Saturday, March 7, 2015

Bungenberg, Griebel, Hobe, & Reinisch: International Investment Law: A Handbook

Marc Bungenberg (Univ. of Siegen - Law), Jörn Griebel (International Investment Law Centre Cologne), Stephan Hobe (International Investment Law Centre Cologne), & August Reinisch (Univ. of Vienna - Law) have published International Investment Law: A Handbook (C.H. Beck/Hart Publishing/Nomos 2015). Here's the abstract:
The growing importance of international investment law, fuelled by the processes of globalisation and the search for natural resources, and fostered by the ease of cross-border financial flows, has given rise to a huge expansion in the incidence of new investment treaties and, consequently, disputes. The complexity of this area and the enormous sums of investment involved mean that the agreements and treaties themselves are highly evolved, while the disputes arising are often hugely intricate and intractable. No area of international law is more in need of the careful and balanced attention of scholars.

Friday, March 6, 2015

Drumbl: Stepping Beyond Nuremberg's Halo: The Legacy of the Supreme National Tribunal of Poland

Mark A. Drumbl (Washington and Lee Univ. - Law) has posted Stepping Beyond Nuremberg's Halo: The Legacy of the Supreme National Tribunal of Poland. Here's the abstract:

The Supreme National Tribunal of Poland (Najwyższy Trybunał Narodowy (Tribunal)) operated from 1946 to 1948. The Tribunal implemented the 1943 Moscow Declaration. This instrument provided for the repatriation of suspected Nazi war criminals. Defendants were to be sent to the countries where they had allegedly committed atrocities to stand trial and, if convicted, to face sentences – all based on applicable national laws. The Tribunal presided over seven high-profile cases. These proceedings implicated a total of forty-nine individual defendants. This paper unpacks two of the Tribunal’s trials: that of Rudolph Höss (Kommandant of Auschwitz (Oświęcim), described as the site of the largest mass murder in history) and that of Amon Göth (commander of the Kraków-Płaszów labor camp).

The Tribunal pursued punitive as well as didactic goals in conducting its trials. On this latter note, the Tribunal aspired to educate the world about Poland’s suffering during the Nazi occupation. Notwithstanding these expressive ambitions, strikingly little has been written about the Tribunal outside Poland. While more robust, discussion within Poland has nonetheless failed to catalyze a broader transnational conversation. The neglect of the Tribunal’s work disappoints in light of the distinctive quality of its jurisprudence, its salience to Poland, and its myriad doctrinal contributions. This paper seeks to recover the Tribunal’s place within the imagined spaces of international criminal accountability. Relatedly, this paper also excavates the Tribunal’s doctrinal innovations and frustrations, in particular regarding how it understood genocide, organizational liability, membership in criminal organizations, medical war crimes, and sexual torture.

Inadvertently, perhaps, the Tribunal also warns of the shadow-side of international criminalization. It does so notwithstanding (or, even, because of) the distinguished nature of its work. The Tribunal’s foundational legal decrees – deployed to assert jurisdiction over Nazis in the name of human rights – also inflated the punitive reach of Polish Communist authorities against other domestic ‘traitors’ seen as inimical to the state and, thereby, channeled the violation of human rights in the post-war period.

This paper proceeds in four parts. Part I sets out the Tribunal’s provenance and background, while also offering a flavor of the politics and pressures that contoured (and co-opted) its activities. Parts II and III respectively examine the Göth and Höss cases. These parts set out the two defendants and their crimes, while also raising doctrinal quandaries and contributions. Throughout, references are made to other cases pursued by the Tribunal. Part IV concludes. It does so by returning to several of the elements discussed in part I and by gesturing toward a broader set of epistemological, motivational, and penological questions central to the operation of transitional justice.

Scoville: Socializing Students: Law Schools and the Efficacy of International Norms

Ryan Scoville (Marquette Univ. - Law) has posted Socializing Students: Law Schools and the Efficacy of International Norms. Here's the abstract:

This Article identifies a global condition and then hypothesizes on why it matters. The condition is that the study of public international law around the world is polymorphic: Reporting the results of the first global survey on the study of the discipline, I demonstrate that there are substantial cross-national variations in the pervasiveness, quality, topical emphases, and ideological orientation of university training on international law. — a website that accompanies the Article — reveals some of these findings in the form of an interactive world map.

The hypothesis, in turn, is that polymorphism matters because it influences the efficacy of international law: In states where international legal education is widespread, rigorous, and supportive of the discipline, universities will materially contribute to norm awareness, utilization, and even obedience over the long run. In states where training is unavailable or limited, poor in quality, or hostile, university curricula will have a neutral or opposite effect. Moreover, the fact of cross-national variation in these conditions imposes a systemic limit on the coherence and value of public international law. The central claim is that this hypothesis — the “training hypothesis” — is reasonable, enjoys substantial empirical support, and, if correct, carries significant implications for universities and foreign ministries.

Green: The Article 51 Reporting Requirement for Self-Defense Actions

James A. Green (Univ. of Reading - Law) has posted The Article 51 Reporting Requirement for Self-Defense Actions (Virginia Journal of International Law, forthcoming). Here's the abstract:
This article examines one of the legal criteria for the exercise of the right of self-defense that has been significantly overlooked in the literature: the so-called “reporting requirement”. Article 51 of the United Nations (UN) Charter provides, inter alia, that “[m]easures taken by members in the exercise of this right of self-defense shall be immediately reported to the Security Council.” Although this requirement to report all self-defense actions to the Council is clearly set out in Article 51, the Charter offers no further guidance with regard to this obligation. Reference to the practice of states since the UN’s inception in 1945 is, therefore, essential to understanding the scope and nature of the reporting requirement. As such, this article is underpinned by an extensive original dataset of reporting practice covering the period from January 1, 1998 to December 31, 2013. We know from Article 51 that states “shall” report, but do they, and – if so – in what manner? What are the various implications of reporting, of failing to report, and of the way in which states report? How are reports used, and by whom? Most importantly, this article questions the ultimate value of states reporting their self-defense actions to the Security Council in modern interstate relations.

Johannesson & Mavroidis: Black Cat, White Cat. The Identity of the WTO Judges

Louise Johannesson (Research Institute of Industrial Economics) & Petros C. Mavroidis (Columbia Univ. - Law; European Univ. Institute - Law) have posted Black Cat, White Cat. The Identity of the WTO Judges. Here's the abstract:
WTO judges are proposed by the WTO Secretariat and elected to act as ‘judges’ if either approved by the parties to a dispute, or by the WTO Director-General in case no agreement between the parties has been possible. They are typically ‘Geneva crowd’, that is, they are either current or former delegates representing their country before the WTO. This observation holds for both first- as well as second instance WTO judges (e.g. Panelists and members of the Appellate Body). In that, the WTO evidences an attitude strikingly similar to the GATT. Whereas the legal regime has been heavily ‘legalized’, the people called to enforce it remain the same.

Call for Papers: Regional Integration

The Center for International Law Studies of the University of Indonesia Faculty of Law, in collaboration with the Faculty of Law Airlangga University, has issued a call for papers for its sixth conference, to take place October 5-6, 2015, in Surabaya. The topic is "Regional Integration." Here's the call:





5-6 OCTOBER 2015



We are pleased to announce that Center for International Law Studies (CILS) of the Faculty of Law University of Indonesia is holding the 6th CILS Conference in Surabaya, Indonesia on 5th and 6th October 2015 in collaboration with the Faculty of Law Airlangga University. The Airlangga University is one of the major stated-owned universities in Indonesia, based in Surabaya, the capital of East Java province. The University was inaugurated in 1954 by the first President of Indonesia Dr. Ir. Soekarno which coincides with the commemoration of Heroes Day, dated 10 November 1954. Another important fact of Airlangga University is that this university originated from the precursor institution Nederlands Indische Artsen School (NIAS) and Tot School Opleiding van Indische Tandartsen (STOVIT), each established by the Dutch government in 1913 and 1928. In 1948, the Dutch government set up a branch Tandheelkunding Instituut Universiteit van Indonesie Jakarta and reopen NIAS with Faculteit der Geneeskunde name is also a branch of the Universiteit van Indonesie, Jakarta. We look forward to welcoming you at the conference and value your contribution to the ongoing success of this annual conference.

The 6th CILS International Conference 2015

The first, second, third, fourth, and fifth CILS International Conference had been carried out with a great success in 2010 at Faculty of Law Universitas Indonesia in Depok, in 2011 at Faculty of Law Universitas Gadjahmada in Yogyakarta, in 2012 at Faculty of Law Universitas Hasanuddin in Makassar, in 2013 at the Faculty of Law Universitas Syiahkuala, in Aceh, and in 2014 at Faculty of Law Universitas Indonesia in Depok, Indonesia. Numerous experts from various countries had attended our Conferences and given their invaluable support to its success. The rotated venue of conference is departed from the thoughts to enhance the development of international law throughout Indonesia, thus this Conference is launched every year in different places in Indonesia where the local Faculty of Law has an interest in developing International Law.

In this year, the CILS International Conference will be placed in Surabaya, Indonesia, particularly at the Faculty of Law Airlangga University, the renowned public university in eastern part of Java Island in Indonesia where the development of international law is also well treated by their respected international law experts. The Conference is therefore continued to serve as a forum of international law stakeholders in Indonesia and beyond to bring together ideas in promoting and developing international law to respond to the growing needs of having strong guiding principles in a borderless world.

This CILS annual conference is expected to take place every year to mark any international law development. The theme of this year is therefore “Regional Integration”. Within this broad conference theme, there are four parallel sessions in which will focus on the following sub-themes:

    (1) Trade and Investment;

    (2) Security;

    (3) Social and Cultural;

    (4) environment,

    (5) General Topic .

Plenary Session

There will be a Plenary Session on the first day of the Conference where the Invited Speakers consisting of respected international law scholars will give speech and share opinion to the participants regarding “Regional Integration” as a major theme of the conference itself. Some experts from EU, ASEAN, African Union and other Regional Organization will take part in this Plenary Session.

Call for Papers

There will be up to twelve papers per panel to give presenters and discussants adequate time for fruitful engagement. We encourage participants to focus their papers and address the conference theme and sub-themes. In addition to the general call for individual papers, we would also like to encourage individuals to organize their own panels by coordinating with colleagues. This will allow for the panels to be more cohesive and will also foster greater collaboration between international law stakeholders.

Selection criteria for papers

The papers accepted for presentation at the CILS international conference will be based on a competitive selection process. The selection criteria will be as follows:

  • Relevance to the broad theme and sub-theme
  • Quality of the abstract
  • Geographical diversity of presenters
  • Balance between senior and junior presenters

Important Deadlines

    1. Submission of Abstract: 1 June 2015. Authors will be notified up to 14 working days after their submission

    2. Deadline for Early Bird Registration and Payment: 1 August 2015

    3. Submission of Completed Paper: 5 September 2015

    4. Closing date for Registration and Payment: 1 September 2015

    5. Conference: 5-6 October 2015

For further information regarding registration, guidelines abstract and paper submission and venue please refer to

Thursday, March 5, 2015

Bohoslavsky: Illicit Financial Flows, Human Rights and the Post-2015 Development Agenda / Report on Financial Complicity: Lending to States Engaged in Gross Human Rights Violations

Juan Pablo Bohoslavsky (Independent Expert on the Effects of Foreign Debt and Other Related International Financial Obligations of States on the Full Enjoyment of All Human Rights, Human Rights Council) has posted his interim study on Illicit Financial Flows, Human Rights and the Post-2015 Development Agenda (UN Doc. A/HRC/28/60) and his Report on Financial Complicity: Lending to States Engaged in Gross Human Rights Violations (UN Doc. A/HRC/28/59). Here are the summaries:

Illicit financial flows generated from crime, corruption, embezzlement and tax evasion represent a major drain on the resources of developing countries, reducing tax revenues and the scope for progressive taxation, hindering development and the rule of law, exacerbating poverty and inequality, and undermining the enjoyment of human rights. Tax evasion and abuse are considered to be responsible for the majority of all illicit financial outflows, followed by illicit financial flows relating to criminal activities, such as drug and human trafficking, the illicit arms trade, terrorism and corruption-based illicit financial flows. According to some estimations developing countries lost US$ 991 billion in illicit financial outflows in 2012 and those flows increased in real terms at a rate of 9.4 per cent per annum over the period 2003–2012. The annual loss is substantially more than the estimated yearly costs of achieving the Millennium Development Goals.

The present interim study is submitted pursuant to Human Rights Council resolution 25/9, and updates earlier reports by the previous Independent Expert. It outlines how illicit financial flows undermine the enjoyment of economic, social, cultural, civil and political rights and emphasizes the need for due diligence and due process in the fight against illicit financial flows, for better protection of witnesses and whistle-blowers and for incorporating human rights considerations in the management of returned stolen assets. It concludes with recommendations on how the goal of curbing illicit financial flows could be operationalized within the post-2015 development agenda of the United Nations.


The present report, submitted in accordance with Human Rights Council resolution 25/16, focuses on the question of lending to States engaged in gross human rights violations. It is intended to contribute to a better understanding of when financial support may contribute to, or sustain the commission of, large-scale gross human rights violations by sketching a rational choice framework premised on the incentives of authoritarian Gov¬ernments and private and official lenders. In the report, the Independent Expert on the effects of foreign debt and other related international financial obligations of States on the full enjoyment of all human rights, particularly economic, social and cultural rights, reviews the existing empirical evidence of the relationship between sovereign financing, human rights practices and the consolidation of Governments engaged in gross violations of human rights. In the report, the Independent Expert presents some interim conclusions and invites stakeholders to discuss them. The legal and policy implications of financial complicity will be discussed in a future study.

Dreyfuss & Frankel: From Incentive to Commodity to Asset: How International Law is Reconceptualizing Intellectual Property

Rochelle Cooper Dreyfuss (New York Univ. - Law) & Susy Frankel (Victoria Univ. of Wellington) have posted From Incentive to Commodity to Asset: How International Law is Reconceptualizing Intellectual Property (Michigan Journal of International Law, forthcoming). Here's the abstract:
Domestic patent, copyright and trademark regimes are traditionally justified on an incentive rationale. While international intellectual property agreements are nominally aimed at harnessing global markets to expand incentives, this article argues that as these agreements come into force, a subtle, but significant, reconceptualization is taking place. Free trade agreements treat intellectual property rights as commodities; bilateral investment treaties convert them into assets. Using examples involving the “working requirement” in patent law and pending disputes challenging Australia’s limits on the use of trademarks on tobacco products, we show that as these moves progressively detach intellectual property from its incentives basis, domestic authority to promote local concerns such as health, education, and development is increasingly impaired. The authors end with proposals for interpreting the impact of existing agreements and for revising international lawmaking so that intellectual property mechanisms can be exploited to motivate innovation without damaging state authority to safeguard public values. While we recognize that technologically sophisticated countries (such as the United States) will continue to demand stronger intellectual property protection worldwide to compensate for losses in their manufacturing sectors, a system that fails to recognize consumer interests also impedes follow-on innovation and entry by start-ups. Balance is, in short, important for every country, no matter where its sits in the technological hierarchy. Furthermore, those now pushing the commodification and assetization agenda must consider how reconceptualization will affect them in the future, when their position in the hierarchy may well be different.

Gätzschmann: Der vorläufige Rechtsschutz in Schiedsverfahren nach der ICSID-Konvention

Ina Gätzschmann has published Der vorläufige Rechtsschutz in Schiedsverfahren nach der ICSID-Konvention (Nomos 2015). Here's the abstract:

Im Fokus der Arbeit steht das Rechtsinstitut des vorläufigen Rechtsschutzes im internationalen Investitionsschutzrecht. Art. 47 der ICSID-Konvention (ICSID) wird anhand der bisherigen Rechtssprechungspraxis der ICSID-Schiedsgerichte eingehend untersucht und in den größeren Kontext zu vorläufigen Maßnahmen nach Art. 41 des IGH-Statuts und Art. 26 der UNCITRAL-Regeln gestellt.

Vor dem Hintergrund immer noch bestehender Unsicherheiten über die Auslegung des Art. 47 ICSID macht sich die Arbeit zum Ziel, für den Rechtsanwender klare Leitlinien zu schaffen, wie ein Antrag auf Anordnung vorläufiger Maßnahmen gestellt werden muss, um erfolgreich zu sein. Nachdem die Voraussetzungen der Norm anhand von Fallbeispielen konkretisiert werden, werden die Fragen der Bindungswirkung sowie der Anerkennungs- und Durchsetzungsfähigkeit von Anordnungen nach Art. 47 ICSID geklärt.

Macklem: Human Rights in International Law: Three Generations or One?

Patrick Macklem (Univ. of Toronto - Law) has posted Human Rights in International Law: Three Generations or One? Here's the abstract:
International human rights are often portrayed as corresponding to three generations. First generation rights refer to civil and political rights, specifically, those enshrined in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, such as freedom of expression and the right to vote. The second generation concerns economic, social and cultural rights, specifically, those enshrined in the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, such as rights to housing and to form a trade union. The third generation typically is said to include the right to development, the right to self-determination, minority rights, the right to a healthy environment, the right to peace, and the right to ownership of the common heritage of mankind. This essay argues that what generational accounts fail to grasp is the fact that, despite the diverse sets of interests they seek to protect, human rights in international law share a common purpose, which is to mitigate injustices produced by the ways in which international law brings legal order to global politics. In this sense, civil and political rights and social, economic and cultural rights, as well those thought of as third generation rights, comprise but one generation: a single population of entitlements, speaking to the structure and operation of international law. This essay, I hope, will introduce readers to The Sovereignty of Human Rights (Oxford University Press, forthcoming), in which I explore its thesis at greater length.

Call for Papers: International Economic Law and Development in Africa: Challenges and Opportunities

The African Association of International Law has issued a call for papers for a conference on "International Economic Law and Development in Africa: Challenges and Opportunities," to take place August 29-31, 2015, in Libreville. Here's the call:


Conference of the African Association of International Law

Libreville, Gabon

29 – 31 August 2015

Deadline for submissions of abstracts: 15 March 2015

Submissions from women are strongly encouraged

The African Association of International Law (AAIL) is pleased to announce its 2015 conference entitled: International Economic Law and Development in Africa: Challenges and Opportunities.

The AAIL, one of the first academic societies in the field of international law on the African continent, was established in 1986 by leading international lawyers including Abdulqawi Yusuf, Georges Abi-Saab, T.O. Elias, Keba Mbaye and Boutros Boutros-Ghali. The first volume of the African Yearbook of International Law was published by the AAIL in 1993, and has continued to be published under the auspices of the African Foundation of International Law (AFIL) established in 2003. The AAIL which was re-activated in 2012 is affiliated with both the Foundation and the African Institute of International Law based in Arusha, Tanzania.


The 2015 AAIL conference will explore the law in relation to economic development in Africa. In 2014 Africa maintained a phenomenal average growth of 5%, with a number of countries emerging as middle income countries. Yet inclusive growth and unequal wealth distribution remains a continent-wide challenge, while political fragility and conflict threaten to crumble even the most stable economies in the region. As the world begins to craft the post-2015 development agenda we ask:

  • What legal frameworks are needed to ensure a conducive environment for sustained economic growth?
  • How has international economic law (IEL) shaped the development agenda?
  • Can justice, the rule of law and good governance play a role in inclusive economic growth?
  • How effective have international and regional economic institutions been in promoting all aspects of development?
  • What is the current state of investment arbitration and investment security in Africa?
  • Are there correlations between economic growth and sustainable development of natural resources in Africa?

We invite papers which will tackle any of these questions or explore, from an African perspective, the developments, paradigms and issues that concern International Economic Law on the following topics:

  • Foreign and south-south investment in Africa;
  • Trade and trade facilitation;
  • The gap between the regulatory framework and the implementation of International trade rules in Africa;
  • International finance and monetary policy;
  • Dispute settlement;
  • Terrorism and its impact on Africa’s economic development;
  • Intellectual property rights and technology acquisition;
  • Energy and Power Africa;
  • Sustainable development Goals and the Post-2015 Agenda;
  • African economic integration in the context of regional economic communities;
  • International economic law and its role in development agendas;
  • The green economy and the impact of climate change on Africa economies;
  • New research, methodologies or innovations in the teaching of International Economic Law in African Universities.

The working languages of the Conference are English and French. Submissions are welcome in either language. Only one submission per author will be considered. Submissions from women are strongly encouraged. Kindly send an abstract (300 – 500 words) of your paper including your curriculum vitae as well as contact details and institutional affiliation. These materials should be sent to: before 15 March 2015.

Successful applicants will be notified by 31 March 2015. The deadline for submission of final papers is 30 June 2015. Conference fees will be waived for all selected panelists. An award will be given to the author(s) of the best paper of the conference. Selected papers will be published in the African Yearbook of International Law.

Should you have any questions about the conference or the call for papers, kindly contact Adejoké Babington-Ashaye, AAIL Director of Programmes at

Call for Papers: Indicators and the Ecology of Governance

The Institute for International Law and Justice at New York University School of Law has issued a call for papers for a conference on "Indicators and the Ecology of Governance." Here's the call:

Indicators and the Ecology of Governance

NYU Law School Conference, July 6-7, 2015


On July 6-7, 2015, the Institute for International Law and Justice (IILJ) at New York University School of Law will convene a conference on indicators and the ecology of governance. This conference has three objectives: to take stock and analyze key ideas from very recent work in the field; to bring together interested scholars and celebrate the launch of several recent books on indicators in global governance; and above all to explore promising directions in current and future research, with a particular focus on the dynamics or ecology of governance in which indicators are one of several competing technologies.

This Call for Papers seeks to bring forward new work, whether case studies or theoretical in any relevant discipline, and to put authors (whether senior or junior, and academics or practitioners) in dialogue with scholars who have been involved in some of the recent publications listed below. The starting point is that indicators are simply one technology of governance among many. Individual indicators exist in increasingly dense and fast-moving environments in which they interact with numerous other indicators and other technologies and modes of governance. These dynamic ecological features have not been studied sufficiently, nor have their implications for institutions, law, resistance, and power-knowledge frameworks been very fully considered.

Lines of inquiry for papers could include the following, but there are many other possibilities:

  • Interaction. Under what conditions has the proliferation of indicators resulted in competition, complementarity, coordination, parallel operation, etc. among producers and/or users of indicators (or, instead, in hegemony of one or a select few indicators)?
  • Countering Indicators. Indicators and now big data and algorithms are a prevalent technology of governance. What have been, or could be, some counter-strategies (including production of competing indicators)? What resistance or contestation has occurred to the rapid proliferation of indicators and measurement algorithms and the use of these in advocacy and decision-making? Are there signs of rejection or delegitimation of governance-by-numbers in favor of other modes of governance? Under what conditions do these phenomena or rejection, contestation and countering occur, and with what results?
  • Indicators, Standards, and Law. What is known about commonalities or relations between indicators, standards and laws? What influences choices of methods or their strategic linkage? How do these insights reflect in regulation?
  • Changes in Data Availability. What impacts do changes in the methods of data collection, in the kinds of data available, and in methods of using data have on power-knowledge dynamics of governance-by-indicators? What have been the relationships between for-profit, non-profit, and governmental or IO sectors in driving changes? What have been the impacts of new entrants and new promulgators of indicators (e.g., corporate philanthropists), or newly influential promulgators, users and targets in different regions of the world?

Recent publications from scholars in several disciplines have contributed greatly to understandings of the theoretical underpinnings of governance by indicators, and have illuminated practical dimensions of indicators within governance structures in such areas as corruption, money laundering, credit ratings, health, education, criminal justice, development, humanitarian relief, democracy, rule of law, transitional justice, human rights, violence against women, human trafficking, land restitution, and climate change, among others. Recent books and special journal issues devoted to the broad topic of governance by indicators and which will be celebrated at the conference include:

  • Gouverner par les standards et indicateurs – de Hume au Ranking, (Benoit Frydman, Arnaud Van Waeyenberg, eds.) (Bruylant, 2014)
  • Indicadores, derecho internacional y el surgimiento de nuevos espacios de participación política en gobernanza global, 25 Revista Colombiana de Derecho Internacional (2015).
  • The Quiet Power of Indicators: Measuring Governance, Corruption, and Rule of Law (Sally Engle Merry, Kevin Davis, Benedict Kingsbury, eds.) (Cambridge University Press, forthcoming 2015)
  • Governance by Indicators: Global Power through Classification and Rankings (Kevin Davis, Angelina Fisher, Benedict Kingsbury, and Sally Engle Merry, eds.) (Oxford University Press 2012, paperback 2015)
  • Ranking the World: Grading States as a Tool of Global Governance (Alexander Cooley, Jack Snyder, eds.) (Cambridge University Press, forthcoming 2015)
  • On Governance: What It Is, What It Measures and Its Policy Uses (Robert I. Rotberg, ed.) (CIGI, forthcoming 2015)
  • A World of Indicators (Richard Rottenburg, Sally Engle Merry, Johanna Mugler, and Songi Park, eds.) (Cambridge University Press, 2015)
  • The MDGs, Capabilities and Human Rights: The power of numbers to shape agendas (Sakiko Fukuda-Parr, Alicia Ely Yamin, eds.) (Routledge 2015)
  • Sakiko Fukuda-Parr, Terra Lawson-Remer, and Susan Randolph, Fulfilling Social and Economic Rights (Oxford University Press, 2015)
  • Sally Engle Merry, “The Seductions of Quantification: Measuring Human Rights, Violence against Women, and Human Trafficking” (University of Chicago Press, forthcoming 2016)

Paper Submissions

Submissions of papers from junior and senior scholars and experienced practitioners are invited on any of the themes outlined above.

Draft papers, ideally in the range 15-35 pages, should be sent (in .pdf or .doc format) to by May 15, 2015. (Earlier submissions are encouraged and will be considered on a rolling basis where possible.) Please provide contact details and a link to an author bio. All authors will be informed of the selection decisions quickly thereafter. Selection will be based on relevance to the theme, innovative materials or perspectives, and the overall blend and coherence of the conference. Authors invited who choose to take part will be asked to send final papers by June 20, 2015.

For those selected from this Call for Papers, the IILJ will provide conference meals, plus accommodation for those based outside the NY area. The IILJ also hopes to be able to assist with modest travel funding in a limited number of cases where needed, subject to budget constraints. This conference is funded by a grant from the National Science Foundation, whose generous support is gratefully acknowledged.

This conference builds on research by NYU Law faculty on the general phenomenon of global governance as well as in fields such as trafficking, rule of law and corruption. Much of this work takes place under the rubric of two ongoing projects of the Institute for International Law and Justice: Inter-Institutional Relations in Global Law and Governance, and Indicators as a Technology of Global Governance. For more information and relevant readings on both of these projects, please see here.

Wednesday, March 4, 2015

Conference: The Case of Crimea in the Light of International Law: Its Nature and Implications

On March 19-20, 2015, the Centre for Polish-Russian Dialogue and Understanding and the Institute of Law Studies of the Polish Academy of Sciences will host a conference on "The Case of Crimea in the Light of International Law: Its Nature and Implications." Program and registration information are here.

Sykes: Economic 'Necessity' in International Law

Alan O. Sykes (New York Univ. - Law) has posted Economic 'Necessity' in International Law. Here's the abstract:
Recent investment litigation against Argentina focuses attention on the necessity defense in customary international law and related provisions in investment treaties. This paper considers, from an economic standpoint, the question of when exigent economic circumstances might create conditions of “necessity” that justify deviation from international obligations. Although economic circumstances may arise in which the performance of certain international obligations might impose costs that exceed the benefits, it can be difficult to observe and verify those circumstances reliably. It can also be difficult to assess whether conditions of economic necessity result from excessive moral hazard, and whether deviation from international obligations is the best policy instrument in response to conditions of necessity. A possible solution to these problems is an appropriate compensation requirement.

Conference: 2015 Research Forum

On May 14-15, 2015, the European University Institute will host the 2015 ESIL Research Forum. The program is here. Registration is now open.

New Issue: Journal of Human Rights

The latest issue of the Journal of Human Rights (Vol. 14, no. 1, 2015) is out. Contents include:
  • Jack Donnelly, Normative Versus Taxonomic Humanity: Varieties of Human Dignity in the Western Tradition
  • Laura A. Hebert, “Women Run the Show”?: Gender Violence Reform and the “Stretching” of Human Rights in Rwanda
  • Karolina S. Follis, Responsibility, Emergency, Blame: Reporting on Migrant Deaths on the Mediterranean in the Council of Europe
  • Lindsey Kingston, The Destruction of Identity: Cultural Genocide and Indigenous Peoples
  • Andrew S. Thompson, Tehran 1968 and Reform of the UN Human Rights System
  • Nevin T. Aiken, The Bloody Sunday Inquiry:Transitional Justice and Postconflict Reconciliation in Northern Ireland
  • Gillian MacNaughton & Lisa Forman, Human Rights and Health Impact Assessments of Trade-Related Intellectual Property Rights: A Comparative Study of Experiences in Thailand and Peru

New Issue: Journal of World Investment & Trade

The latest issue of the Journal of World Investment & Trade (Vol. 16, no. 1, 2015) is out. Contents include:
  • Stephan W. Schill, Editorial: The German Debate on International Investment Law
  • Karl P. Sauvant, The Negotiations of the United Nations Code of Conduct on Transnational Corporations: Experience and Lessons Learned
  • Sotonye Frank, Stabilisation Clauses and Foreign Direct Investment: Presumptions versus Realities
  • Michael Trebilcock, Between Theories of Trade and Development: The Future of the World Trading System
  • Benn McGrady, Principles of Non-Discrimination after US – Clove Cigarettes, US – Tuna II, US – COOL and EC – Seal Products and their Implications for International Investment Law
  • Julian Davis Mortenson, Apotex v United States: Narrowing NAFTA’s Definition of ‘Investment’
  • Regis Y. Simo, Mounting Uncertainty and Power Shifting in Global Economic Governance: Addressing Multilateral Stability in the Context of Rising Regionalism

Tuesday, March 3, 2015

Call for Submissions: Journal of International Law and Drug Policy

A call for submissions has been issued for volume 3 of the Journal of International Law and Drug Policy. Here's the call:

Call for Submissions - Journal of International Law and Drug Policy, Volume 3

The International Centre on Human Rights and Drug Policy is currently seeking submissions for the third edition of its flagship publication, the Journal of International Law and Drug Policy. The Journal is the first and only international peer reviewed law journal focusing exclusively on human rights and drug policy issues.

Established in 2009, the International Centre on Human Rights and Drug Policy is dedicated to developing and promoting innovative and high quality legal and human rights scholarship on issues related to drug laws, policy and enforcement. It pursues this mandate by publishing original, peer reviewed research on drug issues as they relate to international human rights law, international humanitarian law, international criminal law and public international law.

Submissions will be considered under the following categories.

Original articles – research and analysis on drug policy issues as they intersect with international human rights law, international humanitarian law, international criminal law and/or public international law.

Opinion/Commentary – these submissions are designed to allow author(s) a forum to explore new and innovative thinking, promote debate and highlight emerging areas of interest.

Case summaries – these are intended to highlight and summarise new court decisions and other jurisprudence related to the Centre’s mandate.

Responses - these are short comments on previously published papers.

Author’s guidelines, may be found here.

For more information email

New Issue: Revue de Droit International et de Droit Comparé

The latest issue of the Revue de Droit International et de Droit Comparé (Vol. 92, no. 1, 2015) is out. Contents include:
  • R. Adam Akono, Réflexions critiques sur le régime de faveur actuel des créances postérieures : étude à la lumière de la réforme en cours de l’acte uniforme portant organisation des procédures collectives
  • M. Trilsch, La judiciarisation du droit à la santé : Quelles perspectives pour la procédure de communications individuelles devant le Comité des droits économiques, sociaux et culturels ?
  • T. Ondo, La non-coopération avec les juridictions pénales internationales

New Issue: Review of International Studies

The latest issue of the Review of International Studies (Vol. 41, no. 2, April 2015) is out. Contents include:
  • Tom Lundborg & Nick Vaughan-Williams, New Materialisms, discourse analysis, and International Relations: a radical intertextual approach
  • Vincent Pouliot & Jean-Philippe Thérien, The politics of inclusion: Changing patterns in the governance of international security
  • Robin Dunford, Human rights and collective emancipation: The politics of food sovereignty
  • Lene Hansen, How images make world politics: International icons and the case of Abu Ghraib
  • Peter Trubowitz & Peter Harris, When states appease: British appeasement in the 1930s
  • Ido Oren & Ty Solomon, WMD, WMD, WMD: Securitisation through ritualised incantation of ambiguous phrases
  • Adam Bower, Arguing with law: strategic legal argumentation, US diplomacy, and debates over the International Criminal Court
  • Sungju Park-Kang, Fictional IR and imagination: Advancing narrative approaches
  • Valbona Muzaka & Matthew Louis Bishop, Doha stalemate: The end of trade multilateralism?
  • Pía Riggirozzi, Regionalism, activism, and rights: New opportunities for health diplomacy in South America

Jardim de Santa Cruz Oliveira: International Trade Agreements Before Domestic Courts

Maria Angela Jardim de Santa Cruz Oliveira has published International Trade Agreements Before Domestic Courts: Lessons from the EU and Brazilian Experiences (Springer 2015). Here’s the abstract:
This book addresses the role of domestic courts in the enforcement of international trade agreements by examining the experiences of Brazilian and the European Union courts. This comparative study analyzes the differences, similarities and consequences of Brazilian and European courts’ decisions in relation to the WTO agreements, which have “direct effect” in Latin American emerging economies, but not in the European Union or other developed countries. It observes that domestic courts’ enforcement of international trade agreements has had several unintended and counterproductive consequences, which were foreseeable in light of international scholarly debate on the direct effect of WTO agreements. It draws lessons from these jurisdictions’ experiences and argues that the traditional academic literature that fosters domestic courts’ enforcement of international law should be reconsidered in Latin America in relation to international trade agreements. This book defends the view that, as a result of their function and objectives together with the principles of popular sovereignty and democratic self-government, international trade agreements should not be considered to be self-executing or to have direct effect. This empirical work will be valuable to anyone interested in the effects of international trade rules at the domestic level and the role of domestic judges in international law.

New Issue: Journal of International Dispute Settlement

The latest issue of the Journal of International Dispute Settlement (Vol. 6, no. 1, March 2015) is out. Contents include:
  • Thomas Schultz, Of Correct Views on Law Without the State
  • Joshua Karton, The Arbitral Role in Contractual Interpretation
  • Mihail Krepchev, The Problem of Accommodating Indigenous Land Rights in International Investment Law
  • Patrick Dumberry, An Uncharted Question of State Succession: Are New States Automatically Bound by the BITs Concluded by Predecessor States Before Independence?
  • Maria A. Gwynn, South American Countries’ Bilateral Investment Treaties: A Structuralist Perspective
  • Pietro Ortolani, Intra-EU Arbitral Awards vis-à-vis Article 107 TFEU: State Aid Law as a Limit to Compliance
  • Josef Ostřanský, The Termination and Suspension of Bilateral Investment Treaties due to an Armed Conflict
  • Orlando Federico Cabrera Colorado, The Freedom of Arbitrators to Conduct Collective Proceedings When the Rules are Silent: Considerations in the Wake of the Abaclat Decision
  • Antonio Leandro, Towards a New Interface Between Brussels I and Arbitration?
  • Matthew Davie, Taxation-Based Investment Treaty Claims

Stoppioni: La réparation dans le contentieux international de l'investissement

Edoardo Stoppioni has published La réparation dans le contentieux international de l'investissement : Contribution à l'étude de la restituto in integrum (Pedone 2015). Here’s the abstract:

Le droit de la réparation dans le contentieux international relatif à l'investissement constitue un domaine qui a longtemps été négligé par la doctrine internationaliste. Témoignant de fortes hésitations quant à la forme que doit prendre la réparation, la lecture de cette phase finale du raisonnement des arbitres tend à donner l'impression que l'indemnisation pécuniaire constitue le seul moyen de réparation admis par la pratique dans ce domaine particulier.

En partant de l'analyse de la notion de restitutio in integrum, modalité contentieuse de retour au status quo ante initiée par le préteur de droit romain pour combler les lacunes laissées par l'indemnisation pécuniaire, l'ouvrage essaie de retracer l'évolution du régime juridique de l'obligation secondaire de réparation dans le contentieux arbitral d'investissement, à partir des célèbres arbitrages pétroliers des années 1970, jusqu'à la plus récente jurisprudence arbitrale.

En resituant cette pratique foisonnante dans l'évolution actuelle du droit international public, le but d'une telle analyse est de dresser une taxinomie des différentes formes de réparation du dommage que connaît le droit international de l'investissement.

L'étude de l'ontologie juridique polymorphe, dans laquelle se traduit le caractère rétrospectif de la responsabilité internationale, tend à une réhabilitation du rôle de la restitutio in integrum dans cette branche spécialisée du contentieux, ainsi qu'à souligner la nécessité de repenser les relations entre réparation en nature et par équivalent en termes de complémentarité.

Monday, March 2, 2015

New Volume: Recueil des Cours

Volume 371 of the Recueil des Cours, Collected Courses of the Hague Academy of International Law is out. Contents include:
  • Volume 371
    • Paul Lagarde, La méthode de la reconnaissance est-elle l’avenir du droit international privé ?
    • Hilary Charlesworth, Democracy and International Law
    • Pascal de Vareilles-Sommières, L’exception d’ordre public et la régularité substantielle internationale de la loi étrangère
    • Masaharu Yanagihara, Significance of the History of the Law of Nations in Europe and East Asia

New Issue: Nordic Journal of Human Rights

The latest issue of the Nordic Journal of Human Rights (Vol. 33, no. 1, 2015) is out. Contents include:
  • Robert Spano, The European Court of Human Rights and National Courts: A Constructive Conversation or a Dialogue of Disrespect?
  • Amrei Müller, Oslo – Strasbourg – back to Oslo and/or into Wider Europe? The ECtHR's Engagement with the Decisions of Norwegian Courts for Strengthening the Convention System as a Cooperative System
  • Hans Morten Haugen, Coherence or Forum Shopping in Biofuels Sustainability Schemes?
  • Ulrike Barten, Minority Rights in the European Union after Lisbon

Bianchi, Peat, & Windsor: Interpretation in International Law

Andrea Bianchi (Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies), Daniel Peat (Univ. of Cambridge - Law), & Matthew Windsor (Univ. of Cambridge - Law) have published Interpretation in International Law (Oxford Univ. Press 2015). Contents include:
  • Daniel Peat & Matthew Windsor, Playing the Game of Interpretation: On Meaning and Metaphor in International Law
  • Andrea Bianchi, The Game of Interpretation in International Law: The Players, The Cards, and why the Game is Worth the Candle
  • Iain Scobbie, Rhetoric, Persuasion, and the Object of Interpretation in International Law
  • Duncan B Hollis, The Existential Function of Interpretation in International Law
  • Jean d'Aspremont, The Multidimensional Process of Interpretation: Content-Determination and Law-Ascertainment Distinguished
  • Andraz Zidar, Interpretation and the International Legal Profession:
  • Michael Waibel, Interpretive Communities in International Law
  • Gleider Hernández, Interpretative Authority and the International Judiciary
  • Eirik Bjorge, The Vienna Rules, Evolutionary Interpretation, and the Intentions of the Parties
  • Julian Arato, Accounting for Difference in Treaty Interpreation Over Time
  • Anne-Marie Carstens, Interpreting Transplanted Treaty Rules
  • Fuad Zarbiyev, A Genealogy of Textualism in Treaty Interpretation
  • Harlan Grant Cohen, Theorizing Precedent in International Law
  • René Provost, Interpretation in International Law as a Transcultural Project
  • Jens Olesen, Towards a Politics of Hermeneutics
  • Martin Wählisch, Cognitive Frames of Interpretation in International Law
  • Ingo Venzke, Is Interpretation in International Law a Game?
  • Philip Allott, Interpretation- an Exact Art

Nichols: The International Criminal Court and the End of Impunity in Kenya

Lionel Nichols has published The International Criminal Court and the End of Impunity in Kenya (Springer 2015). Here's the abstract:

The period immediately following Kenya's 2007 presidential election left a shocking trail of atrocities, with over 1,000 people dead and countless thousands left victimised and displaced. In response, the International Criminal Court began a series of investigations and trials, promising no impunity for even the highest ranking perpetrators. When the country's president and vice-president were implicated in the crimes, the case took on worldwide significance.

The International Criminal Court and the End of Impunity in Kenya is a five-year study addressing critical human rights issues with a global reach and is the first detailed account of the ICC's intervention in Kenya. It probes the relationship between the ICC and state institutions, known as positive complementarity, and asks whether the ICC's intervention led to an end to impunity. The author provides comprehensive analysis of the Waki Commission's sealed envelope, the government's attempts to establish a special tribunal and the trials in The Hague. He also provides in depth consideration of any influence the ICC's intervention may have had on the passing of a new constitution, the establishment of a truth commission and important reforms to the judiciary, police and witness protection programme.

Hippler & Vec: Paradoxes of Peace in Nineteenth Century Europe

Thomas Hippler (Univ. of Lyon - Institute of Political Studies) & Miloš Vec (Univ. of Vienna - History) have published Paradoxes of Peace in Nineteenth Century Europe (Oxford Univ. Press 2015). Contents include:
  • Thomas Hippler & Miloš Vec, Peace as a Polemic Concept: Writing the History of Peace in Nineteenth Century Europe
  • Miloš Vec, From Invisible Peace to the Legitimation of War. Paradoxes of a Concept in 19th Century International Law Doctrine
  • Eliana Augusti, Peace by Code: Draft Solutions for the Codification of International Law
  • Kristina Lovric-Pernak, Aim: Peace - Sanction: War. International arbitration and the problem of enforcement
  • Thomas Hopkins, The Limits of 'Cosmopolitical Economy': International Trade and the Nineteenth-Century Nation-State
  • Niels P. Petersson, The Promise and Threat of Free Trade in a Globalising Economy: A European Perspective
  • Lea Heimbeck, Legal Avoidance as Peace Instrument. Domination and Pacification through Asymmetric Loan Transactions
  • Matthias Schulz, Paradoxes of a Great Power Peace: The Case of the Concert of Europe
  • Adrian Brisku, The Holy Alliance as 'An Order of Things Conformable to the Interests of Europe and to the Laws of Religion and Humanity'
  • Thomas Hippler, From Nationalist Peace to Democratic War: The Peace Congresses in Paris (1849) and Geneva (1867)
  • Susan Zimmermann, The Politics of Exclusionary Inclusion. Peace Activism and the Struggle on International and Domestic Order in the International Council of Women, 1899 - 1914
  • Oliver Eberl, The Paradox of Peace with 'Savage' and 'Barbarian' Peoples
  • Stefan Kroll, The Illiberality of Liberal International Law: Religion, Science, and the Peaceful Violence of Civilization
  • Mustafa Aksakal, Europeanization, Islamization, and the New Imperialism of the Ottoman State
  • Bo Stråth, Perpetual Peace as Irony, as Utopia, and as Politics

Sunday, March 1, 2015

New Issue: Human Rights Review

The latest issue of the Human Rights Review (Vol. 16, no. 1, March 2015) is out. Contents include:
  • Jonathan Fox, Religious Freedom in Theory and Practice
  • Kaitlin M. Murphy, What the Past Will Be: Curating Memory in Peru’s Yuyanapaq: Para Recordar
  • Kenneth A. Rodman, Intervention and the ‘Justice Cascade’: Lessons from the Special Court for Sierra Leone on Prosecution and Civil War