This Article explores the substantive and procedural aspects of the assertion that recklessness is included on the spectrum of mens rea for war crimes as a matter of customary international law. The substantive aspect of the inquiry, in Part I, engages in a critical assessment of the assertion that the jurisprudence of international criminal tribunals indicates that recklessness is sufficient to support a war crimes prosecution in general. The procedural aspect, in Part II, contests the prevailing “principal-agent” construct of describing the relationship between states and international criminal tribunals and the resulting role of tribunals in establishing customary international law. After rejecting the prevailing construct, the Article introduces the “designate and extend” model to clarify the relationship between states and international criminal tribunals.
The substantive inquiry in Part I demonstrates that the jurisprudence of international criminal tribunals does indicate that recklessness is included on the mens rea spectrum for war crimes, but only in specific, limited conditions. The procedural inquiry in Part II, while applying the new designate and extend model, confirms the role of decisions by international criminal tribunals as a subsidiary — rather than primary — source of customary international law. The substantive aspect of the inquiry addresses the specific issue of the spectrum of mens rea for war crimes in order to refine the existing legal standard, while the procedural aspect adopts a broader approach to clarify the general relationship between states and international criminal tribunals. Both inquires address unsettled issues that are central to the theory and practice of public international law.
Thursday, March 25, 2021
Cox: Recklessness, Intent, and War Crimes: Refining the Legal Standard and Clarifying the Role of International Criminal Tribunals as a Source of Customary International Law
Wednesday, March 24, 2021
- James M. Cooper, Traditional Knowledge in Taiwan: A Call for Greater Participation of Indigenous Peoples in the Global Intellectual Property Marketplace
- William S. Dodge & Wenliang Zhang, Reciprocity in China - US Judgments Recognition
- David Hughes & Yahli Shereshevsky, Something Is Not Always Better than Nothing: Problematizing Emerging Forms of Jus Ad Bellum Argument
- Mauro Megliani, Mozambican Illegal Debts: Testing the Odious Debt Doctrine
- Courtney DeVore, Fortifying American Emergency Power: A Multinational Comparison to Contain Crises Notes
This book investigates the extent to which traditional international law regulating foreign interventions in internal conflicts has been affected by the human rights paradigm. Since the adoption of the Charter of the United Nations, foreign armed interventions in internal conflicts have turned into a common practice. At first sight, it might seem that state practice has developed in a chaotic fashion, however on closer examination, specific patterns emerge. The book charts these patterns by examining the traditional doctrines of intervention and testing them against state practise.
The book has two aims. Firstly, it seeks to clarify the current legal framework regulating interventions in internal conflicts. Secondly, it plots the emergence of new trends and investigates whether they are becoming part of positive international law. By taking this dual focus, it offers the first truly comprehensive examination of foreign interventions in internal conflicts.
Tuesday, March 23, 2021
This volume introduces 'postgenocide' as a novel approach to study genocide and its effects after mass killing has ended. It investigates how the material violence of genocide translates into contests over memory, remembrance, and laws, and the re-imagining of political community. Contributions come from academics across a broad range of disciplines, including law, political science, sociology, and ethnography.
Chapters in this volume explore the various permutations of genocide harms, and scrutinise the efficacy of genocide laws and the prospects for their enforcement. Others engage with socio-political responses to genocide, including efforts to reconciliation, as well as genocide's impacts on victims' communities. Contributions examine the reconstruction of genocide narratives in the display of victims' objects in museums, galleries, and archives.This book brings together cutting edge research from a variety of disciplines, to address formerly overlooked themes and cases, exploring what a diversity of perspectives can bring to bear on genocide scholarship as a whole.
- Jennifer Johnson, The Contradictions of Sovereignty: Development, Family Planning, and the Struggle for Population Control in Postcolonial Morocco
- Michelle Carmody, Making Human Rights Effective? Amnesty International, “Aid and Trade,” and the Shaping of Professional Human Rights Activism, 1961–1983
- Laura Kunreuther, Earwitnesses and Transparent Conduits of Voice: On the Labor of Field Interpreters for UN Missions
- Tom Scott-Smith, Building a Bed for the Night: The Parisian “Yellow Bubble” and the Politics of Humanitarian Architecture
- Oishik Sircar, “A Deep and Ongoing Dive into the Brutal Humanism That Undergirds Liberalism”: An Interview with Jasbir K. Puar
- Lasse Heerten, Anti-Slavery and Indentured Labor in the Age of Global Empire
- Christof Royer, The Conundrum(s) of Political Violence
- James Brassett, Christopher S. Browning & Alister Wedderburn, Humorous States: IR, New Diplomacy and the Rise of Comedy in Global Politics
- James Brassett, Christopher Browning & Muireann O'Dwyer, EU’ve Got to Be Kidding: Anxiety, Humour and Ontological Security
- Liane Hartnett & Cian O’Driscoll, Sad and Laughable and Strange: At War with Just War
- Amanda Källstig, Laughing in the Face of Danger: Performativity and Resistance in Zimbabwean Stand-up Comedy
- Ilan Manor, The Russians are Laughing! The Russians are Laughing! How Russian Diplomats Employ Humour in Online Public Diplomacy
- Robert A. Saunders & Hanne Bruun, “Radio Free Sweden”: Satire, National Identity, and the Un-PC (Geo)Politics of Jonatan Spang
- Brent J. Steele, “A Catharsis for Anxieties”: Insights from Goffman on the Politics of Humour
- Alex Sutton, Generalised Comedy Production: British Political Economy and Stand-Up
- Joanna Tidy, The Part Humour Plays in the Production of Military Violence
Chaumette & Parizot: Les nouvelles formes de criminalité internationale : Dialogue entre pénalistes et internationalistes
Nées de l’apparition de nouveaux lieux déterritorialisés (Internet), d’une attention nouvelle portée à des biens communs (l’environnement) ou à des idéologies meurtrières nourries par des foyers de conflit lointains (les terrorismes contemporains), de nouvelles formes de criminalité internationale viennent brouiller les repères des juristes. Souvent analysées dans des études sectorielles, elles n’avaient pas encore été appréhendées de manière globale au prisme du seul droit international pénal/droit pénal international. Or, de nombreuses questions se posent tant en termes de qualification des actes que d’engagement de la responsabilité de leurs auteurs. Le colloque organisé à l’Université Paris Nanterre par le Centre de droit international de Nanterre (CEDIN) et le Centre de droit pénal et de criminologie (CDPC) avait pour objectif d’apprécier si et comment ces nouvelles formes de criminalité internationale affectent le droit international pénal/droit pénal international. Proposant une méthodologie innovante, faisant travailler ensemble un(e) juriste internationaliste et un(e) juriste pénaliste, les actes de ce colloque ont permis de faire se rencontrer et discuter différents chercheurs autour de thématiques communes. Le lecteur saura trouver dans cet ouvrage les réponses parfois convergentes, parfois divergentes qu’offre le droit international pénal/droit pénal international pour répondre aux défis posés par ces nouvelles formes de criminalité.
China shapes transnational data governance by supplying digital infrastructure to emerging markets. The prevailing explanation for this phenomenon is “digital authoritarianism” by which China exports not only its technology but also its values and governance system to host states. Contrary to the one-size-fits-all digital authoritarianism thesis, this Article theorizes a “Beijing Effect,” a combination of “push” and “pull” factors that explains China’s growing influence in data governance beyond its borders. Governments in emerging economies demand Chinese-built digital infrastructures and emulate China’s approach to data governance in pursuit of “data sovereignty” and digital development. China’s “Digital Silk Road,” a massive effort to build the physical components of digital infrastructure (e.g., fiber-optic cables, antennas, and data centers), to enhance the interoperability of digital ecosystems in such developing states materializes the Beijing Effect. Its main drivers are Chinese technology companies that increasingly provide telecommunication and e-commerce services across the globe. The Beijing Effect contrasts with the “Brussels Effect” whereby companies’ global operations gravitate towards the EU’s regulations. It also deviates from US efforts to shape global data governance through instruments of international economic law. Based on a study of normative documents and empirical fieldwork conducted in a key host state over a four-year period, we explain how the Beijing Effect works in practice and assess its impact on developing countries. We argue that “data sovereignty” is illusory as the Chinese party-state retains varying degrees of control over Chinese enterprises that supply digital infrastructure and urge development of legal infrastructures commensurate with digital development strategies.
- Marjolein Cupido, Causation in International Crimes Cases: (Re)Concenptualizing the Causal Linkage
- Victoria Colvin & Phil Orchard, A Forgotten History: Forcible Transfers and Deportations in International Criminal Law
- Knud Erik Jørgensen & F Asli Ergul Jorgensen, Realist theories in search of realists: The failure in Europe to advance realist theory
- Balázs Szent-Iványi & Pēteris F Timofejevs, Selective norm promotion in international development assistance: the drivers of naming and shaming advocacy among European non-governmental development organisations
- Gadi Heimann & Lior Herman, The strategic use of normative arguments in international negotiations
- Graeme AM Davies, Kingsley Edney, & Bo Wang, National images, trust and international friendship: Evidence from Chinese students
- Diana Panke, Compensating for limitations in domestic output performance? Member state delegation of policy competencies to regional international organizations
- Anna van der Vleuten, Conny Roggeband, & Anouka van Eerdewijk, Polycentricity and framing battles in the creation of regional norms on violence against women
- A Necessarily Historical Materialist Moment? Forum on Global Capitalism, Global War, Global Crisis
- Cemal Burak Tansel, Historical materialism and international studies: Theorising the politics of struggle in the everyday world
- Bob Jessop, Internal relations in global capitalism
- Ian Bruff, A necessarily historical materialist moment for whom? A tale of two literary rhythms
- Sébastien Rioux, Towards a historical geographical materialism
- Lara Montesinos Coleman, Marxism, coloniality and ontological assumptions
- Aida A Hozić, Follow the bodies: Global capitalism, global war, global crisis and feminist IPE
- Victoria M Basham, A necessarily historical materialist moment? Feminist reflections on the need for grounded critique in an age of crises
- Kevin Gray, China and the philosophy of internal relations
- Andreas Bieler & Adam David Morton, Gate-opening political economy
- Roberto MacLean Ugarteche, El Derecho Internacional Privado Y La Justicia
- José Luis Pérez Sánchez Cerro, Soberania Y Derecho Penal Internacional
- Alejandro Deustua Caravedo, La Pandemia: La Globalización, El Rol Del Estado Y De Los Regímenes Internacionales
- Carolina Loayza Tamayo, Tribunales Especiales O Híbridos Y Mecanismos Residuales En El Sistema De Justicia Penal Internacional
- José Félix Pinto-Bazurco Barandiarán, Acuerdo De Escazú: Desafíos Y Oportunidades Para Su Implementación En El Perú
- Daniela Francesca Malapi Hernández, Progresivas Tendencias En La Normatividad Internacional Para La Prevención De Daños Ambientales Transfronterizos
- Soledad Torrecuadrada García-Lozano, Los Derechos Del Niño Desde La Perspectiva Del Derecho Internacional
- Oscar Maúrtua de Romaña, Juan Miguel Bákula Y Su Legado Histórico-Jurídico A La Diplomacia Peruana: Un homenaje a 10 años de su partida
Stöckle: Guarantees of Non-Repetition: Die Anordnung struktureller Reformen durch den Inter-Amerikanischen Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
Der Inter-Amerikanische Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (IAGMR) trifft unter dem Titel der »Guarantees of Non-Repetition« weitreichende Anordnungen, mit denen er auf strukturelle Menschenrechtsprobleme in den seiner Gerichtsbarkeit unterliegenden Staaten Lateinamerikas reagiert. Die Anordnungen verpflichten zu Reformen auf legislativer, administrativer oder institutioneller Ebene, deren Umsetzung der Gerichtshof selbst überwacht. Als eine Maßnahme, die sich nicht den traditionellen Rechtsfolgenanordnungen internationaler Gerichte zuweisen lässt, werfen die Guarantees of Non-Repetition des IAGMR zahlreiche formell- wie materiellrechtliche Fragen auf. Die Arbeit untersucht die Theorie und Praxis der Guarantees of Non-Repetition und geht dabei besonders auf die Kompetenz des IAGMR zur Anordnung struktureller Reformen ein.
Oliveira, Lanfranchi, Barros-Platiau, & Galindo: A Função do Direito na Gestão Sustentável dos Recursos Minerais Marinhos
Monday, March 22, 2021
This paper begins with the observation that, when deciding on a course of action for themselves and their states, individuals sometimes take international law into account, and it sometimes serves for them a reason or a ground for action. It consequently asks why international law would serve as a reason or a ground for action, and whether there is anything international law could do to further encourage people’s consideration of it. The paper proposes a theoretical model which aims to account for those instances in which international law seems to exert a “compliance pull” on individual people. The model suggests there are two types of allegiance to a legal system: a person’s disposition to comply with legal rules, and a person’s fidelity to the system. A legal system's adherence to principles of legality is important for the generation and maintenance of both.
- Scholarly Articles
- Genevieve LeBaron, Wages: An Overlooked Dimension of Business and Human Rights in Global Supply Chains
- Danwood Chirwa & Nojeem Amodu, Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Sustainable Development Goals, and Duties of Corporations: Rejecting the False Dichotomies
- David Birchall, Corporate Power over Human Rights: An Analytical Framework
- Mark Wielga & James Harrison, Assessing the Effectiveness of Non-State-Based Grievance Mechanisms in Providing Access to Remedy for Rightsholders: A Case Study of the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil
- Chiara Macchi, The Climate Change Dimension of Business and Human Rights: The Gradual Consolidation of a Concept of ‘Climate Due Diligence’
- Developments in the Field
- Nicole Janz, James Allen-Robertson, Rajeshwari Majumdar, & Shareen Hertel, Big Data on BHR: Innovative Approaches to Analysing the Business & Human Rights Resource Centre Database
- John F. Sherman III, Irresponsible Exit: Exercising Force Majeure Provisions in Procurement Contracts
- Rachel Chambers, Anthony Ewing, & Meg Roggensack, Teaching Business and Human Rights During the Pandemic
- Elsa Savourey & Stéphane Brabant, The French Law on the Duty of Vigilance: Theoretical and Practical Challenges Since its Adoption
- Stephanie Richard & Suzanne La Pierre, Expanding California’s Law to Increase Protections for Temporary Guest Workers Benefits Businesses
- James Cockayne, Working with the Financial Sector to Correct the Market Failure of Modern Slavery
- Christine Dowuona-Hammond, Raymond A. Atuguba, & Francis Xavier Dery Tuokuu, The Child Labour Quagmire in Ghana: Root Causes and Ephemeral Solutions
- Fabian Bickel, Brexit and Trade Defence: Effects of a Changed Territory
- Marco Bronckers & Giovanni Gruni, Retooling the Sustainability Standards in EU Free Trade Agreements
- Carrie Shu Shang & Wei Shen, Beyond Trade War: Reevaluating Intellectual Property Bilateralism in the US–China Context
- Johannes Hendrik Fahner, Settling Interstate Trade Disputes: Lessons from the EFTA Complaints Procedure
- Amit Kumar Sinha & Pushkar Anand, Feminist Overview of International Investment Law—A Preliminary Inquiry
- Christian Bellak & Markus Leibrecht, Do Economic Crises Trigger Treaty–Based Investor–State Arbitration Disputes?
- Xuan Shao, Environmental and Human Rights Counterclaims in International Investment Arbitration: at the Crossroads of Domestic and International Law
- Emma Aisbett & Jonathan Bonnitcha, A Pareto-Improving Compensation Rule for Investment Treaties
Sunday, March 21, 2021
Over the last decade, a growing number of countries have adopted new laws and other mechanisms to address a longstanding gap in national criminal legal systems: the absence of meaningful procedures to raise post-conviction claims of factual innocence. These legal and policy reforms have responded to a global surge of exonerations, which have been facilitated by the growth of national innocence organizations that increasingly work across borders. It is striking that these developments have occurred with little help from international law. Although numerous treaties recognize extensive fair trial and appeal rights, no international instrument—in its text, interpretation or implementation—explicitly recognizes the right to assert a claim of factual innocence.
We label this omission as international law’s innocence gap. The gap appears increasingly anomalous given how foundational innocence protection has become at the national level, as well as international law’s longstanding commitment to the presumption of innocence, fair trial, and other criminal process guarantees.
We argue the time has come to close international law’s innocence gap by recognizing a new human right to assert post-trial claims of factual innocence. We discuss three national models for reviewing innocence claims and highlight international law’s limited influence on these models. Next, we review the criteria for determining whether and how to categorize a human right as “new,” analyze the right to claim innocence against those criteria, explore how to define the content of the right, and address institutional and advocacy issues. A brief conclusion highlights the implications of our proposal for efforts to reform criminal legal systems and protect human rights.