Guymon: Digest of United States Practice in International Law, 2017

CarrieLyn D. Guymon (Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State) has published Digest of United States Practice in International Law, 2017. Here's a summary of the contents:

Legal Adviser Jennifer Newstead summarized the contents of the 2017 Digest in the Introduction, stating in part:

During most of this year, the Office was fortunate to be led by Principal Deputy Legal Adviser Richard Visek, and a number of excerpts from his remarks and presentations over the course of 2017 are included in this edition.

This volume features explanations of U.S. international legal views in 2017 delivered by representatives of the U.S. government. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson announced the conclusion that ISIS is responsible for genocide against Yezidis, Christians, and Shia Muslims in areas it controls or has controlled, as well as crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing directed at these and other minority groups. Secretary Tillerson also spoke in 2017 on the crisis in Burma’s Rakhine State, conveying the U.S. view that the situation in northern Rakhine state constitutes ethnic cleansing against Rohingya. U.S. Special Adviser Carlos Trujillo at the UN General Assembly’s Sixth Committee expressed the U.S. commitment to accountability for atrocity crimes, and support for international, regional, hybrid, and domestic mechanisms that pursue this goal. And, Acting Legal Adviser Rich Visek also commemorated the closure of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. Mr. Visek spoke at the Assembly of States Parties of the International Criminal Court, reiterating the United States’ long-standing and continuing objection to any ICC assertion of jurisdiction over nationals of States that are not parties to the Rome Statute, absent a UN Security Council referral or the consent of that State. Mr. Visek and Mark Simonoff, Minister Counselor for the U.S. Mission to the United Nations, expressed U.S. views on the work of the International Law Commission in 2017, including the topics of crimes against humanity, provisional application of treaties, general principles of law, evidence before international courts and tribunals, immunity of state officials, protection of the atmosphere, peremptory norms of general international law, succession of states in respect of state responsibility, and protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts. The administration’s views were also conveyed in Congressional communications, including several regarding the domestic and international legal bases for the campaign against al-Qa’ida and associated forces, including against the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria.

There were numerous developments in 2017 relating to U.S. international agreements, treaties and other arrangements. The President notified Congress of his intent to renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement (“NAFTA”). President Trump also announced the U.S. intent to withdraw from the Paris Agreement on climate change but to begin negotiations to reenter either the Paris Agreement or a new arrangement. Additionally, the Administration pursued entry into new international obligations in a variety of areas. For example, Mr. Visek testified before the U.S. Senate on five treaties under consideration that had previously been transmitted: extradition treaties with Kosovo and Serbia; maritime boundary delimitation treaties with Kiribati and the Federated States of Micronesia; and the UN Convention on the Assignment of Receivables in International Trade. The United States entered into new arrangements, including Minute No. 323 to the 1944 Water Treaty with Mexico, outlining joint measures to address water shortages. Four agreements on preventing and combating serious crime entered into force in 2017, with Chile, Romania, New Zealand, and Cyprus. The United States signed new air transport agreements in 2017 with St. Vincent and the Grenadines and with the Kingdom of the Netherlands, in respect of Sint Maarten, and amended air transport agreements with Benin and Sri Lanka. The Minamata Convention on Mercury surpassed the requirement of 50 Parties for entry into force, and the Secretary of State signed the instrument of acceptance to join the 2012 amendments to the Gothenburg Protocol to the 1979 Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution. The United States deposited its instrument of ratification for three regional fisheries conventions. The Republic of Cabo Verde concluded a new Status of Forces Agreement (“SOFA”) with the United States. And, the United States ratified the protocol for Montenegro to join NATO.

The United States was very active in its relations with Cuba, concluding a bilateral Joint Statement on Migration that ended the so-called Wet Foot-Dry Foot policy for Cuban migrants; a bilateral treaty to delimit the maritime boundary in the eastern Gulf of Mexico; a bilateral search and rescue agreement; a bilateral agreement to prepare for and respond to oil spills and hazardous substance pollution in the Gulf of Mexico and the Straits of Florida; a bilateral Law Enforcement Memorandum of Understanding; and also convening the sixth meeting of the Bilateral Commission. Later in the year, the United States ordered the departure of non-emergency personnel assigned to the U.S. Embassy in Havana, Cuba, due to health-related attacks on embassy employees, and President Trump signed the National Security Presidential Memorandum on Strengthening the Policy of the United States Toward Cuba (“NSPM”). With respect to the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (“DPRK”), the Secretary of State designated the DPRK as a State Sponsor of Terrorism in November. In its relations with Russia, the State Department announced that it would require the closure of specified facilities in New York, Washington, D.C., and San Francisco in response to Russia’s invocation of parity to reduce the size of the United States presence in Russia. Several provisions in the Countering America’s Adversaries through Sanctions Act of 2017 (“CAATSA”) relate to, and provide for mandatory sanctions in connection with, Russia. In December, the President issued Proclamation 9683, “Recognizing Jerusalem as the Capital of the State of Israel and Relocating the United State Embassy to Israel to Jerusalem.” The United States condemned the government of Venezuela in several ways including Executive Order 13808, “Imposing Additional Sanctions With Respect to the Situation in Venezuela.” And, recognizing the progress made by the government of Sudan under the Five Track Engagement Plan, including the cessation of aerial bombings and military offensives in Darfur, the United States revoked certain longstanding economic sanctions on Sudan.

Call for Submissions: The Changing Paradigm of State-controlled Entities Regulation: Laws, Contracts and Disputes

Transnational Dispute Management has issued a call for submissions for a special issue on "The Changing Paradigm of State-controlled Entities Regulation: Laws, Contracts and Disputes." The call is here.

Nowak: Das Interventionsverbot im Bürgerkrieg

Christina Nowak has published Das Interventionsverbot im Bürgerkrieg: Darstellung eines Wandels durch die Bürgerkriege in Libyen, Syrien, Irak, Jemen und Ukraine seit 2011 (Peter Lang 2018). Here's the abstract:

Das völkergewohnheitsrechtliche Interventionsverbot ist seit jeher ein unverzichtbares Element des internationalen Friedenssicherungssystems. Trotz seiner unbestrittenen Wichtigkeit ist unklar, welche Handlungsweisen gegenwärtig von dem Verbot umfasst sind. Aufbauend auf eine umfassende Auswertung der Staatenpraxis seit 2011 untersucht die Autorin, unter welchen Voraussetzungen Regierungen und Oppositionsbewegungen in Bürgerkriegen völkerrechtsgemäß unterstützt werden dürfen. Angesichts der Schneise der Verwüstung, die sich seit Beginn des „Arabischen Frühlings" durch die betroffenen Länder erstreckt, hinterfragt die Autorin die kontemporäre rechtliche Relevanz des Interventionsverbots.

Gaetano Morelli Lectures Series: Decisions of the ICJ as Sources of International Law?

The second volume of the Gaetano Morelli Lectures Series has been published. The focus is: "Decisions of the ICJ as Sources of International Law?" Contents include

• Alain Pellet, Decisions of the ICJ as Sources of International Law?
• Christian J. Tams, The Development of International Law by the International Court of Justice
• Paolo Palchetti, The Authority of the Decisions of International Judicial or Quasi-judicial Bodies in the Case Law of the International Court of Justice: Dialogue or Competition?

Bunting & Quirk: Contemporary Slavery: The Rhetoric of Global Human Rights Campaigns

Annie Bunting (York Univ. - Law & Society Program) & Joel Quirk (Univ. of the Witwatersrand - Political Studies) have published Contemporary Slavery: The Rhetoric of Global Human Rights Campaigns (Cornell Univ. Press 2018). Here's the abstract:

This volume brings together a cast of leading experts to carefully explore how the history and iconography of slavery has been invoked to support a series of government interventions, activist projects, legal instruments, and rhetorical performances. However well-intentioned these interventions might be, they nonetheless remain subject to a host of limitations and complications. Recent efforts to combat contemporary slavery are too often sensationalist, self-serving, and superficial and, therefore, end up failing the crucial test of speaking truth to power.

The widely held notion that antislavery is one of those rare issues that "transcends" politics or ideology is only sustainable because the underlying issues at stake have been constructed and demarcated in a way that minimizes direct challenges to dominant political and economic interests. This must change. By providing an original approach to the underlying issues at stake, Contemporary Slavery will help readers understand the political practices that have been concealed beneath the popular rhetoric and establishes new conversations between scholars of slavery and trafficking and scholars of human rights and social movements.

Grosbon: Résistance et résilience des pactes internationaux de droits de l’homme à l’épreuve d’une société internationale post-moderne

Sophie Grosbon (Université Paris Nanterre - Law) has published Résistance et résilience des pactes internationaux de droits de l’homme à l’épreuve d’une société internationale post-moderne (Pedone 2018). The table of contents is here.

Sharpe: The Regional Law of Refugee Protection in Africa

Marina Sharpe (McGill Univ. - Law) has published The Regional Law of Refugee Protection in Africa (Oxford Univ. Press 2018). Here's the abstract:

This book analyses the legal framework for refugee protection in Africa, including both refugee and human rights law as well as treaty and institutional elements. The regime is addressed in two parts. Part One analyses the relevant treaties: the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, the 1969 Organization of African Unity Convention Governing the Specific Aspects of Refugee Problems in Africa and the 1981 African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights. The latter two regional instruments are examined in depth. This includes the first fulsome account of the African Refugee Conventions drafting, an interpretation of its unique refugee definition and original analysis of the relationships between the three treaties. Significant attention is devoted to the systemic relationship between the international and the regional refugee treaties and to the discrete relationships of conflict and complementary relationships between the two refugee instruments, as well as to the relationships between the African Refugee Convention and African Charter. Part Two focuses on the institutional architecture supporting the treaty framework. The Organization of African Unity is addressed in a historical sense, and the contemporary roles of the African Union, the African Commission on Human and Peoples Rights and the current and contemplated African human rights courts are examined. This book is the first devoted to the legal framework for refugee protection in Africa.

New Issue: Global Environmental Politics

The latest issue of Global Environmental Politics (Vol. 18, no. 3, August 2018) is out. Contents include:

• Joshua B. Horton, Jesse L. Reynolds, Holly Jean Buck, Daniel Callies, Stefan Schäfer, David W. Keith, & Steve Rayner, Solar Geoengineering and Democracy
• Eric K. Chu, Transnational Support for Urban Climate Adaptation: Emerging Forms of Agency and Dependency
• Ralph Borland, Robert Morrell, & Vanessa Watson, Southern Agency: Navigating Local and Global Imperatives in Climate Research
• Sandra Schwindenhammer, The New Regionalism in Global Organic Agricultural Governance Through Standards: A Cross-Regional Comparison
• Jesse Abrams, Erik Nielsen, Diana Diaz, Theresa Selfa, Erika Adams, Jennifer L. Dunn, & Cassandra Moseley, How Do States Benefit from Nonstate Governance? Evidence from Forest Sustainability Certification
• Ryan Rafaty, Perceptions of Corruption, Political Distrust, and the Weakening of Climate Policy
• David Ciplet, Kevin M. Adams, Romain Weikmans, & J. Timmons Roberts, The Transformative Capability of Transparency in Global Environmental Governance

Banu: Nineteenth Century Perspectives on Private International Law

Roxana Banu (Western Law School) has published Nineteenth Century Perspectives on Private International Law (Oxford Univ. Press 2018). Here's the abstract:

Private International Law is often criticized for failing to curb private power in the transnational realm. The field appears disinterested or powerless in addressing global economic and social inequality. Scholars have frequently blamed this failure on the separation between private and public international law at the end of the nineteenth century and on private international law's increasing alignment with private law.

Through a contextual historical analysis, Roxana Banu questions these premises. By reviewing a broad range of scholarship from six jurisdictions (the United States, France, Germany, the United Kingdom, Italy, and the Netherlands) she shows that far from injecting an impetus for social justice, the alignment between private and public international law introduced much of private international law's formalism and neutrality. She also uncovers various nineteenth century private law theories that portrayed a social, relationally constituted image of the transnational agent, thus contesting both individualistic and state-centric premises for regulating cross-border inter-personal relations.

Overall, this study argues that the inherited shortcomings of contemporary private international law stem more from the incorporation of nineteenth century theories of sovereignty and state rights than from theoretical premises of private law. In turn, by reconsidering the relational premises of the nineteenth century private law perspectives discussed in this book, Banu contends that private international law could take centre stage in efforts to increase social and economic equality by fostering individual agency and social responsibility in the transnational realm.

New Issue: European Journal of International Law

The latest issue of the European Journal of International Law (Vol. 29, no. 2, May 2018) is out. Contents include:

• Editorial
  • JHHW, Black Lies, White Lies and Some Uncomfortable Truths in and of the International Trading System; Authors of EJIL – Customer Care; In this Issue
• Articles
• Itamar Mann, Maritime Legal Black Holes: Migration and Rightlessness in International Law
• Leora Bilsky & Rachel Klagsbrun, The Return of Cultural Genocide?
• David Kosař & Jan Petrov, Determinants of Compliance Difficulties among ‘Good Compliers’: Implementation of International Human Rights Rulings in the Czech Republic
• Devika Hovell, The Authority of Universal Jurisdiction
• Symposium: International Law and the First World War: Belligerency and Neutrality
• Stephen C Neff, Disrupting a Delicate Balance: The Allied Blockade Policy and the Law of Maritime Neutrality during the Great War
• Andrew J Norris, Uninvited and Unwelcome: The SS Appam and the US Law of Neutrality
• Roaming Charges
• Roaming Charges: Moments of History
• Focus: Investment Arbitration
• Gus Van Harten, Leaders in the Expansive and Restrictive Interpretation of Investment Treaties: A Descriptive Study of ISDS Awards to 2010
• Malcolm Langford & Daniel Behn, Managing Backlash: The Evolving Investment Treaty Arbitrator?
• Focus: Geography of Human Rights
• Tilmann Altwicker, Transnationalizing Rights: International Human Rights Law in Cross-Border Contexts
• Barbara Oomen & Moritz Baumgärtel, Frontier Cities: The Rise of Local Authorities as an Opportunity for International Human Rights Law
• Review Essay
• Akbar Rasulov, A Marxism for International Law: A New Agenda
• Book Reviews
• Jochen von Bernstorff, reviewing Benjamin Allen Coates, Legalist Empire: International Law and American Foreign Relations in the Early Twentieth Century
• Monica Hakimi, reviewing Ian Hurd, How to Do Things with International Law
• Jan Klabbers, reviewing Michael Ignatieff, The Ordinary Virtues: Moral Order in a Divided World
• The Last Page
• Ela Kotkowska, A Migrant Song

Olásolo: International Criminal Law, Transnational Criminal Organizations and Transitional Justice

Héctor Olásolo (Universidad del Rosario - Law; Instituto Iberoamericano de La Haya) has published International Criminal Law, Transnational Criminal Organizations and Transitional Justice (Brill | Nijhoff 2018). Here's the abstract:

Parties negotiating the end of authoritarian regimes or armed conflicts are almost inevitably left in a situation of legal uncertainty. Despite their overlapping scope of application, the differences between the approaches of International Criminal Law (ICL) and Transitional Justice (TJ) are so profound that, unless dogmatisms are left aside and a process of dialogue is entered into, it will not be possible to harmonize the current legal regime of international crimes with the need to articulate transitional processes that are capable of effectively overcoming authoritarian regimes and armed conflicts. The serious material limitations shown by national, international and hybrid ICL enforcement mechanisms should be acknowledged and the goals pursued by ICL should be redefined accordingly. A minimum level of consensus on the scope of application, goals and elements of TJ should also be reached. Situations of systematic or large scale violence against the civilian population by transnational criminal organizations increase the challenge.

SFDI: Le standard de due diligence et la responsabilité internationale

The Société Française pour le Droit International has published Le standard de due diligence et la responsabilité internationale : Journée d'étude franco-italienne du Mans (Pedone 2018). Contents include:

• Sarah Cassella, Les travaux de la Commission du droit international sur la responsabilité internationale et le standard de due diligence
• Yann Kerbrat, Le standard de due diligence, catalyseur d’obligations conventionnelles et coutumières pour les Etats
• Serena Forlati, L’objet des différentes obligations primaires de diligence : prévention, cessation, répression… ?
• Karine Bannelier, Le standard de due diligence et la cyber-sécurité
• Arnaud de Nanteuil, Due diligence et investissements étrangers
• Helene Raspail, Due diligence et droits de l’homme
• Gabriella Venturini, Les obligations de diligence dans le droit international humanitaire
• Sandrine Maljean-Dubois, Les obligations de diligence dans la pratique : la protection de l’environnement
• Ida Caracciolo, Due diligence et droit de la mer
• Evelyne Lagrange, La responsabilité des organisations internationales pour violation d’une obligation de diligence
• Paolo Palchetti, La violation par l’Union européenne d’une obligation de diligence
• Pasquale de Sena, La « due diligence » et le lien entre le sujet et le risque qu’il faut prévenir : quelques observations
• Pierre d’Argent & Alexia de Vaucleroy, Le contenu de l’omission illicite : la non utilisation de moyens raisonnables
• Patrick Jacob, Le contenu de la responsabilité de l’Etat négligent
• Massimo Starita, Négligence illicite et responsabilités multiples : partage ou cumul de responsabilités ?
• Riccardo Pisillo Mazzeschi, Le chemin étrange de la due diligence : d’un concept mystérieux à un concept surévalué

Chalabi: National Human Rights Action Planning

Azadeh Chalabi (Ulster Univ. - Law) has published National Human Rights Action Planning (Oxford Univ. Press 2018). Here's the abstract:

This book deals with human rights action planning, as a largely under-researched area, from theoretical, doctrinal, empirical, and practical perspectives, and as such, provides the most comprehensive studies of human rights planning to date. At the theoretical level, by advancing a novel general theory of human rights planning, it offers an alternative to the traditional state-centric model of planning. This new theory contains four sub-theories: contextual, substantive, procedural, and analytical ones. At the doctrinal level, by conducting a textual analysis of core human rights conventions, it reveals the scope and nature of the states' obligation to adopt a plan of action for implementing human rights. At the empirical level, a cross-case analysis of national human rights action plans of 53 countries is conducted exploring the major problems of these plans in different phases of planning and uncovering the underlying causes of these problems. At the practical level, this volume sets out how these plans should be developed and implemented, how they can be best monitored by international human rights bodies, and how to maximize their effectiveness.

New Issue: Review of International Organizations

The latest issue of the Review of International Organizations (Vol. 13, no. 3, September 2018) is out. Contents include:

• Daniela Donno & Michael Neureiter, Can human rights conditionality reduce repression? Examining the European Union’s economic agreements
• Yasemin Bal Gündüz & Masyita Crystallin, Do IMF programs catalyze donor assistance to low-income countries?
• Asif Efrat & Abraham L. Newman, Divulging data: Domestic determinants of international information sharing
• Iain Osgood & Yilang Feng, Intellectual property provisions and support for US trade agreements
• Heidi Hardt, Who matters for memory: Sources of institutional memory in international organization crisis management

New Issue: Journal of Conflict Resolution

The latest issue of the Journal of Conflict Resolution (Vol. 62, no. 8, September 2018) is out. Contents include:

• Burcu Savun & Daniel C. Tirone, Foreign Aid as a Counterterrorism Tool: More Liberty, Less Terror?
• Civil Conflicts Abroad, Foreign Fighters, and Terrorism at Home Alex Braithwaite, Tiffany S. Chu
• Casey Crisman-Cox, Enemies within: Interactions between Terrorists and Democracies
• Eric Mvukiyehe, Promoting Political Participation in War-torn Countries: Microlevel Evidence from Postwar Liberia
• Yossi David, Nimrod Rosler, & Ifat Maoz, Gender-empathic Constructions, Empathy, and Support for Compromise in Intractable Conflict
• Julia Elad-Strenger & Golan Shahar, Revisiting the Effects of Societal Threat Perceptions on Conflict-related Positions: A Three-wave Study
• Benjamin A. T. Graham, Noel P. Johnston, & Allison F. Kingsley, Even Constrained Governments Take: The Domestic Politics of Transfer and Expropriation Risks
• Sarah Kreps & Sarah Maxey, Mechanisms of Morality: Sources of Support for Humanitarian Intervention

Margalit: Investigating Civilian Casualties in Time of Armed Conflict and Belligerent Occupation

Alon Margalit has published Investigating Civilian Casualties in Time of Armed Conflict and Belligerent Occupation: Manoeuvring between Legal Regimes and Paradigms for the Use of Force (Brill | Nijhoff 2018). Here's the abstract:

In Investigating Civilian Casualties in Time of Armed Conflict and Belligerent Occupation Alon Margalit discusses the appropriate State response to civilian casualties caused by its armed forces. Various legal and practical challenges, arising when investigating the fatal consequences of the use of force, are examined through the practice of the US, the UK, Canada and Israel during military operations in Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia and the occupied Palestinian territory. Alon Margalit considers this topical and sensitive issue within a broader context, namely the public scrutiny of State behaviour and influence of human rights law during armed conflict. The debate over the scope of the duty to investigate reflects competing approaches looking to (re)shape the balance between military necessity and humanitarian considerations.

New Issue: Human Rights Quarterly

The latest issue of the Human Rights Quarterly (Vol. 40, no. 3, August 2018) is out. Contents include:

• Dustin N. Sharp, Pragmatism and Multidimensionality in Human Rights Advocacy
• Monika Heupel, How do States Perceive Extraterritorial Human Rights Obligations? Insights from the Universal Periodic Review
• Jean H. Quataert, A New Look at International Law: Gendering the Practices of Humanitarian Medicine in Europe's "Small Wars," 1879–1907
• Douglas Irvin-Erickson, Prosecuting Sexual Violence at the Cambodian War Crimes Tribunal: Challenges, Limitations, and Implications
• Kristine Eck & Christopher J. Fariss, Ill Treatment and Torture in Sweden: A Critique of Cross-Case Comparisons
• Sara E. Lahti, The Limits of Shock and Shame: An Ethnographic Case Analysis of the Naming and Shaming Technique to Promote Human Rights for the Taalibe Qur'anic School Students of Senegal
• Lauren Eyler, Saira Mohamed, Isabelle Feldhaus, Rochelle Dicker, & Catherine Juillard, Essential Surgery as a Component of the Right to Health: A Call to Action
• Siobhán Wills, Use of Deadly Force by Peacekeepers Operating Outside of Armed Conflict Situations: What Laws Apply?

New Issue: Rivista di Diritto Internazionale

The latest issue of the Rivista di Diritto Internazionale (Vol. 101, no. 2, 2018) is out. Contents include:

• Articoli
• F. Salerno, L’influenza di Santi Romano sulla dottrina e la prassi italiana di diritto internazionale
• P. Fois, Il principio del consenso nel diritto dei trattati, dalla Convenzione di Vienna del 1969 al quadro attuale
• A. Scioli, Il rapporto tra diritto internazionale consuetudinario e ordinamento statunitense nella prospettiva della giurisprudenza ATCA
• F. Ippolito, Vulnerability on Trial: An Emerging Concept for Strengthening the Protection of Migrants in International Adjudication
• Note e Commenti
• Z. Crespi Reghizzi, Domande riconvenzionali davanti alla Corte internazionale di giustizia: l’ordinanza del 15 novembre 2017 nel caso delle pretese violazioni di diritti sovrani e spazi marini nel mare dei Caraibi (Nicaragua c. Colombia)
• P. Pirrone, Obbligo di conformazione alla pronuncia della Corte di Strasburgo e revocazione della sentenza amministrativa: la sentenza n. 123/2017 della Corte costituziona
• Panorama
• M. Arcari, La decisione statunitense di trasferimento dell’ambasciata a Gerusalemme e la portata dell’obbligo di non-riconoscimento in diritto internazionale
• E. Milano, Tensioni diplomatiche nel Mediterraneo orientale: il caso Saipem 12000
• P. Franzi, L’inserimento di norme materiali in misure legislative dell’Unione nel campo del diritto internazionale privato

von Staden: Strategies of Compliance with the European Court of Human Rights

Andreas von Staden (Univ. of Hamburg - Political Science) has published Strategies of Compliance with the European Court of Human Rights: Rational Choice Within Normative Constraints (Univ. of Pennsylvania Press 2018). Here's the abstract:

In Strategies of Compliance with the European Court of Human Rights, Andreas von Staden looks at the nature of human rights challenges in two enduring liberal democracies—Germany and the United Kingdom. Employing an ambitious data set that covers the compliance status of all European Court of Human Rights judgments rendered until 2015, von Staden presents a cross-national overview of compliance that illustrates a strong correlation between the quality of a country's democracy and the rate at which judgments have met compliance. Tracing the impact of violations in Germany and the United Kingdom specifically, he details how governments, legislators, and domestic judges responded to the court's demands for either financial compensation or changes to laws, policies, and practices.

Framing his analysis in the context of the long-standing international relations debate between rationalists who argue that actions are dictated by an actor's preferences and cost-benefit calculations, and constructivists, who emphasize the influence of norms on behavior, von Staden argues that the question of whether to comply with a judgment needs to be analyzed separately from the question of how to comply. According to von Staden, constructivist reasoning best explains why Germany and the United Kingdom are motivated to comply with the European Court of Human Rights judgments, while rationalist reasoning in most cases accounts for how these countries bring their laws, policies, and practices into sufficient compliance for their cases to be closed. When complying with adverse decisions while also exploiting all available options to minimize their domestic impact, liberal democracies are thus both norm-abiding and rational-instrumentalist at the same time—in other words, they choose their compliance strategies rationally within the normative constraint of having to comply with the Court's judgments.

Call for Engaged Listeners: Conference on "Politics and the Histories of International Law"

The Journal of the History of International Law has issued a call for engaged listeners for its conference on "Politics and the Histories of International Law," which will take place February 15-16, 2019, at the Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law, in Heidelberg. The call is directed at those who are interested in participating in the audience of the conference (not as a speaker) and thus contribute to the discussion. The deadline is September 30, 2018. The full call is here.

Call for Submissions: Roman Yearbook of International Law

The Roman Yearbook of International Law has issued a call for submissions for its inaugural volume. The focus theme is: "The 90th anniversary of the creation of the Vatican City State: an international law perspective." The call is here.

Arrabal Ward: Wartime Sexual Violence at the International Level: A Legal Perspective

Caterina E. Arrabal Ward has published Wartime Sexual Violence at the International Level: A Legal Perspective (Brill | Nijhoff 2018). Here's the abstract:

In Wartime Sexual Violence at the International Level: A Legal Perspective Dr. Caterina E. Arrabal Ward discusses the understanding of wartime sexual violence by the international tribunals and argues that wartime sexual violence often takes place without the explicit purpose to destroy a community or population and is not necessarily a strategic choice. This research suggests that a more focused approach based on a much clearer definition of these crimes would help to remedy deficiencies at the different stages of international justice in relation to these crimes.

Moser & Peters: Legal Uncertainty and Indeterminacy – Immutable Characteristics of the OSCE?

Carolyn Moser (Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law) & Anne Peters (Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law) have posted Legal Uncertainty and Indeterminacy – Immutable Characteristics of the OSCE? (in The Legal Framework of the OSCE, Mateja Steinbrück Platise, Carolyn Moser, & Anne Peters eds., forthcoming). Here's the abstract:

This paper disentangles the complex questions relating to the legal status of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE). It unfolds in five steps. First, the political context, institutional development and operational realities of the OSCE – from its inception during the Cold War until its present situation – are briefly outlined. Then, the analysis moves on to describe the patchy legal environment of the OSCE, in particular the interrogations revolving around the entity’s legal nature. Thirdly, the discussion turns to the international legal personality, domestic legal capacity and the privileges and immunities of the OSCE. The inquiry brings to the fore its current lack of a unified international legal personality, which is coupled with a lack of explicit and unequivocal rules on domestic legal personality (‘capacity’), both of which, in turn, lead to the status of the OSCE and its members of staff depending on domestic law or, more precisely, on a patchwork of national legal regimes of various participating States. Building on these insights, the fourth section of the paper outlines different formalisation options with a view to coping with the current legal uncertainty and indeterminacy surrounding the OSCE. Finally, the paper sketches out the content of the book by briefly recapitulating the main arguments made by the paper’s authors.

Call for Submissions: Modernisation of the Energy Charter Treaty (ECT)

Transnational Dispute Management has issued a call for submissions for a special issue on "Modernisation of the Energy Charter Treaty (ECT)." The call is here.

Kunz: Teaching the World Court Makes a Bad Case - Revisiting the Relationship between Domestic Courts and the ICJ

Raffaela Kunz (Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law) has posted Teaching the World Court Makes a Bad Case - Revisiting the Relationship between Domestic Courts and the ICJ. Here's the abstract:

Sentenza 238/2014 of the Italian Constitutional Court (ItCC) highlights the important role domestic courts play in international law. More than prior examples, it illustrates the ever more autonomous and self-confident stance of domestic courts on the international plane. But the ruling of the Italian Constitutional Court also shows that more engagement with international law does not necessarily mean that domestic courts enhance the effectiveness of international law and become ‘compliance partners’ of international courts. The Sentenza rather suggests that domestic courts in times of global governance and increased activity of international courts see their role at the intersection of legal orders also as ‘gate-keepers’, ready to cushion the domestic impact of international law if deemed necessary. The judgment of the ItCC thus offers a new opportunity to examine the multifaceted and complex role of these important actors that apply and shape international law, while always remaining bound by domestic (constitutional) law. This paper does so by exploring how domestic courts deal with rulings of the World Court. It shows that despite the fact that in numerous situations domestic courts could act as compliance partners of the ICJ, in reality more often than not, they have refused to do so and deferred in the implementation of its judgments to the political branches. Assessing this practice, the paper argues that domestic courts should take a more active stance and overcome the purely interstate view which seems at odds with present day international law. While it seems too far-reaching to expect domestic courts to follow international courts unconditionally, the paper cautions that the risk of setting dangerous precedents by openly defying international judgments is considerable. Given that there is no simple way out for domestic courts in cases of conflict between international and domestic (constitutional) law, courts should carefully balance the different interests at stake, namely the interest of an effective system of international adjudication on the one hand and the protection of fundamental domestic principles on the other hand, keeping in mind that at the end of the day a functioning international legal system will to a large extent depend on them.