicial Review of Prosecutorial Discretion in the Initiation of Investigations into Situations of ‘Sufficient Gravity’
- Symposium: Litigating Palestine Before the International Criminal Court
- Triestino Mariniello & Chantal Meloni, Foreword
- Sarah Williams & Hannah Woolaver, The Role of State Amici Curiae in the Article 19(3) ICC Statute Proceedings: Friends or Distraction?
- Ardi Imseis, State of Exception: Critical Reflections on the Amici Curiae Observations and Other Communications of States Parties to the Rome Statute in the Palestine Situation
- Robert Heinsch & Giulia Pinzauti, To Be (a State) or Not to Be? The Relevance of the Law of Belligerent Occupation with regard to Palestine’s Statehood before the ICC
- Yaël Ronen, Palestine in the ICC: Statehood and the Right to Self-determination in the Absence of Effective Control
- Marco Pertile, The Borders of the Occupied Palestinian Territory are Determined by Customary Law: A Comment on the Prosecutor’s Position on the Territorial Jurisdiction of the ICC in the Situation Concerning Palestine
- Micheal G Kearney, The Denial of the Right of Return as a Rome Statute Crime
- Mark Kersten, No Justice Without Peace, But What Peace Is on Offer? Palestine, Israel and the International Criminal Court
- National Prosecution of International Crimes: Legislation and Cases
- Yahli Shereshevsky, The Unintended Negative Effect of Positive Complementarity
Sunday, February 14, 2021
Recent trends in reforms by African states in the field of International Investment Law (IIL) has been dubbed as the Africanization of IIL. These important debates regarding reform of IIL in Africa foreground innovative aspects of International Investment Agreements (IIA) in contrast to the traditional IIL regime. The debates also remind us of the relative lack of African voices in the global IIL reform agenda. There is however little research that critically analyze the Africanization of IIL thesis.
This article undertakes this analysis. Drawing on TWAIL, it characterizes Africanization of IIL into ‘moderate’ and ‘radical’ reforms. The article analyzes the normative features of Africanization of IIL. In this regard, it enriches existing substantive analysis, and advances the debates by interrogating the contours and blind spots of Africanization in IIL. It argues that the Africanization thesis being so far limited to the IIAs between African states, is a ‘moderate’ response from below to the systemic inequities of the IIL regime. Moderate Africanization of IIL – modest and incremental approach to the reform of IIL engenders challenges for African states as they remain nestled in the neoliberal paradigm. To address this deficit and expand the geographies of African centered IIAs to reform and remake IIL, the article makes the case for a cascading of the Africanization thesis in more radical normative form based on a constellation of strategic moderate changes.