Search

Begin New Search Topic International Law Political Geography Global Focus Content Type Journal Article Publication Year within 5 Years

1. Dogmatik and International Criminal Law: Approximations in the Realm of ‘Language’ and ‘Grammar’

Author:
Morten Boe
Publication Date:
08-2023
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Goettingen Journal of International Law
Institution:
The Goettingen Journal of International Law
Abstract:
Starting from the assertion of George Fletcher that there could never be an effective International Criminal Law (ICL) without a corresponding ICL Dogmatik – understood as a supporting culture of ideas and general principles – the article attempts to retrace and critically assess the connection made between the domestic concept and the international realm; to give a first approximation of what ‘ICL Dogmatik’ is supposed to mean. While not being definable in a conclusive way, Dogmatik – as understood in the German legal system – represents a specific habitus and mindset when approaching law, providing for an autonomous legal discourse fueled by the aspiration of a coherent normative system based on argumentative rationality and close cooperation of legal scholarship and legal practice. The article argues that, while the term Dogmatik is a specific cultural expression, the substance of the concept more generally refers to and echoes universal challenges of law and legal scholarship. The urge for an ICL Dogmatik should therefore not be (mis-)understood to argue for an authoritative rule of scholars or the adoption of German legal theories on the international level. Instead, the statement enunciates the necessity to establish ICL as an autonomous normative framework of concepts and terms. Dogmatik merely stands for an abstract vision, which may help to organize legal thinking in ICL, to structure and systemize the field, and most importantly to raise awareness for the necessity to develop a shared and coherent (legal) language, which enables productive discourse between all legal families.
Topic:
International Law and International Criminal Law (ICL)
Political Geography:
Global Focus

2. The Settlement of EEZ Fisheries Access Disputes under UNCLOS: Limitations to Jurisdiction and Compulsory Conciliation

Author:
Valentin J. Schatz
Publication Date:
08-2023
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Goettingen Journal of International Law
Institution:
The Goettingen Journal of International Law
Abstract:
This article revisits the scope of the limitation to jurisdiction ratione materiae under Article 297(3) of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) in the context of Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) fisheries access disputes in the light of recent jurisprudence of UNCLOS tribunals. It first provides an overview over general aspects of Article 297(3) of UNCLOS in the compulsory dispute settlement mechanism of Section 2 of Part XV of UNCLOS. Next, it briefly considers the relationship between Article 297(3) and Article 297(1) of UNCLOS in order to clarify the former limitation’s role in the complex internal logic of Article 297 of UNCLOS. Thereafter, this article addresses the sometimes-overlooked function of Article 297(3) of UNCLOS as a confirmation of jurisdiction with respect to fisheries disputes that are not related to the EEZ. It then analyzes the scope of the limitation to jurisdiction ratione materiae of Article 297(3) of UNCLOS in the context of fisheries access disputes. Next, this article examines the potential and limits of the compulsory conciliation procedure under Article 297(3)(b) and Annex V of UNCLOS with a focus on the scope of the procedural mandate and subject-matter competence of such conciliation commissions.
Topic:
Economics, International Law, and Fishing
Political Geography:
Global Focus

3. Compulsory Settlement of EEZ Fisheries Enforcement Disputes under UNCLOS: “Swallowing the Rule” or “Balancing the Equation”?

Author:
Camille Goodman
Publication Date:
08-2023
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Goettingen Journal of International Law
Institution:
The Goettingen Journal of International Law
Abstract:
While there is a widely held view that disputes concerning fisheries in the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) are largely exempt from the compulsory jurisdiction of courts and tribunals as a result of far-reaching exceptions in Part XV of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (LOSC), this is not the case for all EEZ fisheries disputes. This article examines the specific question of disputes concerning the enforcement of fisheries laws and regulations in the EEZ, and considers how the Part XV framework has been – or could be – used and interpreted for the compulsory settlement of EEZ fisheries enforcement disputes. It examines the obligation of prompt release established in Article 292, the option to exclude compulsory jurisdiction with respect to law enforcement activities concerning EEZ fisheries by written declaration under Article 298(1)(b), and the opportunity to bring disputes concerning EEZ fisheries enforcement within the scope of compulsory jurisdiction under Article 297(1) by characterising them as relating to the freedom of navigation or the protection and preservation of the marine environment. Framing its enquiry by reference to the question posed in this special issue, the article argues that, rather than “swallowing the rule” of compulsory jurisdiction, the jurisdictional scheme established for EEZ fisheries enforcement disputes helps to “balance the equation” and support the effectiveness of Part XV in protecting the compromises that are embodied in the LOSC.
Topic:
International Law, Territorial Disputes, Fishing, and Jurisdiction
Political Geography:
Global Focus

4. Customary International Law Requiring States to Grant Nationality to Stateless Children Born in Their Territory

Author:
William Thomas Worster
Publication Date:
07-2022
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Statelessness & Citizenship Review
Institution:
Peter McMullin Centre on Statelessness, Melbourne Law School
Abstract:
In the most recent few years, state practice and opinio juris are increasingly converging to affirm that states must grant nationality to children born in their territory if they would otherwise be stateless. In prior scholarship, this author has argued that there is a customary international law norm requiring states to grant nationality in such cases. Certainly, UNHCR’s #IBelong campaign is a significant part of this development, placing statelessness back on the international agenda, as well as encouraging states to adhere to the statelessness conventions, adopt birth registration and statelessness determination procedures and revise domestic law. Partly due to this campaign, states are increasingly adopting practice and domestic law that provides for nationality from birth for stateless children but are also increasingly stating their opinion that such an approach is desirable, necessary and morally compelling. In fact, it is effectively impossible to identify any state that claims it has the unfettered right to refuse to grant nationality to a stateless child born in its territory. This article will complete a brief survey of recent practice and expressions of opinion, mostly as documented by UNHCR as a part of the #IBelong Campaign to End Statelessness, to confirm that this norm continues to strengthen under customary international law.
Topic:
International Law, Law, Children, Citizenship, and Nationality
Political Geography:
Global Focus

5. Scylla and Charybdis: The Self-Determination of Peoples Versus the Territorial Integrity of States

Author:
A. Kagramanov
Publication Date:
01-2022
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
International Affairs: A Russian Journal of World Politics, Diplomacy and International Relations
Institution:
East View Information Services
Abstract:
LIKE Odysseus, who fell into the clutches of Scylla after escaping the whirlpool Charybdis, countries that have escaped the threat of losing territory as a result of foreign invasion are facing the threat of disintegration from within. The ancient epic by the great Homer about the adventures of the hero Odysseus, who finds himself between a rock and a hard place, involuntarily comes to mind when considering the perennial international legal dilemma about the relationship between the principle of the territorial integrity of states and the right of peoples and nations to self-determination. As Yekaterina Narochnitskaya rightly notes, self-determination, like freedom, has “its limits and its paradox.” “Just as unlimited freedom destroys itself, so the right to self-determination, elevated to an absolute, risks depriving everyone and everything of self-determination, the inevitable outcome being a chain reaction of countless conflicting expressions of will leading to a general collapse.”1 Experience shows that the principle of self-determination is subject to double standards and often politically exploited by certain groups to achieve their economic, social, ethnocratic, religious, and other narrow, sometimes purely selfish goals that contradict the original purpose of this vital international legal and (in most cases) constitutional provision. And it is for these untoward purposes that the artificial “collision” of this principle with the principle of territorial integrity is often used.
Topic:
International Law, Law, Self Determination, Conflict, Peace, and Territory
Political Geography:
Global Focus

6. An Unlikely Duo? Regionalism and Jus Cogens in International Law

Author:
Carlos Lima Lima and Loris Marotti
Publication Date:
11-2022
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Goettingen Journal of International Law
Institution:
The Goettingen Journal of International Law
Abstract:
Recent years have witnessed a renewed interest in peremptory norms of international law (jus cogens) in the international legal discourse.  e ongoing works of the International Law Commission (ILC or Commission) on the topic1 , also prompted by the increasing relevance such norms have gained in the case law of national and international courts, is refreshing the long-standing debate about the scope, nature and content of peremptory norms2 . Against this background, less attention is being paid to the possible relations between jus cogens and regionalism, as well as to the legal and political implications such relations may have in the international realm.
Topic:
International Law, Law, and Regionalism
Political Geography:
Global Focus

7. Is the International Law Commission Taking Regionalism Seriously (Enough)?

Author:
Janina Barkholdt
Publication Date:
11-2022
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Goettingen Journal of International Law
Institution:
The Goettingen Journal of International Law
Abstract:
Regionalism poses a challenge to the work of the International Law Commission (ILC). The Commission, entrusted by the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) with the “progressive development of international law and its codification”, is tasked with identifying and elaborating universally accepted and acceptable rules of international law. The challenge posed by regionalism lies in its ambivalent role precisely in relation to the mandate of the ILC: on the one hand, a significant share of practice in international law is generated at the regional level. Since regional practice thus constitutes a substantial part of State practice, the ILC cannot avoid taking regional practice into account if it is to identify and develop common rules. On the other hand, regionalism often involves claims for special legal treatment based on the affiliation with a region; thus, deviations from precisely those general legal rules which the ILC seeks to codify and develop. The present contribution analyses how the Commission has approached regionalism in its previous work and identifies four approaches. It shows that each of these approaches suffers from shortcomings. At the same time, the current projects on General principles of law (GPL) and Sea-level rise in relation to international law possibly indicate the emergence of a more fruitful fifth approach. Based on this analysis, the present contribution shows that the practice of the ILC evinces two methodological challenges arising from regional plurality –, the challenge of equal regional representation and the challenge of regional exceptionalism, – and makes suggestions as to how to address these in the future.
Topic:
International Law, United Nations, and Regionalism
Political Geography:
Global Focus

8. Military Intervention on Request in Jus Ad Bellum and Jus In Bello and the question of recognition of governments

Author:
Chiari Redealli
Publication Date:
11-2022
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Goettingen Journal of International Law
Institution:
The Goettingen Journal of International Law
Abstract:
Over the past decades, foreign interventions in internal conflicts upon the request of host governments have turned into a common practice. These instances have proved to be particularly challenging both from a jus ad bellum and a jus in bello point of view. On the one hand, it is often unclear whether the intervention is lawful; on the other hand, the classification of these armed conflicts is equally problematic. In both cases, the key to answer these questions is the identification of the organ capable of speaking on behalf of the state: who is the government? Considering the pivotal relevance of the identification of the government both in jus ad bellum and jus in bello, it is crucial to determine the criteria for identifying the authority capable of issuing a valid invitation. This article seeks to clarify these criteria. Ultimately, it will demonstrate that jus ad bellum and jus in bello reach different conclusions on the matter and it will argue that this should not be the case.
Topic:
International Law, Humanitarian Intervention, Military Intervention, Conflict, and International Humanitarian Law (IHL)
Political Geography:
Global Focus

9. Missed Communications and Miscommunications: International Courts, the Fragmentation of International Law and Judicial Dialogue

Author:
Francis Maxwell
Publication Date:
11-2022
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Goettingen Journal of International Law
Institution:
The Goettingen Journal of International Law
Abstract:
The increase in the number of international judicial bodies has led to different international courts deciding similar issues of international law. There is the real possibility that these international judicial bodies, not subject to the supervision of a common appeal court, may rule differently on similar questions before them. While this fragmentation of decision-making may undermine the coherency and certainty of the international legal system, it may in some cases be in the interests of the international community, including where divergences in decision-making are the result of specialized regimes or where there is progressive development of the law. So that fragmentation is limited to what is beneficial and necessary for the international community, it is essential that international judicial bodies are in open and structured dialogue with one another. This analysis considers three scenarios of overlapping decision-making, over the course of the lives of two sets of international courts: the International Court of Justice, and the international criminal courts and tribunals. It also considers the recent decision of the International Criminal Court with respect to Palestine and the Court’s refusal to weigh in on questions of general international law, in apparent departure from the previous three examples. It is submitted that these examples demonstrate that insufficient attention is given by these international judicial bodies to the issue of judicial dialogue and its importance. This may undermine the legitimacy of the system and introduce the risks of fragmentation without its benefits.
Topic:
International Law, International Court of Justice (ICJ), International Criminal Court (ICC), Dialogue, Fragmentation, and Customary International Law
Political Geography:
Global Focus

10. The Leadership Requirement of the Crime of Aggression Under the Rome Statue of the International Criminal Court

Author:
Faruk H. Avdic
Publication Date:
09-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal of Liberty and International Affairs
Institution:
Institute for Research and European Studies (IRES)
Abstract:
The subject of this analysis was the provisions of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court devoted to the leadership requirement of the crime of aggression. The crime in question is the successor of crimes against peace. This paper employed normative and formal dogmatic legal methods in analyzing the particulars of the leadership clause. Besides, this analysis also took into consideration the case-law of certain judicial bodies. This paper aimed to examine whether the leadership requirement of the crime of aggression has been properly constructed for the Statute. The main focus was on the meaning of the conditions stemming from the leadership clause that each perpetrator ought to fulfill to incur criminal responsibility for the crime of aggression. Additionally, this research addressed the criminal responsibility of public and private actors and the modes of participation in the crime in question. The article established that the leadership requirement concerning the crime of aggression has been aptly incorporated in the Statute since this requirement, at the same time, embraces the post World War Two standards concerning crimes against peace and the contemporary notion of aggression as one of the core crimes under international law.
Topic:
International Cooperation, International Law, Leadership, and International Criminal Court (ICC)
Political Geography:
Global Focus

11. The Evolution of the Prohibition of Genocide: From Natural Law Enthusiasm to Lackadaisical Judicial Perfunctoriness – And Back Again?

Author:
Julia Klaus
Publication Date:
06-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Goettingen Journal of International Law
Institution:
The Goettingen Journal of International Law
Abstract:
International legal scholarship and practice have reached a point where it is undisputed that the prohibition of genocide has the status of jus cogens and entails erga omnes obligations. It is, however, astonishing how little academic focus has been dedicated to the normative development leading to this extraordinary rank. In a legal regime with as little hierarchical structure as public international law, examining the birth process of such a norm promises considerable insights into normative formation in general and may inform jurisprudential theories on the nature of international law. This article illustrates the evolution of the prohibition of genocide by outlining the way to the 1948 UN Genocide Convention and the later interpretations of the norm. It traces the origin of the genocide prohibition to naturalistic ideas of overarching laws of humanity in international law and follows its development into the early 21st century. An analysis of international jurisprudence reveals that, after the jus cogens status of the prohibition of genocide and its erga omnes dimension had been settled, international judges handled the norm in a surprisingly lackadaisical and perfunctory manner. The very recent ICJ order on provisional measures in the Myanmar Genocide case potentially marks a return towards a deeper focus on moral facts determining the prohibition that point to naturalistic theories persisting, notwithstanding the positivistic mainstream approaches to international law. The article contributes to a more accurate picture of and greater academic interest in these naturalistic undercurrents.
Topic:
Genocide, International Cooperation, International Law, International Court of Justice (ICJ), and Humanitarian Crisis
Political Geography:
Global Focus

12. Perspectives for a New International Crime Against the Environment: International Criminal Responsibility for Environmental Degradation under the Rome Statute

Author:
Ammar Bustami and Marie-Christine Hecken
Publication Date:
06-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Goettingen Journal of International Law
Institution:
The Goettingen Journal of International Law
Abstract:
This article draws attention to the need of a reform of the environmental protection by means of international criminal law as enshrined in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. After giving a short overview of the contemporary environmental protection in war- and peacetime offered by international criminal law, it becomes clear that international criminal law fails to succeed at offering sufficient environmental protection. This paper outlines that there is no convincing reason for a differentiated approach in international criminal law to environmental damage in wartime and in peacetime, and that a shift from an anthropocentric to an ecocentric approach would positively contribute to a more effective protection of the environment. It is therefore argued for the introduction of a new integral and ecocentric international crime against the environment in the Rome Statute. The paper then elaborates on existing proposals on such a new crime against the environment before some proper observations on the exact contours of the crime are made. A focus lies on the new crime’s threshold of seriousness as well as on the necessary mens rea requirements. The insufficiency of the contemporary legal framework and the merits of a new crime against the environment are exemplified by an archetype example of peacetime environmental damage, the Chevron/Texaco oil spill scenario in Ecuador.
Topic:
Climate Change, Environment, International Cooperation, and International Law
Political Geography:
Global Focus

13. Moral Imperatives and Legal Realities: The Perennial Conundrum of Humanitarian Intervention

Author:
Chris O'Meara
Publication Date:
09-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Brown Journal of World Affairs
Institution:
Brown Journal of World Affairs
Abstract:
Article 1 of the UN Charter embodies a well-known tension that exists in international law. On the one hand, it sets out perhaps the most fundamental purpose of the UN: the maintenance of international peace and security. This principle underpins the operation of the post-World War II rules-based inter- national order. It is reflected in Article 2(4) of the UN Charter, which prohibits the “threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political indepen- dence of any state.”1 Such prohibition, while routinely flouted by states, stands as an intransgressible rule of international law.2 On the other hand, Article 1 establishes what appears to be an equally foundational principle: promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. Indeed, the burgeoning body of international human rights law that has arisen since the signing of the Charter has increasingly placed human rights and human security at the center of international concern.
Topic:
Human Rights, International Law, Humanitarian Intervention, and International Humanitarian Law (IHL)
Political Geography:
Global Focus

14. International Society and Its Institutions in Refugee Protection during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Revisiting the Solidarism/Pluralism Debate in English School

Author:
Nihal Eminoglu, K. Onur Unutulmaz, and M. Gokay Ozerim
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Uluslararasi Iliskiler
Institution:
International Relations Council of Turkey (UİK-IRCT)
Abstract:
This study aims at discussing the vulnerability of the Global Refugee Protection Regime (GRPR) during crises by applying the ‘international society’ concept within the English School of International Relations theory to the COVID-19 pandemic. We analyze the efficiency of the international society institutions on GRPR through the policies and practices of states as well as organizations such as the United Nations, European Union and Council of Europe. The GRPR has been selected because the ‘vulnerability’ of this regime has become a matter of academic and political debate as much as the vulnerability of those persons in need of international protection, specifically during times of crisis. Our analysis reveals that GRPR-centric practices and policies by the institutions of international society during the first four months afte
Topic:
Diplomacy, International Law, Pandemic, COVID-19, and Health Crisis
Political Geography:
Global Focus

15. ‘Legal Identity for All’ and Statelessness Opportunity and Threat at the Junction of Public and Private International Law

Author:
Bronwen Manby
Publication Date:
12-2020
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Statelessness & Citizenship Review
Institution:
Peter McMullin Centre on Statelessness, Melbourne Law School
Abstract:
This article considers the impact of Target 16.9 of the Sustainable Development Goals (‘SDGs’), ‘to provide legal identity for all, including birth registration’ on the objective of eradicating statelessness. This SDG Target has given a significant boost to initiatives for the strengthening of civil registration and identification systems, supported by the United Nations and World Bank. Yet its impact on the resolution of statelessness is not clear, because of the immense complexity of the definition of ‘legal identity’. Proposed definitions, adopted after the target was established, fail to take on board the challenges involved in cross-border recognition of civil status documents and the determination of nationality of a child for parents who hold no documents. The article concludes that SDG Target 16.9 is both an opportunity and a threat. If the objective of providing universal ‘legal identity’ is to have a positive impact for stateless persons there is a need for new engagement with the regulation of civil status in private international law, and new insistence in public international law on legal frameworks that facilitate recognition and registration of the different elements of a person’s identity, including nationality, even and especially where they are officially in doubt. Short cuts in this process risk long delays.
Topic:
International Law, Law, Identity, and Stateless Population
Political Geography:
Global Focus

16. Tracking the Implementation Gap Empirically Assessing the Translation of International Antislavery Commitments in Domestic Legislation Globally

Author:
Katarina Schwarz and Jean Allain
Publication Date:
06-2020
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Statelessness & Citizenship Review
Institution:
Peter McMullin Centre on Statelessness, Melbourne Law School
Abstract:
The prohibition against slavery in international law is unique in several significant ways. First, it has been recognised by the International Court of Justice as a jus cogens norm carrying obligations erga omnes.1 That is to say, it is a norm of international law binding on all states, from which no derogation is permissible and violation of which attracts the legal interest of the international community as a whole entailing an obligation to cooperate to bring such a breach to an end.2Second, it represents the first universal effort enshrined in international law to influence the domestic legislation of all states on a normative question.3 Third, it is often seen as the first global human rights movement and the root of international human rights law, centring the concept of individual human dignity within the traditionally statist constructs of international law.4 And finally, given its importance at the international level, it is often presumed that its prohibition at the domestic level is already complete everywhere
Topic:
International Law, Slavery, Courts, Justice, and Stateless Population
Political Geography:
Global Focus

17. The Role of International Seabed Authority with Respect to the Administration of Mineral Resources

Author:
Şûle Anlar Güneş
Publication Date:
03-2020
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Uluslararasi Iliskiler
Institution:
International Relations Council of Turkey (UİK-IRCT)
Abstract:
Deep ocean floor called as Area is considered as Common Heritage of Mankind (CHM) and the mining activities are managed by International Seabed Authority (ISA). In this article, firstly, the significance of the CHM concept with respect to decolonised states and its impact on law of the sea is elaborated. Secondly, the mandate of ISA which assumed responsibility for the translation of the CHM concept into practice is examined. Every state can take part in mining activities in the Area as a ‘sponsor state’ but the lack of precision with respect to responsibility limits have a deterrent effect over the states that are disadvantaged technically and financially. Considering the negative impact of this issue over the CHM concept the Advisory Opinion of the International Tribunal for Law of the Sea that was given in 2011 is examined.
Topic:
International Law, United Nations, Natural Resources, Law of the Sea, Maritime, and Mining
Political Geography:
Turkey, Middle East, and Global Focus

18. Reconsidering the Classification of Perpetrators in instances of Genocide and Mass Atrocity: A focus on the Khmer Rouge Era

Author:
Sabah Carrim
Publication Date:
12-2020
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Review of Human Rights
Institution:
Society of Social Science Academics (SSSA)
Abstract:
The terms “primary”, “mid-level” and “lower level” are employed to qualify perpetrators of mass atrocities, based on the magnitude of guilt and criminal responsibility. Could this classification be a misnomer? Could the relationship among perpetrators, or the roles they assume be more intricate, warranting a reassessment of the existing hierarchy? This paper explores the need to be more circumspect in penning perpetrators in categories, especially in complex scenarios of mass atrocity. To do so, the Non-Solitarist View of Human Identity and Framing Theory are used to explore the matter, with a focus on perpetrators of the Khmer Rouge era.
Topic:
Genocide, International Law, Atrocities, and Khmer Rouge
Political Geography:
Cambodia, Southeast Asia, and Global Focus

19. Enhancing the Protection of the Environment in Relation to Armed Conflicts – the Draft Principles of the International Law Commission and Beyond

Author:
Britta Sjostedt and Anne Dienelt
Publication Date:
07-2020
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Goettingen Journal of International Law
Institution:
The Goettingen Journal of International Law
Abstract:
n 2011, the UN International Law Commission (ILC) took up the topic Protection of the Environment in Relation to Armed Conflicts.1 The decision was triggered by a joint report issued by the UN Environment Programme and the Environmental Law Institute in 2009 recommending the ILC to “[...] examine the existing international law for protecting the environment during armed conflicts [...] [including] how it can be clarified, codified and expanded [...]”.2 Since the inclusion of the item on the ILC’s agenda, the Commission has published five reports3 by the two special rapporteurs, Dr. Marie Jacobsson (2011-2016) and Dr. Marja Lehto (2017-). In 2019, the plenary adopted 28 Draft Principles on first reading.4 The ILC has touched on highly controversial issues such as reprisals,5 corporate liability,6 indigenous peoples’ rights,7 among others. Nevertheless, it was clear from the beginning that the ILC would not be able to exhaustively deal with the topic for two main reasons. First, the Commission has a limited mandate that is restricted to “[...] initiate studies and make recommendations for the purpose of [...] encouraging the progressive development of international law and its codification [...]”.8 Enhanced legal protection of the environment, as one of the purposes of the Draft Principles,9 must therefore be based on existing customary international law and its progressive development. The Commission decided to also include recommendations to account for the uncertain legal status of some of the Draft Principles.10 Second, some related issues touch upon controversial and political matters, as mentioned earlier. Consequently, the ILC has been reluctant to include some of these issues in its workflow.11 Therefore, the adoption of the Draft Principles should be regarded as a starting point for shaping and developing the legal framework for environmental protection in relation to armed conflicts. As a part of that process, Hamburg University and Lund University organized an international workshop in March 2019 in Hamburg. Several members of the ILC, including two special rapporteurs, academic legal experts, and practitioners, attended the workshop to discuss the Draft Principles. The discussion also focused on some issues not covered by the ILC, such as the implications for gender and climate security. The engaging dialogue in Hamburg has inspired the publication of this Special Issue of the Goettingen Journal of International Law (GoJIL) to ensure that the outcomes and ideas of the workshop reach a wider audience. It has also contributed to maintaining the momentum of this topical area of international law by inviting contributions from researchers not present during the workshop in Hamburg.12
Topic:
Environment, International Law, and Non State Actors
Political Geography:
Global Focus

20. Reflections on the Legality of Attacks Against the Natural Environment by Way of Reprisals

Author:
Stavros-Evdokimos Pantazopoulos
Publication Date:
07-2020
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Goettingen Journal of International Law
Institution:
The Goettingen Journal of International Law
Abstract:
The paper examines the concept of belligerent reprisals and assesses the legality of attacking the environment by way of reprisals. The law of belligerent reprisals, which is linked to the principle of reciprocity, allows one belligerent State unlawfully injured by another to react by means of what under normal circumstances would constitute a violation of the jus in bello, so as to induce the violating State to comply with the law. The instances of lawful recourse to reprisals have been considerably limited, since their application is either explicitly prohibited against certain protected persons and objects, including against the natural environment, or is subject to stringent conditions according to customary International Humanitarian Law (IHL). Despite its narrowing scope, the doctrine of reprisals remains a valid concept under the existing legal framework. For one, the state of affairs under customary international law with respect to reprisals directed at civilian objects (including against parts of the environment), subject to certain rigorous conditions, remains unclear. To complicate matters even further, any proposition on the status of reprisals in the context of a non-international armed conflict (NIAC) is shrouded in controversy, as there is no relevant treaty provision. In this regard, the present author endorses the approach espoused in the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) Study on Customary IHL, namely to altogether prohibit resort to reprisals in the context of a NIAC. Turning to the status of reprisals against the natural environment under customary IHL, it is argued that a prohibition of attacks against the natural environment by way of reprisals is in the process of formation with respect to the use of weapons other than nuclear ones. All things considered, the International Law Commission (ILC) was confronted with an uncomfortable situation in the context of its work on the ‘Protection of the Environment in Relation to Armed Conflicts’. By sticking to the verbatim reproduction of Article 55(2) of Additional Protocol I, the ILC chose the proper course of action, since any other formulation would not only undercut a significant treaty provision, but might also result in the normative standard of conduct being lowered.
Topic:
Environment, International Law, Humanitarian Intervention, and Red Cross
Political Geography:
Global Focus