- Jonathan G. Odom, Navigating Between Treaties and Tweets: How to Ensure Discourse about Maritime Freedom Is Meaningful
- Alexander N. Vylegzhanin, Oran R. Young & Paul Arthur Berkman, Governing the Barents Sea Region: Current Status, Emerging Issues, and Future Options
- Clive R. Symmons, Recent Developments in Ireland: The Voisinage Doctrine and Irish Waters: Recent Judicial and Legislative Developments
- Yaodong Yu, Yue Zhao & Yen-Chiang Chang, Challenges to the Primary Jurisdiction of Flag States Over Ships
Wednesday, January 17, 2018
- CILJ 2017 Conference: Transforming Institutions
- Jan Klabbers, Transforming institutions: autonomous international organisations in institutional theory
- Rob van Gestel & Jurgen de Poorter, Supreme administrative courts’ preliminary questions to the CJEU: start of a dialogue or talking to deaf ears?
- Catherine Warin & Zheni Zhekova, The Joint Way Forward on migration issues between Afghanistan and the EU: EU external policy and the recourse to non-binding law
- Dominik Düsterhaus, Does the European Court of Justice constitutionalise EU Private International Law?
- Leonie M Huijbers, The European Court of Human Rights’ procedural approach in the age of subsidiarity
- Desmond Johnson, The institutional balance as an agent of transformation in the EU constitutional order: reconciling the simultaneous rise of the European Parliament and European agencies
- Anastasia Karatzia & Menelaos Markakis, What role for the Commission and the ECB in the European Stability Mechanism?
- Tim Kluwen, Universal Jurisdiction in Absentia Before Domestic Courts Prosecuting International Crimes: A Suitable Weapon to Fight Impunity?
- Ezequiel Heffes & Brian E. Frenkel, The International Responsibility of Non-State Armed Groups: In Search of the Applicable Rules
- Esmé Shirlow, Three Manifestations of Transparency in International Investment Law: A Story of Sources, Stakeholders and Structures
- Tomás Restrepo, Modification of Renewable Energy Support Schemes Under the Energy Charter Treaty: Eiser and Charanne in the Context of Climate Change
Tuesday, January 16, 2018
- Tilmann Altwicker, Explaining the Emergence of Transnational Counter-Terrorism Legislation in International Law-Making
- Mehrnoosh Farzamfar, Diplomatic Assurances in Cases of Expulsion to Torture:A Critical Analysis
- Vincent Dalpé, Delimiting the ICC's Ominous Shadow: An Analysis of the Inability Criterion's Nebulous Contours
- Special Section: Sovereignty, Territory and Jurisdiction
- Ilja Richard Pavone, The Ukraine Crisis as a Paradigm of the Limits of International Law and the West's Faults
- Richard C Watkins, Jurisdiction in International Human Rights Law: Application of the European Convention to Soldiers Deployed Overseas
- Heini Tuura, Intervention by Invitation and the Principle of Self-Determination in the Crimean Crisis
- Marc Shucksmith-Wesley, Uti Possidetis: The Procrustean Bed of International Law?
- Giuliano Vosa, From Authorisation to Multi-Parliamentarism: Parliaments in Global Law-Making
Monday, January 15, 2018
TEACHING AND RESEARCHING INTERNATIONAL LAW IN ASIA
The Centre for International Law at the National University of Singapore will be hosting a conference from 21 to 22 June 2018 on “Teaching and Researching International Law in Asia” (TRILA). The broad purposes of the Conference are to assess the current state of teaching and research in International Law in the Asia Pacific region, to identify commonly experienced challenges for teachers of international law, and to formulate a programme of further action and activities to assist individuals in their teaching and research. This Conference follows in the footsteps of the successful Conference held on the same topic in Singapore in 2001. It also complements the ongoing work of the Asian Society of International Law.
The Conference will be preceded by a Junior Faculty Workshop on the 20th of June, which is directed at exploring the challenges junior faculty confront at the beginning of their careers in establishing themselves as teachers and in developing a scholarly agenda.
The Conference on Teaching and Researching
International Law (TRILA)
The Conference will feature a variety of formats – panels, roundtables, break-out sessions – to enable both focused discussion and widespread participation. Topics, themes and issues to be explored include, but are not confined to the following:
- the relevance and importance of international law to the practice of law
- how to make the study of public international law relevant and engaging to students
- the relationship between international and national law
- the place of international law in the law school curriculum
- curriculum content–what topics should be included in a core public international law course, including the possibility of incorporating non-traditional areas (e.g., technology, cyberspace, environment, investment, corporate social responsibility, and others)
- what should be the purpose of teaching international law in an era of globalization
- teaching and research methods in institutions with limited resources
- what teaching methods and materials are appropriate for a course taught in the Asia Pacific region, including the role of moot courts and other experiential learning methods
- the history and theory of international law in the Asia Pacific region and its place in the teaching of international law
- the challenges of teaching international law in the local language
- balancing the demands of teaching and scholarship
- recent developments in international law scholarship
- the internet and the teaching of international law
- the relationship between teaching, scholarly work, and national policy
- the challenges of researching and publishing with limited resources
- comparing the challenges faced by scholars and teachers in Asia with those facing their colleagues in Africa and Latin America
The Conference will be held from 21 to 22 June 2018.
How to Participate
Persons anywhere in the world who are interested in participating in the Conference are invited to submit the following:
1. a curriculum vitae listing work experience, qualifications, publications, and other relevant information
2. a short think piece of no more than 600 words dealing with any issue/topic relating to the broad themes of the Conference OR an official nomination from the Dean of the Law School indicating why the nominee should be selected and how the nominee can contribute to the conference
The deadline for submissions is on 15 January 2018 (extended to 22 January 2018). We expect to be able to announce the result of the paper selection in mid-February 2018.
You may sign up here to express your interest in joining the Conference. We will then provide you with updates, reminders, and other relevant information pertaining to the Conference. You may submit your application requirements here.
Participation in this event is by invitation of selected applicants only.
Junior Faculty Workshop
The Conference will be preceded by a Junior Faculty Workshop on 20 June 2018 which is directed at exploring the challenges junior faculty confront at the beginning of their careers in establishing themselves as teachers and developing a scholarly agenda. Participants of the workshop will have the opportunity to present their works in progress for comment. The workshop will include a forum which will deal with topics including: developing a research agenda; the relationship between teaching and scholarship; the elements of good scholarship; preparing an article for publication.
Participants in the Junior Faculty Workshop will be invited to remain for the Conference on 21st and 22d June.
How to Participate
Teachers of international law who are younger than 35 years of age OR who have no more than six years of teaching experience, are invited to apply. Please submit:
1. a 600 words or less abstract of your paper in progress
2. a curriculum vitae containing details of qualifications, work experience, publications
Papers relating to all topics of international law – General international law, the use of force, human rights, international environmental law, investment law, the history and theory of international law – are welcome.
The deadline for the submission of these materials is 22 January 2018. We expect to be able to announce the result of the paper selection by the last week of February. Participants who are selected will be requested to submit their completed papers (no more than 8,000 words) by 15 April 2018.
You may sign up here to express your interest in joining the Junior Faculty Workshop. We will then provide you with updates, reminders, and other relevant information pertaining to the workshop. You may submit your application requirements here.
Participation in the Conference and in the Workshop are free while lunch and snacks will be provided at the venue. Participants are, however, expected to take care of their other costs.
For inquiries, please contact Mr. Robert Real (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Saturday, January 13, 2018
Reading current statements of world leaders on subjects relevant to international law is liable to cause confusion, even distress to those for whom the 1945 regulatory arrangements, as completed in the post-Cold War era, have become the norm. On occasions international law is invoked, but in what seems an increasingly antagonistic way, amounting often to a dialogue of the deaf. At other times it is apparently or even transparently ignored. This touches many of the arrangements governments spent the preceding period seeking to establish. Is there a pattern to all this, and how should we respond? How susceptible is the edifice of international law to such rhetoric? These issues are examined in the context of the law of withdrawal from treaties. Three recent high profile examples are examined: Brexit, South Africa's purported withdrawal from the Rome Statute, and the United States’ announced withdrawal from the Paris Agreement.
Thursday, January 11, 2018
- Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biodiversity: Southern Hemisphere Issues and Approaches
- Robin Warner, Strengthening Governance Frameworks for Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biodiversity in Areas beyond National Jurisdiction: Southern Hemisphere Perspectives
- Carole Durussel; Eulogio Soto Oyarzún & Osvaldo Urrutia S., Strengthening the Legal and Institutional Frame-work of the Southeast Pacific: Focus on the BBNJ Package Elements
- Genevieve C. Quirk & Harriet R. Harden-Davies, Cooperation, Competence and Coherence: The Role of Regional Ocean Governance in the South West Pacific for the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Biodiversity beyond National Jurisdiction
- Constance M. Johnson, The Relevance of the Southern Ocean to the Development of a Global Regime for Marine Areas beyond National Jurisdiction—An Uncommon Commons
- Marta Chantal Ribeiro, South Atlantic Perspectives on the Future International Legally Binding Instrument under the LOSC on Conservation and Sustainable Use of BBNJ
- Glen Wright & Julien Rochette, Regional Management of Areas beyond National Jurisdiction in the Western Indian Ocean: State of Play and Possible Ways Forward
- Harriet R. Harden-Davies, Research for Regions: Strengthening Marine Technology Transfer for Pacific Island Countries and Biodiversity beyond National Jurisdiction
Wednesday, January 10, 2018
- Ordering the World? Liberal Internationalism in Theory and Practice
- G. John Ikenberry, Inderjeet Parmar, & Doug Stokes, Introduction: Ordering the world? Liberal internationalism in theory and practice
- G. John Ikenberry, The end of liberal international order?
- Constance Duncombe & Tim Dunne, After liberal world order
- Beate Jahn, Liberal internationalism: historical trajectory and current prospects
- Carla Norrlof, Hegemony and inequality: Trump and the liberal playbook
- Christopher Layne, The US–Chinese power shift and the end of the Pax Americana
- Naná De Graaff & Bastiaan Van Apeldoorn, US–China relations and the liberal world order: contending elites, colliding visions?
- Doug Stokes, Trump, American hegemony and the future of the liberal international order
- Inderjeet Parmar, The US-led liberal order: imperialism by another name?
- H. Tuerk, 20 years of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS): an overview
- M. Chochorelou & C. Espaliu Berdud, Recent regional investment treaties and dispute settlement: investors and States on a rollercoaster of predominance
- C. Lequesne-Roth, Le contentieux arbitral des dettes souveraines
- M. Ambomo, Le cycle de Doha 15 ans après: l’OMC ou l’illusion du développement
- A. Ibrahim, La Déclaration De Khartoum du 23 mars 2015 : une réévaluation des rapports juridiques entre États du bassin du Nil?
- F. Dubuisson & G. Poissonnier, La Cour de justice de l’Union européenne et la question du Sahara occidental: cachez cette pratique (illégale) que je ne saurais voir
- C. Verrier, L’obtention du statut de réfugié sous la directive 2004/83/CE pour les déserteurs: un parcours du combattant? Un commentaire de l’arrêt Shepherd de la Cour de justice de l’Union européenne
- Sara Bailey, Beyond radical rhetoric: translating structural conceptions of the right to food into concrete demands for change
- Dominique Clément, Human rights or social justice? The problem of rights inflation
- Joshua B. Forrest, Local autonomy as a human right
- Ignatius Yordan Nugraha, Human rights derogation during coup situations
- Jeremy Sarkin, Respecting and protecting the lives of migrants and refugees: the need for a human rights approach to save lives and find missing persons
- Sebastien Moretti, Protection in the context of mixed migratory movements by sea: the case of the Bay of Bengal and Andaman Sea Crisis
- Jessika Eichler, New responses to mining extractivism in the Bolivian lowlands: the role and potential of indigenous cooperatives in self-managing mining resources
- Luke G.G. Bhatia, Intersections between the local and global: the Bahrain human rights movement
- Claudia Aradau & Tobias Blanke, Governing others: Anomaly and the algorithmic subject of security
- Stephane J. Baele, Thierry Balzacq, & Philippe Bourbeau, Numbers in global security governance
- Meredith Loken & Anna Zelenz, Explaining extremism: Western women in Daesh
- Luca Trenta, The Obama administration’s conceptual change: Imminence and the legitimation of targeted killings
- Marcus Schulzke, Necessary and surplus militarisation: Rethinking civil-military interactions and their consequences
- Freya Irani, ‘Lawfare’, US military discourse, and the colonial constitution of law and war
- In Memoriam
- Iain Scobbie, Jean d’Aspremont, & Yenkong Ngangjoh Hodu, Professor Gillian White (1936–2016)
- Andrew Dickinson, Keeping up Appearances: The Development of Adjudicatory Jurisdiction in the English Courts
- Harriet Moynihan, Regulating the Past: The European Court of Human Rights’ Approach to the Investigation of Historical Deaths under Article 2 ECHR
- Jamie Trinidad, The Disputed Waters around Gibraltar
- Jack Wass, Jurisdiction by Estoppel and Acquiescence in International Courts and Tribunals
Indeterminacy in the law of war exacts a severe humanitarian toll, and it is not likely to be reduced by the conclusion of additional treaties. The present article argues that the adverse consequences of this indeterminacy may be mitigated through a U.N. Security Council action establishing an international advisory regime and using the broad powers of the Security Council to provide incentives for states to subscribe to this regime voluntarily. States subscribing to the advisory regime (“operating states”) would undertake to follow the interpretation of the law of war laid out by international legal advisors. The advisory regime would represent a bargain between the Security Council and operating states, which would grant protection for states against the costs that typically attach to non-compliance with the law of war, to the extent that the state followed the legal guidance provided by the international advisors. This article demonstrates that the powers of the Security Council under the U.N. Charter accommodate such a bargain. The desirability of the proposed advisory regime from a humanitarian perspective, and its appeal for states, depend on the interpretive approach to the law of war that would guide the international advisors. This article identifies an interpretive approach to the law of war that would make the proposed advisory regime the best bargain from a humanitarian perspective that is politically feasible. Such an interpretive approach marks the farthest a state would be willing to stray from the most permissive interpretive approach to the law of war made possible by the indeterminacy of the law to secure the benefits that the advisory regime offers. Use of such an interpretive approach would be secured through the selection of international advisors, tailored to ensure that they are inclined to embrace the desired interpretive approach.
Tuesday, January 9, 2018
This Brief uses the theory of norm contestation as a model for understanding variation in norm-related behavior in international relations. While most typical approaches to understanding norms view norms as stable structures and actor responses to them as unquestioned, in a global political climate where departures from expected behavior may occur, a more nuanced model is needed. By using a norm contestation framework that highlights norm fluidity and actor agency, this book expands the discussion, providing insight into divergent interpretations of norm violation and compliance and the dynamic nature of norms. The first two chapters introduce the norm contestation model, explain how it contributes to the literature on norm violations, and discuss the reasons for the cases discussed. Chapters Three and Four provide detailed case studies of the mechanisms of norm contestation as they apply to the civilian immunity and non-intervention norms. Chapter Five concludes by reconnecting the norm contestation model to the case studies and describing how it can be applied to norms other than those regulating armed conflict. It also discusses policy implications and avenues for future research.
Call for Papers
Polish Yearbook of International Law
Polish Yearbook of International Law (PYIL) is currently seeking articles for its next volume (XXXVII), which will be published in June 2018. Authors are invited to submit complete unpublished papers in areas connected with public and private international law, including European law. Although it is not a formal condition for acceptance, we are specifically interested in articles that address issues in international and European law relating to Central and Eastern Europe. Authors from the region are also strongly encouraged to submit their works.
Submissions should not exceed 12,000 words (including footnotes) but in exceptional cases we may also accept longer works. We assess manuscripts on a rolling basis and will consider requests for expedited review in case of a pending acceptance for publication from another journal.
All details about submission procedure and required formatting are available at the PYIL’s webpage.
Please send manuscripts to email@example.com. The deadline for submissions is 31 January 2018.
- Eirik Bjorge & Cameron Miles, Introduction
- William S Dodge, The Charming Betsy and The Paquete Habana (1804 and 1900)
- Michael Waibel, Mavrommatis Palestine Concessions (Greece v Great Britain) (1924–27)
- Chester Brown, Factory at Chorzów (Germany v Poland) (1927–28)
- Douglas Guilfoyle, SS Lotus (France v Turkey) (1927)
- Eirik Bjorge, Island of Palmas (Netherlands v United States of America) (1928)
- Rolf Einar Fife, Legal Status of Eastern Greenland (Denmark v Norway) (1933)
- Duncan French, Trail Smelter (United States of America/Canada) (1938 and 1941)
- Katherine O'Byrne & Philippe Sands, Trial Before the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg (1945–46)
- Thomas D Grant & Rowan Nicholson, The Early United Nations Advisory Opinions (1948–62)
- James Crawford & Paul Mertenskötter, The South West Africa Cases (1949 to 1971)
- Nikiforos Panagis & Antonios Tzanakopoulos, North Sea Continental Shelf (Federal Republic of Germany v Netherlands; Federal Republic of Germany v Denmark) (1969)
- Giorgio Gaja, Barcelona Traction, Light and Power Company (Belgium v Spain) (1970)
- Nigel Rodley, Tyrer v United Kingdom (1978)
- Robert Kolb, Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v United States of America) (1984 to 1986)
- Sarah MH Nouwen & Michael A Becker, Tadic v Prosecutor (1995)
- Surabhi Ranganathan, The Nuclear Weapons Advisory Opinions (1996)
- Laurence Boisson de Chazournes & Makane Moïse Mbengue, Gabcíkovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary/Slovakia) (1997)
- Sam Luttrell, Vivendi v Argentina (1997–2010)
- Callum Musto & Catherine Redgwell, US-Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products (1998)
- Cameron Miles, LaGrand (Germany v United States of America) (2001)
- John Dugard, Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (2004)
- Omri Sender & Michael Wood, Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v Italy; Greece intervening) (2012)
- Claire Q. Smith & Tom Jarvis, Ending Mass Atrocities: An Empirical Reinterpretation of ‘Successful’ International Military Intervention in East Timor
- Paul F. Diehl & Daniel Druckman, Multiple Peacekeeping Missions: Analysing Interdependence
- Andrew T. Wolff, Invitations to Intervene and the Legitimacy of EU and NATO Civilian and Military Operations
- Kseniya Oksamytna, Policy Entrepreneurship by International Bureaucracies: The Evolution of Public Information in UN Peacekeeping
- Kathia Légaré, Transnational State-Building in Lebanon and Bosnia-Herzegovina: Strengthening or Shattering the Peace?
- Dorina A. Bekoe, The United Nations Operation in Côte d’Ivoire: How a Certified Election Still Turned Violent
Monday, January 8, 2018
- Arthur J. Cockfield, How Countries Should Share Tax Information
- Jonathan Hafetz, Fairness, Legitimacy, and Selection Decisions in International Criminal Law
- Amnon Lehavi, Globalizing Property Law: An Institutional Analysis
- Stephen Townley, Indiscriminate Attacks and the Past, Present, and Future of the Rules/Standards and Objective/Subjective Debates in International Humanitarian Law
- Part One
- Ilan Strauss, Explaining Global Trends in FDI in 2015 and Beyond
- Jesse Coleman, Lisa Sachs, Lise Johnson, & Kanika Gupta, International Investment Agreements, 2015-2016: A Review of Trends and New Approaches
- Notable Developments in International Investment Arbitration Case Law: 2015-2016, Kendra Magraw
- Part Two
- Karen Remmer, The Outcomes of Investment Treaty Arbitration: A Reassessment
- Mark Feldman, Multinational Enterprises and Investment Treaties
- Shu XU, Yingying Wu & Henry Hailong Jia, Investment Law's Roots in Customary International Law: Why investment law and trade diverge regarding the Right to Regulate
- Jean-Michel Marcoux, Embedding the International Investment Regime: An assessment of UNCTAD's proposal for reform
- Eve Bain, When Some Are More Equal Than Others: The need for a more substantive conception of 'equality of the parties' in investment arbitration
- Facundo Pérez-Aznar, Federal States and Investment Arbitration
- Giorgio Sacerdoti, Has China Become 'Legally' a Market-Economy Country on 11 December 2016 under The WTO Antidumping Agreement? Analyzing an open question
- Chin Leg Lim, Fragrant Harbour and Oyster Mirror: Beijing's investment treaty policy toward Hong Kong and Macao
- Gus Van Harten & Dayna Nadine Scott, Investment Treaties and the Internal Vetting of Regulatory Proposals: A Case Study from Canada (Part 2)
- Ely Caetano Xavier Junior & José Augusto Fontoura Costa, Expropriation in Brazil's Cooperation and Facilitation Investment Agreements: A failed attempt to think outside the box