Der Vertrag über konventionelle Streitkräfte in Europa (KSE) aus dem Jahr 1990 ist ein Kernelement der kooperativen Sicherheitspolitik in Europa. Von daher ist der Vertrag unverändert von strategischer Bedeutung für Europa. Die konventionelle Rüstungskontrolle in Europa ist jedoch in einer tiefen Krise, da Russland den ursprünglichen KSE-Vertrag suspendiert hat und der Angepasste KSE-Vertrag (AKSE) von 1999 noch nicht in Kraft getreten ist. In diesem Band analysieren führende Experten aus den USA, Russland sowie anderen europäischen Ländern die Situation, legen Vorschläge vor, wie die gegenwärtige Blockade überwunden werden kann, und zeigen Optionen für konventionelle Rüstungskontrolle in Europa im Sicherheitsumfeld des 21. Jahrhunderts auf.
The 1990 Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (CFE) is a core element of cooperative security policy in Europe. The Treaty remains, therefore, of strategic relevance for Europe. However, with the original CFE Treaty suspended by Russia and the 1999 Adapted CFE (ACFE) Treaty not yet in force, conventional arms control in Europe is in a deep crisis. In this volume, leading experts from the USA, Russia and other European countries analyze the situation, propose how the current stalemate can be overcome, and offer options for conventional arms control in Europe in the security environment of the 21st century.
Saturday, June 27, 2009
Economists and political scientists have begun to isolate the causes and implications of the spread of the global financial crisis in late 2008. Critical attention – often accompanied by strident disagreement – has also focused on the efficacy of various domestic plans implemented in response to the crisis. International lawyers have contributed little to these debates. Our analysis aims to partly redress this gap by examining whether and how international economic law might act as a credible constraint on state tendencies towards domestic preference when formalizing emergency responses to the crisis.
The question we then address is whether international economic law will operate to constrain these nuanced forms of protectionism. International economic law comprises a variety of sources, most notably commitments on trading relations (especially under the World Trade Organization) and the treatment of foreign investors. We argue that international investment law is, in the short-term, more likely than any other area of international economic law to give rise to complaint and initiation of legal action and examine the most probable substantive norms likely to be violated.
Friday, June 26, 2009
Cet ouvrage présente la coopération judiciaire internationale en matière pénale sous ses quatre aspects: l extradition; l entraide judiciaire; la délégation de la poursuite pénale et l exécution des décisions pénales étrangères, y compris la coopération avec les juridictions pénales internationales. La première partie de l ouvrage est consacrée aux normes, internationales et nationales, régissant la matière; la deuxième, aux autorités et à la procédure. La troisième partie expose les conditions matérielles de la coopération internationale, les motifs de son exclusion et les principes qui en déterminent l’étendue. La quatrième partie traite de la délégation de la poursuite et de l exécution des décisions pénales étrangères. L ouvrage vise à une présentation synthétique et à une mise en perspective des thèmes essentiels de la coopération judiciaire internationale en matière pénale, du point de vue du droit suisse. Il rend compte de la jurisprudence, publiée et non publiée.
van Genugten, Scharf, & Radin: Criminal Jurisdiction 100 Years after the 1907 Hague Peace Conference
The 8th Hague Joint Conference honored the centennial anniversary of The 1907 Hague Conference, which launched the modern era of international humanitarian law. The provisions adopted at the 1907 Hague Conference formed the basis for, amongst other things, the later promulgation of the 1949 Geneva Conventions. Moreover, the so-called “Martens Clause” in the 1907 Hague Convention IV served as a foundation for the concept of crimes against humanity.
Held on 28-30 June 2007, the 8th Hague Joint Conference was attended by an interesting mix of established experts and international institutional ‘insiders’ as well as promising newcomers, practitioners and academics, which resulted in lively debate. Most of the participating speakers’ contributions are included in this book. The Conference consisted of a series of key note addresses and panels focusing on salient issues in international humanitarian law and criminal jurisdiction. The topics include the battle against impunity, the head of State immunity for former leaders and lessons learned from the trials of Slobodan Milosevic, Charles Taylor, and Saddam Hussein; the need for a comprehensive anti-terrorism convention and the judicial review of internationally-enacted anti-terror measures; the defining, suppressing and trying of genocide; the issues of truth commissions, accountability and the International Criminal Court, as well as the future of the International Criminal Court; corporate liability for human rights crimes; international humanitarian intervention in the post-9/11 era; the plundering of natural resources and destruction of the environment in times of armed conflict, and, finally, ways of dealing with present-day conduct of hostilities.
Two recent books place international law at the centre of inquiries into the nature of cultural rights. The first, Cultural Rights in International Law: Article 27 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Beyond, by Elsa Stamatopoulou, explores 'the concept of cultural rights by reviewing international and national legal instruments, international practice, and especially the role of UN bodies and entities in the implementation of these rights.' The second, Cultural Human Rights, is a collection of essays edited by Francesco Francioni and Martin Scheinin. Wide-ranging in scope, Cultural Human Rights includes contributions that explore the relationship between cultural rights and the state, the relationship between cultural rights and other human rights, the rights of minorities and indigenous peoples, normative justifications of human rights in general and minority rights in particular, the law and politics of cultural identity and collective memory, and various forms of cultural protection in a variety of regional and international institutional contexts. They demonstrate that understanding cultural rights in international law requires a multi-faceted approach, one that pays close attention to the historical, textual and institutional dimensions of cultural rights. They reveal, too, that international legal commitments to sovereignty and human rights are more relevant to moral and political accounts of the significance of cultural rights than they might otherwise appear.
Lecturer in International Law f/m
Maastricht, 6200 MD, (Limburg), 38 hours per week
AT2009.122. Lecturer in International Law f/m, Faculty of Law
The Department of International and European Law is looking for a lecturer in international law to teach courses on international law at Bachelor and Master level (75%). In addition to teaching activities, the position offers the possibility to do research.
Master degree in law, already awarded or to be obtained this academic year (2008-2009); Bachelor degree (not necessarily in law); excellent academic record; clear interest in doing research in the field of international economic law; excellent English language skills.
Additional information about the job
In addition to teaching activities, the position offers the possibility to do research towards the writing of a research proposal for a PhD project (25%). Knowledge of Dutch is an advantage.
Maastricht University is renowned for its unique, innovative, problem-based learning system, which is characterized by a small-scale and student-oriented approach. Research at UM is characterized by a multidisciplinary and thematic approach, and is concentrated in research institutes and schools. Maastricht University has around 13,500 students and 3,500 employees. Reflecting the university's strong international profile, a fair amount of both students and staff are from abroad. The university hosts 6 faculties: Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Faculty of Law, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Faculty of Humanities and Sciences, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, Faculty of Psychology and Neuroscience.
Conditions of employment
Estimated maximum salary per month: eur 3500 - 4000
Maximum salary amount in Euro's a month 3755
Employment basis: Temporary for specified period
Duration of the contract: 2 yearsMaximum hours per week: 38
Additional conditions of employment:
The salary is dependent on academic qualifications and experience. The salary will be set in scale 10 of the CAO Nederlandse Universiteiten (min. € 2.379,00 – max. € 3.755,00).
Additional information about the vacancy can be obtained from:
Prof.dr. P.L.H. Van den Bossche
Telephone number: +31 43 388 3233/3129
Dr. D. Prévost
Telephone number: +31 43 388 2777
E-mail address: email@example.com
You can apply for this job before 29-06-2009 by sending your application to:
Faculty of Law, HRM department
P.O.Box 6166200 MD Maastricht
More information on this vacancy can be obtained from Prof.dr. P.L.H. Van den Bossche (mail: firstname.lastname@example.org, +31 43 388 3233) and Dr. D. Prévost (mail: email@example.com, +31 43 3882777)
When applying for this job always mention the vacancy number AT2009.122.
The short URL code for this job opening is: 00349-1532. You can use this as a direct link to the job by adding the code to the URL www.academictransfer.org/
Thursday, June 25, 2009
- Stephan W. Schill, Most-Favored-Nation Clauses as a Basis of Jurisdiction in Investment Treaty Arbitration — Arbitral Jurisprudence at a Crossroads
- Luan Xinjie & Julien Chaisse, Why Will China Establish a Government-Sponsored Response Mechanism in Countervailing Games?
- F. Robert Buchanan & Syed Tariq Anwar, Resource Nationalism and the Changing Business Model for Global Oil
- Gu Minkang, When Antidumping Becomes Anti "Chinese": New Features of Western Antidumping Actions
- Bayo Adaralegbe, Foreign Private Participation in the Electricity Sector of Developing Countries: What Works? An Examination of Nigeria's Reformed Electricity Sector
- Yenkong Ngangjoh-Hodu, Sino-African Relationship and its impact on Africa's Regional Integration Processes
- Jacques Werner, What a Week! A Chairman's Diary
For the last sixty years, scholars and practitioners of international human rights have paid insufficient attention to the ground level social contexts in which human rights norms are imbued with or deprived of social meaning. During the same time period, social science insights have shown that social conditions can have a significant impact on human behavior. This Article is the first to investigate the far ranging implications of behavioralism,especially behavioral insights about social influence, for the international human rights regime. It explores design implications for three broad components of the regime: the content, adjudication, and implementation of human rights. In addition, the Article addresses some of the advantages and limitations of the behavioral approach and identifies the rich but unexplored nexus of behavioralism, norms, and international law.
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
- Jerry I.-H. Hsiao, Can Product-by-Process Patent Claims Provide Protection for Modernized Chinese Herbal Medicine?
- Lee-Ann Tong, Copyright Protection for Computer Programs in South Africa: Aspects of Sui Generis Categorization
- Viviane Yumy Mitsuuchi Kunisawa, Patenting Pharmaceutical Inventions on Second Medical Uses in Brazil
- Lim Heng Gee, Ida Madieha Azmi, & Rokiah Alavi, Reforms Towards Intellectual Property-Based Economic Development in Malaysia
- Eric Colvin, Convicting the Innocent: A Critique of Theories of Wrongful Convictions
- Sergey Vasiliev, Proofing the Ban on `Witness Proofing’: Did the ICC Get it Right?
- Hector Olasolo, Joint Criminal Enterprise and Its Extended Form: a Theory of Co-Perpetration Giving Rise To Principal Liability, a Notion of Accessorial Liability, or a Form of Partnership In Crime?
This year's conference will address multilateral readiness to respond to a range of global challenges and the relevant institutional framework and approaches required in international law and policy to remedy these pressing issues. Leaders from academia, law, policy and business will be invited to address current global issues and to discuss the strengths and weaknesses of multilateral institutions, and the processes and policy options designed and necessary to respond to these challenges. Notable confirmed speakers include Gen. (ret) John de Chastelain, current Chairman of the Independent International Commission on Decommissioning (Northern Ireland), Professor Bernard H. Oxman, Richard A. Hausler Professor of Law at the University of Miami School of Law, and John Weekes, Senior Policy Adviser at Sidley Austin LLP (Geneva). Panel topics will include: “Policing” law-breakers at a multilateral level, including international criminal activity and associated human rights dimensions; The way forward on the regulation of global financial markets; Ensuring food security and food safety; Trade and investment treaty rules for today and tomorrow; Piracy and high seas terrorism; and New governance issues for international relations in the 21st century.
Alter & Helfer: Nature or Nurture? Judicial Law Making in the European Court of Justice and the Andean Tribunal of Justice
Are international courts (ICs) by nature expansionist lawmakers, expanding the reach and scope of their authority at the expense of state sovereignty when permissive conditions allow? Or are they naturally conservative, applying international law in straightforward and circumscribed ways unless environmental factors encourage them to be more expansive? We investigate expansionist lawmaking patterns in the European Court of Justice (ECJ) and the Andean Tribunal of Justice (ATJ), the ECJ’s jurisdictional twin and the third most active IC. We argue that international judges are more likely to become expansive lawmakers when they are supported by influential sub-state interlocutors and compliance constituencies. These intermediaries include national judges, administrative agency officials, and private actors who have a personal, professional or ideological stake in promoting respect for international rules. Our study investigates lawmaking across all ATJ preliminary rulings through 2007 and analyzes the political effects of cloning the ECJ in region outside of Europe.
This article analyzes whether managerial judging reforms that were introduced to expedite procedure at the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) achieved their goal. Using survival analysis—Weibull regression—the paper tests the hypothesis that the higher the number of reforms a case was subjected to, the shorter the pretrial and trial phase of that case should be. Our six models for pretrial and trial reveal that in all pretrial and trial models the number of reforms is significantly correlated with longer pretrial and trial. The article explains that reforms made process longer rather than shorter because ICTY judges did not use their managerial powers or used them deficiently, and prosecution and defense managed to neutralize the implementation of the reforms. To explain judges’ behavior, the paper articulates an unnoticed challenge for managerial judging—the court is likely to have limited information about the case that may lead judges to restrict use of their managerial powers to avoid making inefficient decisions. In addition, ICTY did not have an implementation plan to encourage judges to change their behavior. The paper also explains the incentives that prosecution and defense had to neutralize the reforms.
An increasing number of scholars have begun to apply rational choice methodologies to the study of international law. Earlier rational choice scholarship voicing skepticism about international law’s true force has since been followed by sophisticated rational choice defenses of international law. This review essay focuses on Andrew Guzman’s recent book How International Law Works: A Rational Choice Theory (2008), one of the best of those defenses. In that book, Guzman develops an elegant and sophisticated account of 'reputation' and the role it can play in encouraging rational compliance with international law. Based on this account, Guzman makes a powerful case that rational choice theory does support international law’s claims of legal force and can explain how international law works. This essay lays out some of the book’s key contributions to international law scholarship. But this essay also argues that in developing his account of 'reputation,' Guzman has demonstrated the inadequacy of rational choice descriptions of how international law works. This essay lays out three specific critiques of Guzman’s rational choice account: (1) that the account has trouble explaining international practice in areas like human rights, (2) that the account takes too narrow a view of the ways international law 'works,' and (3) that rational choice may be insufficient to explain the force of reputation or to create testable hypotheses of state action. This essay concludes by using Guzman’s account of reputation to suggest a more expansive account of how international law works integrating elements of rational choice, constructivist, and liberal theories.
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
- Gauthier De Beco, Human Rights Impact Assessments
- Robin C.A. White & Iris Boussiakou, Voices from the European Court of Human Rights
- Corinne Lennox, Reviewing Durban: Examining the Outputs and Review of the 2001 World Conference Against Racism
The energy sector is one of the areas where antitrust enforcement in the EU has been the most intensive in recent years. In addition to the very significant sector inquiry 2005-2007 and the cases that are now resulting from that inquiry, the remedies (e.g. divestiture of significant network assets, energy release programmes, etc.) that have been ordered by the European Commission in the energy sector have sparked a lot of controversy. Whilst the EU seems to lean towards increased antitrust intervention in energy markets, including access issues, downstream markets, long-term agreements, LNG imports, etc. other jurisdictions, such as the United States, apparently promote less intrusive approaches (as a result, amongst others, of some US Supreme Court decisions such as Trinko). Finally, a number of antitrust agencies inside and outside the EU have a significant record in the enforcement of antitrust rules in the energy sector.
We encourage submission of relevant papers, studies, and brief comments on various aspects of this subject. The topics may cover all aspects of antitrust enforcement (vertical/horizontal cooperation agreements, abuse of dominance, merger control, etc.) relevant for oil, gas, electricity and other energy sub-sectors including LNG and nuclear.
Corruption, generally defined as ‘the abuse of public office for private gain’, is one of the greatest social evils of our time. In the words of former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan, ‘Corruption hurts the poor disproportionately by diverting funds intended for development, undermining a government’s ability to provide basic services, feeding inequality and injustice, and discouraging foreign investment and aid.’ The adoption of several international anti-corruption treaties such as the United Nations Convention Against Corruption in 2003 put the problem on the international agenda, and it is likely to stay there. Research on corruption is conducted by scholars in several academic areas and the problem is addressed by the major international financial institutions and NGOs. However, from the human rights perspective, corruption has not been studied extensively. This two-day conference aims to bring together researchers in various disciplines to further examine the links between corruption and human rights.
- Antje Wiener & Uwe Puetter, The Quality of Norms is What Actors Make of It: Critical Constructivist Research on Norms
- Andrea Liese, Exceptional Necessity: How Liberal Democracies Contest the Prohibition of Torture and Ill-Treatment when Countering Terrorism
- Arturo Santa-Cruz, Contested Compliance in a Liberal Normative Structure: The Western Hemisphere Idea and the Monitoring of the Mexican Elections
- Susan Park, The World Bank, Dams and the Meaning of Sustainable Development in Use
- Guido Schwellnus, The Domestic Contestation of International Norms: An Argumentation Analysis of the Polish Debate Regarding a Minority Law
- Ingo Venzke, Legal Contestation about 'Enemy Combatants': On the Exercise of Power in Legal Interpretation
- Patrick Low, Potential Future Functions of the World Trade Organization
- Diana Tussie, Process Drivers in Trade Negotiations: The Role of Research in the Path to Grounding and Contextualizing
- Andrew D. Mitchell & Tania Voon, Operationalizing Special and Differential Treatment in the World Trade Organization: Game Over?
- Simon J. Evenett, Aid for Trade and the "Missing Middle" of the World Trade Organization
- Peter Gallagher & Andrew Stoler, Critical Mass as an Alternative Framework for Multilateral Trade Negotiations
- Heribert Dieter, The Multilateral Trading System and Preferential Trade Agreements: Can the Negative Effects Be Minimized?
Do international criminal courts sufficiently enable defence counsel to conduct an effective defence? When the ad hoc Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda were set up in the mid-nineties to prosecute those responsible for serious violations of international humanitarian law, little thought had been given to how to organize the defence. The Statutes and Rules of Procedure and Evidence were rather concise on the right to legal assistance and the role of the defence in proceedings. Simply assigning one counsel per accused was at first deemed sufficient. However, as the first trials got under way, it became apparent that more assistance was necessary to safeguard fair proceedings.
This book is the first integral analysis which deals with the position of the defence in the international criminal courts. It pays particular attention to the sui generis character of international criminal proceedings and explores the critical areas that amount to an effective defence, including a proper legal aid system, access to competent legal assistance, equality of arms between the defence and the prosecution, sound standards of professional conduct and an effective right to self-representation.
- Nicole Van Crombrugghe, The Agency Agreement under Belgian Law
- Olivier Delgrange, Drittwirkung von Verträgen im französischen Recht
- Patrick Ostendorf, Noch einmal: Führt die Vereinbarung einer CIF-Klausel zum Fixgeschäft?
- Interview with Sergio Jaramillo Caro
- Andreas Wenger & Simon J. A. Mason, The civilianization of armed conflict: trends and implications
- Emily Camins, The past as prologue: the development of the ‘direct participation’ exception to civilian immunity
- Stéphanie Bouchié de Belle, Chained to cannons or wearing targets on their T-shirts: human shields in international humanitarian law
- Carolin Wuerzner, Mission impossible? Bringing charges for the crime of attacking civilians or civilian objects before international criminal tribunals
- Adam Roberts, The equal application of the laws of war: a principle under pressure
- Jasmine Moussa, Can jus ad bellum override jus in bello? Reaffirming the separation of the two bodies of law
- Jonathan D. Greenberg, Articles the Kremlin's Eye: The 21st Century Prokuratura in the Russian Authoritarian Tradition
- Amichai Magen, The Rule of Law and Its Promotion Abroad: Three Problems of Scope
- Brad Poore, Somaliland: Shackled to a Failed State
- Brian Ray Policentrism, Political Mobilization, and the Promise of Socioeconomic Rights
This year marks the Golden Jubilee of the first bilateral investment treaty. Signed on 25 November 1959 by the Federal Republic of Germany and the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, it formed part of the process of reconstruction in the aftermath of the Second World War. 1959 also saw the early attempts at multilateralism in the form of the draft Convention on Investments Abroad, a combination of the 1957 draft International Convention for the Mutual Protection of Private Property Rights, produced by the Gesellschaft zur Förderung von Auslandsinvestitionen (one of the promoters of this conference) and the 1958 Abs Shawcross Proposed Convention to Protect Foreign Investment. This conference is the official celebration of this anniversary in Germany.
The purpose of this conference is not just to celebrate. With significant changes in the pattern of movement of foreign capital, a deep financial crisis, a turf war over competence in Europe and the threat of protectionism, this Golden Jubilee also provides a timely opportunity to examine the policy issues which will shape the international investment law of the years to come. The conference will bring together academics, advocates, arbitrators, economists, investors, policy makers and political scientists to identify and debate these issues. The conference has been designed to complement both in time and content the "OECD Global Forum on International Investment VIII", taking place in Paris on 7-8 December 2009. Details of the OECD forum are available here.
Monday, June 22, 2009
- Yoshifumi Tanaka, Reflections on Maritime Delimitation in the Nicaragua/Honduras Case
- Jean D’Aspremont & Frédéric Dopagne, Two Constitutionalisms in Europe: Pursuing an Articulation of the European and International Legal Orders
- Johannes Reich, Direkte Demokratie und völkerrechtliche Verpflichtungen im Konflikt – Funktionellrechtlich differenzierte Herstellung praktischer Konkordanz zwischen der Beachtung des Völkerrechts und konfligierenden Volksinitiativen im schweizerischen Bundesverfassungsrecht
- Zhenis Kembayev, Die Rechtslage des Kaspischen Meeres
- Cristiano D’Orsi, Sub-Saharan Africa: Is a New Special Regional Refugee Law Regime Emerging?
- Mia Swart, The Constitutionalisation of Diversity: An Examination of Language Rights in South Africa after the Mikro Case
- Eva Lahnsteiner, Maßnahmen positiver Diskriminierung für Minderheiten im Rumänischen Wahlrecht
- Ismael Muvingi, Sitting on Powder Kegs: Socioeconomic Rights in Transitional Societies
- Mark Findlay, Activating a Victim Constituency in International Criminal Justice
- Sativa January, Tribunal Verité: Documenting Transitional Justice in Sierra Leone
- Andrew H. Beattie, An Evolutionary Process: Contributions of the Bundestag Inquiries into East Germany to an Understanding of the Role of Truth Commissions
- Conor McCarthy, Reparations under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court and Reparative Justice Theory
- Kerstin McCourt, Judicial Defenders: Their Role in Postgenocide Justice and Sustained Legal Development
This monograph intends to assess whether certain recently established criminal judicial organs – namely the Special Court for Sierra Leone, the Cambodian Extraordinary Chambers, the Special Panels for Serious Crimes of the Dili District Court and the Regulations 64 Panels in Kosovo – set up a new normative category, liable to be placed beside the institutional paradigms currently working in the field of international criminal justice: national jurisdictions and international jurisdictions (International Criminal Court and International Criminal Tribunals for the Former Yugoslavia and for Rwanda).
The majority of legal scholars tends indeed to describe those organs as a self-contained category – called "Mixed Criminal Tribunals" – stressing on their organizational structure and judicial competence as conclusive criteria. In particular, according to the ruling legal reasoning this would depend on the fact that those entities are partly composed of judges, prosecutors, defence counsels and support staff who are nationals of the country where the Tribunal is established, partly of analogous figures with foreign citizenship appointed at international level, and apply substantive and procedural rules which are rooted both in the territorial State’s law and in international treaty and customary law. Moreover, the above classification would follow from the Tribunals’ location in the territories where the offences within their jurisdiction were perpetrated.
Even though relying on a normative reconstruction appears persuasive at first sight, nevertheless one needs to ask himself whether this outcome flows from a too rash evaluation of each Tribunal’s features, and from an analysis influenced by requirements merely descriptive in character. This volume argues that the elements on whose basis the legal literature singles out an independent class of criminal judicial authorities are misleading. On the contrary, the research carried out in the book reveals that every Tribunal is by its very nature characterised by a specific level or degree of internationalisation (i.e. a different balancing between "internal component" and "international component"), which considerably distinguishes it from the others. As a consequence, these remarks lead to believe that the alleged unitary normative category of Mixed Criminal Tribunals breaks down into a wide range of organizational models.
Thus, the attempt is made to find in other features the "common element" enabling to reduce the phenomenon to unity under a less rigid and formalistic perspective. Accordingly, it is intended to show that the Mixed Criminal Tribunals share two fundamental aspects. On a formal level, they all are judicial organs internal to the territorial State. On a substantial level, they all exercise a specific function within the international legal system (as are aimed at protecting certain essential values of the International Community as a whole, both in a basically effective and in a much-awaited preventive way), being linked to post-conflict peace-building activities undertaken by the UN in the territories where they are constituted (in particular, to those activities aimed at restoring the rule of law for the benefit of war-torn societies, fostering national reconciliation processes and training local lawyers in the prosecution of crimina iuris gentium).
Holzmeyer: Human Rights in an Era of Neoliberal Globalization: The Alien Tort Claims Act and Grassroots Mobilization in Doe v. Unocal
This article examines a widely publicized corporate accountability and human rights case filed by Burmese plaintiffs and human rights litigators in 1996 under the Alien Tort Claims Act in U.S. courts, Doe v. Unocal, in conjunction with the three main theoretical approaches to analyzing how law may matter for broader social change efforts: (1) legal realism, (2) Critical Legal Studies (CLS), and (3) legal mobilization. The article discusses interactions between Doe v. Unocal and grassroots Burmese human rights activism in the San Francisco Bay Area, including intersections with corporate accountability activism. It argues that a transnationally attuned legal mobilization framework, rather than legal realist or CLS approaches, is most appropriate to analyze the political opportunities and indirect effects of Doe v. Unocal and similar litigation in the context of neoliberal globalization. Further, this article argues that human rights discourse may serve as a common vocabulary and counterhegemonic resource for activists and litigators in cases such as Doe v. Unocal, contrary to overarching critiques of such discourse that emphasize only its hegemonic potentials in global governance regimes.
- Alastair Mowbray, An Examination of the European Court of Human Rights' Approach to Overruling its Previous Case Law
- Gareth Sweeney & Yuri Saito, An NGO Assessment of the New Mechanisms of the UN Human Rights Council
- Aoife Nolan, Addressing Economic and Social Rights Violations by Non-state Actors through the Role of the State: A Comparison of Regional Approaches to the 'Obligation to Protect'
- Helen Keller & Andreas Fischer, The UN Anti-terror Sanctions Regime under Pressure
- Matthew E. Cross & Sarah Williams, Recent Developments at the ICC
- Katja S. Ziegler, Strengthening the Rule of Law, but Fragmenting International Law: The Kadi Decision of the ECJ from the Perspective of Human Rights
- David Jenkins, Habeas Corpus and Extraterritorial Jurisdiction after Boumediene: Towards a Doctrine of 'Effective Control' in the United States
- Jamil Ddamulira Mujuzi, Issues Surrounding Life Imprisonment after the Abolition of the Death Penalty in Rwanda
The Captures Clause of the United States Constitution gives Congress the power to “make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water.” A variety of courts, scholars, politicians and others have recently cited the Clause to support conflicting arguments about the scope of Congress’s power to initiate and prosecute war. Some claim or assume that the Captures Clause gives Congress power over the taking and detention of people, while others conclude that the power is limited to property only. Similarly, those who view Congress’s power broadly understand the Captures Clause as giving Congress the power to determine what (or whom) may be seized both as method of initiating conflict and as measure of war prosecution. Others maintain that the Clause only gives Congress power over the adjudication and division of property seized by armed private vessels. Virtually all of these accounts rely on original history, yet none examines the Captures Clause in any detail.
This Article does so, tracing the meaning of captures through British and Colonial Admiralty documents, prominent works of international law, the Revolutionary War and Articles of Confederation, and the drafting and ratification of the Constitution. The result is that the eventual language in the Constitution could have been plausibly understood in a variety of ways prior to the Revolutionary War, but it probably did not include the power to determine what or whom could be taken. The Continental Congress used the word “captures” in a significantly different way – to authorize what goods (but not what people) could be taken by both public and private vessels. This is also the best reading of the Constitution’s text.
The Captures Clause illuminates a small but significant area of constitutional history, for captures were extremely important throughout the eighteenth century. And the Captures Clause sheds important light on the meaning of the Letters of Marque and Reprisal, Declare War, and the Commander-in-Chief Clauses. Contrary to the views of almost everyone writing on these topics, the first gave Congress only the power to license private vessels to make captures – it was the Captures Clause that gave Congress the power to determine what property was subject to capture by both public and private forces. This, in turn, supports at least a relatively broad reading of the Declare War Clause, because it gives Congress a power closely tied to the initiation of war. It also means that at least some questions of combat strategy were lodged with Congress, narrowing the possible scope of the Commander in Chief Power. Finally, however, a careful look at the Captures Clause also illustrates gaps and overlaps in the Constitution’s allocation of war powers.
Call for Papers: Humanitarianism and Humanitarian Law: Reflecting on Change Over Time in Theory, Law and Practice
The International Law Division and The Concord Centre for the Integration of International Law in Israel at the School of Law, The College of Management Academic Studies; the Delegation of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) in Israel and the Occupied and Autonomous Territories and the Minerva Center for Human Rights, Faculty of Law Tel Aviv University, are organizing an international conference to commemorate the 60th anniversary of the Geneva Conventions of 1949 as well as the 150th anniversary of the battle of Solferino.
This event will examine the nature of humanitarianism in armed conflict, exploring change over time in theory, normative and institutional development and practice. The conference will take place at the Law School, The College of Management Academic Studies on 16-17 December 2009.
Recipients of this call for papers are invited to submit proposals to present a paper at the conference. Authors of select proposals will be offered flight expenses to Israel and accommodation for the duration of the conference.
While principles and customs seeking to limit the ravages of war have a genealogy reaching back to antiquity, the genesis of modern humanitarianism is commonly traced to the battle of Solferino (24 June 1859). A Memory of Solferino (1862), Henry Dunant's poignant account of the horrors he had witnessed in the aftermath of the battle, in fact generated the foundation of the Red Cross movement as well as the adoption of the First Geneva Convention of 1864.
These twin developments were, in turn, the precursors for the subsequent proliferation of humanitarian aid agencies and for the creation of the expansive normative framework constituting cotemporary international humanitarian law (IHL).
Since Solferino, the evolution of the humanitarian project has been consistently propelled by a quest to overcome failures exposed through painful experience. This was never more apparent then when the Geneva Conventions of 1949 were concluded in the wake of the outrages of the Second World War. The 1949 Conventions, which have been acceded to by 194 States and enjoy virtually universal acceptance, established a system of legal safeguards that now form the bedrock of IHL. However, over the last sixty years many new challenges have emerged making it necessary for humanitarian law and practice to evolve still further.
By looking at humanitarianism's passage through time, much can be learned about its present state and future prospects. What, for example, has remained its essential meaning even as it reinvented itself time and again? What is the meaning of the principle of distinction in an era when most armed conflicts are fought by and against civilians? What should be conserved and where is there need for progress? What dilemmas, trials and impasses has IHL encountered and which of these are likely to continue to beset it? Who participates in the current making of humanitarian norms? What is the role of Military Advocates General in this process? Has IHL benefited from its convergence with Human Rights Law?
Purpose of the Conference
The conference aims to celebrate the remarkable humanitarian achievements that have arisen from the constitutive moments of 1859 and 1949, but in so doing it seeks not only to highlight what has been accomplished, but also to assess what remains to be achieved and draw lessons for the future. To this end, the conference will consist of three panels each addressing a separate issue.
The first panel will focus on the concept of "humanitarian action". Contributors will be invited to reflect on the theoretical underpinnings of "humanitarianism" and the nature of humanitarian action as well as the challenges and dilemmas it entails.
The second panel will examine change over time in IHL since Solferino. Here contributors will be invited to critically appraise the ways in which humanitarian law and practices have been adapted to respond to emerging challenges, the degree to which they have withstood the tests of time and other related questions.
The third and final panel will look into current ways and means of making (and unmaking) humanitarian norms. In particular, contributors will be invited to reflect on questions arising from the ways in which the role of States as authors of IHL norms is increasingly complemented and perhaps also challenged by humanitarian actors and other elements of civil society; the relationship between military action and legal counsel and the role and responsibility of Military Advocates General.
Researchers interested in addressing these issues, are invited to respond to this call for papers with a one-page proposal for a presentation, along with a brief CV.
Proposals should be submitted no later than 15 July 2009, by email, to Mr. Ariel Yosef, the Executive Secretary of the Concord Center, at the following address: firstname.lastname@example.org. The e-mail should indicate: "Humanitarianism".
All applicants should receive notification of the academic committee's decision by 15 August 2009. Short written contributions (of approx. 8-10 pages) based on the selected proposals will be expected by 1 November 2009.
Conference Academic Committee
Prof. Orna Ben-Naftali, Dean, School of Law, The College of Management Academic Studies
Prof. Frances Raday, Chair, The Concord Center, School of Law, The College of Management Academic Studies
Dr. Shai Lavi, Director, The Minerva Centre for Human Rights, Faculty of Law, Tel-Aviv University
Adv. Larry Maybee, ICRC, Israel and the Occupied and Autonomous Territories
Adv. Eitan Diamond, ICRC, Israel and the Occupied and Autonomous Territories
Sunday, June 21, 2009
- Antoine Buyse, Home Sweet Home? Restitution in Post-Conflict Bosnia and Herzegovina
- Stephan Parmentier, Marta Valiñas, & Elmar Wettekamp, How to Repair the Harm After Violent Conflict in Bosnia? Results of a Population-Based Survey
- Wouter Veraart, Redressing the Past with an Eye to the Future. The Impact of the Passage of Time on Property Rights Restitution in Post-Apartheid South Africa