This chapter discusses whether judicial dialogue on international law between domestic courts may be conceptualised as a new means of interpretation -- beyond the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. After defining 'dialogue' and presenting its various potential iterations, the chapter argues that in fact judicial dialogue between domestic courts is required under international law, including the Vienna Convention. This is because domestic court decisions on international law may constitute subsequent practice which is to be taken into consideration when interpreting a treaty, in accordance with Article 31(3)(b) VCLT. But domestic court decisions may also constitute practice and/or reflect opinio juris, which domestic courts must find in order to determine the existence and content of customary international law. As such, domestic courts must engage with the relevant decisions on international law by domestic courts in other jurisdictions. They must engage in judicial dialogue as a means for interpreting international law.
Saturday, September 20, 2014
Friday, September 19, 2014
Natens & Descheemaeker: Making Sense of the Seemingly Insensible — 'Procedural’ Good Faith as a Legal Impediment to Validly Established Jurisdiction
The Appellate Body’s (AB) remarks in paragraphs 53 and 54 of the Mexico – Soft Drinks case on the existence of legal impediments to exercise jurisdiction may appear to make little sense. The AB notes that there is no margin of discretion to decline to exercise validly established jurisdiction, yet goes on by implying that legal impediments precluding a panel from exercising its jurisdiction may nonetheless exist. This paper argues that the AB’s statements are both internally coherent and coherent in the whole of its jurisprudence by way of two arguments. First, indeed, a panel has no margin of discretion to decline to exercise validly established jurisdiction. However, jurisdiction is not automatically validly established. Second, legal impediments precluding validly established jurisdiction exist. These are Articles 3.7 and 3.10 DSU. The paper subsequently develops ‘procedural’ good faith in Article 3.10 DSU as a legal impediment, the test for a violation of which is a ‘clear statement’. However, the conditions for the fruitful invocation of a violation of ‘procedural’ good faith as in Article 3.10 DSU have never been met in WTO disputes. Nonetheless, we consider that case law has cleared the path for a dispute in which this would be the case.
- Gudrun Hochmayr, Applicable Law in Practice and Theory: Interpreting Article 21 of the ICC Statute
- Carolyn Hoyle & Leila Ullrich, New Court, New Justice?: The Evolution of ‘Justice for Victims’ at Domestic Courts and at the International Criminal Court
- Ian Freckelton & Magda Karagiannakis, Fitness to Stand Trial under International Criminal Law: Challenges for Law and Policy
- Symposium: Enforced Disappearance: Challenges to Accountability Under International Law
- Gabriella Citroni, Foreword
- Helen Keller & Corina Heri, Enforced Disappearance and the European Court of Human Rights: A ‘Wall of Silence’, Fact-Finding Difficulties and States as ‘Subversive Objectors’
- Corina Heri, Enforced Disappearance and the European Court of Human Rights’ ratione temporis Jurisdiction: A Discussion of Temporal Elements in Janowiec and Others v. Russia
- Sarah Fulton, Redress for Enforced Disappearance: Why Financial Compensation is not Enough
- Gabriella Citroni, The Pitfalls of Regulating the Legal Status of Disappeared Persons Through Declaration of Death
- Micaela Frulli, Nino Cassese and the Early Stages in the Fight against Enforced Disappearances
- Cases before International Courts and Tribunals
- Carsten Stahn, Justice Delivered or Justice Denied?: The Legacy of the Katanga Judgment
- Céline Bauloz, The Definition of Internal Armed Conflict in Asylum Law: The 2014 Diakité Judgment of the EU Court of Justice
- National Prosecution of International Crimes: Legislation and Cases
- Francesco de Sanctis, Reconciling Justice and Legality: A Quest for Fair Punishment in Cases on Bosnian Atrocity Crimes
- Anthony O’Rourke, The Speedy Trial Right and National Security Detentions: Critical Comments on United States v. Ghailani
- Editorial Comment
- James A. Green, The Annexation of Crimea: Russia, Passportisation and the Protection of Nationals Revisited
- Claus Kreß, Major Post-Westphalian Shifts and Some Important Neo-westphalian Hesitations in the State Practice on the International Law on the Use of Force
- Joe Boyle, Making Sense of Self-Defence in the War on Terror
- Mika Hayashi, Reacting to the Use of Chemical Weapons: Options for Third States
- Anders Henriksen & Marc Schack, The Crisis in Syria and Humanitarian Intervention
- Special Issue: Transnational Solidarity – An Interdisciplinary Approach
- Karl-Peter Sommermann, Some reflections on the concept of solidarity and its transformation into a legal principle
- Hauke Brunkhorst, Europe as crossroads: Between the Kantian mindset of democratic capitalism and the managerial mindset of capitalist democracy
- Sally J. Schulz, Solidarity as a human right
- Kirsten Schmalenbach & Markus Tobias Kotzur, Solidarity among nations
- Doris Wydra & Helga Pülzl, Solidarity discourse in national parliaments: the Europaen crisis hits home!
- Erwin Stolz, Solidarity in times of crisis from a sociological perspective: a comparative analysis of intergenerational support in six European countries
- C.L. Lim & J.H. Senduk, The Wages of Belonging: Rare Earths from China, and the Return of GATT À LA CARTE
- Michael Lux, Access to Information Held by EU-Institutions for Economic Operators and National Courts
- Laura Fraedrich, Chase Kaniecki, & Ruby Balaram, Conflict over Conflict Minerals: U.S. Policy Fails First Amendment Test
- Jing Jia Ke, Moving towards ASEAN Economic Community: A New Era Starting from the ATIGA
- Fernando Piérola, General Thoughts on the Standard of ‘Cogent Reasons’ in the Treatment of WTO Jurisprudence
- Julio Carlos Lascano, The Condition of Sale for the Purposes of Royalty-Based Adjustments under Article 8 of the GATT Valuation Agreement
- Michael Appel, Interview Questions for David J. Brummond, Former Senior Sanctions Advisor – OFAC
- Carsten Weerth, New Countries Applying the Harmonized System Nomenclature: Update 2014
- Special Issue: Globalisation and 21st Century International Borders
- Lawrence A. Herzog, Globalisation, Place and Twenty-First-Century International Border Regions: An Introduction to the Special Issue
- Stephen P. Mumme, Trade and Environmental Protection along the United States–Mexico Border
- Keith Pezzoli, Justine Kozo, Karen Ferran, Wilma Wooten, Gudelia Rangel Gomez & Wael K. Al-Delaimy, One Bioregion/One Health: An Integrative Narrative for Transboundary Planning along the US–Mexico Border
- Lawrence A. Herzog & Christophe Sohn, The Cross-Border Metropolis in a Global Age: A Conceptual Model and Empirical Evidence from the US–Mexico and European Border Regions
- Joseph Nevins, Policing the Workplace and Rebuilding the State in “America's Finest City”: US Immigration Control in the San Diego, California–Mexico Borderlands
- Paul Ashby, Solving the Border Paradox? Border Security, Economic Integration and the Mérida Initiative
Thursday, September 18, 2014
Schultz & Kovacs: The Law is What the Arbitrator Had for Breakfast: How Income, Reputation, Justice, and Reprimand Act as Determinants of Arbitrator Behaviour
This paper examines the salient incentives and constraints that the current socio-legal system of arbitration places on arbitrators. In doing so, it mirrors the main steps taken by classical law and economics studies on judicial behaviour. It takes the main types of incentives and constraints identified in these studies and applies them to the behaviour of arbitrators. The rationale of the current study is that arbitrators, like everyone else, are maximisers of their own utility. The pursuit of that maximisation influences how they decide cases. The components of their utility are determinants of their behaviour. If we better comprehend these determinants - what influences and motivates the behaviour of arbitrators - we can better understand arbitration, and the law that applies and should apply to it, and the law created by it.
- Antônio Augusto Cançado Trindade, Reflections on a century of international justice and prospects for the future
- Andreas Zimmermann, Between the quest for universality and its limited jurisdiction : the role of the International Court of Justice in enhancing the international rule of law
- Chehrazad Krari-Lahya, Cooperation and competition between the International Court of Justice and the Security Council
- Christopher Greenwood, Judicial integrity and the advisory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice
- Hugh Thirlway, Peace, justice, and provisional measures
- Giorgio Gaja, Preventing conflicts between the court's orders on provisional measures and Security Council resolutions
- Rosa Möhrlein, Act-dependent judicial review of Security Council and General Assembly resolutions
- Ronny Abraham, The effects of international legal obligations in domestic law in light of the judgment of the court in the Medellín case
- Mariko Kawano, Decisions of the International Court of Justice on disputes concerning internal law
- Marcelo Kohen, The Court's contribution to determining of the content of fundamental principles of international law
- Mohamed Bennouna, The International Court of Justice : bestriding past and present
The International Organizations Interest Group of the American Society of International Law will hold a works-in-progress workshop on Friday, December 12th, in New York City.
If you are interested in presenting a paper at the workshop, please submit an abstract to David Gartner (David.Gartner@asu.edu), Julian Arato (email@example.com), and Sarah Dadush (firstname.lastname@example.org) by the end of the day on October 1st, 2014. Abstracts should be a couple of paragraphs long but not more than one page. Papers should relate to the study of international organizations – broadly construed to include public treaty bodies and more informal international institutions like public-private partnerships, trade associations, and networks.
Papers selected for presentation are due no later than November 28th, as they will be pre-circulated. Papers should not yet be in print so that authors will have time to make revisions based on the comments from the workshop.
The workshop's format will be structured to afford each presenter significant individual feedback. Each paper will have a dedicated session, in which it will first be introduced by a commentator. Thereafter the author will have the opportunity to respond if he or she wishes. The floor will then be opened up for discussion. The workshop will be conducted on the assumption that everyone has read all of the papers in advance. One need not present a paper or comment on a paper to participate. Registration for the workshop will open in November.
Il est bien connu que le droit international humanitaire s’applique pendant les conflits armés. Pourtant, lorsque surgit la question de savoir depuis quand tel conflit armé existe ou si tel autre a pris fin, et donc lorsque se pose corrélativement la question de savoir à partir de quand et jusqu’à quand le droit international humanitaire s’applique, les ébauches de réponse demeurent floues. Ceci résulte notamment du fait que l’applicabilité du droit international humanitaire n’est pas codifiée dans tous ses aspects, et donc fait l’objet de controverses. Il n’existe toutefois que très peu d’études sur ce thème, lesquelles ne traitent que de sujets particuliers.
Cette thèse de doctorat propose une étude transversale, traitant simultanément du début et de la fin de l’applicabilité du droit international humanitaire, et ce à la fois dans ses aspects généraux et spécifiques.
Ce faisant, l’auteure arrive à la conclusion que le début de l’applicabilité du droit international humanitaire dépend exclusivement des faits tels qu’ils peuvent être constatés sur le terrain, et qu’il est différent pour les conflits armés internationaux et non internationaux. Quant à la fin, elle distingue entre la fin générale et la fin spécifique de l’applicabilité du droit international humanitaire. Pour la première, le moment déterminant est la fin générale des opérations militaires, pour laquelle la thèse propose des indicateurs, tandis que pour la seconde ce moment peut intervenir plus tôt, (rapatriements des prisonniers de guerre, collecte des restes explosifs de guerre…), ou plus tard (occupation, personnes détenues…). La démonstration est en outre illustrée de nombreux exemples, tels que la situation en Syrie, la bande de Gaza ou encore le cas du général Noriega.
- Vaughan Lowe, The Law of Treaties; or, Should this Book Exist?
- Enzo Cannizzaro, The Law of Treaties through the Interplay of its Different Sources
- Martins Paparinskis, Regulating Treaties: A Comparative Perspective
- Akbar Rasulov, Theorizing Treaties: The Consequences of the Contractual Analogy
- André Nollkaemper, The Effects of Treaties in Domestic Law
- Markus Kotzur, The Temporal Dimension: Non-retroactivity and Its Discontents
- Marko Milanovic, The Spatial Dimension: Treaties and Territory
- Alexander Proelss, The Personal Dimension: Challenges to the pacta tertiis Rule
- Jean d’Aspremont, Formalism versus Flexibility in the Law of Treaties
- Katherine del Mar, Integrity versus Flexibility in the Application of Treaties
- Sotirios-Ioannis Lekkas & Antonios Tzanakopoulos, Pacta sunt servanda versus Flexibility in the Suspension and Termination of Treaties
- Malgosia Fitzmaurice & Panos Merkouris, Uniformity versus Specialisation (1): The Quest for a Uniform Law of Inter-State Treaties
- Michael Waibel, Uniformity versus Specialisation (2): A Uniform Regime of Treaty Interpretation?
- Jasper Finke, Regime-collisions: Tensions Between Treaties (and How to Solve Them)
- Surabhi Ranganathan, Responding to Deliberately-created Treaty Conflicts
- Christian J Tams, Treaty Breaches and Responses
- Andreas Zimmermann & James Devaney, Succession to Treaties and the Inherent Limits of International Law
- Yaël Ronen, Treaties and Armed Conflict
- Philippa Webb, Treaties and International Organisations: Uneasy Analogies
- Markos Karavias, Treaty Law and Multinational Enterprises: More than Internationalized Contracts?
- Ilias Plakokefalos, Treaties and Individuals: Of Beneficiaries, Duty-bearers, Users, and Participants
Wednesday, September 17, 2014
- Paul B. Stephan, Introduction
- George Rutherglen & James Y. Stern, Sovereignty, Territoriality, and the Enforcement of Foreign Judgments
- Pamela K. Bookman, Once and Future U.S. Litigation
- William S. Dodge, The Penal and Revenue Rules, State Law, and Federal Preemption
- Paul B. Stephan, Unjust Legal Systems and the Enforcement of Foreign Judgments
- Linda Silberman, The Need for a Federal Statutory Approach to the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Country Judgments
- Keith Loken, The Current U.S. Judgments Agenda
- Peter D. Trooboff, Implementing Legislation for the Hague Choice of Court Convention
- David P. Stewart, Implementing the Hague Choice of Courts Convention: The Argument in Favor of ‘Cooperative Federalism’
- Kevin L. Cope, Reconceptualizing Recognition Uniformity
- Timothy J. McEvoy, Common Law Versus Statutory Approaches to Enforcing Foreign Judgments
- Geraint Hughes, Skyjackers, jackals and soldiers: British planning for international terrorist incidents during the 1970s
- Michelle Bentley, Strategic taboos: chemical weapons and US foreign policy
- Thomas Waldman, Reconciliation and research in Afghanistan: an analytical narrative
- Robert H. Wade, The Piketty phenomenon: why has Capital become a publishing sensation?
- Rosemary Foot, ‘Doing some things’ in the Xi Jinping era: the United Nations as China's venue of choice
- Ramesh Thakur, The inconsequential gains and lasting insecurities of India's nuclear weaponization
- Pervez Hoodbhoy & Zia Mian, Nuclear fears, hopes and realities in Pakistan
- Francis Baert & Timothy M. Shaw, Are you willing to be made nothing? Is Commonwealth reform possible?
- Peter Hakim, The future of US–Brazil relations: confrontation, cooperation or detachment?
International law has long been dominated by the State. But it has become apparent that this bias is unrealistic and untenable in the contemporary world as the rise of the notion of common goods challenges this dominance. These common goods - typically values (like human rights, rule of law, etc) or common domains (the environment, cultural heritage, space, etc) - speak to an emergent international community beyond the society of States and the attendant rights and obligations of non-State actors.
This book details how three key areas of international law - human rights, culture and the environment - are pushing the boundaries in this field. Each category is of current and ongoing significance in legal and public discourse, as illustrated by the Syrian conflict (human rights and international humanitarian law), the destruction of mausoleums and manuscripts in Mali (cultural heritage), and the Deepwater Horizon oil spill (the environment). Each exemplifies the need to move beyond a State-focused idea of international law.
This timely volume explores how the idea of common goods, in which rights and obligations extend to individuals, groups and the international community, offers one such avenue and reflects on its transformative impact on international law.
- Research Articles
- Noam Lupu, Brand Dilution and the Breakdown of Political Parties in Latin America
- Irfan Nooruddin & Nita Rudra, Are Developing Countries Really Defying the Embedded Liberalism Compact?
- Egor Lazarev, Anton Sobolev, Irina V. Soboleva & Boris Sokolov, Trial by Fire: A Natural Disaster's Impact on Support for the Authorities in Rural Russia
- Jan Rovny, Communism, Federalism, and Ethnic Minorities: Explaining Party Competition Patterns in Eastern Europe
- Amanda Lea Robinson, National Versus Ethnic Identification in Africa: Modernization, Colonial Legacy, and the Origins of territorial Nationalism
European Society of International Law
Research Forum 14 - 15 May 2015
Academy of European Law, European University Institute, Florence
Call for Papers
The 2015 ESIL Research Forum will take place on 14 and 15 May 2015, at the European University Institute in Florence. With the transition to Annual Conferences, the Society will maintain the Research Forum in a smaller but more intensive format. The Research Forum is re-launched as a scholarly conference which promotes engagement with research in progress by members of the Society. From 2015, it will be convened at least once a year and is organized around a broad theme.
The Research Forum targets in particular scholars at an early stage of their careers, especially advanced PhD students and post-doctoral researchers. All ESIL members are invited to attend the Research Forum as audience members.
Approximately 10-15 papers will be selected from among the submissions, and during the Research Forum paper presenters will receive comments on their papers from members of the ESIL Executive Board and invited experts.
This year, the Research Forum calls for papers addressing the following set of issues in international law:
We stress that papers which address any dimensions of the call, including through interdisciplinary research and methods, and through historical, theoretical or empirical approaches, will be given serious consideration. We welcome papers that propose to redefine or re-imagine our understanding of the terms of the call and their meaning in the current context.
- The Use of Force
- Statehood, Secession, the Creation of States
- The Legitimacy and Illegitimacy of Governments and States
- Territories and Boundaries
Abstracts of not more than 750 words should be submitted by interested applicants to ESIL-RF2015@EUI.eu by Monday 1 December 2014. Please include the following information: name, affiliation, email address, and whether you are an ESIL member. Applicants should also send a one-page curriculum vitae with the abstract. Papers should be unpublished at the time of the presentation.
Successful applicants will be notified by email by 15 January 2015. Complete drafts of papers will be required by 15 April 2015. Following review, selected papers will be published in the ESIL SSRN Paper Series.
Successful applicants will be expected to bear the costs of their own travel and accommodation. Partial financial support may be available on a needs basis for a limited number of scholars. Scholars selected to present a paper who have exhausted other potential sources of funds can submit a request to the Selection Committee for financial support with an explanation of why they are in need of assistance.
Once selected, applicants will be informed of several hotels that offer preferential rates to Research Forum participants. Lunch on both days will be provided, and a dinner for presenters, commentators and ESIL Executive Board members will be hosted by the Academy of European Law on the evening of 14 May.
- October 10, 2014: Catherine Redgwell (Univ. of Oxford - Law), The Internationalization of Energy Law
- October 17, 2014: Holger Hestermeyer (Court of Justice of the European Union), The Changing Structure of International Law and Its Normative Consequences: International IP Law as an Example
- October 24, 2014: Jessie Hohmann (Queen Mary, Univ. of London - Law), International Law’s Objects
- October 31, 2014: Devika Hovell (London School of Economics - Law), The Power of Process: Procedural Fairness in Security Council Decision-making
- November 7, 2014: Lorna McGregor (Univ. of Essex - Human Rights Centre), The Principle of Due Diligence: A Core Principle of International Human Rights Law?
- November 14, 2014: Chandra Lekha Sriram (Univ. of East London - Law), Kenya and the international criminal court: Insights for gravity, complementarity, and ‘positive complementarity
- November 21, 2014: Jolyon Thomson (U.K. Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs), Science and international environmental law: a meeting of minds, or two disciplines worlds apart?
- November 28, 2014: David A. Gantz (Univ. of Arizona - Law), TTIP and the post-Bali WTO: Toward a New World Trade Order?
Tuesday, September 16, 2014
- A human right to conscientious objection to same-sex unions?
- Introduced by Silvia Borelli and Chiara Vitucci
- Michel Miaille, Désobéir à la loi? La clause de conscience et le mariage pour tous
- Ryan Hill, Non-discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation: should the law accord exemptions on the basis of freedom of conscience?
- Andrew Boutton & David B. Carter, Fair-Weather Allies? Terrorism and the Allocation of US Foreign Aid
- Douglas L. Kriner & Francis X. Shen, Reassessing American Casualty Sensitivity: The Mediating Influence of Inequality
- Ananthi Al Ramiah, Miles Hewstone, Todd D. Little, & Kyle Lang, The Influence of Status on the Relationship between Intergroup Contact, Threat, and Prejudice in the Context of a Nation-building Intervention in Malaysia
- Hanne Fjelde & Lisa Hultman, Weakening the Enemy: A Disaggregated Study of Violence against Civilians in Africa
- Robert Braun & Michael Genkin, Cultural Resonance and the Diffusion of Suicide Bombings: The Role of Collectivism
- Belgin San-Akca, Democracy and Vulnerability: An Exploitation Theory of Democracies by Terrorists
- Joe Clare, Hawks, Doves, and International Cooperationon
The Junior International Law Scholars Association (JILSA) is holding its annual meeting on Friday, January 23, 2015, at the University of Miami School of Law. JILSA is an informal network of junior scholars at mostly American law schools who get together annually for a self-funded workshop. Junior faculty and fellows interested in presenting at the meeting should email proposals to MJ Durkee and Jean Galbraith by Friday, October 10. If you are interested in presenting a working draft, please send us the title, an abstract, and an indication of how far along the paper is. Because of the nature of the workshop, we can only include working drafts that have not yet been accepted for publication. We also workshop early stage projects. If you are interested in presenting on an early stage project, please let us know the working title and a few lines about the idea you are pursuing. Finally, if you are interested in being a discussant, please let us know. We will do our best to get back to everyone in November, and, for those whose working drafts are accepted for the conference, we will expect the authors to provide the drafts a few weeks before the conference.
- General Articles
- Sergio Puig, International Regime Complexity and Economic Law Enforcement
- Alberto Alvarez-Jimenez, The Great Recession and the New Frontiers of International Investment Law: The Economics of Early Warning Models and the Law of Necessity
- Han-Wei Liu, International Standards in Flux: A Balkanized ICT Standard-Setting Paradigm and its Implications for the WTO
- Symposium in Honor of John H. Jackson
- R. Michael Gadbaw & Robert B. Thompson, Trade, International Economic Law, and the Challenges of the Global Economy: A Symposium in Honor of John H. Jackson
- An Appreciation and Reflection by Professor John H. Jackson
- Steve Charnovitz, The Field of International Economic Law
- Donald McRae, International Economic Law and Public International Law: The Past and the Future
- Ernst-Ulrich Petersmann, Need for a New Philosophy of International Economic Law and Adjudication
- Thomas Cottier, International Economic Law in Transition from Trade Liberalization to Trade Regulation
- William J. Davey, The WTO and Rules-Based Dispute Settlement: Historical Evolution, Operational Success, and Future Challenges
- Mitsuo Matsushita, A View on Future Roles of the WTO: Should There be More Soft Law in the WTO
- Walter Mattli & Thomas Dietz, Mapping and Assessing the Rise of International Commercial Arbitration in the Globalization Era: An Introduction
- Alec Stone Sweet & Florian Grisel, The Evolution of International Arbitration: Delegation, Judicialization, Governance
- Ralf Michaels, Roles and Role Perceptions of International Arbitrators
- Joshua Karton, International Arbitration Culture and Global Governance
- Moritz Renner, Private Justice, Public Policy: The Constitutionalisation of International Commercial Arbitration
- Claire Cutler, International Commercial Arbitration, Transnational Governance, and the New Constitutionalism
- Thomas Dietz, Does International Commercial Arbitration Provide Efficient Contract Enforcement Institutions for Global Commerce?
- Thomas Hale, What is the Effect of Commercial Arbitration on Trade?
- Horatia Muir Watt, The Contested Legitimacy of Investment Arbitration and the Human Rights Ordeal: the Missing Link
This is the first comprehensive study of corruption in international investment arbitration. The book considers the limited effectiveness of efforts to combat transnational corruption in international law and the emergence of international investment arbitration as a singular means for effective control of corruption within the international legal order. The case law on corruption by investment tribunals is studied exhaustively, jurisprudential trends are identified, and reforms aimed at enhancing the effectiveness and fairness of investment arbitration as a mechanism to combat corruption are proposed.
Divided into three parts, part I focus on the phenomenon of corruption in foreign investment and attempts at its control through international law. Part II analyses the available case law in international investment arbitration dealing with corruption. Llamzon identifies nine distinct trends emerging from the case law and provides a table summarizing the key areas of corruption decision-making and each relevant tribunal's approach, which is an invaluable tool for practitioners engaging in 'live' issues of corruption within arbitral proceedings. Part III reflects on the implications of these trends for both the 'supply' and 'demand' sides of corruption in international law, and proposes a integrative framework of decision for corruption issues in international investment arbitration.
Monday, September 15, 2014
- Filippo Dionigi, UN Security Council Resolutions as Factors of International Socialization: The Case of Hezbollah
- Hugh Breakey & Sidney Dekker, Weak Links in the Chain of Authority: The Challenges of Intervention Decisions to Protect Civilians
- Rashed Uz Zaman & Niloy Ranjan Biswas, Bangladesh's Participation in UN Peacekeeping Missions and Challenges for Civil–Military Relations: A Case for Concordance Theory
- Olivera Simić & Melanie O'Brien, ‘Peacekeeper Babies’: An Unintended Legacy of United Nations Peace Support Operations
- Madhav Joshi, Sung Yong Lee & Roger Mac Ginty, Just How Liberal Is the Liberal Peace?
- Maria do Céu Pinto, A Small State's Search for Relevance: Peace Missions as Foreign Policy
- September 10, 2014: Harold Hongju Koh (Yale Univ. – Law), How to End the Forever War? 9/11+13
- September 24, 2014: Robert Chesney (Univ. of Texas – Law), The Paradigm of Legitimate Participation in War: On the Origins and Evolution of a Troubled Concept
- October 1, 2014: Gregory McNeal (Pepperdine Univ. – Law), War Against Transnational Crime?
- October 8, 2014: David Cole (Georgetown Univ. – Law), The Spirit of Liberty: Civil Society, Constitutional Law, and the War on Terror
- October 15, 2014: Steve Vladeck (American Univ. – Law), Military Courts and Article III
- October 22, 2014: Ashley Deeks (Univ. of Virginia – Law), An International Legal Framework for Surveillance
- October 29, 2014: Jennifer Daskal (American Univ. – Law), Data's Un-territoriality
- November 12, 2014: Deborah Pearlstein (Yeshiva Univ. – Cardozo Law School), Illegal But Legitimate Use of Force? Considering the Case for Permissive Imminence in Self-Defense
- November 19, 2014: Michael Schmitt (U.S. Naval War College), Tallinn 2.0: The International Law of Cyber Conflict
With the increasing sophistication of transnational criminal organization, coupled with globalization and its heavy dependence on maritime transport, the suppression of criminality at sea has again become a priority on the international community’s agenda. The theme at the heart of this volume is therefore Crimes at Sea — an issue of both great practical importance and academic interest. This work is the fruit of the 2012 session of the Hague Academy Centre for Studies and Research in International Law and International Relations — collectively, the fourteen chapters in this volume underscore the common challenges in international co-operation at the legal level with respect to crimes at sea and identify a number of the potential strengths and shortcomings of the applicable international law. There is a wide breadth of subject matters addressed in this volume, some focusing on particular crimes at sea, others on the general international legal framework within which responses to criminality at sea operate. Throughout the volume, there is a common theme of regime interaction — exploring the limits and efficiencies resulting from the overlapping applicability of human rights law, international criminal law, the law of State responsibility and the UN Charter regime. The contributions both illustrate and clarify the significant links between these legal regimes which support the fight against crimes at sea.
Trafficking in persons is a serious crime that affects the human rights, dignity and integrity of all its victims including women, men, and children in the Association of Southeast Asia Nation (ASEAN) region. ASEAN has made efforts to fight human trafficking through inter alia the establishment of regional counter-human trafficking laws and human rights bodies to establish best norms and practices for its member countries. Nevertheless, the International Labour Organization (ILO) recently declared that there are more than 11.7 million forced labor victims in the Asia-Pacific region encompassing the biggest concentration of forced labour victims in the world.
This volume reviews the achievements and the deficiencies of ASEAN’s counter-human strategies at the national and regional level. It offers suggestions for the reform of ASEAN's anti-trafficking laws and for the creation of a regional anti-trafficking human rights body specialized in preventing human trafficking, promoting equal protection of all trafficking victims, and prosecuting human traffickers.
The decline of sovereign states in global governance was accompanied by the expansion of transnational standard-setting bodies, which are not part of treaty-based institutions. The standard-setting in these bodies is led not only by governmental regulators, but also by industry representatives and scientific experts.
These bodies’ transnational standards permeate national standards, domestic statutes, administrative instruments, and judicial decisions. The interactions between transnational standards and the domestic legal order have significantly evolved, and reduced regulatory fragmentation across states without the rigidity of concluding any formal international treaties.
The evolving interactions between transnational standards and the domestic legal order give rise to the fundamental questions about authority and legitimacy. Extensive studies have already been produced on the role of transnational standard-setting bodies. Much less recognized are the interactions of transnational standards with the domestic legal order. Given that the regulatory significance of transnational standards often depends on domestic acceptance, it is important to examine the queries of how the authority of transnational standards is constituted at the domestic level, and whether the authority is legitimate.
Against this background, the workshop will address the evolving interactions between transnational standards and the domestic legal order, particularly from the following three angles:
* Transnational standards in domestic legal practices
* Authority of transnational standards
* Legitimacy of transnational standards
Sunday, September 14, 2014
- Special Issue: Not Such an International Human Rights Norm? Local Resistance to Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Rights
- Cai Wilkinson & Anthony J. Langlois, Preliminary Comments
- Michael J. Bosia, Strange Fruit: Homophobia, the State, and the Politics of LGBT Rights and Capabilities
- Momin Rahman, Queer Rights and the Triangulation of Western Exceptionalism
- Karen Zivi, Performing the Nation: Contesting Same-Sex Marriage Rights in the United States
- Anthony J. Langlois, Human Rights, “Orientation,” and ASEAN
- Katherine Browne & Catherine J. Nash, Resisting LGBT Rights Where “We Have Won”: Canada and Great Britain
- Phillip M. Ayoub, With Arms Wide Shut: Threat Perception, Norm Reception, and Mobilized Resistance to LGBT Rights
- Cai Wilkinson, Putting “Traditional Values” Into Practice: The Rise and Contestation of Anti-Homopropaganda Laws in Russia