Wednesday, February 22, 2017
Call for Papers: The Role of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights: Jurisprudential Advances and New Responses
- Giorgio Sacerdoti, La contribution de l'organe d'appel de l'OMC à la construction du droit international économique : système commercial mutilatéral, accords régionaux , droit de l'investissement
- Anne Choquet, Des drones à des fins touristiques en Antarctique?: De l'intérêt d'un moratoire avant un cdre réglementaire spécifique
- Maïa-Oumeïma Hamrouni, Les juridictions européennes et l'article 103 de la charte des Nations Unies: A propos de l'affaire Kadi devant la Cour de justice de l'Union européenne et de l'affaire Al-Dulimi devant la Cour européenne des droits de l'homme
- Pasquale De Sena, Proportionality and Human Rights in International Law:: Some ... "Utilitarian" Reflections
- Fabrizio Vismara, Rilievi in tema di inaction e consuetudine internazionale alla luce dei recenti lavori della Commissione del diritto internazionale
- Alessandra Gianelli, Il contributo della dottrina italiana al tema della responsabilità internazionale degli Stati per fatto illecito: qualche osservazione
- Pia Acconci, La cooperazione nel campo normativo negli accordi in materia di commercio internazionale dell'Unione Europea dopo il Trattato di lisboa
- Note e Commenti
- Beatrice I. Bonafé, La Corte europea dei diritti dell'uomo e la giurisdizione universale in materia civile
- Lucas Carlos Lima, Expert Advisor or Non-Voting Adjudicator?: The Potential Function of Assessors in the Procedure of the International Court of Justice
- Rebekka Monico, Il private antitrust enforcement nello spazio giudiziario europeo
- Laura Salvadego, La nuova disciplina italiana sulle operazioni di "intelligence di contrasto" all'estero
- Chiara Cipolletti, Il diritto alla cittadinanza e il rispetto della vita privata e familiare nella sentenza
- Santiago Álvarez González, ¿Qué norma de conflicto de leyes hay que adoptar para determinar la ley aplicable a las cuestiones previas a efectos de la sucesión?
- Rafael Arenas García, El legislador europeo y el DIPr de sociedades en la UE
- Pedro Alberto de Miguel Asensio, Competencia y derecho aplicable en el reglamento general sobre protección de datos de la Unión Europea
- Fernando Esteban de la Rosa, Régimen de las reclamaciones de consumo transfronterizas en el nuevo Derecho europeo de resolución alternativa y en línea de litigios de consumo
- Elena Rodríguez Pineau, La refundición del Reglamento Bruselas?II bis: de nuevo sobre la función del Derecho internacional privado europeo
- Ángel Rodrigo Hernando & Marta Abegón Novella, El concepto y efectos de los tratados de protección de intereses generales de la comunidad internacional
- Carmen Pérez González, ¿Un Derecho internacional del deporte? Reflexiones en torno a una rama del Derecho internacional in statu nascendi
- Justo Corti Varela, El principio de precaución en la jurisprudencia internacional
- Elisenda Calvet Martínez, Retos de la ayuda humanitaria en conflictos armados prolongados: el rol creciente de los agentes locales
- Gregory Messenger, Desarrollo sostenible y agenda 2030 -- El rol de Derecho internacional dentro del desarrollo sostenible y la agenda 2030
- Antonio Cardesa Salzmann & Antoni Pigrau i Solé, Desarrollo sostenible y agenda 2030 -- La agenda 2030 y los objetivos para el desarrollo sostenible. Una mirada crítica sobre su aportación a la gobernanza global en términos de justicia distributiva y sostenibilidad ambiental
- Francisco José Pascual Vives, Unión Europea e inversiones: mecanismos de solución de controversias -- La Unión Europea y el arbitraje de inversión en el CETA y el TTIP
- Katia Fach Gómez, Unión Europea e inversiones: mecanismos de solución de controversias -- Unión Europea e inversiones internacionales: el futuro de los mecanismos de resolución de controversias inversor-Estado
- Adriana González, Karima Sauma & Arianna Arce, La Transparencia y el Capítulo 10 del CAFTA-DR
- Elia M. Naranjo Morelli, Daños Punitivos en el Arbitraje Comercial Internacional
- Viviana Méndez Valle, La Regulación de la Competencia Judicial Internacional bajo los Principios y Reglas ALI/UNIDROIT de Procedimiento Civil Transnacional: Posibles Dificultades de Reconocimiento en Latinoamérica
- Haideer Miranda Bonilla, La Obligación de la Interpretación Conforme a la Convención Americana de Derechos Humanos
This book explores the intended and unintended impact of international criminal justice on the legitimacy of quasi-state entities (QSEs). In order to do so, the concept of ‘quasi-state entity’ is introduced to distinguish actors in statehood conflicts that aspire to statehood, and fulfil statehood functions to a greater or lesser degree, including the capacity and willingness to deploy armed force, but lack the status of sovereign statehood. This work explores the ability of QSEs to create and maintain legitimacy for their actions, institutions and statehood projects in various constituencies simultaneously. It looks at how legitimacy is a prerequisite for success of QSEs and, using critical legitimacy theory, assesses the legitimating narratives of QSEs and their statehood adversaries. The book links international criminal justice to statehood projects of QSEs and their success and legitimacy. It looks at the effects of international criminal justice on the ability to create and maintain legitimacy of QSEs, an approach that leads to new insights regarding international courts and tribunals as entities competing with states over statehood functions that increasingly have to take the legal implications of their actions into consideration. Most important, a close assessment of the legitimising narratives of QSEs, counter narratives, and the messages sent by international criminal justice with which QSEs have to deal, and their ability to overcome legitimacy crises, provides insight on QSEs and the complex processes of legitimation.
- Arthur van Coller, The history and development of the law of armed conflict (part II)
- Brian Sang YK, Contemporary conflicts and protection gaps in international humanitarian law: the necessity and practical utility of fundamental standards of humanity
- Kesolofetse Lefenya & Ilyayambwa Mwanawina, The unforeseen humanitarian law implications of the NATO intervention in Libya
- Shannon Bosch, Taking stock of civilian status in a quasi post-Guantanomo bay world
Tuesday, February 21, 2017
- Glen Anderson, A Post-Millennial Inquiry into the United Nations Law of Self-Determination: A Right to Unilateral Non-Colonial Secession?
- Daniel C.K. Chow, Why China Established the Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank
- Michèle Finck & Sofia Ranchordás, Sharing and the City
- Mark V. Vlasic & Helga Turku, Protecting Cultural Heritage as a Means for International Peace, Security and Stability: The Case of ISIS, Syria and Iraq
26th Annual SLS-BIICL Conference
on Theory and International Law
3 May 2017, 14:00-19:00
British Institute of International and Comparative Law,
Charles Clore House, 17 Russell Square, London WC1B 5JP
INSIDE THE MIND OF INTERNATIONAL DECISION-MAKERS
The 2017 Conference on Theory and International Law seeks to understand better the behaviour of those who shape international law - international and domestic judges, arbitrators, and state officials. Inspired by ground-breaking research that opens the “black box” of international decision-making, this Conference invites participants to theorise, experiment and speculate.
Some of the questions we will explore are: Do decision-makers behave rationally? Do they behave predictably? What factors may influence their decision-making? What are the roles of cognitive skills, intuition, and background, including education and political persuasion? What are the implications of these insights for choosing a method of dispute settlement for a particular case or designing a dispute settlement mechanism for future disputes? What are the implications for the conduct and procedures of international negotiations?
We are pleased to announce that the keynote address will be delivered by Professor Anne van Aaken, Professor of Law and Economics, Legal Theory, Public International Law and European Law at the University of St. Gallen and Vice-President of the European Society of International Law. She has coauthored an article, Inside the Arbitrator’s Mind, which is the first-ever experimentally conducted psychological study of international arbitrators.
The closing address will be given by Dr Charlotte Peevers of the University of Glasgow who will speak on ‘Prospects of truth seeking: the Chilcot Inquiry and the decision to go to war’.
The convenors welcome contributions that:
- Draw on different disciplines, such as economics or psychology;
- Employ experimental or empirical methods;
- See to look behind a judgment or award to the factors that influence and motivate decisions;
- Consider the process of decision making; and/or
- Examine implications for dispute settlement strategies and institutions.
Submission of abstracts is open to academics, including graduate students, and to legal practitioners. Please submit an abstract in Word or PDF of no more than one page to Dr Philippa Webb (firstname.lastname@example.org) and Professor Christian Henderson (C.M.Henderson@sussex.ac.uk). The following information should also be provided with each abstract:
The deadline for submission of abstracts is 20 March 2017. Applicants will be informed by 31 March 2017. Regrettably, we are unable to provide funding for travel to and attendance at the conference, but there will be a reception at the end of the conference.
- The author’s name and affiliation
- The author’s CV, including a list of relevant publications
- The author’s contact details, including email address
Philippa Webb and Christian Henderson
- Thijs Etty, Veerle Heyvaert, Cinnamon Carlarne, Dan Farber, Bruce Huber, & Jolene Lin, Transnational Environmental Law on the Threshold of the Trump Era
- Yonghee Yoon, The Impacts and Implications of CERCLA on the Soil Environmental Conservation Act of the Republic of Korea
- Martin Hedemann-Robinson, Environmental Inspections and the EU: Securing an Effective Role for a Supranational Union Legal Framework
- Anatole Boute, The Impossible Transplant of the EU Emissions Trading Scheme: The Challenge of Energy Market Regulation
- Felicity Deane, Evan Hamman, & Yilin Pei, Principles of Transparency in Emissions Trading Schemes: The Chinese Experience
- Benoit Mayer, Migration in the UNFCCC Workstream on Loss and Damage: An Assessment of Alternative Framings and Conceivable Responses
- Sabaa A. Khan, The Global Commons through a Regional Lens: The Arctic Council on Short-Lived Climate Pollutants
- Shi-Ling Hsu, Capital Transitioning: An International Human Capital Strategy for Climate Innovation
- Shannon Brincat, Cosmopolitan recognition: three vignettes
- Alena Drieschova, Peirce’s semeiotics: a methodology for bridging the material–ideational divide in IR scholarship
- Christopher J. Finlay, The concept of violence in international theory: a Double-Intent Account
- Jorge F. Garzón, Multipolarity and the future of economic regionalism
- Scott Hamilton, A genealogy of metatheory in IR: how ‘ontology’ emerged from the inter-paradigm debate
Attorney-client privilege is often invoked as a defence in international arbitration proceedings however the participants often have very different expectations regarding the applicable privilege standard, as national attorney-client privilege laws vary widely between jurisdictions. This is complicated by the fact that institutional arbitral rules do not include provisions on the scope of attorney-client privilege, nor do they outline the conflict of laws issues determining the applicable national privilege law. The applicable level of privilege is therefore left to the discretion of the arbitral tribunal.
Drawing on interviews with more than thirty leading international arbitration practitioners and extensive academic research, this book is the first of its kind to provide clear guidance to arbitral tribunals regarding the determination of the applicable attorney-client privilege standard. It compares attorney-client privilege in key common and civil law jurisdictions, analyses precedent from previous tribunals, and finally sets out proposed changes to the legal framework governing this area.
With the sensational arrest of former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet in 1998, the rise to prominence of universal jurisdiction over crimes against international law seemed to be assured. The arrest of Pinochet and the ensuing proceedings before the UK courts brought universal jurisdiction into the foreground of the "fight against impunity" and the principle was read as an important complementary mechanism for international justice –one that could offer justice to victims denied an avenue by the limited jurisdiction of international criminal tribunals. Yet by the time of the International Court of Justice’s Arrest Warrant judgment four years later, the picture looked much bleaker and the principle was being read as a potential tool for politically motivated trials.
This book explores the debate over universal jurisdiction in international criminal law, aiming to unpack a practice in which international lawyers continue to disagree over the concept of universal jurisdiction. Using Martti Koskenniemi’s work as a foil, this book exposes the argumentative techniques in operation in national and international adjudication since the 1990s. Drawing on overarching patterns within the debate, Aisling O’Sullivan argues that it is bounded by a tension between contrasting political preferences or positions, labelled as moralist ("ending impunity") and formalist ("avoiding abuse") and she reads the debate as a movement of hegemonic and counter-hegemonic positions that struggle for hegemonic control. However, she draws out how these positions (moralist/formalist) merge into one another and this produces a tendency towards a "middle" position that continues to prefer a particular preference (moralist or formalist). Aisling O’Sullivan then traces the transformation towards this tendency that reflects an internal split among international lawyers between building a utopia ("court of humanity") and recognizing its impossibility of being realized.
Call for papers
THE UNITED NATIONS SECURITY COUNCIL AND THE SEA
4-5 May 2017
Université Jean Moulin Lyon 3
The law of the sea governs the repression of criminality at sea only to a limited extent. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), for example, is almost silent on the matter. It does not, for instance, sufficiently address issues such as drug trafficking or migrant smuggling, while its provisions are sometimes out-dated and refer to issues such as the slave trade, piracy and unauthorised broadcasting. Sectoral treaties (such as the Palermo Protocol, the Vienna Convention and SUA Convention) complement the UNCLOS regime as regards the repression of criminality at sea, but they are of a limited scope and insufficient in various respects.
The fundamental question raised by the Conference at hand is as follows: in cases where the law of the sea regime does not offer the necessary legal tools to address criminality at sea, does having recourse to the UN Security Council constitute an effective alternative to the fight against criminality at sea? The aim is to assess whether recourse to the UN Security Council offers possible legal solutions, especially in terms of authorization of interventions for States where the law of the sea does not contain them.
More broadly, the Conference will address issues related to the mutual influence and interplay between UN Security Council practice and the law of the sea. To this end, contributions on the UN Security Council’s practice (such as in the nuclear field, piracy, etc.) and its impact on other relevant international organisations (WMI, NATO, EU, etc.) are most welcome.
We invite you to send an abstract (two pages maximum) in French or English by 15 March 2017 to email@example.com together with a short CV. Notification of acceptance will be sent on 31 March 2017. Presentations at the Conference can be given in either French or English.
Appel à contributions
LE CONSEIL DE SÉCURITÉ DES NATIONS UNIES ET LA MER
4-5 mai 2017
Université Jean Moulin Lyon 3
Le droit de la mer est souvent limité en matière de lutte contre la criminalité. La Convention des Nations Unies sur le droit de la mer (CNUDM) est presque muette à ce sujet. Elle ne traite par exemple que trop peu des problématiques liées au trafic de drogue ou de migrants. Les seuls éléments sont assez anciens et ont trait au transport d’esclaves à la piraterie ou aux émissions non autorisées. Certains traités sectoriels viennent compléter la CNUDM, mais ils restent quand même assez limités (Protocole de Palerme, Convention de Vienne, Convention SUA, etc.).
Toutefois, la question fondamentale que le Colloque se proposer de traiter est la suivante : lorsque le droit de la mer est limité et ne fournit pas les outils juridiques nécessaires, le recours au Conseil de sécurité des Nations Unies peut-il être une alternative efficace pour combattre la criminalité en mer ? Il s’agira alors d’évaluer la pertinence du recours à cet organe comme solution juridique, notamment en ce qu’il permet d’offrir aux États un titre d’intervention lorsque le droit de la mer ne le fait pas.
Plus largement le Colloque abordera la question de l’influence de la pratique du Conseil de sécurité sur l’évolution du droit de la mer et inversement. À cette fin des contributions tant sur la pratique maritime du Conseil (en matière nucléaire ou de piraterie notamment) que sur son impact sur les autres organisations internationales compétentes (OMI, OTAN, UE, etc.) sont les bienvenues.
Les propositions sont à envoyer en français ou en anglais (2 pages maximum) à l’adresse suivante : firstname.lastname@example.org avant le 15 mars 2017 accompagnées d’un bref CV. Les résultats de la sélection seront connus le 31 mars 2017. Les interventions lors de la Conférence peuvent être faites en français ou en anglais.
Monday, February 20, 2017
- Javed Younas & Todd Sandler, Gender Imbalance and Terrorism in Developing Countries
- Julia Macdonald & Jacquelyn Schneider, Presidential Risk Orientation and Force Employment Decisions: The Case of Unmanned Weaponry
- Nadav G. Shelef & Yael Zeira, Recognition Matters!: UN State Status and Attitudes toward Territorial Compromise
- Theresa Schroeder, When Security Dominates the Agenda: The Influence of Ongoing Security Threats on Female Representation
- Florian Justwan, Trusting Publics: Generalized Social Trust and the Decision to Pursue Binding Conflict Management
- Sang Ki Kim, Third-party Intervention in Civil Wars and the Prospects for Postwar Development
- Raynee Gutting & Martin C. Steinwand, Donor Fragmentation, Aid Shocks, and Violent Political Conflict
- Thomas Gift & Daniel Krcmaric, Who Democratizes?: Western-educated Leaders and Regime Transitions
Institutions and International Law in Eastern Europe
Leibniz Institute for the History and Culture of Eastern Europe (GWZO)
Date: 28–29 September 2017, Leipzig
International law is enjoying increasing popularity among historians of global and international 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 examined the transnational character of law and legal communities, and the oftentimes complex negotiation processes that precede the codification and subsequent ratification of international 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 international 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, imperialism, and civilization, and scrutinizing the role of international law in imperial and civilizing 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, problems, 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 workshop 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 contentious reordering of the region since the Congress of Vienna. The workshop proposes that the extraordinary density of political, social and ethnic conflicts and the decades-long struggles over territorial boundaries in Eastern Europe have left clear traces in international law. More specifically, the workshop 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 constellations were universalized in the process of negotiating and implementing international norms and rules.
The workshop stems from a research project at the Leibniz Institute for the History and Culture of Eastern Europe (GWZO) that deals with processes of juridification in international relations. The project advances the argument that the history of conflict in Eastern Europe has shaped modern international law to a significant degree. This contention holds for the results of the Crimean War (1854–1856) and the regulations formulated by the Congress of Berlin (1878), as well as for minority protections after World War I and the status of the Free City of Danzig, to mention a few examples. The main output of the research group will be “Law and History in Eastern Europe,” a three-part handbook to be published by de Gruyter in 2020. The handbook’s second part seeks to illuminate the relationship between law and international institutions from an Eastern Europe perspective. To this end, workshop participants might contribute chapters to the handbook.
The workshop welcomes contributions that cover the 19th and 20th centuries. Papers should focus either on legal issues in international institutions in Eastern Europe, or on the representation of Eastern Europeans in international institutions concerned with international law. Regarding subject matter, we invite papers presenting case studies from within the region that also connect to the wider topic of the legal transformation of international relations. Inter-regional comparisons are particularly welcome.
Participants are asked to submit their papers no later than two weeks before the start of the workshop. The workshop will be held on 28 and 29 September 2017 at the Leibniz Institute for the History and Culture of Eastern Europe (GWZO) in Leipzig, Germany. Travel and accommodation costs will be covered. Please send your proposal (max. 750 words) and a short CV by 10 March 2017 to Isabella.email@example.com.
This chapter examines a postcard which is readily available at the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia. As an object of international criminal law, the postcard reveals a great deal about the aims of international criminal law, and the concomitant image of international criminal law. I argue that the postcard demonstrates international criminal law’s particular preoccupation with two aims: ending impunity, and providing a meaningful voice for victims. I also examine the postcard as an object that is used in the branding and marketing of international criminal law. In particular, I examine the claims to end impunity and to provide a place for victims as statements to market the ICTY and international criminal law. But why does an object designed to ‘market’ an international criminal tribunal use language and imagery that suggests guilt? What is the effect of this? And what does the placement of the victim’s handcuffs and the accused’s handcuffs tell us about the place of the victim and the accused in these trials? I argue that these aspects of the postcard are problematic. As a marketing technique, this postcard succeeds in promoting particular aspects of international criminal law – but in doing so, it also manipulates (and reinforces) unhelpful tropes of good versus evil, of ‘deserving’ victimhood, and of conviction as a core component of international criminal law. The postcard and the handcuffs provide a place to critically analyse the system of international criminal law, and the stories it tells about its aspirations and operations.
In this paper, it is argued that Spinoza is far from being a ‘denier’ of international law. Instead, it is shown that Spinoza offers a nuanced argument for why states are compelled to cooperate with one another in the form of international law. The argument is developed as follows: Part II outlines Spinoza’s realist starting point which can be called the ‘international state of nature’. Part III reconstructs – drawing on his ethical and ontological theory outlined in the Ethica Ordine Geometrico Demonstrata (Ethics, E) and in the Tractatus Theologico-Politicus (Theological-Political Treatise, TTP) – Spinoza’s international legal argument, i.e. the conditions that must be fulfilled for international law to exist. Part IV condenses and generalizes Spinoza’s international legal argument in the form of three analytical concepts (normativity of international law, being a State sui iuris and the concept of international cooperation). Part V concludes by outlining Spinoza’s lasting contribution to the theory of international relations and law.
Sunday, February 19, 2017
The Eleventh Annual Juris Conferences’ Investment Treaty Arbitration Conference will tackle the complex developments raised by investor-state arbitration and its intersection with international investments in the technology sector. Although there have only been a few investment cases touching on issues related to the technology sector, with continued international integration and the rise of product piracy, counterfeiting, issues related to IP rights, cybersecurity, and the internet of things, international trade and investment disputes may be inevitable in the years to come. Our group of eight authors again take contrary positions and grapple with the dramatic developments of investment arbitration as it relates to technology, intellectual property and investor-State arbitration. Our expert faculty will then continue the debate following the original contributions from our authors for what always proves to be highly entertaining. This conference will be of great value to practitioners, industry counsel, and academics alike who are interested in these important cutting-edge issues.
- Marion Jansen, Joost Pauwelyn & Theresa Carpenter, Introduction: the use of economics in international trade and investment disputes
- Robert Teh & Alan Yanovich, Integrating economic analysis into WTO dispute settlement practice: a view from the trenches
- Thomas Graham, Present at the creation: economists and accountants in international trade law practice
- Christian Lau & Simon Schropp, The role of economics in WTO dispute settlement and choosing the right litigation strategy – a practitioner's view
- David Unterhalter, On interpretation and economic analysis of law
- James Flett, The client's perspective
- Bruce Malashevich, The use of economics in competition law: what works and what doesn't across national jurisdictions?
- Anne van Aaken, What to do if economic insights are disputed: on the challenge to deal with competing and evolving theories or empirics in international trade disputes
- Marion Jansen & Marios Iacovides, Lost in translation: communication and interpretation challenges related to economic evidence in trade disputes
- Petros Mavroidis & Damien Neven, Land rich and cash poor? The reluctance of the WTO dispute settlement system to entertain economics expertise: an institutional analysis
- Jorge Miranda, The economics of actionable subsidy disputes
- Pablo M. Bentes, In search of a 'genuine and substantial' cause: the analysis of causation in serious prejudice claims
- Amar Breckenridge, The games we play – simulation models in merger analysis and their potential use in trade litigation
- Wolfgang Alschner, Aligning loss, liability and damages: towards an integrated assessment of damages in investment arbitration
- Bastian Gottschling & Willis Geffert, An economic assessment of contracts and requests for contract reform and damages in international arbitration
- Carla Chavich & Pablo Lopez, Economics in investor-state arbitration beyond quantum
- Manuel A. Abdala & Alan Rozenberg, Assessing investor damages involving publicly traded companies – with examples from the Yukos' cases
- Fuad Zarbiyev, From the law of valuation to valuation of law? On the interplay of international law and economics in fair-market valuation
- Theresa Carpenter, Marion Jansen & Joost Pauwelyn, Conclusion
- Theresa Carpenter, Marion Jansen & Joost Pauwelyn, Appendix. Guidelines for best practices for the use of economics in WTO dispute settlement
Saturday, February 18, 2017
A defence of the claim that giving effect to the morality of human rights is the formative aim of international human rights law.
Stone Sweet & Grisel: The Evolution of International Arbitration: Judicialization, Governance, Legitimacy
The development of international arbitration as an autonomous legal order is one of the most remarkable stories of institution building at the global level over the past century. Today, transnational firms and states settle their most important commercial and investment disputes not in courts, but in arbitral centres, a tightly networked set of organizations that compete with one another for docket, resources, and influence.
In this book, Alec Stone Sweet and Florian Grisel show that international arbitration has undergone a self-sustaining process of institutional evolution that has steadily enhanced arbitral authority. This judicialization process was sustained by the explosion of trade and investment, which generated a steady stream of high stakes disputes, and the efforts of elite arbitrators and the major centres to construct arbitration as a viable substitute for litigation in domestic courts. For their part, state officials (as legislators and treaty makers), and national judges (as enforcers of arbitral awards), have not just adapted to the expansion of arbitration; they have heavily invested in it, extending the arbitral order's reach and effectiveness. Arbitration's very success has, nonetheless, raised serious questions about its legitimacy as a mode of transnational governance.
The book provides a clear causal theory of judicialization using original data and analysis, and a broad, relatively non-technical overview of the evolution of the arbitral order. Each chapter compares international commercial and investor-state arbitration, across clearly specified measures of judicialization and governance. Topics include: the evolution of procedures; the development of precedent and the demand for appeal; balancing in the public interest; legitimacy debates and proposals for systemic reform. This book is a timely assessment of how arbitration has risen to become a key component of international economic law and why its future is far from settled.
Maia & Kolb: O Estatuto Internacional da Província Angolana de Cabinda à Luz do Direito Internacional Público
Este estudo visa aplicar alguns conceitos-chaves do direito internacional num contexto relativamente pouco conhecido, a saber, reivindicações de secessão em Angola. Antigos “tratados” celebrados com chefes indígenas podiam ser considerados como convenções de direito internacional ou eram atos de direito interno? Qual o papel que estes podem desempenhar nas atuais reivindicações de autodeterminação? Como apreciar em direito internacional a validade de um acordo relativo à independência de uma colónia concluído no âmbito de um direito constitucional português em plena mutação? A questão suscita comentários tanto do ponto de vista do direito nacional como do ponto de vista do artigo 46.º da Convenção de Viena sobre o Direito dos Tratados de 1969, cujo conteúdo poderia eventualmente ser aplicado a título de direito consuetudinário. O que pensar, em seguida, do argumento do direito de secessão a favor do “povo” cabindense? Será que tal povo existe na aceção do direito internacional? Além disso, o que é um povo no sentido do direito de autodeterminação? E como defini-lo neste caso? O que se deve pensar do argumento da secessão-remédio, segundo o qual uma minoria oprimida e sem acesso equitativo ao Governo de um Estado adquiriria um direito de secessão em direito internacional? Será que tal doutrina existe em direito internacional público geral? Como definir a opressão que visa? Qual a prática internacional a este respeito? Qual é, finalmente, a situação concreta dos nativos de Cabinda em relação ao Governo de Angola, ou seja, o seu tratamento em termos de direitos humanos ou de participação ao poder? Estas são algumas perguntas, entre outras, sobre as quais a presente obra tenta trazer esclarecimentos. O espaço lusófono, que serve aqui como pano de fundo, oferece-nos um prisma tangível aos vários aspetos de direito internacional público analisados.
Petersmann: When the Sovereign Sleeps: Who Protects Fundamental Rights and Other ‘Public Goods’ in Transatlantic Free Trade Agreements?
EU law requires the EU to place ‘the individual at the heart of its activities’, to take ‘decisions as openly as possible and as closely as possible to the citizen’, and protect citizens and their fundamental rights also in the external relations of the EU. Free trade agreements (FTAs) protecting rights and remedies of citizens have been uniquely successful in European integration for providing transnational public goods (PGs) like equal rights of citizens, rule of law, open markets promoting general consumer welfare, and empowerment of citizens to use their ‘republican virtues’ for enforcing trade and competition rules in national and European courts. In FTA negotiations with non-European countries, however, the EU disregards its ‘cosmopolitan foreign policy mandate’ and regulatory ‘consistency’ requirements by emulating intergovernmental power politics of non-European trading countries. Rather than protecting fundamental rights and judicial remedies in domestic courts in economic integration among transatlantic democracies, the EU's transatlantic FTAs risk undermining fundamental rights and judicial remedies. Parliaments in the EU have not challenged the ‘disempowerment’ of citizens and ‘re-feudalization’ of EU trade policies through intergovernmental trade diplomacy. Citizens challenge interest group politics in transatlantic FTAs and the EU’s neglect for participatory and deliberative democracy and ‘subsidiarity’ in EU trade regulations of transnational ‘market failures’ and ‘governance failures’. The EU's new 'investment court provisions' in recent FTAs (e.g. with Canada) risk 're-fragmenting' international investment law; they are no model for reforming international investment law.
Ample research has demonstrated that exposure to inadmissible evidence affects decision-making in criminal and civil cases. However, the difficulty of ignoring information in the context of legal interpretation has not been examined yet. Our study addresses the possible effects that exposure to preparatory work has on the interpretation of treaties. In the present article, we examine the ability of students enrolled in international law courses and of international law experts to ignore preparatory work when they are not allowed to use it. We found that exposure to preparatory work affected the students’ interpretation of treaties, while no such effect was found among the experts. These results reaffirm the practical relevance of the debate over the hierarchy between the rules of treaty interpretation. In particular, our study demonstrates that preparatory work can play a significant role in decision-making, depending on the legal rule that applies to the use of such materials. More generally, our study suggests that legal interpretation by students and experts is qualitatively different, and that international law experts might be better able than non-experts to discount irrelevant information in the process of treaty interpretation.