Wednesday, June 28, 2017

New Issue: International Organization

The latest issue of International Organization (Vol. 71, no. 2, Spring 2017) is out. Contents include:
  • Articles
    • Alyssa K. Prorok, The (In)compatibility of Peace and Justice? The International Criminal Court and Civil Conflict Termination
    • Ranjit Lall, Beyond Institutional Design: Explaining the Performance of International Organizations
    • Milli Lake, Building the Rule of War: Postconflict Institutions and the Micro-Dynamics of Conflict in Eastern DR Congo
    • Joseph O'Mahoney, Making the Real: Rhetorical Adduction and the Bangladesh Liberation War
  • Research Notes
    • Vincent Arel-Bundock, The Unintended Consequences of Bilateralism: Treaty Shopping and International Tax Policy
    • Leonardo Baccini, Pablo M. Pinto, & Stephen Weymouth, The Distributional Consequences of Preferential Trade Liberalization: Firm-Level Evidence
    • Matthew Fuhrmann & Michael C. Horowitz, Droning On: Explaining the Proliferation of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles

Call for Papers: ESIL 2018 Research Forum

The European Society of International Law has issued a call for papers for its 2018 Research Forum, which will take place February 28-March 1, 2018, at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem Faculty of Law. Here's the call:

European Society of International Law Research Forum

28 February - 1 March 2018

Hebrew University Faculty of Law, Jerusalem, Israel

Call for Papers

International Law in Times of Disorder and Contestation

The 2018 ESIL Research Forum will take place on 28 February - 1 March at the Hebrew University Faculty of Law.

The ESIL Research Forum is a scholarly conference that promotes engagement with research in progress by members of the Society. It has a small and intensive format. The Forum targets particularly scholars at an early stage of their careers, especially advanced PhD students and post-doctoral researchers. Approximately 25 papers will be selected from among the submissions and paper presenters will receive during the Forum comments on their papers from members of the ESIL Board and invited experts.

The 2018 Research Forum addresses challenges to the international legal order emanating from dynamics of disengagement from multilateral governance, a perceived erosion of support by states and other stakeholders in existing international institutions, contestation of universal values, shifts in hegemonic power at the global and regional level, and the rise in populist, antiliberal, anti-institutional and isolationist political sentiments in various regions of the world. Such processes occur in tandem with growing concerns about the suitability of the existing international legal structures and approaches to address global phenomena such as migration, cyber-security threats and climate change, and to influence the conduct of non-state actors such as corporations. It is the combination of the ‘re-emergence of the state’ from out of the shadows of multilateralism and international governance, a growing discontent and backlash from multiple sectors of society directed against existing international norms and institutions and the limited ability of the latter to address serious contemporary problems, which generate a sense of crisis and a possible plunge towards world disorder (Although, it may also be claimed that the current state of affairs creates new opportunities for introducing much needed reforms in international law).

The Forum seeks to bring together scholarly works that address questions such as whether international law can adjust to a more disordered environment and, if so, how? Can and should a new legal order emerge in the foreseeable future? To what extent has international law contributed to world disorder, and to what extent can it be part of the remedy? To what extent is the post-1945 international legal order actually eroding? And what lessons can be learned from past periods of legal and political transformation and upheaval at the international level?

The 2018 ESIL Research Forum invites the submission of papers addressing the theme of international law in times of disorder and contestation, including the following set of issues:

  • International governance and reassertions of sovereignty
  • Backlashes against international judicial institutions
  • Challenges to the UN Charter as a global constitutional framework
  • Erosion of the prohibition against the threat and use of force in international law
  • International human rights and humanitarian law, institutions and concepts under new pressures
  • The adequacy of international responses to the migration and refugee crisis
  • Regulation of non-state actors within the existing international legal order
  • International law governing areas and spaces beyond national sovereignty: in search of a new paradigm?
  • New points of equilibrium in international economic law and regional economic integration
  • International responses to intractable/frozen conflicts
  • Universality of values underlying the international legal system
  • Return to the past? Can the pre-Westphalian legal order provide lessons for a postWestphalian legal order?
Papers that address any dimensions of the call, including through interdisciplinary research and methods, and through historical, theoretical, critical or empirical approaches, will be given serious consideration. We welcome papers that propose to redefine or re-conceptualize our understanding of the terms of the call and their meaning in the current context.

Abstracts (of not more than 750 words) should be submitted to ESIL-RFJER2018@mail.huji.ac.il by 15 September 2017. Please include your name, email address and a one-page curriculum vitae with your abstract.

Successful applicants will be notified by email by 15 October 2017. Complete drafts of papers will be required by 15 February 2018. Papers may in due course be published in the ESIL SSRN Conference Paper Series.

Successful applicants will be expected to bear the costs of their own travel and accommodation. However, ESIL travel grants will be available to offer partial financial support to some speakers on a competitive basis. Further information on financial support will be distributed in due course.

Selected speakers will also 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 Board members will be hosted on the evening of 28 February 2018.

Bassiouni: Investigating War Crimes in the Former Yugoslavia War 1992-1994

M. Cherif Bassiouni (DePaul Univ. - Law) has published Investigating War Crimes in the Former Yugoslavia War 1992-1994 (Intersentia 2017). Here's the abstract:

Following World War Two, the progress towards international accountability and international criminal justice came to a halt as a result of the Cold War. But only three years since the end of the Cold War and forty-five years after the post-WWII prosecutions, the international community was forced to face the ethnic tensions and civil war tearing apart the republics that once comprised the former Yugoslavia.

United Nations Security Council Resolution 780 (1992), appointed a Commission of Experts to investigate war crimes and crimes against humanity amounting to violations of international humanitarian law in the territory of the former Yugoslavia and it was expected that the Commission would be the historic link to the post-WWII experiences. Despite the Commission’s mandate being the broadest of its kind since Nuremberg, those who opposed its work sought to hamper its success through bureaucratic and political chicanery, including the failure to fund the Commission’s work.

The investigation into the conflict is detailed in this book including the uncovering of 187 mass graves, the interviewing of 223 victims of rape and sexual assault, and the utilization of prison camps and mass expulsion for the purpose of ethnic cleansing. Along with the author’s personal insights and insider anecdotes on the conflict, this book highlights the continuing need for the pursuit of accountability and international criminal justice in a world of thriving bureaucracy and realpolitik.

The Commission broke the glass ceiling of realpolitik by fighting the hard battle that lead to the success of its mandate and to the establishment of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia. This timely work reminds us all that indeed the past is prologue.

Madsen: Rebalancing European Human Rights: Has the Brighton Declaration Engendered a New Deal on Human Rights in Europe?

Mikael Rask Madsen (Univ. of Copenhagen - Law) has posted Rebalancing European Human Rights: Has the Brighton Declaration Engendered a New Deal on Human Rights in Europe? (Journal of International Dispute Settlement, forthcoming). Here's the abstract:
Has the Brighton Declaration produced a New Deal on European human rights in terms of engendering a new and more central role to national legal and political institutions? A greater subsidiarity? Against the backdrop of a systematic exploration of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), the articles concludes that the ECtHR is indeed providing more subsidiarity following the Brighton Declaration. It does so by a greater use of the terms “margin of appreciation” and “wide(r) margin,” and particularly with regard to two areas of law: Art. 8 on the right to privacy and Art. 35 on access to the Court. However, as the article further demonstrates, this increase in subsidiarity is very uneven across the member states. The old Western member states generally benefit far more from these new directions in the ECtHR’s jurisprudence. But contrary to popular belief, vocal critiques of the system are not given more deference according to this analysis. A final more general conclusion follows from these findings, namely that the ECtHR is receptive to political signals and does not operate in isolation from politics as it is often claimed. Although currently merely soft law documents, the Brighton Declaration and associated Protocols have triggered change at the Court in the direction set out in these documents and events. This has theoretical implications for the understanding of the evolution of international courts.

New Issue: Transnational Legal Theory

The latest issue of Transnational Legal Theory (Vol. 8, no. 1, 2017) is out. Contents include:
  • Dimensions of Justice and Justification in EU and Transnational Contexts
    • Ester Herlin-Karnell & Poul F. Kjaer, Dimensions of justice and justification in EU and transnational contexts
    • Poul F. Kjaer, Why justification? The structure of public power in transnational contexts
    • Jan Pieter Beetz & Enzo Rossi, The EU’s democratic deficit in a realist key: multilateral governance, popular sovereignty and critical responsiveness
    • Ben Crum, Public reason and multi-layered justice
    • Sionaidh Douglas-Scott, Human rights as a basis for justice in the European Union
    • Ester Herlin-Karnell, The domination of security and the promise of justice: on justification and proportionality in Europe’s ‘Area of Freedom, Security and Justice’
    • Lyn K. L. Tjon Soei Len, Equal respect, capabilities and the moral limits of market exchange: denigration in the EU internal market

Tuesday, June 27, 2017

Macklem: Positivism and Practice Beyond Sovereignty

Patrick Macklem (Univ. of Toronto - Law) has posted Positivism and Practice Beyond Sovereignty. Here's the abstract:
This essay is a reply to commentaries on The Sovereignty of Human Rights (New York: Oxford University Press, 2015). Three themes inform the commentaries. Each represents a topic that the book engages with in ways challenged or critiqued in some of these essays. The first relates to its enlistment of international legal positivism as a defining feature of what constitutes a human right in international law. The second is the role that practice plays in the account that I offer of the normative mission of human rights in international law – namely, that human rights act as legal instruments that mitigate some of the pathologies associated with how international law organizes global politics into an international legal order. Finally, some of the essays in this issue inquire into the role that human rights play beyond sovereignty – specifically, in relation to non-state actors such as multinational corporations and international economic institutions.

AJIL Unbound Symposium: Industry Associations in Transnational Legal Ordering

AJIL Unbound has posted a symposium on "Industry Associations in Transnational Legal Ordering." The symposium includes an introduction by Gregory Shaffer and Melissa J. Durkee and contributions by Joshua Karton, Ayelet Berman, Sarah Dadush, Kishanthi Parella, and Melissa J. Durkee.

New Issue: International Theory

The latest issue of International Theory (Vol. 9, no. 2, July 2017) is out. Contents include:
  • Mathias Koenig-Archibugi, How to diagnose democratic deficits in global politics: the use of the ‘all-affected principle’
  • Joseph MacKay & Christopher David LaRoche, The conduct of history in International Relations: rethinking philosophy of history in IR theory
  • Symposium: Liquid Authority in Global Governance
    • Nico Krisch, Liquid authority in global governance
    • Michael Zürn, From constitutional rule to loosely coupled spheres of liquid authority: a reflexive approach
    • Julia Black, ‘Says who?’ liquid authority and interpretive control in transnational regulatory regimes
    • Ole Jacob Sending, Recognition and liquid authority
    • Kate Macdonald & Terry Macdonald, Liquid authority and political legitimacy in transnational governance

Monday, June 26, 2017

New Issue: Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

The latest issue of the Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law (Vol. 50, no. 3, May 2017) is out. Contents include:
  • Sandra Marco Colino, The Perks of Being a Whistleblower: Designing Efficient Leniency Programs in New Antitrust Jurisdictions
  • Tanya J. Monestier, You're It! Tag Jurisdiction over Corporations in Canada
  • Gregory M. Stein, What Will China Do When Land Use Rights Begin to Expire?
  • Peter K. Yu, The RCEP and Trans-Pacific Intellectual Property Norms

Alvarez: The Human Right to Property

José E. Alvarez (New York Univ. - Law) has posted The Human Right to Property. Here's the abstract:
How does the human right of property relate to protecting human rights in the age of Trump? Human rights advocates faithful to Henkin’s vision need to combat the dangerous consensus between elements on the political left and right that international law (including arbitration bodies outside U.S. courts) has no business protecting the right to property, for aliens or anybody else. From Hamilton through Henkin, immigrants with foresight have told us why the effective protection of rights, even in states with robust rule of law traditions such as the United States, requires supranational scrutiny. Although the United States is rightly regarded as a strong defender of property rights, even the U.S. (along with other Western “rule of law” states) could benefit from supranational scrutiny in this respect.

New Issue: Stanford Journal of International Law

The latest issue of the Stanford Journal of International Law (Vol. 53, no. 2, Spring 2017) is out. Contents include:
  • Shafi U. Khan Niazi & Richard Krever, Romance and Divorce Between International Law and E.U. Law: Implications for European Competence on Direct Taxes
  • S.J. Rombouts, The Evolution of Indigenous Peoples' Consultation Rights under the ILO and U.N. Regimes
  • Ravi Soopramanien, International Trade in Indigenous Cultural Heritage: What Protection Does International Law Provide for Indigenous Cultural Goods and Services in International Commerce
  • Damira Khatam, Chevron and Ecuador Proceedings: A Primer on Transnational Litigation Strategies

New Issue: Zeitschrift für Internationale Beziehungen

The latest issue of Zeitschrift für Internationale Beziehungen (Vol. 24, no. 1, 2017) is out. Contents include:
  • Aufsätze
    • Mathias Albert & Bettina Mahlert, Weltgesellschaft und Kommunikation: zur Systemtheorie internationaler Beziehungen
    • Regina Hack, Deliberation als Reaktion auf Protest? Das zivilgesellschaftliche Dialogforum der WTO
    • Manuel Becker, Reparationszahlungen im UN-Sicherheitsrat. Verfahrensregeln für ein sachgerechtes Kompensationssystem
    • Steve Schlegel & Christoph Schuck, Denn nur vom Nutzen wird die Welt regiert? Zum abnehmenden Stellenwert der Critical Security Studies/Welsh School in den IB
  • Forum - Die zib-Debatte zum kommunikativen Handeln Thomas Risse zum 60. Geburtstag
    • Anna Holzscheiter, Im Anfang war das Wort... und es ward Schnee von gestern? Das Vermächtnis der zib-Debatte zum kommunikativen Handeln
    • Nicole Deitelhoff, Billiges Gerede und leeres Geschwätz?
    • Anna Holzscheiter, Was vom arguing übrigblieb…
    • Gerald Schneider, Theorien kommen und gehen: wider die Debattennostalgie
    • Harald Müller, Grenzen der Logiken und Logik der Grenzen
    • Thomas Risse, Reden ist (immer noch) nicht billig

Triggiani, Cherubini, Ingravallo, Nalin, & Virzo: Dialoghi con Ugo Villani

Ennio Triggiani (Università degli studi di Bari), Francesco Cherubini (LUISS), Ivan Ingravallo (Università degli studi di Bari), Egeria Nalin (Università degli studi di Bari), & Roberto Virzo (Università degli Studi del Sannio) have published Dialoghi con Ugo Villani (Cacucci 2017). Contents include:
  • Paolo Fois, I principi della Dichiarazione sulle relazioni amichevoli del 24 ottobre 1970 e il “nuovo ordine internazionale”
  • Luigi Fumagalli, L’incidenza sul diritto sostanziale della funzione giudiziaria nell’ordinamento internazionale
  • Paolo Palchetti, Effetti giuridici e conseguenze indirette derivanti da misure cautelari della Corte internazionale di giustizia
  • Gianluigi Palombella, “The Judicial Lodestar”. Funzione giudiziaria e identità del diritto internazionale
  • Fulvio Maria Palombino, I poteri del Consiglio di sicurezza in materia di esecuzione delle sentenze della Corte internazionale di giustizia
  • Maria Irene Papa, L’esecuzione delle sentenze della Corte internazionale di giustizia nel sistema dell’ONU
  • Francesco Seatzu, The Challenge of Reforming the Pact of Bogotà
  • Massimo Starita, L’esecuzione delle sentenze della Corte internazionale di giustizia tra l’art. 94, par. 2, della Carta e nuovi meccanismi di pressione ed assistenza
  • Roberto Virzo, La soluzione delle controversie nei contratti relativi all’Area dei fondi marini internazionali
  • Giulio Bartolini, “Il mancato processo al Kaiser” nella prassi e nella dottrina italiana
  • Vincenzo Buonomo, Un Accordo per contribuire alla pace, secondo il diritto internazionale
  • Ida Caracciolo, Il caso Al Mahdi: responsabilità penale internazionale per crimini di guerra e distruzione intenzionale del patrimonio culturale
  • Emanuele Cimiotta, Alcune novità nei rapporti tra Nazioni Unite, organizzazioni regionali e sub-regionali per il mantenimento della pace in Africa
  • Andrea de Guttry, La risposta internazionale alla crisi in Burundi del 2015-2016: luci ed ombre della cooperazione rafforzata tra le Nazioni Unite e l’Unione africana
  • Pietro Gargiulo, Il mantenimento della pace nei rapporti tra l’ONU e le organizzazioni regionali
  • Giuseppe Gioffredi, La responsabilità di proteggere: contenuto del concetto e prassi applicativa
  • Edoardo Greppi, International Humanitarian Law and Criminal Justice: International, Domestic and Comparative Law at a Crossroads
  • Egeria Nalin, L’intervento militare della coalizione anglo-americana in Iraq del 2003 alla luce del rapporto Chilcot e degli sviluppi della prassi in tema di legittima difesa preventiva
  • Giuseppe Nesi, La repressione dei crimini di sfruttamento e abusi sessuali da parte dei peacekeepers. Recenti sviluppi e prospettive future
  • Criseide Novi, Brevi considerazioni sulle missioni militari dell’Unione europea volte a supportare operazioni multifunzionali delle Nazioni Unite
  • Pietro Pustorino, L’intervento esterno nei conflitti armati interni a sostegno del governo al potere o degli insorti
  • Tullio Scovazzi, Il traffico illecito di beni culturali: non soltanto una minaccia alla pace e alla sicurezza internazionali
  • Silvio Suppa, Quale bilancia smarrita fra pace e guerra; ovvero, le ombre lunghe delle due guerre del Golfo
  • Gabriella Venturini, Assistenza umanitaria e diritto internazionale: alcune riflessioni
  • Adelina Adinolfi, Alcune riflessioni sulla reazione dell’Unione europea alle violazioni dei diritti umani in Turchia e sui possibili strumenti di contrasto
  • Luca Buonvino, La direttiva europea sulle garanzie procedurali penali del minore
  • Mario Pio Calogero, Recenti sviluppi della vicenda delle occupazioni sine titulo
  • Andrea Cannone, La sentenza della Grande camera della Corte europea dei diritti dell’uomo del 3 luglio 2014, Georgia c. Russia (I) (merito): brevi osservazioni
  • Sergio Maria Carbone, I diritti degli individui e delle imprese nell’evoluzione del diritto internazionale dell’economia: alcuni cenni
  • Gabriella Carella, La responsabilità giuridica delle multinazionali per violazioni dei diritti umani: fata Morgana o vaso di Pandora?
  • Giuseppe Cataldi, La deroga francese alla Convenzione europea dei diritti dell’uomo. Un precedente da non seguire
  • Bernardo Cortese, Il rilievo del diritto internazionale nelle scelte estreme dell’etica medica pediatrica: il ruolo della famiglia
  • Patrizia De Pasquale, Tutela dei diritti fondamentali: antinomie giurisprudenziali in materia di divieto di ne bis in idem
  • Anna Di Lieto, L’arcipelago Chagos: vecchio e nuovo colonialismo
  • Luigi Iannuzzi, Alcune considerazioni sul meccanismo di Revisione periodica universale nell’ambito delle Nazioni Unite
  • Massimo Iovane, L’affaire de l’immunité juridictionnelle de l’Allemagne devant les tribunaux italiens: une tentative extrême d’assurer le respect du droit international des droits de l’homme ou un exemple de protection diplomatique par les juges?
  • Antonio Leandro, Arbitration, Multi-tier Waiver of the Access to Courts and the European Convention on Human Rights: Some Remarks on the Tabbane Decision
  • Massimo Francesco Orzan, Il contributo della Corte di giustizia nella definizione dei diritti procedurali dei destinatari di misure restrittive
  • Antonio Jerry Palma, Lo stato di eccezione turco ed il destino delle garanzie giudiziarie: alla ricerca di un rimedio effettivo sul piano interno ed internazionale
  • Luigi Pannarale, La sfida dei diritti umani
  • Riccardo Pisillo Mazzeschi, Sicurezza umana e diritto internazionale
  • Vito Rubino, L’evoluzione della nozione di “consumatore” fra tutela dei diritti della persona, economia collaborativa e futuro del mercato interno dell’Unione europea
  • Giancarlo Scalese, Some Remarks on Soft Law and Human Rights
  • Augusto Sinagra, Il Consiglio dei diritti umani e il diritto alla pace
  • Roberto Voza, La protezione contro i licenziamenti ingiustificati come diritto fondamentale nell’ordinamento dell’Unione europea (con uno sguardo alla più recente legislazione italiana)
  • Giuliana Ziccardi Capaldo, Giudice interno, reato di tortura e maltrattamenti: un nuovo approccio allo jus cogens human rights per contrastare l’impunità
  • Susanna Cafaro, Alcune riflessioni sul ruolo legittimante dei cittadini a fondamento del processo di integrazione europea
  • Giovanni Cellamare, In tema di “Paese sicuro” nel sistema europeo di asilo
  • Antonietta Damato, In tema di diritto di iniziativa dei cittadini europei
  • Juan Manuel de Faramiñan Gilbert, Europa en la encrucijada: ¿Y dónde la diplomacia?
  • Valeria Di Comite, Il diritto di circolazione degli studenti per la formazione di una coscienza europea
  • Marcello Di Filippo, An International Law Oriented Approach to the Allocation of Jurisdiction in Asylum Procedures
  • Maria Rosaria Mauro, Il divieto di espulsione collettiva dei migranti irregolari: i casi Hirsi e Khlaifia
  • Giuseppe Morgese, Principio di solidarietà e proposta di rifusione del regolamento Dublino
  • Claudia Morviducci, L’iniziativa dei cittadini europei: la Commissione non risponde
  • Annarita Larissa Sciacovelli, Gli effetti della giurisprudenza Zambrano sulle politiche statali di immigrazione e di tutela dell’ordine pubblico e pubblica sicurezza: in margine alle sentenze Réndon Marín e CS
  • Chiara Amalfitano, La certezza del diritto nel diritto dell’Unione europea
  • Paolo Bargiacchi, La strategia globale dell’Unione europea per la democrazia
  • Giandonato Caggiano, Dialogo sullo Stato di diritto negli Stati membri dell’Unione europea
  • Federico Casolari, Lo strano caso del regolamento 2016/369, ovvero della fornitura di sostegno di emergenza all’interno dell’Unione ai tempi delle crisi
  • Gianluca Contaldi, L’evoluzione dei poteri della Banca centrale europea
  • Carlo Curti Gialdino, Tra etica e diritto: il caso Barroso-Goldman Sachs
  • Fabio Ferraro, Alcune riflessioni sul ruolo marginale del Parlamento europeo nella PESC
  • Franco Gallo, Giustizia sociale e giustizia fiscale nell’Unione europea
  • Ivan Ingravallo, Osservazioni sulle prospettive di allargamento dell’Unione europea ai Balcani occidentali
  • Marc Jaeger, L’accès au juge de l’Union européenne des personnes phisiques ou morales: quelques réflexions sur la jurisprudence de la CJUE concernant l’article 263, quatrième alinéa, du TFUE
  • Nicola Lupo, Le molteplici funzioni dell’early warning system, alla luce del terzo “cartellino giallo” sui lavoratori distaccati
  • Luigi Mari, L’Europea del disinganno
  • Marilù Marletta, Corte dei conti europea e contrasto alle frodi IVA in un articolato sistema di tutela degli interessi finanziari dell’Unione europea
  • Roberto Mastroianni, Stato di diritto o ragion di Stato? La difficile rotta verso un controllo europeo del rispetto dei valori dell’Unione negli Stati membri
  • Paolo Mengozzi, La Corte di giustizia come giudice del sistema costituzionale europeo e dei valori in esso riconosciuti?
  • Denise Milizia, Studies on European Integration: A “Venture” Worth the Effort
  • Bruno Nascimbene, Valori comuni dell’Unione europea
  • Lorenzo Federico Pace, Crisi dell’Unione europea, “antieuropeismo” e il futuro dell’euro. Riflessioni su di un saggio di Giorgio Napolitano
  • Ornella Porchia, Equilibrismi interistituzionali per “legiferare meglio”
  • Fabio Raspadori, Il deficit democratico della Unione europea visto attraverso le lenti statocentriche
  • Nicola Ruccia, Alcune riflessioni sul deficit democratico nell’UEM
  • Teresa Russo, La solidarietà come valore fondamentale dell’Unione europea: prospettive e problematiche
  • Gian Luigi Tosato, Notes on the Legal Challenges Posed by the EMU Evolution
  • Ennio Triggiani, Rilegittimare il processo di integrazione europea
  • Maria Luisa Tufano & Sara Pugliese, Patrimonio culturale europeo come veicolo di valori identitari
  • Anna Lucia Valvo, L’Unione europea nel XXI secolo: sfide politico-istituzionali
  • Marina Castellaneta, La libera circolazione dei lavoratori ai tempi della Brexit: spunti di riflessioni sul futuro dei rapporti tra Regno Unito e Unione europea
  • Francesco Cherubini, “What is done is done”? Recesso dall’Unione europea e ripensamenti britannici
  • Luigi Daniele, Brevi note sull’accordo di recesso dall’Unione europea ai sensi dell’art. 50 TUE
  • Pietro Manzini, Sulla revoca della notifica di recesso dall’Unione europea
  • Fausto Pocar, Verso una “Brexit” anche della cooperazione giudiziaria con il Regno Unito?
  • Talitha Vassalli di Dachenhausen, Brexit e spazio giudiziario europeo: dialogo interno tra civil law e common law
  • Christopher Williams, What Future for the English Language in a post-Brexit European Union?
  • Vincenzo Caputi Iambrenghi, Danno ambientale e ordinamento dell’Unione europea
  • Micaela Falcone, Conflitto e bilanciamento tra diritti fondamentali. Il caso Ilva tra tutela dell’ambiente, della salute e diritto al lavoro
  • Francesco Francioni, Da Rio a Parigi: cosa resta della Dichiarazione del 1992 su ambiente e sviluppo?
  • Roberto Giuffrida, Il dovere di prevenzione del danno da inquinamento per la tutela dell’ambiente nel diritto internazionale generale ed europeo
  • Umberto Leanza, Le tre generazioni dei diritti umani e la genesi del diritto all’ambiente
  • Claudia Morini, Regional Mechanisms in the Field of Disaster Risk Management: An Overview of American and Asian Experiences
  • Francesco Munari, Il ruolo della scienza nella giurisprudenza della Corte di giustizia in materia di tutela della salute e dell’ambiente
  • Anna Oriolo, Il principio di proporzionalità in materia di donazioni di sangue: i parametri di armonizzazione della Corte di giustizia nel caso Léger per una gestione condivisa della health governance
  • Elisa Baroncini, The Relation between the Marrakesh System and Regional Trade Agreement in the WTO Case-Law
  • Giuseppe Di Gaspare, La fabbrica dei derivati
  • Ugo Draetta, Truncated Tribunals: A Possible Remedy to the Misconduct of an Arbitrator
  • Daniele Gallo, Quale ruolo per l’arbitrato interstatale sugli investimenti nei recenti accordi sul libero commercio dell’Unione europea?
  • Maria Chiara Malaguti, “Sviluppo” e diritto internazionale dell’economia
  • Sergio Marchisio, Lo sfruttamento delle risorse minerarie dei corpi celesti nel diritto internazionale
  • Alessandra Mignolli, In vino veritas: riflessioni sul dibattito americano in merito alla questione delle indicazioni geografiche nel negoziato TTIP
  • Francesco Moliterni, Commercio internazionale, polizze di carico e letters of indemnity: suggestioni dal modello dei sistemi di pagamenti “istantanei” peer to peer e loro possibile applicazione al sistema di regolamento delle electronic bills of lading
  • Giuseppe Palmisano, Reflections on the implementation procedures of the OECD guidelines for multinational enterprises
  • Attila Tanzi, Remarks on Breach of State Contracts for the Purposes of Jurisdiction and Admissibility in International Investment Arbitration
  • Michele Vellano, Alla ricerca di un’etica globale nel diritto internazionale dell’economia
  • Bruno Veneziani, Globalizzazione, lex mercatoria e autonomia collettiva
  • Amedeo Arena Curia non facit saltus: origini ed evoluzione del principio del primato anteriormente alla sentenza Costa c. Enel
  • Gian Candido De Martin, Le amministrazioni territoriali tra Stato nazionale e integrazione europea
  • Angela Del Vecchio, Recenti sviluppi della giurisprudenza costituzionale in materia di applicazione della CEDU nell'ordinamento italiano
  • Angela Di Stasi, L’art. 6 della CEDU come “cerniera” normativa tra ordinamento nazionale, sistema CEDU e ordinamento giuridico dell’Unione europea: brevi considerazioni in tema di mancata motivazione del rifiuto di rinvio pregiudiziale
  • Giacomo Gattinara, Regioni italiane e Unione europea: “a che punto è la notte?”
  • Martina Guidi, L’interpretazione “costituzionalmente orientata” quale chiave di lettura obbligatoria delle sentenze della Corte europea di Strasburgo nell’ordinamento italiano
  • Monica Lugato, Considerazione dei “processi interni” e “dialogo” fra corti supreme
  • Carmela Panella, La riforma costituzionale del 2016 in materia di rapporti internazionali dello Stato
  • Lucia Serena Rossi, La partecipazione dell’Italia all’Unione europea: spunti offerti dalla (mancata) revisione della Costituzione
  • Giuseppe Tesauro, Sui limiti all’applicazione di norme esterne
  • Antonio Tizzano, Diritti fondamentali e corti supreme europee. Qualche considerazione dal versante lussemburghese
  • Antonio Uricchio, Efficacia della Convenzione europea dei diritti dell’uomo nell’ordinamento italiano, con particolare riguardo ai diritti del contribuente
  • Daniela Vitiello, Il dialogo giurisprudenziale sul programma OMT: rapporti tra ordinamenti, identità nazionale e controlimiti
  • Claudio Zanghì, La progressiva frenata della giurisprudenza costituzionale introdotta dalle sentenze gemelle del 2007
  • Bruno Barel, L’adozione nella dimensione transnazionale dopo le riforme italiane del 2013-2016
  • Maria Caterina Baruffi, La riforma del regolamento Bruxelles II bis e la tutela dell’interesse superiore del minore
  • Ruggiero Cafari Panico, La prestazione caratteristica tra legge applicabile e giurisdizione
  • Domenico Damascelli, Brevi note sull’efficacia probatoria del certificato successorio europeo riguardante la successione di un soggetto coniugato o legato da unione non matrimoniale
  • Pietro Franzina, L’applicazione genuina del diritto straniero richiamato dalle norme di conflitto dell’Unione europea
  • Costanza Honorati, L’oggetto del giudizio “di riesame” ai sensi dell’art. 11 del regolamento Bruxelles II bis
  • Emilia Maria Magrone, Un’Europa a geometria supervariabile in materia dei regimi patrimoniali delle coppie internazionali? Prime considerazioni sui regolamenti 2016/1103 e 2016/1104
  • Fabrizio Marongiu Buonaiuti, Il riconoscimento della filiazione derivante da maternità surrogata – ovvero fecondazione eterologa sui generis – e la riscrittura del limite dell’ordine pubblico da parte della Corte di cassazione, o del diritto del minore ad avere due madri (e nessun padre)
  • Franco Mosconi & Cristina Campiglio, Richiami interni alle legge di diritto internazionale privato e regolamenti comunitari: il caso dei divorzi esteri
  • Giuseppina Pizzolante, Qualificazione del contratto di trasporto merci e legge applicabile in assenza di scelta
  • Angela Maria Romito, Brevi riflessioni sul diritto internazionale privato e processuale dell’Unione europea
  • Francesco Salerno, Limiti e prospettive attuali della funzione interpretativa nel diritto internazionale privato
  • Ilaria Viarengo, Il coordinamento tra gli accordi di scelta della legge applicabile nei regolamenti comunitari in materia di famiglia e di successioni
  • Roberto Baratta, Prassi estensive e competenze delle organizzazioni internazionali: spunti ricostruttivi
  • Umberto Carabelli, Legge sindacale e ordinamento intersindacale: brevi riflessioni
  • Luciano Garofalo, È in atto un processo di “costituzionalizzazione” del diritto internazionale? Alcune riflessioni
  • Alfonso Giordano, Il contributo del pensiero geografico allo Spatial Turn nella riflessione giuridica contemporanea
  • Massimo Panebianco, Il codice Leibniz. Primo codice europeo di diritto internazionale
  • Piero Pennetta, Considerazioni sugli atti normativi delle organizzazioni internazionali regionali
  • Gianpaolo Maria Ruotolo, In tema di diritto alla scienza nell’ordinamento internazionale e istanze di accesso aperto alla conoscenza nell’Unione europea e in Italia

Sunday, June 25, 2017

Call for Papers: Democratic Governance Workshop

The Manchester International Law Centre has issued a call for papers for a workshop on "Democratic Governance," to take place November 3, 2017. Here's the announcement (with a link to the full call):

The Manchester International Law Centre (MILC) Workshop on Democratic Governance

MILC is organizing a workshop on 3 November 2017 dedicated to the question of democratic governance with a view to revisiting the state of the practice in international law twenty-five years after this narrative attracted attention in international legal scholarship following the publication of Tom Franck’s seminal article. The workshop aims to foster debate about current problems surrounding the theory of democratic governance, and will take a critical look at international legal discourses and practice pertaining to democratic governance, including the practice of the European Union. We invite contributions which adopt new theoretical perspectives on the topic. Those employing inter-disciplinary methods and/or drawing on contemporary developments are especially welcome. Early career researchers are encouraged to apply. Abstracts of no more than 1000 words should be submitted by email to milc@manchester.ac.uk by 15th August 2017. Confirmed keynote speakers include Steven Wheatley (University of Lancaster), Russell Buchan (University of Sheffield), and the workshop will conclude with a presentation by Brad Roth (Wayne State University). The organisers anticipate that selected papers will be published in a volume of the newly established Melland Schill Guidebooks on International Law. You can find the Call for Papers and register to attend the event on Eventbrite.

Saturday, June 24, 2017

Belporo: La responsabilité des entreprises multinationales pour les violations des droits de l'homme en Afrique

Christelle Belporo has published La responsabilité des entreprises multinationales pour les violations des droits de l'homme en Afrique (L'Harmattan 2017). Here's the abstract:
La question de la responsabilité des entreprises multinationales pour les violations des droits de l'homme est d'une actualité brûlante. Alors qu'à travers le monde les scandales se multiplient, sur le continent africain, des voix s'élèvent pour dénoncer les nombreuses violations des droits internationalement protégés. Cet ouvrage évalue les réponses offertes par le droit pour l'encadrement de la responsabilité juridique des entreprises multinationales à l'aune des instruments internationaux et africains.

New Issue: Arbitration International

The latest issue of Arbitration International (Vol. 33, no. 2, June 2017) is out. Contents include:
  • Articles
    • Jack Beatson, International arbitration, public policy considerations, and conflicts of law: the perspectives of reviewing and enforcing courts
    • Constantine Partasides & Simon Maynard, Raising the Curtain on English Arbitration
    • Julio César Betancourt, State Liability for Breach of Article II.3 of the 1958 New York Convention
  • Recent Developments
    • Parul Kumar, Is Fraud Arbitrable? Examining the Problematic Indian Discourse
    • Joseph Mante, Arbitrability and public policy: an African perspective
    • Leonardo V. P. de Oliveira, Arbitrability under the new Brazilian arbitration act: a real change?
  • Case Notes
    • Diego P. Fernández Arroyo, The curious case of an arbitration with two annulment courts: comments on the YPF saga
    • Rushmi Sethi, International Arbitration: The Secretary of State for the Home Department v Raytheon Systems Ltd, and enforcement of arbitration awards in England and Wales

New Issue: Revista Electrónica de Estudios Internacionales

The latest issue of the Revista Electrónica de Estudios Internacionales (No. 33, June 2017) is out. Contents include:
  • Estudios
    • César A. Villegas Delgado, El estado de derecho en el ámbito internacional y el imperio de la ley en las relaciones internacionales: Tendencias, retos y desafíos
    • Francisco Pascual Vives, El futuro del arbitraje de inversión en los acuerdos internacionales celebrados por la Unión Europea
    • Felipe Gómez Isa, EU promotion of deep democracy in Egypt after the Arab spring: A missed opportunity?
    • Julio Jorge Urbina, La cooperación internacional en la aplicación de medidas comerciales para luchar contra la pesca ilegal, no declarada y no reglamentada
    • Carolina Jiménez Sánchez, La persecución de género en el Derecho Internacional de los Refugiados: Nuevas perspectivas
    • Beatriz Pérez de las Heras, La Unión Europea y la asociación de naciones del sudeste asiático: Sinergias y retos en la cooperación interregional
    • Eulalia W. Petit de Gabriel, Los “derechos consulares” de los extranjeros detenidos: ¿Nuevas cartas en la baraja de los derechos fundamentales?
  • Notas
    • Jesús Verdú Baeza, A propósito de la cumbre climática de Marrakech: Cuando la solución empieza a ser parte del problema
    • Yolanda Martínez Mata, Bolkestein revisited in the era of the sharing economy
    • Francisco de Asís Peña Díaz, La agenda europea de migración: Últimos desarrollos
    • Marco António Batista Martins & Fernando Miguel Magano Martins, La dependencia hídrica de Portugal respecto a España: Cuestiones de política y seguridad
    • Irene Nuviala Lapieza, The expansion of the Panama Canal and its ruling international contract: A mega-project sailing in troubled waters?

Conference: The Other Globalisers: How the Socialist and the Non-Aligned World Shaped the Rise of Post-War Economic Globalisation

On July 6-7, 2017, the 1989 after 1989: Rethinking the Fall of State Socialism in Global Perspective research project at the University of Exeter will hold a conference on "The Other Globalisers: How the Socialist and the Non-Aligned World Shaped the Rise of Post-War Economic Globalisation." The program is here.

Nersessian: International Human Rights Litigation: A Guide for Judges

David Nersessian (Babson College - Accounting & Law Division) has published International Human Rights Litigation: A Guide for Judges (Federal Judicial Center 2016). Here's the abstract:

This Guide was written to assist federal judges in managing and resolving federal cases involving international human rights claims, and it provides a comprehensive analysis of all substantive and procedural issues involved. A detailed analysis is provided on the Alien Tort Statute, Torture Victim Protection Act, and other federal statutes. The book also includes a model scheduling order for human rights cases as well as case summaries, tables, and research references.

The Guide was drafted to be neutral as between human rights plaintiffs and defendants, and thus should provide useful information for all. Because it was commissioned by a federal government agency (the FJC) for the benefit of federal judges, lawyers, and agencies, the Guide has been placed in the public domain and is available as a free resource. Readers can freely distribute, print, and otherwise use and transmit the Guide in its present form, provided that no changes are made to the manuscript itself.

Job Opening: BIICL (Director)

The British Institute of International and Comparative Law is seeking to appoint a new Director. The advertisement is here.

New Additions to the UN Audiovisual Library of International Law

The Codification Division of the UN Office of Legal Affairs recently added two lectures to the UN Audiovisual Library of International Law. They were given by Diane Desierto on “ASEAN Law and Regional Integration” and Santiago Villalpando on “The 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties: Lights and Shadows.”

Friday, June 23, 2017

Errico: The American Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

Stefania Errico (Coventry Univ. - Centre for Agroecology, Water and Resilience) has posted an ASIL Insight on The American Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

New Issue: Global Trade and Customs Journal

The latest issue of Global Trade and Customs Journal (Vol. 12, no. 6, 2017) is out. Contents include:
  • Jorge Miranda, Analysis and WTO Implications of the Proposed ‘Border Adjusted’ Tax
  • Pablo Muñiz, Challenging the Validity of EU Customs Measures Before the Court of Justice of the EU: Please Use the Back Door
  • Davide Rovetta & Laura Carola Beretta, EU Economic Sanctions Law Against Russia After the ‘Rosneft’ Judgment by the Grand Chamber of the Court of Justice of the European Union: Get Me a Lawyer!
  • Zhaokang Jiang, Customs Valuation and Transfer Pricing: Legal Rules, Practices - A China Case Study - and Proposals to Address the Significant Concern for Cost-Efficient Compliance and Trade Facilitation
  • Jeong Cheol Cho, Korean Tax Authorities’ Taxation of Foreign-Invested Enterprises Which Are Related Parties

Thursday, June 22, 2017

Vasiliev: Cross-Fertilisation Under the Looking Glass: Transjudicial Grammar and the Reception of Strasbourg Jurisprudence by International Criminal Tribunals

Sergey Vasiliev (Leiden Univ. - Grotius Centre for International Legal Studies) has posted Cross-Fertilisation Under the Looking Glass: Transjudicial Grammar and the Reception of Strasbourg Jurisprudence by International Criminal Tribunals (in Judicial Dialogue on Human Rights: The Practice of International Criminal Tribunals, T. Mariniello & P. Lobba eds., forthcoming). Here's the abstract:
What rules of transjudicial communication govern the international criminal tribunals’ invocation of the European Court of Human Rights’ jurisprudence? What parameters should guide the assessments of inter-curial cross-referencing and on what basis can the specific instances thereof be deemed appropriate or otherwise? In tackling these questions, the present chapter seeks to make a methodological contribution to the debate on judicial cross-fertilization in the area of human rights, although the findings may be of a more general application. The horizontal and discretionary character of transjudicial communication does not – and should not – mean that it is free from any (informal) conventions, and that the recipient court can treat the donor court’s case law the way it pleases. Although broader extra-judicial objectives are sometimes attributed to the cross-fertilization practice, no valid benchmarks can be derived from them such that could be deployed in categorising any inter-systemic transposition of legal tests either as ‘use’ or ‘abuse’. Instead, one should look to how the recipient court identifies, construes, adjusts, and applies foreign rationes: it is the method that matters. Transjudicial cross-referencing is motivated primarily by the recipient court’s aspiration to enhance the quality of its legal analyses and persuasiveness of its reasoning. Thus, any appraisal of this practice should consider, at least, whether it is in fact capable of promoting that goal. The chapter identifies, and demonstrates with examples from jurisprudence, four basic rules of ‘transjudicial grammar’ that international criminal judges should respect when relying on Strasbourg human rights tests. It also reflects on the potential consequences of failing to abide by those rules by way of gauging their deterrent potential.

Wednesday, June 21, 2017

Kassoti: The Council v. Front Polisario Case: The Court of Justice's Selective Reliance on International Rules on Treaty Interpretation (Second Part)

Eva Kassoti (The Hague Univ. - Law) has posted The Council v. Front Polisario Case: The Court of Justice's Selective Reliance on International Rules on Treaty Interpretation (Second Part). Here's the abstract:
In the context of the debate on the relationship between EU and international law, it has been observed in the literature that the Court’s approach to international law seems to have shifted over time. It has been argued that, although in its earlier case-law the Court seemed to have adopted a friendly and open attitude towards international law, more recent case-law evidences a more reserved, inward-looking attitude and a tendency to eschew engagement therewith. In this context, the Court’s judgment in Front Polisario is highly relevant since the Court relied heavily on international rules on treaty interpretation and, thus, the judgment provides important insights into how the Court treats international law in its practice. This Article discusses the findings of the Court and argues that the Court’s reliance on international law was artificial and selective. The Article concludes by arguing that, ultimately, the Front Polisario judgment lends evidentiary force to critical voices in the literature that have casted doubt on the image of the EU, as evidenced by the jurisprudence of its principal judicial organ, as an actor maintaining a distinctive commitment to international law.

Hilpold: How to Construe a Myth: Neutrality within the United Nations System Under Special Consideration of the Austrian Case

Peter Hilpold (Universität Innsbruck - Law) has posted How to Construe a Myth: Neutrality within the United Nations System Under Special Consideration of the Austrian Case. Here's the abstract:
In the 19th century neutrality was a highly appreciated concept. In the 20th century it has widely lost relevance and in principle it should be incompatible with UN membership. However, also under the UN system some states have opted for neutrality and it can be argued that there is still space for this status within the universal peace order. In fact, this peace order is far from perfect. There are several lacunae in the prohibition of the use of force and this concept is open to different interpretations. New threats, such as international terrorism, are emerging that could threaten the absolute prohibition of the use of force. It is contended here that neutrals could play an important role when it comes to find an interpretation of this prohibition that best could reconcile the goals of peace and security with the overall - still imperfect - structure of the UN system. These questions are analysed with primary reference to Austrian neutrality which on the hand seems obsolete but on the other is forcefully looking for a new meaning.

Call for Papers: 2017 ASIL Research Forum (Reminder)

The American Society of International Law has issued a call for papers for its 2017 Research Forum, to be held October 27-28, at the Washington University School of Law in St. Louis as part of the Society's Midyear Meeting. The deadline is June 26, 2017. Here's the call:

The American Society of International Law calls for submissions of scholarly paper proposals for the ASIL Research Forum to be held during the ASIL Midyear Meeting in St. Louis, Missouri at Washington University School of Law.

The Research Forum, a Society initiative introduced in 2011, aims to provide a setting for the presentation and focused discussion of works-in-progress. All ASIL members are invited to attend the Forum, whether presenting a paper or not.

Papers may be on any topic related to international and transnational law and should be unpublished (for purposes of the call, publication to an electronic database such as SSRN is not considered publication). Interdisciplinary projects, empirical studies, and jointly authored papers are welcome.

Proposals should be submitted via the form here by June 26, 2017. Interested paper-givers should submit an abstract (no more than 500 words in length) summarizing the scholarly paper to be presented at the Forum. Abstracts will be considered via a blind review process. Papers that do not follow these guidelines will not be considered. Notifications of acceptance will go out by the end of July.

Papers accepted for presentation will be assembled into panels. The organizers welcome volunteers to serve as discussants who will comment on the papers. All authors of accepted papers will be required to submit a draft paper four weeks before the Research Forum (September 29, 2017). Accepted authors must commit to being present on both Friday, October 27 and Saturday, October 28, 2017. Draft papers will be posted in advance of the Forum on an asil.org website accessible only by attendees of the Forum.

Anderson & Waxman: Debating Autonomous Weapon Systems, Their Ethics, and Their Regulation Under International Law

Kenneth Anderson (American Univ. - Law) & Matthew C. Waxman (Columbia Univ. - Law) have posted Debating Autonomous Weapon Systems, Their Ethics, and Their Regulation Under International Law (in The Oxford Handbook of Law, Regulation, and Technology, Roger Brownsword, Eloise Scotford, & Karen Yeung eds., forthcoming). Here's the abstract:
An international public debate over the law and ethics of autonomous weapon systems (AWS) has been underway since 2012, with those urging legal regulation of AWS under existing principles and requirements of the international law of armed conflict, on the one side, in argument with opponents who favor, instead, a preemptive international treaty ban on all such weapons, on the other. This Chapter provides an introduction to this international debate, offering the main arguments on each side. These include disputes over defining an AWS, the morality and law of automated targeting and target selection by machine, and the interaction of humans and machines in the context of lethal weapons of war. Although the Chapter concludes that a categorical ban on AWS is unjustified morally and legally — favoring the law of armed conflict’s existing case-by-case legal evaluation — it offers an exposition of arguments on each side of the AWS issue.

Tuesday, June 20, 2017

Cuniberti: Rethinking International Commercial Arbitration: Towards Default Arbitration

Gilles Cuniberti (Univ. of Luxembourg - Law) has published Rethinking International Commercial Arbitration: Towards Default Arbitration (Edward Elgar Publishing 2017). Here's the abstract:
This innovative book proposes a fundamental rethink of the consensual foundation of arbitration and argues that it should become the default mode of resolution in international commercial disputes. The book first discusses the most important arguments against this proposal and responds to them. In particular, it addresses the issue of the legitimacy of arbitrators and the compatibility of the idea with guarantees afforded by European human rights law and US constitutional law. The book then presents several models of non-consensual arbitration that could be implemented to afford neutral adjudication in disputes between parties originating from different jurisdictions, to offer an additional alternative forum in the doctrine of forum non conveniens or to save judicial costs.

Brunnée & Toope: Norm Robustness and Contestation in International Law: Self-Defence against Non-State Actors

Jutta Brunnée (Univ. of Toronto - Law) & Stephen J. Toope (Univ. of Toronto - Munk School of Global Affairs) have posted Norm Robustness and Contestation in International Law: Self-Defence against Non-State Actors. Here's the abstract:
This paper is part of an interdisciplinary project on 'Norm Robustness and Contestation', convened Nicole Deitelhoff and Lisbet Zimmermann. Using the example of the right to self-defense under customary international law, we engage with questions concerning the linkage between norm robustness and legality. We draw out important differences between validity contestation and applicatory contestation within law. In so doing, we connect the IR debate over norm robustness with our framework of interactional international law, bringing together constructivist insights into social normativity and a theory of international legality. We hypothesize that norms that meet the requirements of legality and are upheld by practices of legality enjoy 'validity' and 'facticity' (as defined by Deitelhoff and Zimmermann), and are 'robust.' This model reveals that law operates through a continuing process of contestation. The requirements of legality impose a discipline, such that legal contestation will normally be applicatory contestation. Through practices of legality, therefore, legal norms can be maintained or shifted. However, legal norms may decay when practices of legality weaken, or when challenges amount to validity contestation. The currently heightened contestation surrounding the circumstances under which the right to self-defense can be exercised against non-state actors allows exploration and illustration of these dynamics.

Symposium: Disaster Risk Reduction and International Law

On June 29-July 1, 2017, the University of Reading's School of Law and Walker Institute and the American Society of International Law's Disaster Law Interest Group will hold a symposium on "Disaster Risk Reduction and International Law," in Reading. The program is here. Here's the idea:

The international community is grappling with the increasing frequency and severity of a broad range of ‘man-made’ and ‘natural’ disasters, through initiatives such as the Sendai Framework on Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030, Sustainable Development Goals 2015, and UN Framework Convention on Climate Change.

The current global landscape governing disaster risk reduction (DRR) is therefore in a significant period of evolution. It is likely that the reach of DRR will extend into many different legal regimes, both in the development of ‘soft’ (non-binding policy) and ‘hard’ (formally binding) law governing a broad range of disasters.

Conference: ANZSIL 25th Annual Conference

The Australian and New Zealand Society of International Law will hold its 25th Annual Conference on June 29-July 1, 2017, in Canberra. The theme is "Sustaining the International Legal Order in an Era of Rising Nationalism." The program is here.

New Issue: Rivista di Diritto Internazionale

The latest issue of the Rivista di Diritto Internazionale (Vol. 100, no. 2, 2017) is out. Contents include:
  • Articoli
    • C. Focarelli, Jus gentium in Alberico Gentili: A Call for Prudence and the Common Sense of Humanity
    • L. Borlini, Soft law, soft organizations e regolamentazione « tecnica » di problemi di sicurezza pubblica e integrità finanziaria
    • P. Mori, La Corte costituzionale chiede alla Corte di giustizia di rivedere la sentenza Taricco: difesa dei controlimiti o rifiuto delle limitazioni di sovranità in materia penale?
    • M. Marchegiani, Tendenze evolutive nel ricorso al principio della protezione equivalente da parte della Corte europea dei diritti dell’uomo
  • Note e Commenti
    • N. Ronzitti, La legge italiana sulle missioni internazionali
    • G. Biagioni, Unioni same-sex e diritto internazionale privato: il nuovo quadro normativo dopo il d.lgs. n. 7/2017
    • O. Lopes Pegna, Effetti dei matrimoni same-sex contratti all’estero dopo il « riordino » delle norme di diritto internazionale privato italiane
  • Panorama
    • A. Saccucci, I « ripensamenti » della Corte europea sul caso Khlaifia: il divieto di trattamenti inumani e degradanti e il divieto di espulsioni collettive « alla prova » delle situazioni di emergenza migratoria
    • R. Nigro, La sentenza della Corte di giustizia dell’Unione Europea nel caso Lounani e le controverse motivazioni giuridiche al fine di escludere lo status di rifugiato per presunti terroristi

Monday, June 19, 2017

Chen: Bilateral Investment Treaties and Domestic Institutional Reform

Richard C. Chen (Univ. of Maine - Law) has posted Bilateral Investment Treaties and Domestic Institutional Reform (Columbia Journal of Transnational Law, forthcoming). Here's the abstract:

The bilateral investment treaties (BITs) signed between developed and developing countries are supposed to increase the flow of investment from the former to the latter. But the evidence indicates that the existing approach of guaranteeing special protections for foreign investors has only a modest impact on luring their dollars. At the same time they are failing to produce meaningful benefits, these treaty commitments create substantial costs for the host states that make them, exposing them to liability and constraining their regulatory authority. Given this state of imbalance, the time seems ripe for a new approach, but existing proposals for revising BITs are either insufficient or unrealistic, or in some instances even counterproductive.

This Article calls for a fundamental redesign of BITs based on empirically validated premises about how host states actually attract foreign investment. Political science and economic studies show that foreign investors place substantial weight on the quality of domestic institutions. Existing BITs fail to promote investment because they are not an adequate substitute for these institutions, nor are they effective in generating reform. The proposed model would make domestic institutional reform the organizing principle of BIT design, and the Article offers several specific provisions that would help achieve that goal. Such an approach would produce immediate benefits for host states and so should be particularly attractive to developing countries. But the institutional reform model also retains the end goal shared by both sides of increasing foreign investment and so should be more realistically attainable than proposals pitched as benefiting developing states alone.

Gardner: Parochial Procedure

Maggie Gardner (Harvard Univ. - Law) has published Parochial Procedure (Stanford Law Review, Vol 69, no. 4, April 2017). Here's the abstract:

The federal courts are often accused of being too parochial, favoring U.S. parties over foreigners and U.S. law over relevant foreign or international law. According to what this Article terms the “parochial critique,” the courts’ U.S.-centrism generates unnecessary friction with allies, regulatory conflict, and access-to-justice gaps. This parochialism is assumed to reflect the preferences of individual judges: persuade judges to like international law and transnational cases better, the standard story goes, and the courts will reach more cosmopolitan results.

This Article challenges that assumption. I argue instead that parochial doctrines can develop even in the absence of parochial judges. Our sometimes-parochial procedure may be the unintended result of decisionmaking pressures that mount over time within poorly designed doctrines. As such, it reflects not so much the personal views of individual judges but the limits of institutional capacity, the realities of behavioral decisionmaking, and the path dependence of the common law. This Article shows how open-ended decisionmaking in the midst of complexity encourages the use of heuristics that tend to emphasize the local, the familiar, and the concrete. These decisionmaking shortcuts, by disfavoring the foreign, put a parochial thumb on the scale—but that tilt is not limited to individual cases. Rather, it is locked in and amplified through the accumulation of precedent, as later judges rely on existing decisions to resolve new cases. Over time, even judges with positive conceptions of international law and transnational order will find themselves, in applying these doctrines, consistently favoring U.S. litigants over foreigners and U.S. law over foreign or international law.

To explore this theory, this Article traces the evolution of four procedural doctrines: discovery of foreign evidence, forum non conveniens, service of process abroad, and the recognition of foreign judgments. The decisionmaking pressures outlined here can explain why the first two doctrines (framed as open-ended standards) are often criticized as parochial while the latter two (framed in more rule-like terms) are not. And if that account is at least plausible, it supports the primary claim of this Article: the occasional parochialism of our courts does not necessarily reflect the personal prejudices of our judges. If so, then avoiding the costs of parochialism will require structural, not just personal, solutions.

Galbraith: Making Treaty Implementation More Like Statutory Interpretation

Jean Galbraith (Univ. of Pennsylvania - Law) has published Making Treaty Implementation More Like Statutory Interpretation (Michigan Law Review, Vol. 115, no. 8, June 2017). Here's the abstract:
Both statutes and treaties are the “supreme law of the land,” and yet quite different practices have developed with respect to their implementation. For statutes, all three branches have embraced the development of administrative law, which allows the executive branch to translate broad statutory directives into enforceable obligations. But for treaties, there is a far more cumbersome process. Unless a treaty provision contains language that courts interpret to be directly enforceable, they will deem it to require implementing legislation from Congress. This Article explores and challenges the perplexing disparity between the administration of statutes and treaties. It shows that the conventional assumption that Congress must implement treaties that are not directly enforceable by courts stems from an unduly narrow historical perspective. Instead, largely forgotten nineteenth-century practice and cases reveal that the executive branch can implement treaties so as to make them enforceable in the courts. Drawing on this past practice, this Article argues that it is time to reconfigure the administration of treaties. In at least some circumstances, the executive branch should be able to translate treaty provisions into court-enforceable obligations in a manner comparable to the statutory context, including through rulemaking by administrative agencies. This approach is particularly desirable for multilateral regulatory treaties, which have come to play an increasingly important role in global governance.

Call for Abstracts: Diálogos de derecho internacional

The Escuela de Derecho de la Universidad Torcuato Di Tella and the Revista Latinoamericana de Derecho Internacional have issued a call for abstracts for a symposium on "Diálogos de derecho internacional," to take place October 19, 2017, in Buenos Aires. Here's the call:

La Escuela de Derecho de la Universidad Torcuato Di Tella y la Revista Latinoamericana de Derecho Internacional convocan a enviar trabajos originales para el primer coloquio “Diálogos de derecho internacional”, que tendrá lugar el día jueves 19 de octubre de 2017 en la sede de la UTDT (Buenos Aires). El coloquio busca promover el debate académico sobre asuntos vinculados al derecho internacional. En esta ocasión, se dará prioridad a los trabajos que fomenten el diálogo entre el derecho internacional y otras disciplinas, como la ciencia política, la economía, los estudios internacionales, la filosofía y la historia.

El coloquio se propone explorar los aportes de otras perspectivas disciplinarias al derecho internacional y discutir si sería necesario adoptar perspectivas disciplinarias específicas en investigaciones futuras. A estos efectos, se alienta especialmente la presentación tanto de trabajos que aborden específicamente la relación entre el derecho internacional y otra(s) disciplina(s), como trabajos que discutan cualquier cuestión de derecho internacional público incorporando una perspectiva interdisciplinaria.

El coloquio está abierto a académicos/as, profesionales y estudiantes avanzados de derecho internacional y disciplinas afines. En particular, se espera contar con la participación de jóvenes internacionalistas. Las propuestas serán seleccionadas de acuerdo a su calidad, originalidad y su capacidad de estimular un debate productivo. Las contribuciones deberán ser inéditas. Los trabajos presentados durante el coloquio serán considerados para su publicación en la Revista Latinoamericana de Derecho Internacional. En esta oportunidad, se aceptarán solamente trabajos en idioma castellano.

La conferencia central estará a cargo de Víctor Abramovich, Profesor de la Universidad de Buenos Aires, Director de la Maestría en Derechos Humanos de la Universidad Nacional de Lanús, Profesor Adjunto de American University y Procurador Fiscal ante la Corte Suprema de Justicia de la Nación. Se desempeñó como Vicepresidente de la Comisión Interamericana de Derechos Humanos, y como Relator para Colombia, Cuba, Guatemala y Nicaragua, y Relator Especial sobre los derechos de las mujeres ante ese organismo.

Envío de propuestas: Se recibirán resúmenes (máximo 500 palabras) hasta el 15 de julio de 2017. Estos deberán enviarse, junto con un CV actualizado, a coloquiodip2017@gmail.com. Los resultados serán informados el 1 de agosto de 2017. Los borradores deberán ser enviados a más tardar el 1 de octubre de 2017. Lamentablemente, la organización no cuenta con fondos para financiar viajes o estadías para el coloquio.

Call for Papers: Seventh Annual Junior Faculty Forum for International Law

A call for papers has been issued for the Seventh Annual Junior Faculty Forum for International Law, convened by Dino Kritsiotis (Univ. of Nottingham - Law), Anne Orford (Univ. of Melbourne - Law), and J.H.H. Weiler (New York Univ. - Law). The Seventh Forum will be held at the University of Melbourne on May 28-30, 2018. The closing deadline for applications is December 15, 2017. The full call is here.

Job Opening: EUI/WZB Berlin (Research Fellow/Ph.D. Candidate)

The “Global Citizenship Law” Project, co-hosted by the WZB Berlin Social Science Center and the European University Institute, is seeking to appoint a Research Fellow (Ph.D. Candidate) in the field of “International Law and Governance of Citizenship.” The deadline is July 31, 2017. Details about the Ph.D. vacancy are available here. Details about the project are available here.

Sunday, June 18, 2017

Call for Papers: ASIL Midwest Works-in-Progress Workshop

The ASIL-Midwest, an interest group of the American Society of International Law, has issued a call for papers for its annual works-in-progress workshop, to take place September 15-16, 2017, in Cleveland. Here's the call:

ASIL-Midwest is co-sponsoring its fourth scholarly works-in-progress conference at the Cleveland-Marshall College of Law in Cleveland, Ohio on September 15-16, 2017. The goal is to create a friendly, open conversation about works in progress and to foster a Midwestern United States international law community. To that end, the workshop will include both full drafts and early works in progress.

Those interested in presenting at the conference should send a 500-word abstract to ASIL-Midwest Co-Chair Cindy Buys (cbuys@siu.edu) by Friday, July 28, 2017. Please also include a sentence about the stage the paper is expected to be in by September (e.g., reasonably complete draft, early work in progress, etc.). Papers may address any International Law topics, and this Call for Submissions is open to everyone in the international legal community. Preference will be given to ASIL members who are also members of the ASIL-Midwest Interest Group. Paper presenters will be asked to circulate their drafts (or a summary of the project if it's early stage) to workshop attendees no later than September 1, 2017.

Those interested in serving as a commentator for a paper should also send an email to the Co-Chair Cindy Buys by July 28 (cbuys@siu.edu). Commentators will be asked to prepare five to eight minutes of comments on one or more of the papers. Those interested in presenting are also encouraged to comment on the other papers and should indicate whether they are willing to serve as commentators as well.

ASIL members and Cleveland-Marshall College of Law faculty, staff, and students may attend for free. Participants who are not ASIL members or Cleveland-Marshall College of Law affiliates will be required to pay a $50 registration fee (includes workshop and some meals) for the conference. Some meals will be provided, but participants are responsible for their own travel and hotel expenses. More details regarding transportation, hotels and other logistics will be provided shortly.

For any questions about papers and presentations, please contact ASIL-Midwest Interest Group Co-Chairs, Cindy Buys (cbuys@siu.edu) or Neha Jain (njain@umn.edu). For questions about conference logistics, contact immediate past-Chair, Milena Sterio (m.sterio@csuohio.edu).

Brunnée & Toope: Interactional Legal Theory, the International Rule of Law and Global Constitutionalism

Jutta Brunnée (Univ. of Toronto - Law) & Stephen J. Toope (Univ. of Toronto - Munk School of Global Affairs) have posted Interactional Legal Theory, the International Rule of Law and Global Constitutionalism (in Handbook on Global Constitutionalism, Anthony F. Lang & Antje Wiener eds., forthcoming). Here's the abstract:
In this contribution to a forthcoming handbook on global constitutionalism, we outline our interactional approach to international law. We then connect that approach to ‘circular,’ practice-oriented and interpretative understandings of the rule of law. We go on to show how those conceptions of the rule of law can help to support a limited ‘constitutionalism’ that is still at a nascent stage in international society. We argue that a constitutionalism that is expressed primarily through the rule of law is more open to diversity than might at first appear to be the case; indeed, we suggest that it is likely to be more open than forms of political constitutionalism that focus on constituent power.

Saturday, June 17, 2017

Special Issue: Internationales Meeresumweltschutzrecht

The latest issue of Zeitschrift für Umweltrecht (2017, no. 6) focuses on "Internationales Meeresumweltschutzrecht." Contents include:
  • Internationales Meeresumweltschutzrecht
    • Till Markus & Harald Ginzky, Editorial: Internationales Meeresumweltschutzrecht?!
    • Harald Ginzky & Hans-Peter Damian, Bergbau am Tiefseeboden – Standards und Verfahren für einen effektiven Schutz der Umwelt
    • Andrea Weiß, Meeresstrategie-Rahmenrichtlinie: Auf dem Weg zu einem guten Umweltzustand der Meeresgewässer in Europa?
    • Sven Mißling & Sebastian Unger, Schutz und nachhaltige Nutzung der marinen Biodiversität in Gebieten jenseits nationaler Hoheitsgewalt
    • Valentin J. Schatz, Die Rolle des Flaggenstaates bei der Bekämpfung illegaler Fischerei in der AWZ im Lichte der jüngeren internationalen Rechtsprechung

Friday, June 16, 2017

New Issue: International Criminal Law Review

The latest issue of the International Criminal Law Review (Vol. 17, no. 3, 2017) is out. Contents include:
  • Ben Saul, The Legal Relationship between Terrorism and Transnational Crime
  • Juan-Pablo Perez-Leon-Acevedo, Victims at the Prospective International Criminal Law Section of the African Court of Justice and Human and Peoples’ Rights
  • Mohamed Elewa Badar & Noelle Higgins, Discussion Interrupted: The Destruction and Protection of Cultural Property under International Law and Islamic Law - the Case of Prosecutor v. Al Mahdi
  • Frederick Cowell & Ana Leticia Magini, Collapsing Legitimacy: How the Crime of Aggression Could Affect the ICC’s Legitimacy
  • Nikola Hajdin, The Nature of Leadership in the Crime of Aggression: The ICC’s New Concern?
  • Domenico Carolei, Cestaro v. Italy: The European Court of Human Rights on the Duty to Criminalise Torture and Italy’s Structural Problem

New Issue: International Community Law Review

The latest issue of the International Community Law Review (Vol. 19, nos. 2-3, 2017) is out. Contents include:
  • Russell Buchan & Nicholas Tsagourias, The Crisis in Crimea and the Principle of Non-Intervention
  • Gabriela A. Oanta, In the Search of an Appropriate Legal Framework to Prevent Environmental Risks Caused by Navigation in the Black Sea
  • Leslie-Anne Duvic-Paoli, The Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services or the Framing of Scientific Knowledge within the Law of Sustainable Development
  • Wei-Chung Lin, Safeguarding the Environment? The Effectiveness of Amicus Curiae Submissions in Investor-State Arbitration
  • Ulf Linderfalk, Navigating the Legal Landscape between the General and the Specific: General Concepts as Tools of Legal Reasoning
  • Niall Alexander Rand, Reforming the International Whaling Commission: Indigenous Peoples, the Canadian Problem and the Road Ahead

Benvenisti & Lustig: Taming Democracy: Codifying the Laws of War to Restore the European Order, 1856-1874

Eyal Benvenisti (Univ. of Cambridge - Law) & Doreen Lustig (Tel Aviv Univ. - Law) have posted Taming Democracy: Codifying the Laws of War to Restore the European Order, 1856-1874. Here's the abstract:
In this article, we contend that the canonical narrative about civil society’s efforts to discipline warfare during the mid-nineteenth century - a narrative of progressive evolution of Enlightenment-inspired international humanitarian law (IHL) - does not withstand scrutiny. On the basis of archival work and close reading of protocols, we argue that European governments codified the laws of war not for the purpose of protecting civilians from combatants’ fire, but rather to protect combatants from civilians eager to take up arms to defend their nation - even against their own governments’ wishes. We further argue that the concern with placing “a gun on the shoulder of every socialist” extended far beyond the battlefield. Monarchs and emperors turned to international law to put the dreaded nationalist and revolutionary genies back into the bottle. Specifically, we propose that it was the Franco-Prussian War of 1870 - 1871 and the subsequent short-lived, but violent, rise of the Paris Commune that prompted governments (more than any other war during this formative era of international law) to adopt the Brussels Declaration of 1874, the first comprehensive text on the laws of war. The new law not only exposed civilians to the war's harms, but also supported the growing capitalist economy by ensuring that market interests would be protected from the scourge of war and the consequences of defeat. The laws of war, in this formative stage, were more about restoring the political and economic order of Europe than about wartime.

Rosso: Les mécanismes de flexibilité dans le droit de l'OMC

Catherine Rosso has published Les mécanismes de flexibilité dans le droit de l'OMC (Bruylant 2017). Here's the abstract:

Orienté vers le libre-échange, le droit de l’Organisation Mondiale du Commerce est basé sur plusieurs principes fondamentaux : la non-discrimination, la réciprocité et la réduction progressive des obstacles au commerce. À l’instar des règles du Droit international économique, il existe des mécanismes répondant à l’impératif d’adaptabilité nécessaires aux Membres pour faire face à des situations exceptionnelles afin d’intégrer de la souplesse dans l’application du droit de l’OMC et de déroger aux principes et règles régissant le commerce international. Cela vaut aussi bien en période de crise qu’indépendamment de l’environnement économique général, dès lors que les conditions sont réunies pour que les Membres les mettent en œuvre. La crise économique et financière de 2008 donne à l’analyse de ces mécanismes une acuité particulière puisque la période a fait craindre un recours accru, voire abusif, à ces instruments d’exception, de dérogation, de sauvegarde, recours qui signifierait un retour à des pratiques protectionnistes.

La réflexion sur l’utilisation de ces outils permet la mise en évidence des instruments proposés par le droit de l'OMC pour faire face aux crises et plus généralement à des situations qui nécessitent un frein au libre-échange. Mais au-delà, elle précise les pratiques des Membres dans l’utilisation de ces outils, la logique générale de ces mécanismes de flexibilité et l’équilibre qui existe entre les principes orientés vers le libre-échange et les exceptions qui supposent des restrictions au commerce. Les questions qui se posent alors doivent conduire à étudier l’ensemble de ces instruments de flexibilité, l’articulation entre ces instruments et ceux des autres organisations internationales en lien avec l’OMC, le rôle du juge de l’OMC dans les différends liés à l’utilisation de ces mécanismes, et les perspectives d’évolution des instruments de flexibilité du droit de l’OMC.

Thursday, June 15, 2017

Call for Session Proposals: 2018 ASIL Annual Meeting

The American Society of International Law has issued a call for session proposals for its 112th Annual Meeting, which will take place April 4-7, 2018, in Washington, DC. The conference theme is: "International Law in Practice." As one of the co-chairs, I encourage everyone to submit a proposal! Here's the call:

International Law in Practice

Practice reifies and animates international law, shaping what it means, how it is applied, and how effectively it achieves the diverse goals of those who invoke it. Practice is constitutive and contentious. It looks both backward and forward.

The 2018 Annual Meeting will focus on international law in action: how and by whom international law is made, shaped, and carried out, both formally and informally; how it is taught; how the practices of international institutions, law firms, companies, not-for-profit organizations, government offices, and militaries generate international rules; how and in what ways states and other actors interact; and how participants deploy international legal arguments. The meeting will consider how international legal practice has changed and is continuing to change in response to geopolitical shifts and contemporary challenges, including demands for greater transparency, accountability, legitimacy, and inclusion.

At its 112th Annual Meeting, the American Society of International Law invites policymakers, practitioners, academics across the disciplinary spectrum, and students to reflect on the broad manifestations, sources, and implications of international legal practice.

2018 ASIL Annual Meeting Committee Co-Chairs

Kathleen Claussen
Jacob Katz Cogan
Tafadzwa Pasipanodya

Thematic Tracks:

  • International Dispute Resolution
  • Criminal Law, Human Rights, Migration
  • International Law & Domestic Law
  • Armed Conflict, Use of Force, and Terrorism
  • Environment, Territory, Sea, and Space
  • International Business
  • Global Governance and International Organizations

Call for Session Proposals

To suggest a session to the Committee, please complete the form below by no later than July 18, 2017.

Click to Access Proposal Form

New Issue: Journal of Conflict Resolution

The latest issue of the Journal of Conflict Resolution (Vol. 61, no. 6, June 2017) is out. Contents include:
  • Nils W. Metternich, Shahryar Minhas, & Michael D. Ward, Firewall? or Wall on Fire? A Unified Framework of Conflict Contagion and the Role of Ethnic Exclusion
  • Katherine Sawyer, Kathleen Gallagher Cunningham, & William Reed, The Role of External Support in Civil War Termination
  • Lindsay L. Heger & Danielle F. Jung, Negotiating with Rebels: The Effect of Rebel Service Provision on Conflict Negotiations
  • Clionadh Raleigh & Kars De Bruijne, Where Rebels Dare to Tread: A Study of Conflict Geography and Co-option of Local Power in Sierra Leone
  • Ursula Daxecker, Dirty Hands: Government Torture and Terrorism
  • Matthias Mader, Citizens’ Perceptions of Policy Objectives and Support for Military Action: Looking for Prudence in Germany
  • Lisa Hultman & Dursun Peksen, Successful or Counterproductive Coercion? The Effect of International Sanctions on Conflict Intensity

Wednesday, June 14, 2017

Park: Sovereignty and Status in East Asian International Relations

Seo-Hyun Park (Lafayette College - Government and Law) has published Sovereignty and Status in East Asian International Relations (Cambridge Univ. Press 2017). Here's the abstract:
This book provides a theoretical and empirical analysis of a key concept in East Asian security debates, sovereign autonomy, and how it reproduces hierarchy in the regional order. Park argues that contemporary strategic debates in East Asia are based on shared contextual knowledge - that of international hierarchy - reconstructed in the late-nineteenth century. The mechanism that reproduces this lens of hierarchy is domestic legitimacy politics in which embattled political leaders contest the meaning of sovereign autonomy. Park argues that the idea of status seeking has remained embedded in the concept of sovereign autonomy and endures through distinct and alternative security frames that continue to inform contemporary strategic debates in East Asia. This book makes a significant contribution to debates in international relations theory and security studies about autonomy and status, as well as to the now extensive literature on the nature of East Asian regional order.