Call for Papers
‘Turkey and International Law: History, Present and Future’
Date: 14 December Thursday
Koç University, İstanbul
Call for Papers
International law’s encounters with Turkey and Turkey’s encounters with international law have a long-standing and rich history. Ranging from the Ottoman Empire’s history of treaty engagement with the Concert of Europe states to the Treaty of Lausanne that underpins the international legal personality of the Turkish Republic, and from arguably one of the most cited cases of the Permanent Court of International Justice, Lotus/Bozkurt, to the development of the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights through Turkish cases, Turkey is ever present in international law. Yet, scholarship that takes a comprehensive look at international law’s encounter with Turkey and Turkey’s encounter with international law is underdeveloped. This workshop aims to contribute to a better understanding of Turkey’s engagement with international law by asking the ‘Turkey’ question in international law. How has Turkey contributed to international law and how has international law shaped Turkey’s encounters with international relations, law and legal reasoning? Is there a Turkish approach to international law and if so, what are the core features and markers of such an approach?
With this dual research question in mind, Center for Global Public Law of Koç University invites submissions from international law, international history, international relations and domestic law scholars assessing the two-way relationship between Turkey and international law. We therefore encourage paper proposals to address at least one of two interrelated themes below:
A) Turkish approaches to international law: Turkish perspectives on the history, theory, sources, doctrine, branches and teaching of international law (in scholarship, domestic judicial pronouncements and political discourse).
B) Turkey’s role in shaping international law: Turkey's contribution to international custom, treaties and doctrine.
We encourage papers to look beyond specific cases and instead offer theoretical accounts and aggregate perspectives. The workshop also welcomes submissions that focus on a particular historic period of engagement, including engagement during the Ottoman Empire with international law, or papers that focus on a particular branch or field of international law, for example, Turkey’s engagement with international law of the sea, international trade law, international human rights law, international law of state responsibility, or international law on the use of force. The workshop invites papers to develop theoretical takes on the relationship between Turkey and international law. It also encourages inter-disciplinary approaches.
We invite submissions of paper abstracts of 500 words alongside a one page brief CV in one single document. The selection process will be based on the relevance of the proposal to the theme of the workshop as outlined above and its scholarly merit. The language of the workshop will be Turkish and English. Please indicate your language preference with respect to delivery.
Applications should be submitted by 1 November 2017 to email@example.com.
All applicants will be notified of the outcome of the selection process by 15 November 2017. Outline of papers are due by 10 December 2017.
Center for Global Public Law will be able to cover one night accomodation in Istanbul, economy air fare for those that do not receive support from their own institutions.
All paper givers are invited to the official workshop dinnner on 14 December 2017, Thursday.
Wednesday, September 20, 2017
The Military Law and the Law of War Review
Call for Papers
The Military Law and the Law of War Review / Revue de Droit Militaire et de Droit de la Guerre is a journal specialised in matters of interest for both civilian and military legal advisors as well as legal scholars and academics. Published since 1962, it is among the oldest publications at the international level in the areas of military/security law and the law of war. For decades, the Review has been an important forum of discussion for scholars and practitioners from all over the world.
The Review is published under the auspices of the International Society for Military Law and the Law of War. It features original and challenging articles, case notes, commentaries of the latest legal developments, as well as book reviews. As a distinct trait, it accepts contributions in six languages: English, French, German, Spanish, Italian and Dutch.
For its coming issue (vol. 55/2), the Review’s editorial board welcomes submissions from scholars and practitioners that come within the broader scope of the Review (including military law, law of armed conflict, law on the use of force, as well as international criminal law and human rights law (inasmuch as related to situations of armed conflict)).
The deadline for submission is 15 November 2017.
Submissions should be sent by e-mail to firstname.lastname@example.org and will be subject to double-blind peer review. Articles should normally not be longer than 15.000 words (footnotes included), although longer pieces may exceptionally be considered. Inquiries as to whether a possible submission comes within the scope of the Review can be sent to the abovementioned e-mail address.
Selected papers will be published online on the Review’s website in advance access (in a non-downloadable and non-printable form) as well as on Hein Online following editing and type-setting. The print version of the issue is scheduled to come out in Spring 2018.
Evidence for Hope makes the case that, yes, human rights work. Critics may counter that the movement is in serious jeopardy or even a questionable byproduct of Western imperialism. They point out that Guantánamo is still open, the Arab Spring protests have been crushed, and governments are cracking down on NGOs everywhere. But respected human rights expert Kathryn Sikkink draws on decades of research and fieldwork to provide a rigorous rebuttal to pessimistic doubts about human rights laws and institutions. She demonstrates that change comes slowly and as the result of struggle, but in the long term, human rights movements have been vastly effective.
Attacks on the human rights movement’s credibility are based on the faulty premise that human rights ideas emerged in North America and Europe and were imposed on developing southern nations. Starting in the 1940s, Latin American leaders and activists were actually early advocates for the international protection of human rights. Sikkink shows that activists and scholars disagree about the efficacy of human rights because they use different yardsticks to measure progress. Comparing the present to the past, she shows that genocide and violence against civilians have declined over time, while access to healthcare and education has increased dramatically. Cognitive and news biases contribute to pervasive cynicism, but Sikkink’s investigation into past and current trends indicates that human rights is not in its twilight. Instead, this is a period of vibrant activism that has made impressive improvements in human well-being.
Exploring the strategies that have led to real humanitarian gains since the middle of the twentieth century, Evidence for Hope looks at how these essential advances can be supported and sustained for decades to come.
Tuesday, September 19, 2017
Over the past decades the European Court of Human Rights has been increasingly engaged in constitutional decision-making. In this time the Court has decided whether abortion, assisted suicide, and surrogate motherhood are human rights. The Court’s judgments therefore do not just affect the parties to a particular case, but individuals, other member states, and often European society at large. Unsurprisingly, a variety of entities such as non-governmental organisations, try to participate in the Court’s proceedings as third-party interveners. Acknowledging a certain public interest in its decision-making, the Court accepted the first intervention in 1979. Since that time, interventions by individuals, member states and non-governmental organisations have increased. Yet despite this long-standing practice, third-party interventions have never been fully theorised.
Third-Party Interventions before the European Court of Human Rights is the first comprehensive and empirical study on third-party interventions before an international court. Analysing all cases between 1979 and 2016 to which an intervention was made the book explores their potential influence on the reasoning and decision-making of the Court. It further argues that there are three different type of intervention playing different roles in the administration of justice: amicus curiae interventions by organisations with a virtual interest in the case which strengthen the Court’s legitimacy in its democratic environment; member state interventions reinforcing state sovereignty; and actual third-party interventions by individuals who are involved in the facts of a case and who are protecting their own legal interests. As a consequence, the book makes a plea for applying distinct admissibility criteria to the different type of interventions as well as a more transparent procedure when accepting and denying interventions.
Frei, Stahl, & Weinke: Human Rights and Humanitarian Intervention: Legitimizing the Use of Force since the 1970s
- Daniel Stahl & Annette Weinke, Intervening in the Name of Human Rights. On the History of an Argument
- Bronwyn Leebaw, Legitimating Interventions. Humanitarianism and Human Rights
- Eleanor Davey, The Language of ingérence. Interventionist Debates in France, 1970s – 1990s
- Jan Eckel, Humanitarian Intervention as Global Governance. Western Governments and Suffering »Others« before and after 1990
- Julian Bourg, From the Left Bank to Libya. The New Philosophy and Humanitarianism
- Robert Albro, Culture’s Iron Cage. U.S. Anthropology, Human Rights, and the Recalcitrant Defense Intellectual
- Matthias Nass, Halabja, Rwanda, Srebrenica. The Media and the Case for Interventionism
- Andrea Böhm, From Success to Crisis. Human Rights and the Transformation of the Media since the Late Twentieth Century
- Patricia Daley, Celebrities, Geo-Economics, and Humanitarianism. The Significance of Racialized Hierarchies
- Fabian Klose, Protecting Universal Rights through Intervention. International Law Debates from the 1930s to the 1980s
- Oliver Jütersonke, Responsibility to Protect and Tû-Tû Concepts. A Legal-Realist Contribution
- Gerd Hankel, Claus Kress, & Annette Weinke, The Slow Pace of International Law. A Conversation about the Past and Future of Humanitarian Intervention
- Interaction between human rights: 50 years of the Covenants
- Lauren Neumann & Tara Van Ho, A Tribute to Professor Sir Nigel Rodley, KBE: Reflections on 50 Years of the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
- Chiara Macchi, Right to Water and the Threat of Business: Corporate Accountability and the State's Duty to Protect
- Vito Todeschini, The ICCPR in Armed Conflict: An Appraisal of the Human Rights Committee’s Engagement with International Humanitarian Law
- Shreya Atrey, Fifty Years On: The Curious Case of Intersectional Discrimination in the ICCPR
- Elena Abrusci, A Tale of Convergence? Discrimination based on Sexual Orientation in Regional Human Rights Bodies and the Human Rights Committee
- Eduardo Gill-Pedro & Xavier Groussot, The Duty of Mutual Trust in EU Law and the Duty to Secure Human Rights: Can the EU's Accession to the ECHR Ease the Tension?
- Other Articles
- Eric P Tudzi, John T Bugri & Anthony K Danso, Human Rights of Students with Disabilities in Ghana: Accessibility of the University Built Environment
- Nastassja White, Youth for Human Rights: Rising to the Challenge of New Threats against Rights Advocacy and Institutions
This book takes the reader on a sweeping tour of the international legal field to reveal some of the patterns of difference, dominance, and disruption that belie international law's claim to universality.
Pulling back the curtain on the "divisible college of international lawyers," Anthea Roberts shows how international lawyers in different states, regions, and geopolitical groupings are often subject to distinct incoming influences and outgoing spheres of influence in ways that reflect and reinforce differences in how they understand and approach international law. These divisions manifest themselves in contemporary controversies, such as debates about Crimea and the South China Sea.
Not all approaches to international law are created equal, however. Using case studies and visual representations, the author demonstrates how actors and materials from some states and groups have come to dominate certain transnational flows and forums in ways that make them disproportionately influential in constructing the "international." This point holds true for Western actors, materials, and approaches in general, and for Anglo-American (and sometimes French) ones in particular.
However, these patterns are set for disruption. As the world moves past an era of Western dominance and toward greater multipolarity, it is imperative for international lawyers to understand the perspectives and approaches of those coming from diverse backgrounds. By taking readers on a comparative tour of different international law academies and textbooks, the author encourages them to see the world through the eyes of others -- an essential skill in this fast changing world of shifting power dynamics and rising nationalism.
- Stefan Griller, Walter Obwexer, & Erich Vranes, Mega-Regional Agreements: New Orientations for EU External Relations?
- Ernst-Ulrich Petersmann, CETA, TTIP, and TiSA: New Trends in International Economic Law
- Erich Vranes, The Contents of CETA, TTIP, and TiSA: The (Envisaged) Trade Disciplines
- Christian Tietje & Kevin Crow, The Reform of Investment Protection Rules in CETA, TTIP, and other Recent EU-FTAs: Convincing?
- Stephan Schill, Authority, Legitimacy, and Fragmentation in the (Envisaged) Dispute Settlement Disciplines in Mega-Regionals
- Thomas Cottier, Intellectual Property and Mega-Regional Agreements: Progress and Opportunities Missed
- Walter Berka, CETA, TTIP, TiSA, and Data Protection
- Christoph Ohler, CETA, TTIP, TiSA, and Financial Services
- Lorand Bartels, Human Rights, Labour Standards, and Environmental Standards in CETA
- Panos Delimatsis, TTIP, CETA, TiSA Behind Closed Doors: Transparency in the EU Trade Policy
- Stefan Mayr, CETA, TTIP, TiSA, and their Relationship with EU Law
- Christoph Moser, On the Expected Economic Effects of Trade Liberalisation and the (TTIP)
- Sonja Puntscher Riekmann, The Struggle for and against Globalisation: International Trade Agreements and the Democratic Question
- Stefan Griller, Three Salient Issues of the New Comprehensive Free Trade Agreements
- Verena Madner, A New Generation of Trade Agreements: An Opportunity not to be Missed?
- Stefan Griller, Walter Obwexer, & Erich Vranes, Conclusions
Monday, September 18, 2017
Call for Papers – 2018 ASIL Annual Meeting New Voices
From April 4-7, 2018, the American Society of International Law will convene its 112th Annual Meeting. The theme of the 2018 Meeting is "International Law in Practice." As in the past, the Annual Meeting will include at least one "New Voices" session that will provide a platform for junior scholars and practitioners to present their work.
ASIL invites submissions from non-tenured scholars and junior practitioners on any topic of international law in connection with the Meeting's theme. Those who submitted an abstract as part of the call for session proposals need not re-submit; those abstracts remain under consideration. Abstracts should be well-developed and reflect advanced progress on a paper that will be presented at the Meeting. Final papers will be due by March 26, 2018. Send your abstract to email@example.com by no later than Monday, October 9, 2017, with the subject line "New Voices Proposal." Please send the abstract as a Microsoft Word attachment, including your name and contact information (email address & affiliation). Abstracts should be no longer than 1000 words. Notifications will be made by the end of October.
The political and legal theory of
international courts and tribunals
Oslo, June 18-19, 2018
Call for Papers
PluriCourts announces a workshop that brings together scholars of philosophy, political theory and legal theory who study one or more regional and international courts and tribunals (ICs). States have established manifold regional and international ICs to resolve disputes, interpret treaties, and deter illegal behavior. These ICs cover a range of issues including, human rights, trade, investment, border disputes, and international crimes. ICs’ competences, level of authority, method of interpretation, and geographical reach widely vary. ICs’ increase in number and influence has spawned controversy and complaints, often phrased as charges that they are illegitimate. The workshop aims at clarify the various senses in which they might be illegitimate, and to evaluate such criticism and proposed responses. The workshop welcomes both abstract and practice-focused perspectives on those issues.
We invite papers that address one or more such IC, on such themes as:
Some travel grants are available upon request.
- The appropriate legitimacy standards for ICs from the perspectives of history of ideas and/or contemporary legal and political theory, such as human rights, transparency, or rule of law;
- Their multilevel separation of authority, and its impact on adjudication;
- Law and morality in international adjudication;
- Norm-indeterminacy and international adjudication;
- Specialization and fragmentation in ICs;
- ICs and the international rule of law;
- Independence and accountability of ICs;
- International judicial review and democracy;
- IC performance, ranging from securing states’ objectives to global justice;
- The comparative advantages of ICs;
- Best practices and models for ICs;
- IR theory perspectives on ICs.
PluriCourts is a multidisciplinary Centre of Excellence whose overriding research objective is to analyze and assess the legitimate present and future roles of this international judiciary in the global legal order: Why and when are these international courts and tribunals legitimate authorities, whose decisions should enjoy deference by various domestic and international ‘compliance communities’? The PluriCourts Research Plan is available here.
November 1, 2017 Expression of interest with provisional paper title, abstract, travel grant request can be submitted here
December 15, 2017 Decisions on acceptance of proposals and travel grants announced
May 15, 2018 Draft papers due
June 18-19, 2018 Workshop
Sunday, September 17, 2017
Benvenisti & Downs: Between Fragmentation and Democracy: The Role of National and International Courts
Between Fragmentation and Democracy explores the phenomenon of the fragmentation of international law and global governance following the proliferation of international institutions with overlapping jurisdictions and ambiguous boundaries. The authors argue that this problem has the potential to sabotage the evolution of a more democratic and egalitarian system and identify the structural reasons for the failure of global institutions to protect the interests of politically weaker constituencies. This book offers a comprehensive understanding of how new global sources of democratic deficits increasingly deprive individuals and collectives of the capacity to protect their interests and shape their opportunities. It also considers the role of the courts in mitigating the effects of globalization and the struggle to define and redefine institutions and entitlements. This book is an important resource for scholars of international law and international politics, as well as for public lawyers, political scientists, and those interested in judicial reform.
Saturday, September 16, 2017
- 60th Anniversary Issue
- Bruce Russett, A History of the Journal of Conflict Resolution
- Erik Gartzke & Matthew Kroenig, Social Scientific Analysis of Nuclear Weapons: Past Scholarly Successes, Contemporary Challenges, and Future Research Opportunities
- Todd Sandler, International Peacekeeping Operations: Burden Sharing and Effectiveness
- Daniel Druckman & James A. Wall, A Treasure Trove of Insights: Sixty Years of JCR Research on Negotiation and Mediation
- Christopher Gelpi, Democracies in Conflict: The Role of Public Opinion, Political Parties, and the Press in Shaping Security Policy
- Erica Chenoweth, Evan Perkoski, & Sooyeon Kang, State Repression and Nonviolent Resistance
- Thomas Zeitzoff, How Social Media Is Changing Conflict
- Lars-Erik Cederman & Manuel Vogt, Dynamics and Logics of Civil War
- Special Issue: The International Criminal Court’s Policies and Strategies
- Matthew E. Cross & Antonio Coco, Foreword
- Carsten Stahn, Damned If You Do, Damned If You Don’t: Challenges and Critiques of Preliminary Examinations at the ICC
- Anni Pues, Towards the ‘Golden Hour’? A Critical Exploration of the Length of Preliminary Examinations
- Maria Varaki, Revisiting the ‘Interests of Justice’ Policy Paper
- Sophie T. Rosenberg, The International Criminal Court in Côte d’Ivoire: Impartiality at Stake?
- Eliana Teresa Cusato, Beyond Symbolism: Problems and Prospects with Prosecuting Environmental Destruction before the ICC
- Luigi Prosperi & Jacopo Terrosi, Embracing the ‘Human Factor’: Is There New Impetus at the ICC for Conceiving and Prioritizing Intentional Environmental Harms as Crimes Against Humanity?
- Nadia Bernaz, An Analysis of the ICC Office of the Prosecutor’s Policy Paper on Case Selection and Prioritization from the Perspective of Business and Human Rights
- Birju Kotecha, The ICC’s Office of the Prosecutor and the Limits of Performance Indicators
- Gaelle Carayon & Jonathan O’Donohue, The International Criminal Court’s Strategies in Relation to Victims
- Antonio Coco & Matthew E. Cross, Epilogue – The ICC on the Yellow Brick Road
Thirty years ago, the Leiden Journal of International Law was born, at a time when the writing of histories was hardly a popular endeavour for international legal scholars. In his 1987 article ‘Probleme der Völkerrechtsgeschichte’ (‘The Problems of International Legal History’), Heinhard Steiger argued that only very few, ‘mostly authors of the older generation’, were interested in international legal history. Much has changed since that time.
The aim of this symposium is to pay tribute to the remarkable developments within the field, to engage in critical reflection on the directions that it has taken, and to discuss the potential avenues for future research. The symposium will engage with questions of methodology and perspective. We hope that it will encourage further historical work on international law and reveal the new possible ways of its application.
- Jeffrey L. Dunoff & Mark A. Pollack, The Judicial Trilemma
- Gráinne de Búrca, Human Rights Experimentalism
- Monica Hakimi, Constructing an International Community
- Notes and Comments
- Theodor Meron, The West Bank and International Humanitarian Law on the Eve of the Fiftieth Anniversary of the Six-Day War
- J. Samuel Barkin & Yuliya Rashchupkina, Public Goods, Common Pool Resources, and International Law
- David Bosco, Discretion and State Influence at the International Criminal Court: The Prosecutor's Preliminary Examinations
- Current Developments
- Christine Gray, The 2016 Judicial Activity of the International Court of Justice
- In Memoriam
- Stephen M. Schwebel, Sir Elihu Lauterpacht (1928–2017)
- International Decisions
- Diane Marie Amann, Obligations Concerning Negotiations Relating to Cessation of the Nuclear Arms Race and to Nuclear Disarmament
- Santiago Diaz-Cediel, Garcia de Borissow and Others v. Supreme Court of Justice – Labor Chamber, Embassy of the Lebanese Republic in Colombia and Embassy of the United States of America in Colombia
- Eloïse Glucksmann, Commisimpex v. Republic of Congo
- A.Kh. Abashidze, M.V. Ilyashevich, & A.M. Solntsev, Anchugov & Gladkov v. Russia
- Ágoston Mohay & Norbert Tóth, Decision 22/2016. (XII. 5.) AB on the Interpretation of Article E)(2) of the Fundamental Law
- Contemporary Practice of the United States Relating to International Law
- Kristina Daugirdas & Julian Davis Mortenson, Contemporary Practice of the United States Relating to International Law
- Recent Books on International Law
- Kevin L. Cope & Mila Versteeg, The Interpretation of International Law by Domestic Courts: Uniformity, Diversity, Convergence
- Donald McRae, reviewing Transnational Legal Orders. edited by Terence C. Halliday and Gregory Shaffer
- Steven R. Ratner, reviewing Compliant Rebels: Rebel Groups and International Law in World Politics, by Hyeran Jo
- Tom Farer, reviewing Sovereignty: The Origin and Future of a Political and Legal Concept, by Dieter Grimm
- David Scheffer, reviewing East West Street: On the Origins of “Genocide” and “Crimes Against Humanity”, by Philippe Sands
- William R. (Bill) Mansfield, reviewing Whaling and International Law, by Malgosia Fitzmaurice
Friday, September 15, 2017
International law is enjoying increasing popularity among historians of global and interna-tional affairs, due to a re-reading of legal norms and rules that questions a state-centered approach. Instead of seeing law as an outcome of state behavior, recent scholarship has ex-amined the transnational character of law and legal communities, and the oftentimes com-plex negotiation processes that precede the codification and subsequent ratification of in-ternational conventions. This perspective aligns with the focus on border-crossing relations and on professional and nonstate actors and institutions that has become essential to global and international history. Moreover, connections forged between the history of internation-al law and discussions of the limits of legal universalism have increased the legal dimension’s relevance for historians of empire and decolonization. Encircling notions of hegemony, im-perialism, and civilization, and scrutinizing the role of international law in imperial and civiliz-ing missions, this strand of research has given rise to regional histories of international law. Scholars have begun to explore the relationship between legal and regional developments by asking how international law has been tailored to serve specific regional interests, prob-lems, or conflicts. This approach complements the focus on the law’s imperial bias and acknowledges the entanglement of legal and political agendas while also emphasizing the agency of regional actors. It also concedes that regional appropriations of international law could serve these actors’ own agendas or be a vehicle for emancipation.
The conference unites research on the history of international law with studies on Eastern Europe to investigate the controversial role of international law in the complex and conten-tious reordering of the region since the Congress of Vienna. The conference proposes that the extraordinary density of political, social and ethnic conflicts and the decades-long strug-gles over territorial boundaries in Eastern Europe have left clear traces in international law. More specifically, it addresses these issues through the lens of international institutions, which offer a starting point from which to identify topics; single out involved states, groups, and transnational actors from East Central and Eastern Europe; and reveal how regional con-stellations were universalized in the process of negotiating and implementing international norms and rules.
JTMS Winter/Spring 2018 Issue Call for Papers
The Journal of Territorial and Maritime Studies (JTMS) is soliciting submissions for its Winter/Spring 2018 issue. In the interest of increasing submissions, JTMS is offering authors of articles successfully passing peer review and selected for publication in the Winter/Spring 2018 issue an honorarium of $1000. JTMS is an interdisciplinary Journal of research on territorial and maritime issues sponsored by the Northeast Asia History Foundation with editorial offices hosted by Yonsei University in South Korea. The Journal provides an academic medium for the announcement and dissemination of research results the fields of history, international law, international relations, geography, peace studies, and any other relevant discipline. The journal covers all continental areas across the world, and it discusses any territorial and maritime subjects through the various research methods from different perspectives; moreover, practical studies as well as theoretical works, which contribute to a better understanding of territorial and maritime issues, are encouraged.
Manuscript should be submitted electronically to firstname.lastname@example.org . Submitted papers should include four major sections: the title page, structured abstract, main body, and references. The title page should contain the title of the paper, the authors name, the institutional affiliation and keywords. Manuscripts should follow the JTMS style guide available on our website. A length of maximum 9,000 words is preferred for an article, including endnotes, and approximately 2,000 words for a review. Submissions wishing to be considered for the Winter/Spring issue must submit their manuscripts by no later than October 1st, 2017. Inquiries may be sent via the email address provided above.
Our style guide and other journal information may be found on our website.
CALL FOR NOMINATIONS:
WILIG’s Prominent Women in International Law Award, 2018
The Women in International Law Interest Group of ASIL invites nominations for the Prominent Women in International Law Award. 2018 marks the 25th year that the award is being given, and in honor of this milestone, WILIG has determined to formalize the nomination process through this call for nominees.
The WILIG Prominent Women in International Law Award honors those who have advanced women, gender, and women’s rights in international law.
The diverse accomplishments of previous awardees demonstrate the multiple ways in which honorees achieve this feat. Awardees have included: Justices on the ICJ and International Criminal Tribunals, founders of women’s rights NGOs, business leaders, government officials, and scholars. Some of these women have broken glass ceilings in the field, while others have worked tirelessly to promote women and women’s voices in international law, and still others contribute substantively to advancing, researching, or advocating for women’s rights.
Please submit letters of nomination for a Prominent Woman in International Law who meets some or all of the following criteria:
Letters of nomination should be addressed to WILIG’s Co-Chairs, Tracy Roosevelt and Shana Tabak, and should be submitted by October 30, 2017 to email@example.com. Any supporting documentation in addition to the nomination letter is welcome; please submit all information in one PDF document titled with the nominee’s name and “PWIL Award.”
- Employs international law to advance women and women’s rights -- awardees need not be attorneys, though most are;
- Breaks through glass ceilings for women in international law;
- Promotes women and women’s voices in the field;
- Contributes substantively to advancing, researching, advocating for, or promoting women’s rights and/or gender justice;
- Is considered prominent in the field of international law – or whose accomplishments merit further recognition through this prestigious award.
With the accession of Afghanistan in 2016, the World Trade Organization (WTO) numbered 164 members with nineteen other states in line to join. The WTO is certainly not alone in its growth though; the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), and the European Union (EU) are all expanding with dozens of states continuing to negotiate their potential membership. What impact does membership in international organizations really have? Why do some states have a seemingly easy path to joining international organizations while others find the process nearly impossible? What implications do these difficult accession processes have on the domestic and international politics of the acceding states? The author presents the two-level theory of accession, which highlights factors at the domestic level and international organization level, to explain how accession processes in the WTO and EU vary from state to state and the impact of these variations. In so doing, this book provides a unique perspective on the topic of membership in international organizations.
- Stijn Smet, Introduction - Conflicts of Rights in Theoretical and Comparative Perspective
- Samantha Besson, Human Rights in Relation - A Critical Reading of the ECtHR's Approach to Conflicts of Rights
- Stijn Smet, Conflicts between Human Rights and the ECtHR: Towards a Structured Balancing Test
- Sébastien Van Drooghenbroeck, Conflict and Consent: Does the Theory of Waiver of Fundamental Rights Offer Solutions to Settle Their Conflicts?
- Eva Brems, Evans v UK: Three Grounds for Ruling Differently
- Lorenzo Zucca, The Comedy of Mrs Evans
- Dolores Morondo Taramundi, To Discriminate in order to Fight Discrimination: Paradox or Abuse?
- Russell Sandberg, The Future of Religious Freedom
- Dirk Voorhoof, Freedom of Expression versus Privacy and the Right to Reputation
- Leto Cariolou, Circumnavigating the Conflict Between the Right to Reputation and the Right to Freedom of Expression
- Javier Martínez-Torrón, Fernández Martínez v Spain: An Unclear Intersection of Rights
- Ian Leigh, Reversibility, Proportionality, and Conflicting Rights: Fernández Martínez v Spain
- Eva Brems, Conclusion - Conflicting Views on Conflicting Rights
International law feeds on preconditions which it cannot guarantee itself. International scholarship, too, must come to grips with pre-conditions and existing parameters over which it has no control itself. But such scholarship must not ‘succumb’ to these factual and ideational realities by adapting its methods and findings to any given political, social, and economic climate. It is the job of international legal scholars to produce ideas in a spirit of realist utopianism (John Rawls). Depending on the existing parameters, these ideas are apt to shape attitudes and actions, or not. Such scholarship also needs to distance itself from its object of study in order not to lose its capacity to criticise the law and the practice. How far exactly scholarly writing should transcend or keep aloof from the prevailing political climate and from concerns of feasibility depends on the research questions under discussion and is a matter of judgment. The style of scholarship suggested here is illustrated by the work of three eminent scholars whose careers continued through different political eras more or less favourable to the international rule of law: Hersch Lauterpacht, Antonio Cassese, and Josef Kunz.
Thursday, September 14, 2017
This chapter constitutes a heuristic exercise meant to re-imagine international courts and arbitral tribunals as bureaucratic bodies controlling the social reality created by the definitional categories of international law. It primarily claims that, in performing their wide variety of functions, international courts and arbitral tribunals, not only make use of the social reality created by international law, but also exert control over it. This control over the social reality created by the definitional categories of international law is approached as a form of control over knowledge and, it is argued, constitutes a feature of bureaucratic processes. In contending that international courts and arbitral tribunals control knowledge in this way, this chapter projects an image of international dispute resolution processes as bureaucratic sites where power is exercised. By virtue of this specific representation of international courts and arbitral tribunals as bureaucratic bodies controlling knowledge, this chapter challenges some common representations of international courts and arbitral tribunals as resorting to some pre-existing knowledge and accordingly sheds light on the extent to which international courts and arbitral tribunals define social reality and the problems in which they intervene. This chapter ultimately aims at providing new perspectives on the power exercised by international courts and arbitral tribunals, while also inviting international lawyers to reflect on the extent to which the knowledge they rely on to manage the world is controlled by international courts and arbitral tribunals.
Wednesday, September 13, 2017
Workshop: International Human Rights and Freedom: Possibilities, Epistemologies, Legacies and Alternatives
We are delighted to present a two-day workshop that examines critiques of human rights and looks at possible alternative routes to emancipation and progressive politics. We warmly invite interested scholars at all stages in their career and from any discipline to join us. Extensive critiques of International human rights (IHR) by critical legal scholars - especially feminists and postcolonial theorists – have called into question its worth as a path to human freedom and progressive politics. As a facet of liberal freedom and justice at the global level, human rights have been discredited as part of an Enlightenment project that is neither inclusive nor non-violent and which compels a specific way to be and be free in the world. Encounters with the world’s `Others’ - particularly well-meaning missions to save them - expose the gender, cultural, racial and religious norms on which rescue projects are based and the discomfort caused by these encounters often ends in epistemicide (de Santos) – the destruction of non-liberal/alternate epistemologies.
From this starting point, the workshop seeks to start four conversations. The first interrogates our own assumptions; are the possibilities of human rights really exhausted as a path to freedom? The second grapples with the violence of Enlightenment epistemologies. The third panel draws historical work on the colonial past of human rights into the present moment by thinking about its legacy. The final panel attempts to move beyond the liberal imaginary to rethink freedom - if human rights are not the key to human freedom, what is?
The workshop brings together a host of academics from a range of social science and humanities backgrounds. In taking human rights and freedom as our subject matter at a time of deep suspicion of others in the West, we seek to contribute to a broader conversation about critique and what lies beyond it.