- Joseph Lelliott, Unaccompanied Children in Limbo: The Causes and Consequences of Uncertain Legal Status
- Petra Sussner, Addressing Heteronormativity: The Not-So-Lost Requirement of Discretion in (Austrian) Asylum Law
- Danae F Georgoula, Building Walls at Sea: An Assessment of the Legality of the Greek Floating Barrier
Saturday, August 6, 2022
Friday, August 5, 2022
- Special Issue: Forum on Peace and Security: Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine
- T.D. Gill, The Jus ad Bellum and Russia’s “Special Military Operation” in Ukraine
- Sergey Sayapin, A Short Commentary Concerning Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine and the Jus in Bello
- Noëlle Quénivet, The Conflict in Ukraine and Genocide
- Rebecca Barber, What Does the ‘Responsibility to Protect’ Require of States in Ukraine?
- Rustam Atadjanov, Holding the Aggressor Accountable
- Tamsin Phillipa Paige, Mission: Impossible? Reforming the UN Charter to Limit the Veto
- Mason Richey & Leif-Eric Easley, Russia Attacks and the International Order Strikes Back
- Habib Nassar, Justice as Resistance: How Post-Arab Spring Experiences Are Reshaping the Global Transitional Justice Landscape
- Pamina Firchow & Yvette Selim, Meaningful Engagement from the Bottom-Up? Taking Stock of Participation in Transitional Justice Processes
- Wilhelm Verwoerd, Alistair Little, & Brandon Hamber, Peace as Betrayal: On the Human Cost of Relational Peacebuilding in Transitional Contexts
- Johanna Mannergren Selimovic, The Stuff from the Siege: Transitional Justice and the Power of Everyday Objects in Museums
- Nicole Fox & David Cunningham, Transitional Justice in Public and Private: Truth Commission Narratives in Greensboro
- Mohamed Sesay, Decolonization of Postcolonial Africa: A Structural Justice Project More Radical than Transitional Justice
- Carla Cubillos-Vega, Alejandra Zúñiga-Fajuri, Ximena Faúndez Abarca, Dahiana Gamboa Morales, & José Gaete Fiscella, Evolution of the Conception of Justice within the Field of Transitional Justice in Post-dictatorial Chilean Society
Throughout history, dissenting opinions have been subject to soaring praise as well as vitriolic criticism. Although some commentators nominally acknowledge that the normative value of dissenting opinions necessarily varies depending on the unique context in which the relevant court operates, in fact we see the same arguments advanced to support or oppose dissenting opinions, regardless of the court in which those opinions appear. Dissents are particularly prevalent in international criminal courts—those courts established to prosecute the worst crimes known to humankind: genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. Although dissents in these courts have garnered little scholarly attention, the few normative arguments that have been made track those that have been advanced for decades in the United States and other judicial systems. In a previous work, I launched a comprehensive empirical and normative analysis of separate opinions in international criminal law. Whereas my earlier scholarship laid the groundwork and evaluated certain alleged benefits of separate opinions, this article begins by empirically assessing their costs. The article then evaluates the primary normative claim made in support of separate opinions both domestically and internationally: that they enhance the legitimacy of the court and its opinions. These examinations reveal that previous commentators have employed one-size-fits-all analyses that fail to take account of the unique features of international criminal courts and mass atrocity trials. These features complicate the relationship between separate opinions and legitimacy, but the quantitative and qualitative evidence combined strongly suggest that separate opinions are likely to delegitimize an already fragile, vulnerable criminal justice system.
Controversial cases such as the Karadžić trial and the Bemba acquittal have highlighted the importance of fairness in international criminal trials. Through an in-depth critical analysis of procedural decisions at the ICTY and ICC between 2008 and 2018, Sophie Rigney shows that there is a clear separation between fairness and rights in practice.
Rigney demonstrates the various ways that fairness is invoked in international criminal law decisions – ways that are not always consistent, and are frequently at odds with defendants’ rights. She builds a new theoretical framework for understanding the concept and application of fairness and rights in international trials. In this way, she offers new paths for solving the problems currently plaguing those researching, designing, practising, adjudicating and being judged by international criminal law.
Thursday, August 4, 2022
- On My Way Out – Advice to Young Scholars VII: Taking Exams Seriously (Part 1); Vital Statistics; In This Issue; In This Issue – Reviews
- Symposium: International Law and Inequalities
- Anne van Aaken, Diane Desierto, Isabel Feichtner, Jan Klabbers, Doreen Lustig, Sarah M.H. Nouwen, & Joseph H.H. Weiler, Introduction: International Law and Inequalities
- Petra Weingerl & Matjaž Tratnik, Climbing the Wall around EU Citizenship: Has the Time Come to Align Third-Country Nationals with Intra-EU Migrants?
- Lorenzo Gradoni & Luca Pasquet, Voice under Domination: Notes on the Making and Significance of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Peasants
- David Schneiderman, International Investment Law and Discipline for the Indebted
- Johan Horst, Inequality, Law and Distribution in Transnational Financial Markets
- Donatella Alessandrini, A Not So ‘New Dawn’ for International Economic Law and Development: Towards a Social Reproduction Approach to GVCs
- Bernard Hoekman, On Trade Agreements and a Social Reproduction Approach to GVCs: A Reply to Donatella Alessandrini
- Dimitri Van Den Meerssche, Virtual Borders: International Law and the Elusive Inequalities of Algorithmic Association
- Shin-yi Peng, The Uneasy Interplay between Digital Inequality and International Economic Law
- Amrita Bahri & Daria Boklan, Not Just Sea Turtles, Let’s Protect Women Too: Invoking Public Morality Exception or Negotiating a New Gender Exception in Trade Agreements?
- Roaming Charges
- Lorenzo Gradoni, Blue Sky Thinking
- Review Essay
- Heike Krieger, Of Zombies, Witches and Wizards – Tales of Sovereignty
- Book Reviews
- Jason Beckett, reviewing Vijayashri Sripati, Constitution-Making under UN Auspices: Fostering Dependency in Sovereign Lands
- Taylor St John, reviewing Nicolás Perrone, Investment Treaties and the Legal Imagination: How Foreign Investors Play by Their Own Rules
- Miriam Bak McKenna, reviewing Thomas Burri and Jamie Trinidad, The International Court of Justice and Decolonisation: New Directions from the Chagos Advisory Opinion
- Jörg Kammerhofer, reviewing Sondre Torp Helmersen, The Application of Teachings by the International Court of Justice
- Callum Musto, reviewing Esmé Shirlow, Judging at the Interface: Deference to State Decision-Making Authority in International Adjudication
- The Last Page
- Charlotte Anna Perkins Gilman, The Anti-Suffragists
Tuesday, August 2, 2022
Global climate diplomacy—from the Kyoto Protocol to the Paris Agreement—is not working. Despite decades of sustained negotiations by world leaders, the climate crisis continues to worsen. The solution is within our grasp—but we will not achieve it through top-down global treaties or grand bargains among nations.
Charles Sabel and David Victor explain why the profound transformations needed for deep cuts in emissions must arise locally, with government and business working together to experiment with new technologies, quickly learn the best solutions, and spread that information globally. Sabel and Victor show how some of the most iconic successes in environmental policy were products of this experimentalist approach to problem solving, such as the Montreal Protocol on the ozone layer, the rise of electric vehicles, and Europe’s success in controlling water pollution. They argue that the Paris Agreement is at best an umbrella under which local experimentation can push the technological frontier and help societies around the world learn how to deploy the technologies and policies needed to tackle this daunting global problem.
A visionary book that fundamentally reorients our thinking about the climate crisis, Fixing the Climate is a road map to institutional design that can finally lead to self-sustaining reductions in emissions that years of global diplomacy have failed to deliver.
- Eva Hilberg, The Terra Nullius of Intellectual Property
- Roundtable: Vulnerable Communities, Future Generations, and Political Representation in Climate Policy and Practice
- Morten Fibieger Byskov & Keith Hyams, Introduction: Representing Vulnerable Communities and Future Generations in the Face of Climate Change
- Simon Caney, Global Climate Governance, Short-Termism, and the Vulnerability of Future Generations
- Stephen M. Gardiner, On the Scope of Institutions for Future Generations: Defending an Expansive Global Constitutional Convention That Protects against Squandering Generations
- Colin Hickey, Climate Justice and Informal Representation
- Morten Fibieger Byskov & Keith Hyams, Who Should Represent Future Generations in Climate Planning?
- Marco Grix & Krushil Watene, Communities and Climate Change: Why Practices and Practitioners Matter
- Gordon Arlen & Carlo Burelli, Getting Real about Taxes: Offshore Tax Sheltering and Realism's Ethic of Responsibility
- Review Essay
- Theresa Reinold, Holding International Organizations Accountable: Toward a Right to Justification in Global Governance?
Monday, August 1, 2022
- Darryl Robinson, Ecocide — Puzzles and Possibilities
- Albert Nell, A Rhetorical Reading of Self–Other Polarities in Counsel Arguments made before the Trials of Major Criminals at Nuremberg and Tokyo
- Florian Jeßberger & Leonie Steinl, Strategic Litigation in International Criminal Justice: Facilitating a View from Within
- Carla Ferstman & Marina Sharpe, Iran’s Arbitrary Detention of Foreign and Dual Nationals as Hostage-taking and Crimes Against Humanity
- Cases Before International Courts and Tribunals
- Miles Jackson, Causation and the Legal Character of Command Responsibility after Bemba at the International Criminal Court
- National Prosecution of International Crimes: Legislation and Cases
- Seunghyun Nam, Court Decisions in the Republic of Korea on Japan's Accountability for Sexual Slavery of the Comfort Women
- Jeremy Pizzi, Peddling Atrocity: Holding Canadian Corporations Responsible for Core International Crimes
- Francesca Tassinari, The European Union Adequacy Standard in the Field of Data Protection: A Competence Approach
- Alessandra Gianelli, Dalla disapplicazione di norme confliggenti alla mancata applicazione di norme vincolanti
- Deborah Russo, Sulla diretta applicabilità della CEDU nel giudizio di cassazione
- Andrea Cardone, La diretta applicabilità della CEDU nella giurisprudenza comune tra (apparenti) ritorni al passato e nuove dimensioni problematiche
- Lorenzo Acconciamessa & Francesca Tammone, La diretta applicabilità dei trattati nell’ordinamento italiano. Quo vadis?
- Pasquale De Sena, Lorenzo Acconciamessa, Andrea Cardone, Alessandra Gianelli, Deborah Russo, Andrea Saccucci, & Francesca Tammone, Dichiarazione congiunta degli studiosi di diritto internazionale e di diritto costituzionale sulla diretta applicabilità dei trattati internazionali nell’ordinamento italiano
- Morgan Eleanor Harris, Costs of Environmental Suits in Italy: Some Reflections on the Findings of the Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee on Communication C/2015/130
- Silvia Solidoro, The Role Played by the Inter-American System in Advancing the Business and Human Rights Discourse at the International Level
- Laura Magi, Cambiamento climatico e minori: prospettive innovative e limiti delle decisioni del Comitato per i diritti del fanciullo nel caso Sacchi e altri
- Alessio Azzariti, French Vaccine Pass to the Test of the Constitutional Council: Some Considerations in the Light of the European Convention on Human Rights
- Mattia Colli Vignarelli, Detenzione per motivi politici, la sentenza della Corte europea dei diritti umani nel caso Demirtaş
- Francesca Di Matteo, Diritto alla privacy, stereotipi sessisti nelle decisioni giudiziarie e Corte europea dei diritti umani: il caso J.L.
- Maria Luisa Padelletti, L’esecuzione all’estero delle pene detentive: ritorno al passato?
- Jurisditional Immunities Again
- Introduced by Serena Forlati and Pietro Franzina
- Karin Oellers-Frahm, Questions relating to the request for the indication of provisional measures in the case Germany v Italy
- Riccardo Pavoni, Germany versus Italy reloaded: Whither a human rights limitation to State immunity?
- Pierfrancesco Rossi, Italian courts and the evolution of the law of State immunity: A reassessment of Judgment no 238/2014
- Giulia Berrino, The impact of Article 43 of Decree-Law no 36/2022 on enforcement proceedings regarding German State-owned assets
- Zuhaib Mahmood, Kyle Beardsley, Christopher Newton, Chhandosi Roy, Jacob D. Kathman, Colin Tucker, William G. Nomikos, Danielle N. Villa, Martin Binder, Susan Allen, Amy Yuen, Timothy J.A. Passmore, Megan Shannon, Lisa Hultman & Terrence L. Chapman, The United Nations After 75: Assessing Current Understandings, Charting Fruitful Research Agendas
- Melanie Sauter, A Shrinking Humanitarian Space: Peacekeeping Stabilization Projects and Violence in Mali
- Jared Oestman, Beyond Dues: The Role of U.S. Military Aid in UN Peacekeeping Operations
- Kaitlin Gibson, Alina Dixon, Allison Goebel & Susan Bartels, Love, Sex, and Exchange in the Context of Peacebuilding in the Democratic Republic of Congo
Sommerer, Agné, Zelli, & Bes: Global Legitimacy Crises: Decline and Revival in Multilateral Governance
Global Legitimacy Crises addresses the consequences of legitimacy in global governance, in particular asking: when and how do legitimacy crises affect international organizations and their capacity to rule. The book starts with a new conceptualization of legitimacy crisis that looks at public challenges from a variety of actors. Based on this conceptualization, it applies a mixed-methods approach to identify and examine legitimacy crises, starting with a quantitative analysis of mass media data on challenges of a sample of 32 IOs. It shows that some, but not all organizations have experienced legitimacy crises, spread over several decades from 1985 to 2020. Following this, the book presents a qualitative study to further examine legitimacy crises of two selected case studies: the WTO and the UNFCCC. Whereas earlier research assumed that legitimacy crises have negative consequences, the book introduces a theoretical framework that privileges the activation inherent in a legitimacy crisis. It holds that this activation may not only harm an IO, but could also strengthen it, in terms of its material, institutional, and decision-making capacity. The following statistical analysis shows that whether a crisis has predominantly negative or positive effects depends on a variety of factors. These include the specific audience whose challenges define a certain crisis, and several institutional properties of the targeted organization. The ensuing in-depth analysis of the WTO and the UNFCCC further reveals how legitimacy crises and both positive and negative consequences are interlinked, and that effects of crises are sometimes even visible beyond the organizational borders.
Selvadurai: Law, War and the Penumbra of Uncertainty: Legal Cultures, Extra-legal Reasoning and the Use of Force
This book argues that lawyers must often rely on contestable ethical and strategic intuitions when dealing with legal and factual uncertainties in 'hard cases' of resort to force. This area of international law relies on multiple tests which can be interpreted in different ways, do not yield binary 'yes/no' answers, and together define 'paradigms' of lawful and unlawful force. Controversial cases of force differ from these paradigms, requiring lawyers to assess complex, incomplete factual evidence, and to forecast the immediate and long-term consequences of using and not using force. Legal rules cannot resolve such uncertainties; instead, techniques from legal risk management, strategic intelligence assessment and political forecasting may help. This study develops these arguments using the philosophy of knowledge, socio-legal, politico-strategic and ethical theory, structured interviews and a survey with 31 UK-based international lawyers, and systematic analysis of key International Court of Justice cases and scholarly assessments of US-led interventions.
- Amit Kumar Jha & Priyanka Rajan, Software protection and software piracy
- Nimmy Saira Zachariah, Patent as security in insolvency process: Problems and solutions
- Kunle Ola, Role of traditional knowledge in the COVID-19 battle
- Mitja Kovac & Lana Rakovec, The COVID-19 pandemic and long-term incentives for developing vaccines: Patent law under stress
- Muhammad Z. Abbas, Patent law and 3D printing applications in response to COVID-19: Exceptions to inventor rights
- Irina Razinkina, Mariya Bulatenko, Sergei Chernov, & Valeriy Prasolov, Ethical and legal balance of modern economic intelligence
- David J. Jefferson, Treasured relations: Towards partnership and the protection of Māori relationships with taonga plants in Aotearoa New Zealand
- Kheira Mousseddek, The legal protection of new plant varieties in Algerian and American system
- Olugbenga A. Olatunji, Historical account of dwindling national flexibilities from the Paris Convention to post-TRIPS era: What implications for access-to-medicines in low-and-middle-income-countries?
- Wathsala R. Samaranayake, A critical evaluation of the interface between intellectual property rights and human rights with special emphasis on indigenous intellectual property
- Anitha Ramanna & Regine Andersen, Stewardship or ownership in India: Options for community seed banks in managing crop genetic resources in relation to intellectual property rights
- Rahul Sharma, Lavanya Madhusoodanan, Patrika Soni, & Amit Dubey, Biodiversity and intellectual property rights: Conflict or synergy
- Edison Bicudo, Michael Morrison, Phoebe Li, Alex Faulkner, Andrew Webster, Miranda Mourby, & Jane Kaye, Patent power in biomedical innovation: Technology governance in biomodifying technologies
- Supriya Bhandarkar & Meenakshi Rajeev, What determines foreign direct investment to India's pharmaceutical sector? Intellectual property implementation versus inherent institutional strength
- Amy Tesoriero, Using the flexibilities of Article 30 TRIPS to implement patent exceptions in pursuit of Sustainable Development Goal 3
- Felix K. Hess, US anti-suit injunctions and German anti-anti-suit injunctions in SEP disputes
- Tito Rendas, Streaming platforms under Portuguese copyright law
- Stephen J. Maxwell & Michael Underdown, A potential intellectual property issue with the way in which some nomenclature code decisions are made
- Muzamil Farooq, Abid Bashir, & Nufazil Altaf, Patent law failure: A systematic literature review
Sunday, July 31, 2022
Bexell, Jönsson, & Uhlin: Legitimation and Delegitimation in Global Governance: Practices, Justifications, and Audiences
The legitimacy of global governance institutions is both contested and defended in contemporary global politics. Legitimation and Delegitimation in Global Governance explores processes of legitimation and delegitimation of such institutions. How, why, and with what impact on audiences, are global governance institutions legitimated and delegitimated? The book develops a comprehensive theoretical framework for studying processes of (de)legitimation in governance beyond the state. It provides broad comparative analyses to uncover previously unexplored patterns of (de)legitimation processes. A diverse set of global and regional governmental and nongovernmental institutions in different policy fields are included. Variation across these institutions is explained with reference to institutional set-up, policy field characteristics, and broader social structures, as well as to the qualities of agents of (de)legitimation. The approach builds on a mixed-methods research design that uses quantitative and qualitative new empirical data. Three main interlinked elements of processes of legitimation and delegitimation are at the center of the analysis: the varied practices employed by different agents that may boost or challenge the legitimacy of institutions; the normative justifications that these agents draw on when engaging in legitimation and delegitimation practices; and the different audiences that may be impacted by legitimation and delegitimation. This results in a dynamic interplay between legitimation and delegitimation in contestation over the legitimacy of GGIs.