What are the prospects for multilateral trade law and for megaregional agreements such as the TTIP in the Trump era? Are existing tools in international economic law sufficient to address popular grievances and issues of global justice? In the context of U.S. policy discourse, what similarities and what differences characterize the Trump- and Sanders-esque critiques of trade and globalism? And on the other side of the Atlantic, what is the significance of Brexit and other anti-EU movements? This conference will address these questions as scholars from local law schools and others gather to debate the impact of the Trump Era policies on the global economy.
Wednesday, August 23, 2017
- Part 1: Special Theme: Selected Papers on International Law and Development in Africa Presented at the 2015 AAIL Conference, Libreville Gabon
- Robert S.M. Dossou, Introductory Remarks
- Oliver C. Ruppel, Foreign Direct Investment Protection in Africa – Contemporary Legal Aspects between BITS and BRICS
- Rostand Banzeu, L’impact des organisations régionales d’intégration sur le développement économique de l’Afrique : Regards croisés sur l’expérience de la CEEAC et de la CEDEAO
- Thierry Ngosso, Défis intergénérationnels pour l’Afrique subsaharienne: est-il possible de concilier l’urgence du developpement et l’urgence de la protection de la planete?
- Dominic N. Dagbanja, The Limitations Environmental Protection Duty Places on Investment Treaty Making and Interpretation: Perspectives from Ghana
- Didier Prince-Agbodjan, Accord de partenariat économique entre l’Union Européenne et l’Afrique de l’Ouest : Droit international economique, droits humains indivisibles et économie politique
- Mohamed Oudebji, Les accords bilatéraux d’investissement signés par le Maroc avec d’autres pays africains et leurs incidences sur le developpement économique
- Tafadzwa Pasipanodya, The Law of the Sea’s Role in Steering Africa’s Blue Economy
- Romy Klimke, How to Unleash the Economic Potential of Women in Africa – Challenges and Opportunities in the Context of the Post-2015 Agenda
- Gérard Aïvo, L’impact des conflits armés et du terrorisme sur le développement socio-économique de l’Afrique
- Part 2: Notes and Comments / Notes et Commentaires: General Articles/ Articles Generaux
- Gino J. Naldi & Konstantinos D. Magliveras, The International Criminal Section of the African Court of Justice, Human and Peoples’ Rights: An Appraisal
Scholars of Holocaust trials have emphasised law's potentiality as a tool of physical atrocity, and the part played by liberal trials in obscuring this dark side of legality. That responses to mass atrocity should better acknowledge law's contribution to violence is all the more pressing in light of authoritarian regimes' reliance on courts, and the growing and paradoxical obsession with legal form accompanying widespread violence in the neo-liberal era. If trials of atrocity, intensely publicized and reported upon, do not acknowledge the legality of much violence, we - lawyers and members of the public, including potential perpetrators - might fail to recognise mass atrocity when it is before us, cloaked with legal rationality and familiarity. Yet the principal legal mechanisms used to address mass atrocity, namely domestic and international criminal trials as well as truth commissions, do not appear to expose the legality of violence better than the post-WWII criminal trials. This paper explores the possibility of developing what it terms "self-reflexive law": a mass atrocity trial that could expose the part played by law in violence. It does so by exploring a class action lawsuit filed in U.S. courts against Ferdinand Marcos where at trial law's contribution to violence was made very clear for doctrinal, evidentiary and strategic reasons. Part of a collection of essays on "minor historical jurisprudence," this paper offers a distinct version of such jurisprudence as the attempt to derive normative insights from minor practices within law, here oral trial proceedings.
The Irish Yearbook of International Law is now accepting submissions for the next Volume (Volume XIII (2018)). Edited by Professor Siobhán Mullaly (incoming at NUI Galway) and Professor Fiona de Londras (University of Birmingham) and published by Hart Publishing, the Yearbook is internationally peer reviewed and publishes longer and shorter articles on all areas of international law. The Irish Yearbook of International Law is committed to the publication of articles of general interest in international law as well as articles that have a particular connection to, or relevance for, Ireland. Articles are usually 10,000 to 12,000 words in length, although longer pieces will be considered. The Yearbook also publishes a small number of shorter articles and notes, which should not exceed 6,000 words.
Authors are asked to conform to the Hart Publishing house style. Submissions, comprising a brief 100-word abstract, article and confirmation of exclusive submission, should be sent to both Siobhán Mullally (firstname.lastname@example.org) and Fiona de Londras(email@example.com) by October 31 2017. Initial inquiries can be directed to either or both Editors.
If you wish to review a title in the Yearbook’s book review section, please contact the book reviews editor Dr. Dug Cubie, firstname.lastname@example.org (University College Cork).
Tuesday, August 22, 2017
The Trial Chamber of the International Criminal Court (ICC) recently terminated the last trial in the “Kenyan cases” declaring, as a consequence of a finding of no case to answer, a “mistrial without prejudice” for subsequent prosecutions. The Chamber found the prosecution not to be “genuinely weak” due to the politicization of the case, a hostile climate against the Court and interferences with the proceeding and estimated an acquittal to be grossly unjust. The paper focusses on the premises and possible consequences of the majority opinion and particularly on the assertion that article 20 of the ICC Statute is no longer in with criminal legislations progressively introducing “extraordinary remedies” in order to retrial in the interest of justice acquitted individuals. Accordingly, the paper analyzes the current stand of the ne bis in idem rule in its “international” application (characterized by a relevant potential for domestic and cross-jurisdictional influence) having regard to the jurisprudence of Human Rights bodies, and international criminal tribunals. The aim of this analysis is to verify if the current trend towards the extension of the principle is to some extent “balanced” by the progressive introduction of extraordinary remedies allowing the retrial of finally acquitted defendants.
- Tonya L. Putnam & Jacob N. Shapiro, International Law and Voter Preferences: the Case of Foreign Human Rights Violations
- Nisha Mukherjee Bellinger, Voting and Human Rights in Democratic Societies
- Diya Uberoi & Beatriz Galli, In Pursuit of a Balance: the Regulation of Conscience and Access to Sexual Reproductive Health Care
- Peter Hilpold, Unilateralism in Refugee law—Austria’s Quota Approach Under Scrutiny
- Alan J. Simmons, Domestic Attitudes Towards International Jurisdiction over Human Rights Violations
- Karel Wellens, The International Court of Justice, Back to the Future: Keeping the Dream Alive
- Aslan Abashidze & Svetlana Shatalova, International Crimes Exception to the Immunity of State Officials from Foreign Criminal Jurisdiction: The Russian Perspective on the Work of the International Law Commission
- Pauline Janssen & Renée Kool, Recognising Victimhood: Lessons from the International Criminal Court and Mass Claim Programmes for the Compensation Procedure Parallel to the Trial of International Crimes in the Netherlands
- Manisuli Ssenyonjo, The Influence of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in Africa
- Martin D. Fink, Naval Blockade and the Humanitarian Crisis in Yemen
- Jie Huang, Comparison of E-commerce Regulations in Chinese and American FTAs: Converging Approaches, Diverging Contents, and Polycentric Directions?
- Bryan Druzin, Towards a Theory of Spontaneous Legal Standardization
- Freya Baetens, Judicial Review of International Adjudicatory Decisions: A Cross-Regime Comparison of Annulment and Appellate Mechanisms
- David Collins, Loss Aversion Bias or Fear of Missing Out: A Behavioural Economics Analysis of Compensation in Investor–State Dispute Settlement
- Suar Sanubari, Arbitrator’s Conduct on Social Media
- Ilias Bantekas, Interstate Arbitration in International Tax Disputes
- Catharine Titi, International Dispute Settlement in Cultural Heritage Law and in the Protection of Foreign Investment: Is Cross-Fertilization Possible?
- Lorenzo Palestini, Forget About Mavrommatis and Judicial Economy: The Alleged Absence of a Dispute in the Cases Concerning the Obligations to Negotiate the Cessation of the Nuclear Arms Race and Nuclear Disarmament
Monday, August 21, 2017
- Jong Woo Kang & Dorothea M. Ramizo, Impact of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures and Technical Barriers on International Trade
- Joachim Monkelbaan, Using Trade for Achieving the SDGs: The Example of the Environmental Goods Agreement
- Wonkyu Shin & Dukgeun Ahn, Firm’s Responsive Behaviours in WTO Trade Disputes: Countervailing Cases on Korean DRAMs
- Ole Gunnar Austvik & Carolina Lembo, EU-Russian Gas Trade and the Shortcomings of International Law
- Bradly J. Condon, Disciplining Clean Energy Subsidies to Speed the Transition to a Low-Carbon World
- Christopher S. Wong, Regulating Currency Manipulation: Political, Legal and Economic Barriers to Reform
- Giulia Meloni & Johan Swinnen, Standards, Tariffs and Trade: The Rise and Fall of the Raisin Trade Between Greece and France in the Late Nineteenth Century
- Chris Downes, The Post-Brexit Management of EU Agricultural Tariff Rate Quotas
Sunday, August 20, 2017
Unrecognized states are characterized by stagnant or crumbling economies and political instability, often serve as havens for illicit trade, and challenge the territorial sovereignty of recognized states. Their persistence is both intellectually puzzling and normatively problematic, but unrecognized statehood can be a remarkably stable outcome, persisting for decades. Our dynamic four-player model reveals that unrecognized statehood emerges as an equilibrium outcome when a patron state is willing and able to persistently invest resources to sustain it. We assess options available to actors in the international community who seek to impose their preferred outcomes in these disputes and find that, although sanctions are the most frequently employed, they can often lead to renewed conflict instead of the intended resolution.
Saturday, August 19, 2017
Alschner, Seiermann, & Skougarevskiy: Text-as-Data Analysis of Preferential Trade Agreements: Mapping the PTA Landscape
Preferential trade agreements (PTAs) form an intricate web that connects countries across the globe. In this article, we introduce a PTA text corpus and research tools for its fine-grained, automated analysis. Recent computational advances allow for efficient and effective content analysis by treating text as data. We digitize PTA texts and use textual similarity tools to assess PTA design patterns on the global, national, and chapter level. Our descriptive analysis reveals, inter alia, that PTAs are more heterogeneous as a group than, for instance, bilateral investment agreements, but that they converge in regional or inter-regional clusters of similarly worded agreements. Following our descriptive account, we provide three concrete, interdisciplinary examples of how text-as-data analysis can advance the study of trade economics, politics, and law. In trade economics, similarity measures can provide more detailed representations of PTA design differences. These allow researchers to capture more meaningful variation when studying the economic impact of PTAs. In trade politics, scholars can use treaty similarity to trace design diffusion more accurately and test competing explanations for treaty design choices. Finally, in trade law, similarity measures offer new insights into the processes of normative convergence between legal regimes such as trade and investment law.
- Benjamin Heng, Rain Liivoja, Daniel Ng & Bruce ‘Ossie’ Oswald, Military Justice in a Comparative and International Perspective: A View from the Asia Pacific
- Bruce ‘Ossie’ Oswald, Sexual Exploitation and Abuse in UN Peace Operations: Challenges and Developments
- Carlos Augusto de Sousa, Brazilian Federal Military Justice’s Jurisdiction to Prosecute Civilians
- Joshua Matthew Goh, The Development of Singapore’s Military Justice System
- Jeffrey Kahn, ‘Unlawful Influence’ and the al-Nashiri Military Commission at Guantánamo Bay
- Tennille Marsh, Civilian Sentencing Principles in Summary Military Discipline Proceedings
- Ursula Smith & Daniel J. Lecce, Litigating National Security Cases under The United States Uniform Code of Military Justice
- Gus Waschefort, Implications of Children’s Rights for Military Justice in the Context of Members of the Armed Forces Younger than the Age of Eighteen
Friday, August 18, 2017
The conference “Peace Through Law: The Versailles Peace Treaty and dispute settlement after WWI” is designed to investigate both the notion of “peace through law” and the new international framework set up by the Treaty in the aftermath of the Great War. Held a century later, the conference will also offer a unique moment of reflection on the state of the dispute settlement system.
The WTO Appellate Body has established itself as a leading international tribunal in the world today. However, Uruguay Round negotiators did not intend to create a court. There is no statute creating the Appellate Body, but only a sparse article in the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes. It is remarkable how international respect for the Appellate Body as a judicial body grew very quickly in its first few years. The founding Appellate Body members were critically aware that they had to establish the reputation of this new judicial body, it had to be earned by the quality of their decisions, their actions, their comportment, and the fairness of their procedures. This is the story, written by the first Director of the Appellate Body Secretariat, of the steps they and their Secretariat took, in the early years, to establish an international judicial body that would earn the trust and respect of WTO Members and the public globally. Independence and impartiality are the sine qua non for credibility, coherency, accountability and legitimacy of any judicial body. In order to protect the independence and impartiality of the Appellate Body in the future, reforms to the terms of appointment of Appellate Body members must be considered.
- Thomas Buergenthal, Human Rights: From San Francisco to The Hague
- “Effectiveness and Legitimacy of International Law” Symposium in Honour of Christian Tomuschat
- Armin von Bogdandy, Anne Peters, & Karl-Peter Sommermann, Symposium in Honour of Christian Tomuschat
- Christian Tomuschat, Effectiveness and Legitimacy in International Law
- Karl-Peter Sommermann, Transformative Effects of the Aarhus Convention in Europe
- Malgosia Fitzmaurice, Legitimacy of International Environmental Law. The Sovereign States Overwhelmed by Obligations: Responsibility to React to Problems Beyond National Jurisdiction?
- Carsten Stahn, Daedalus or Icarus? Footprints of International Criminal Justice Over a Quarter of a Century
- Andreas Buser, Colonial Injustices and the Law of State Responsibility: The CARICOM Claim to Compensate Slavery and (Native) Genocide
- Alessandro Bufalini, On the Power of a State to Waive Reparation Claims Arising from War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity
- Stellungnahmen und Berichte
- Matthias Hartwig, Völkerrechtliche Praxis der Bundesrepublik Deutschland im Jahr 2012
CALL FOR AUTHORS
Smit & Herzog on the Law of the European Union
Herzog, Campbell & Zagel eds
This four-volume loose-leaf founded by Prof Hans Smit and Prof Peter Herzog more than 30 years ago was the first English-language and remains the most comprehensive article-by-article commentary of the treaties through which the European Union is established and operates.
The editors seek to refresh Smit & Herzog’s stable of authors on the occasion of the recent or impending retirement of several of the highly regarded academics and practitioners who have contributed to Smit & Herzog for many years. For the relevant (groups of) articles, see here.
We invite expressions of interest from holders of doctoral (or higher) degrees in European Union law (with teaching and research or practice experience).
The parameters for engagement would be (i) to prepare, over the next 12-18 months, updates or rewrites of existing commentary or in some cases submit new manuscripts on articles as yet without commentary and (ii) to commit to update said commentary (at least once) in the ensuing 3-5 years. The publication issues update releases every six months.
A very general template is to be followed in preparing the commentaries, but this still allows ample scope for each author to analyse the provisions according to her or his own expert approach.
For additional information, please contact email@example.com referencing “Smit & Herzog” in the subject line.
- Jerome A. Cohen, Establish Yourself at Thirty: My Decision to Study China’s Legal System
- Mizushima Tomonori, Law-Making Process concerning State Jurisdiction over Artworks Loaned from Abroad: Implications of the Exhibition of Treasured Masterpieces from Taipei
- Yann-huei Song, U.S. Practice Regarding Article 121(3) of UNCLOS and the South China Sea Arbitration Case
- Michael Sheng-ti Gau, The 2015 Award on Jurisdiction and Admissibility of the South China Sea Arbitration and the Insurmountable Thresholds
- Yuka Fukunaga, Infrastructure Investment in Asia and Protection under International Investment Agreements
- Michelle Dy, Coordinating Games: The Challenge of Pursuing a Financial Integration Project in ASEAN
- Special Reports
- Nigel N.T. Li, Amicus Curiae Submission by the Chinese (Taiwan) Society of International Law in the South China Sea Arbitration: An Introductory Note
- Der-Chin Horng, Taiwan Practices in the WTO Main Activities: 2002-2015
- Pasha L. Hsieh & Pei-Lun Tsai, The 2015 Ma-Xi Meeting in Singapore
Thursday, August 17, 2017
China’s accession to the WTO is widely understood as an important step towards greater global market liberalization and integration. However, this step has been also perceived in an ambivalent way. On one hand, the global market liberalization would have never been really completed without participation of such a major player as China. On the other hand, many observers articulated concerns about China’s ability to integrate into the WTO system. In order to tackle the issues of concern, attention was paid mainly to technical issues, which were seen as a precondition for China’s successful integration into the WTO system. For this reason, topics related with market integration, such as e.g. liberalization requirements, as well as topics related with transparency and legal and administrative policies, necessary for securing of just and equitable resolution of commercial and trade disputes, were initially addressed.
Still, in the light of the changing and evolving geopolitical climate, it has become more evident that Non-Trade Concerns (NTCs) might be another multifaceted topic requiring special attention. EU and US, becoming increasingly aware of the fact that competition of economies with different level of development might result not only in job losses in developed countries due to relocation of production, but also to general deterioration of environmental, social and health standards, have accentuated the importance of a global consensus on NTCs and their inclusion into EU and US external policies concerning foreign trade and investment. Civil society from the developed world, in general, is afraid that further liberalization may endanger public policies at different levels: environmental protection and sustainable development, good governance, cultural rights, labor rights, public health, social welfare, national security, food security, access to knowledge, consumer protection, and animal welfare.
On the other hand, coalition consisting of China and other BRICS countries as well as other developing countries gaining more influence in the WTO and other international fora has been able to articulate discontent with measures adopted by developed countries to address NTCs. The clash between interests of developed and developing countries reveals potential unfairness and inconsistencies of the international system, including the international trade system, which needs to undergo a deep reform to integrate the developing countries’ needs.
Many of the measures that developed countries introduce to address NTCs were received by developing countries with suspicion, resistance, and even hostility. Developing countries, including China, doubt the authenticity of such considerations and think they might actually hide protectionist purposes. Additionally, developing countries see these measures as an indirect form of western imperialism whereby they will have no choice but to comply with the social, ethical, and cultural values of the developed states. Nonetheless, not only has China undergone serious reforms and adopted new regulations to address the issue of NTCs, but the country has even begun to play an important role in the international negotiations on NTCs—such as those on climate change, energy, culture, and so on.
However, at the same time it provides an opportunity for China and other developing countries to defend their interests in a constructive dialogue with developed countries and restructure the system in order to find a necessary balance between globalization and sustainable development or to shape it according to their interests.
International legal frameworks exist to formalize interactions between countries, supposedly muting the need for behind-the-scenes bargaining in the event of disagreements. Yet diplomacy persists, and sometimes escalates, even after countries invoke dispute settlement mechanisms. What is the purpose and impact of diplomatic engagement in the presence of international law? To date, the answer to this question has been elusive due to a shortage of both granular, systematic data on diplomatic interaction and precise theories about its effects. This paper redresses these deficits by exploring the relationship between diplomacy and the settlement of international trade disputes prior to a final legal judgment. We argue that even when states resort to international legal mechanisms, they still engage in a considerable amount of diplomacy outside of those processes. But the effects of diplomatic engagement vary depending on pre-existing state affinity. Specifically, we argue that diplomatic interactions help states that have dissimilar policy preferences resolve their disputes before they reach a formal ruling. By contrast, diplomacy has minimal impact on dispute settlement in relationships between countries with higher affinity. To establish this argument, we focus on the diplomatic interactions behind litigation involving the United States (US) at the World Trade Organization (WTO).
- Sebastian Schutte, Violence and Civilian Loyalties: Evidence from Afghanistan
- Miguel R. Rueda, Popular Support, Violence, and Territorial Control in Civil War
- Cullen S. Hendrix & Idean Salehyan, A House Divided: Threat Perception, Military Factionalism, and Repression in Africa
- Michael C. Horowitz, Paul Poast, & Allan C. Stam, Domestic Signaling of Commitment Credibility: Military Recruitment and Alliance Formation
- Daniel McCormack & Henry Pascoe, Sanctions and Preventive War
- Timothy M. Peterson, Export Diversity and Human Rights
- Jeff Carter, The Political Cost of War Mobilization in Democracies and Dictatorships
- Author Exchange
- Philip Paolino, Surprising Events and Surprising Opinions: The Importance of Attitude Strength and Source Credibility
- Christopher Gelpi, The Surprising Robustness of Surprising Events: A Response to a Critique of “Performing on Cue”
Droubi: Institutionalisation of Emerging Norms of Customary International Law through Resolutions and Operational Activities of the Political and Subsidiary Organs of the United Nations
The paper looks at resolutions and operational activities of the UN as parts of processes of institutionalisation of nascent norms of CIL. It argues that institutionalisation clarifies the scope of the norm and of its application; and improves mechanisms of persuasion and compliance with the norm, thereby increasing social pressure on resilient States. Hence, institutionalised norms have a higher potential to affect both the behaviour and attitude of States than noninstitutionalised norms. Crucially, the paper argues that UN resolutions and activities foster processes of institutionalisation of new norms. Although the work acknowledges that is not possible to foresee whether a norm will crystallise as CIL, it suggests that its potential increases if it matches and draws on the normative framework provided by the UN Charter; if it does not excessively challenge the predominant expectations of States, and if UN organs work together in promoting it.