New Issue: International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law

The latest issue of the International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law (Vol. 39, no. 3, 2024) is out. Contents include:

• Special Issue: Protecting the Ocean: The London Convention and Stockholm Declaration at 50
• Arsenio Domínguez, Foreword to the Special Issue on Protecting the Ocean: the London Convention and Stockholm Declaration at Fifty
• Ríán Derrig, Ronán Long, Zhen Sun, & Aleke Stöfen-O’Brien, Special Issue on Protecting the Ocean: The London Convention and Stockholm Declaration at Fifty – Introduction
• Part 1: Context
• Ronán Long, Celebrating the Genesis of Multilateralism in Marine Environmental Law: Reflections from the WMU-Sasakawa Global Ocean Institute
• Nilüfer Oral, A Stocktake of Ocean Governance Fifty Years after Stockholm: New Challenges for International Law
• Andrew Birchenough, Fredrik Haag, & Zhen Sun, The Development and Administration of the London Convention and Protocol: ‘Two Instruments, One Family’ and Their Link to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea
• José M Pacheco Castillo, Dorothee Seybold, & David Santillo, The London Regime’s Adaptability and Impact
• Part 2: Liability and Responsibility
• Richard Barnes, The London Convention: Jurisdiction and Liability Issues
• Atsuko Kanehara, Effective Implementation of the Stockholm Declaration and the London Convention Regime on Dumping: Dynamically Incorporating the Development of the Concept of Environment in the Twenty-First Century into the LOSC
• Seokwoo Lee & Clive Schofield, Japan’s Release of Wastewater from Fukushima: What Role for the Law of the Sea?
• Måns Jacobsson, The Contribution of the International Compensation Regimes to the Protection of the Ocean
• Part 3: Sources of Knowledge
• Aleke Stöfen-O’Brien & Roxanne Graham, The Establishment of Science-Policy Interfaces for the Global Plastics Treaty: Reflections on Small Island Developing States’ Perspectives
• Momoko Kitada & Mariamalia Rodríguez-Chaves, Advancing Gender Equality in Contemporary Ocean Affairs
• Chris Vivian & Linda Del Savio, The London Convention and Protocol: Adapting to Address the Ocean-Climate Crisis
• Youna LBL Lyons, David Santillo, & Federica Catonini, Legitimate Scientific Research: Objective Scientific Assessment of Marine Geoengineering Activities under the London Convention and London Protocol
• Todd Bridges, Shana Jones, & Matthew Shudtz, Innovating through Nature-Positive Engineering: How Can We Move Forward?
• Tafsir Matin Johansson, Aspasia Pastra, and Maximo Q Mejia Jr, Seaworthiness and Protecting the Ocean: Maritime Remote Inspection Technologies
• Part 4: Political Economy
• Alla Pozdnakova, Ship Recycling and the Right to a Healthy Environment
• Ríán Derrig, Carl Grainger, Kahlil Hassanali, & Fuad Bateh, Protecting the Ocean in the Contemporary International Order: Capacity-Building and Technology Transfer from the Stockholm Declaration to the BBNJ Agreement
• Sara L Seck, Legal Systems and Loss & Damage at the Ocean-Climate Nexus: a Tribute to Meinhard Doelle
• Fae Sapsford, The Cost of Neglecting the Sargasso Sea
• Vasco Becker-Weinberg & Tracy Shimmield, Strengthening Environmental Impact Assessment Obligations of Deep Seabed Mining in Areas beyond National Jurisdiction

New Issue: Swiss Review of International and European Law

The latest issue of the Swiss Review of International and European Law (Vol. 34, no. 3, 2024) is out. Contents include:

• Andreas Th. Müller & Anna Petrig, Die Schweiz im UNO-Sicherheitsrat: Ein Plus für die Rechtsstaatlichkeit?
• Chris De Cock, The Protection of Essential Services from Attack in Times of Armed Conflict
• Anna Petrig & Mareike Sinz, Der Anwendungsbereich des Bundesgesetzes über die Durchsetzung von internationalen Sanktionen

Conference: 2024 ASIL Midyear Meeting

On November 14-16, 2024, the American Society of International Law will hold its Midyear Meeting in Chicago. Program and registration are here.

Symposium: The Geneva Conventions at 75: Need for Innovation

On September 26-27, 2024, the Midwest Regional Conference of the American Branch of the International Law Association will host a symposium on "The Geneva Conventions at 75: Need for Innovation." Details are here.

Conference: International Law Weekend 2024

The American Branch of the International Law Association will hold International Law Weekend 2024 in New York City on October 24-26. The theme is "Powerless Law or Law for the Powerless?" The program is here.

Conference: Biennial Conference on International Law and the Social Sciences

On September 27-28, 2024, the American Society of International Law's International Law and Social Sciences Interest Group will hold the inaugural Biennial Conference on International Law and the Social Sciences, at Northwestern University School of Law, Chicago. Details are here.

Webinar Series: Treaties & Empire

The collaborative research project "Historical Treaties of Southeast Asia" is hosting a webinar series during the autumn semester on "Treaties & Empire." Details are here.

Workshop: Six Shades of Arms Trade Regulation: The Reform of the Italian Arms Export Law and Other National Regulatory Frameworks in Comparison

On October 7, 2024, the School of International Studies at the University of Trento will host a workshop on "Six Shades of Arms Trade Regulation: The Reform of the Italian Arms Export Law and Other National Regulatory Frameworks in Comparison." Details are here.

Conference: 53rd Annual Conference of the Canadian Council on International Law

The Canadian Council on International Law will hold its 53rd Annual Conference on November 7-8, 2024, in Ottawa. The theme is: "International Law: Enforcement and Entanglements." Program and registration are here.

Sender: International Law-Making by the International Court of Justice and International Law Commission: Partnership for Purpose in a Decentralized Legal Order

Omri Sender has published International Law-Making by the International Court of Justice and International Law Commission: Partnership for Purpose in a Decentralized Legal Order (Cambridge Univ. Press 2024). Here's the abstract:

The book provides an unparalleled account of the links that draw together the International Court of Justice and the International Law Commission, exposing the depth of the relationship between these central organs of the international legal system and its profound, unintended impact. By drawing upon historical records, as well as interviews with members of both organs, the book reveals that the original vision for interaction between the Court and the Commission has been lost in time. It inquires not only into the cross-fertilization that may be traced in the output of each body but also into the more subtle ties that they nurture; it also shows how even the rare occasions of disagreement attest to the strength of the inter-institutional relationship rather than undermine it. All this throws light on the largely intangible process of international law-making and challenges the notion that international legislation is the sole preserve of States.

New Issue: Revue Générale de Droit International Public

The latest issue of the Revue Générale de Droit International Public (Vol. 128, no. 2, 2024) is out. Contents include:

• Dossier: contrats des organisations internationales. I . Droit applicable aux contrats des organisations internationales
• Anne Marie Thévenot-Werner, Le droit applicable aux agents non prequalifiés de membres du personnel
• Philippe Vorreux, La conclusion des contrats avec des états et d'autres organisations internationales
• Rémi Cèbe, Le droit applicable aux contrats des organisations internationales avec les sociétés de droit privé
• Olivier Fourés, Droit applicable aux contrats d'emploi dans les organisations internationales
• Dossier : contrats des organisations internationales. II. Protection des données personnelles et contrats
• Anne Thida Norodom, Protection des données personnelles et contrats des organisations internationales: une question de choix et d'equilibre
• Rémi Cèbe, Entretien de Olivier Matter: team leader for international cooperation
• Rémi Cèbe, Entretien de Magali Viard: conseiller juridique, OCDE
• Dossiers: contrats des organisations internationales. III Tendances récentes en matière de règlement des conflits
• Laurent Germond, Tendances récentes en matière de réglement des conflits: l'exemple singulier de l'Office Européen des Brevets
• Yas Banifatemi, Entretien de Andra Nicoara: senior legal adviser, CNUCED

Luban: The Crime of Aggression: Its Nature, the Leadership Clause, and the Paradox of Immunity

David Luban (Georgetown Univ. - Law) has posted The Crime of Aggression: Its Nature, the Leadership Clause, and the Paradox of Immunity (in Research Handbook on International Legal Theory, Eliav Lieblich & Tom Dannenbaum eds., forthcoming). Here's the abstract:

The paper, written for a research handbook, critically surveys some fundamental philosophical, historical, and doctrinal issues in the crime of aggression. The two introductory sections set the theoretical issues in the context of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and explain the origins of criminalizing aggression under the heading of “crimes against peace.” Section 3 explores an ambiguity between aggression as first use of force and aggression as unprovoked use of force, while section 4 discusses the doctrinal distinction between acts of aggression and wars of aggression.

Sections 5 and 6 turn to the theory of aggression. Section 5 examines modern versus early modern just war theorists’ views of just cause. Section 6 explores various theories of what exactly makes aggressive war so evil that it belongs in the pantheon of core crimes, side by side with genocide, crimes against humanity, and other war crimes. The basic question is whether aggression is fundamentally a crime against states, a crime against human rights, or a crime against peace itself. I reject the first, statist, version, and endorse the human rights version. I examine three versions of the view that aggressive war is fundamentally about its human costs: that aggressive wars lead to atrocities (Trainin); that aggressive wars lead more generally to unjustified killings (Dannenbaum); and that aggressive wars lead to both unjustified killings by the aggressor, and to unnecessary killings that include the justified killings of aggressors’ troops by defenders (Mégret). As for crimes against peace, I argue that this theory of aggression’s evils comes in two “flavors,” one of which has justly been criticized by postcolonial writers, and one of which I think is legitimate. The former originates in Judge Pal’s famous dissenting opinion in the IMTFE, and argues that criminalizing aggression is a move by colonial powers to freeze the oppressive status quo. The more legitimate version is that in an age of catastrophically destructive weapons, the risks of escalation in armed conflict –the threat that conflicts will spiral into world wars–are simply too great in human terms. Thus, the legitimate version of “crimes against peace” is part and parcel of the human rights analysis.

The final sections break new ground. Section 7 considers whether aggression is solely a leadership crime. Everyone agrees that it would be wrong to punish ordinary soldiers for the crime of aggression launched by their leaders. The questions is why, and it is not easy to answer. Examining it brings us to a contemporary dispute over which leaders can be prosecuted: only those who control or direct the aggressive policies (as per the ICC’s Rome Statute), or others as well, who “shape or influence” the policy without necessarily directing it (as the customary rule used to be formulated). I argue against any narrowing of the leadership clause.

Section 8 explores the “paradox of immunity”: Under the legal principle of sovereign immunity, apex leaders are immune from prosecution in the courts of another state. But under the narrow leadership clause, only apex leaders can be prosecuted. Here I argue for a surprising conclusion: that in fact there never was a customary rule of immunity for the crime of aggression. If so, the paradox of immunity disappears. This resolution also helps cut the Gordian knot of a current debate about whether a relatively small subset of states (the EU, perhaps) can form an aggression tribunal and call it “international.”

Lecture: Boisson de Chazournes on “The Request for an Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice on Climate Change: Continuity and Evolution”

On September 26, 2024, Laurence Boisson de Chazournes (Univ. of Geneva - Law) will give a lecture (a masterclass), via Zoom, on “The Request for an Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice on Climate Change: Continuity and Evolution,” hosted by the Brazilian Branch of the International Law Association and the Graduate Program in Law at the Federal University of Minas Gerais, in partnership with Stylus Curiarum – Research Group on International Courts and Tribunals. The discussant will be Lucas Carlos Lima (Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais - Law). Details are here.

Howley: Overlapping Individual and Interstate Claims in International Law

Jessica Howley has published Overlapping Individual and Interstate Claims in International Law (Oxford Univ. Press 2024). Here's the abstract:

Mechanisms for individuals to bring claims under international law have become increasingly common in recent decades, particularly in human rights and investment law. Nonetheless, when the International Law Commission codified the law of State responsibility, it largely ignored the bringing of international claims by individuals, and the relationship between such claims and those brought on the interstate level. Overlapping Individual and Interstate Claims in International Law is the first dedicated monograph examining this relationship - one that is of mounting importance on both a practical and theoretical level.

This work provides a comprehensive survey of the potential for overlapping individual and interstate claims to arise. It underlines issues of fairness, consistency, and interference with autonomy that can result when multiple claimants vie to have their claims determined before different forums. The author analyses in detail how treaty provisions and various rules and principles of international law can be expected to regulate such overlapping claims, considering, among others, the local remedies rule, the rule precluding double recovery, res judicata, waiver, and certain circumstances precluding wrongfulness. The book clarifies the nature of international claims, including in the theoretically muddled field of diplomatic protection, and highlights undertheorized foundations of topical debates concerning the use of countermeasures and self-defence outside of the interstate arena. It concludes with a human rights-oriented proposal for resolving the complex policy issues to which these overlapping claims give rise.

Kilibarda: Recognition of States in International Law

Pavle Kilibarda (Univ. of Geneva) has published Recognition of States in International Law (Oxford Univ. Press 2024). Here's the abstract:

Although the recognition of States is a common occurrence in international relations and retains a central position in discussions of international law, its nature and legal effects have remained controversial well into the twenty-first century. While some believe that recognition plays a fundamental role in the creation of statehood, others deny recognition any legal value. Regardless, debates surrounding any case where statehood is disputed will sooner or later turn to the matter of recognition, or lack thereof, by other States.

This book challenges the widespread views of statehood as an absolute or empirical fact and of recognition as merely declaratory in the creation of States as the primary and original persons of international law. Drawing upon a comparative analysis of contested States ranging from Palestine and Kosovo to Somaliland and Eastern Ukraine, this book seeks to ascertain the normative value and the effects of the act of recognition in various situations, distinguishing between: cases where statehood may be inferred from applicable rules of international law, cases where statehood could only be explained by recognition, and cases where the establishment of a State is prevented by international legal norms. In addition to discussing a range of issues related to recognition, this book provides an up-to-date overview of the history of recognition, the positions of various governments, and a broad, critical summary of domestic and international jurisprudence.

New Issue: International Organization

The latest issue of International Organization (Vol. 78, no. 2, Spring 2024) is out. Contents include:

• Articles
• Austin Carson, Eric Min, & Maya Van Nuys, Racial Tropes in the Foreign Policy Bureaucracy: A Computational Text Analysis
• Derek Bolton, Security, Society, and the Perennial Struggles over the Sacred: Revising the Wars of Religion in International Relations Theory
• Lars-Erik Cederman, Yannick I. Pengl, Luc Girardin, & Carl Müller-Crepon, The Future Is History: Restorative Nationalism and Conflict in Post-Napoleonic Europe
• Aníbal Pérez-Liñán & Angie K. García Atehortúa, Oversight Hearings, Stakeholder Engagement, and Compliance in the Inter-American Court of Human Rights
• Research Notes
• Taylor J. Damann, Dahjin Kim, & Margit Tavits, Women and Men Politicians’ Response to War: Evidence from Ukraine
• Deniz Aksoy, Ted Enamorado, & Tony Zirui Yang, Russian Invasion of Ukraine and Chinese Public Support for War

Ohlin: War's Rustic Code of Honor

Jens David Ohlin (Cornell Univ. - Law) has posted War's Rustic Code of Honor (Virginia Journal of International Law, forthcoming). Here's the abstract:

With armed conflict raging all around, international law generally, and the law of war specifically, has come under renewed scrutiny. Do we live in a rules-based international order, and does law regulate and constrain battlefield behavior? Previous explorations of this controversy have used empirical analysis or jurisprudential investigations. But an illuminating answer to this question may come from an unlikely source -- the world of opera. Drawing inspiration from the Italian opera Cavalleria Rusticana, a melodrama about a rural village gripped by seduction, betrayal, and a fatal duel, this Article argues that war is governed by a rustic code of honor, based on norms that are often described as chivalry. The relationship between the ancient tradition of chivalry and the modern Law of Armed Conflict (LOAC) is not new, but this Article's novel contribution hangs not on invoking the concept of chivalry, but rather on highlighting its "rustic" qualities. Using this framework of rusticity, this Article explores the variety of meanings that rusticity can have and shows that they provide a compelling framework for identifying not just the shortcomings of the law of war, as an allegedly primitive legal system, but also the great virtues of the law of war as a robust system of normative regulation -- an alternate meaning of "rustic" but an equally important one. As in the plot of the opera, where chivalry constitutes the only meaningful constraint on behavior in its rural village far from central legal authority, chivalry in war is a pre-legal norm deeply embedded in the psyche of its participants and in its distant location, divorced from civil authority. In both contexts, chivalry ripens into a full-blown system that is deserving of the label of "law," as imperfect as it is. What emerges is a portrait of the law of war that is at once realistic and even-handed, rather than caricatured in either direction by its critics or boosters. Yes, the law of war is rustic in the sense that it is distant, primitive, and unsophisticated. But the law of war is also rustic in the sense that it is simple, uncomplicated, robust, distilled to its core, and ultimately effective because it is tailored, in bespoke fashion, for its unique context. This is War's Rustic Code of Honor.

Dothan: Staging an Intervention for Rogue States

Shai Dothan (Univ. of Copenhagen - Law) has posted Staging an Intervention for Rogue States. Here's the abstract:

In recent years, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) is beginning to play a larger role in world politics. The court has interpreted the erga omnes partes doctrine as giving every state that is a member of some treaties creating ICJ jurisdiction the right to start a case against any other member of that treaty. When the treaty deals with salient political issues, like the Genocide Convention, other states often join the process by intervening in the proceedings. The idea that states should act as guardians of humanity isn't new. It was tried before in the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) and failed. States either chose not to bring cases because they feared the political backlash involved or they used their standing for political paybacks. This paper argues that the attempts to position states as guardians of humanity and use the collective pressure of the international community to guide rogue states into compliance with international law are unlikely to succeed. Insights from the social sciences suggest that a small community composed of complex actors with a variety of interests, some of which are clandestine, can easily spread falsehoods among its members. The community of states is such a network. In light of this, one can expect that the community of states participating in politically salient ICJ cases will not be guided by the truth.

New Issue: Chinese Journal of Transnational Law

The latest issue of the Chinese Journal of Transnational Law (Vol. 1, no. 2, September 2024) is out. Contents include:

• Special Issue: Legalization of Foreign Relations in China
• Zheng Tang & Congyan Cai, Legalization of Foreign Relations in China
• Huang Huikang, Milestone of China's Foreign-Related Legislation – A Review of the Law of the People's Republic of China on Foreign Relations
• Malcolm Jorgensen, Political Framing in China's Foreign Relations Law: International Law and ‘Fundamental Norms Governing International Relations’
• William S. Dodge, China's Foreign State Immunity Law: A View from the United States
• Guiqiang Liu, A Critical Appraisal on China's Blocking Statutes from a Private Actor's Perspective
• Meng Lin, A Future Uniform Regime of International Commercial Mediator Immunity: Limited, Party-Agreed and Statute-Required
• Short Article and Recent Development
• Ka Lok Yip, Reading China's Global Security Initiative Through an International Legal Lens

New Issue: Melbourne Journal of International Law

The latest issue of the Melbourne Journal of International Law (Vol. 24, no. 2, 2023) is out. Contents include:

• Kate Gauld, How Is the Crime against Humanity of Gender Persecution Being Litigated before the International Criminal Court, and What Are Its Implications?
• Maria Gudzenko, An Impossible Dream: Using the Standard of Free and Fair Elections for Government Recognition
• Joanna Jarose, Giving Due Regard to the Obligation of 'Due Regard' under Article IX of the Outer Space Treaty

New Issue: European Journal of International Relations

The latest issue of the European Journal of International Relations (Vol. 30, no. 3, September 2024) is out. Contents include:

• Maja Zehfuss, Time, the state system and the double chronopolitics of managing ‘migrants’: implications of the Windrush scandal
• Torsten Michel, Moral status – human status? Interrogating the connection between morality and dehumanisation during mass violence
• Seanon S. Wong, Audience costs, humiliation, and social creativity strategies: how Beijing boosts citizens’ esteem in international conflicts
• Adam B. Lerner, Global injustice and the production of ontological insecurity
• Laura McLeod, Transformative indicators? Gender expertise and technocratic peace
• Richard Caplan, John Gledhill, & Maline Meiske, Exploring the impact of United Nations peacekeeping operations on the external affairs of host states
• Frederik B. Jerris, Constructing decolonisation: the Greenland case and the birth of integration as decolonisation in the United Nations, 1946–1954
• Shahar Hameiri & Lee Jones, Why the West’s alternative to China’s international infrastructure financing is failing
• Alex Yu-Ting Lin & Saori N. Katada, Manufacturing consensus: China’s strategic narratives and geoeconomic competition in Asia
• Inken von Borzyskowski & Felicity Vabulas, When do member state withdrawals lead to the death of international organizations?

Conference: The Scope of Litigation under the UNCLOS

On November 21-22, 2024, the Judicial Jurisdiction Project – a joint project of the Netherlands Institute for the Law of the Sea and the Utrecht University Centre for Water, Oceans and Sustainability Law at Utrecht University School of Law – will host a conference on “The Scope of Litigation under the UNCLOS – Where Are We Now and Where May We Be Going?,” in Utrecht. The program is here. Those who wish to register must provide, by November 1, 2024, a statement (max. 250 words) explaining their interest in the topic of judicial jurisdiction (in the law of the sea) and their expectations for the conference. Details are available here.

Webinar: Legal Education During Armed Conflict

On September 23, 2024, the Clinical Legal Education Center at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem in collaboration with the Minerva Center for the Rule of Law under Extreme Conditions at the University of Haifa will hold a webinar on "Legal Education During Armed Conflict." Details are here.

Call for Papers: Workshop on Race and International Relations

The International Race and Rights Lab at the University of Notre Dame has issued a call for papers for its third workshop on "Race and International Relations," to take place March 27-28, 2025, in South Bend. The call is here.

Mavronicola: The Case Against Human Rights Penality

Natasa Mavronicola (Univ. of Birmingham - Law) has published The Case Against Human Rights Penality (Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. 44, no. 3, Autumn 2024). Here's the abstract:

This article seeks to make the human rights case against human rights penality—that is, against the reliance upon and foregrounding of penal mechanisms in the protection of (certain) human rights. The rationale for the alliance between human rights and state penality has at least three central dimensions: effectiveness, accountability and equal protection. In particular, the mobilisation of criminal law (enforcement) and punishment is often treated as the most effective means of preventing and/or redressing human rights violations. Moreover, the criminal process and sanction are often understood as the pinnacle of accountability for serious human rights violations. Finally, the egalitarian rationale for human rights penality views it as redistributing protection to under-protected persons. While remaining committed to human rights, I unpack (some of) the ways in which human rights penality ultimately fails to uphold and even undermines the principles that it has been promoted as fulfilling within the human rights frame.