Search

Begin New Search Topic International Law Content Type Journal Article Publishing Institution Brown Journal of World Affairs Publication Year within 5 Years

1. 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

2. Taking Care of Business: Industrial Espionage and International Law

Author:
Russell Buchan
Publication Date:
09-2019
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Brown Journal of World Affairs
Institution:
Brown Journal of World Affairs
Abstract:
The essence of espionage is the non-consensual collection of confidential information. Espionage takes different forms depending upon the identity of the perpetrator and the nature of the confidential information targeted. Political espionage describes the state-sponsored theft of confidential information, and its purpose is to shed light on the capabilities and intentions of other state and non- state actors. Economic espionage is also state-sponsored, and it involves states stealing trade secrets from companies located in foreign jurisdictions, usually with the intention of passing this information to domestic companies so that they possess a competitive advantage. In contrast, industrial espionage is perpetrated by non-state actors insofar as it entails companies stealing foreign competitors’ confidential information without the support or assistance of a state. Espionage usually implies a transboundary dimension to its operations, thereby raising the question of whether international law can be invoked to regulate this practice. In recent years, considerable academic attention has been dedicated to the status of political and economic espionage under international law.2 Less attention, however, has been directed toward the application of inter- national law to industrial espionage. While this omission is understandable given that international law is a state-based system, it is not inevitable: the activities of non-state actors fall within the purview of international law on the basis that they operate under the jurisdiction of the state.3 As such, international law imposes an obligation upon states to regulate the conduct of non-state actors within their jurisdictions or, to be exact, to streamline non-state actors’ conduct such that their activities do not contravene the rights of other states. The objective of this article is to examine whether and to what extent the obligation to prevent transboundary harm applies to those situations in which a company commits industrial espionage against a company located in a foreign jurisdiction.4
Topic:
International Law, Business, Espionage, and Industry
Political Geography:
Global Focus

3. The Extraordinary Gamble: How the Yugoslav Tribunal’s Indictment of Slobodan Milošević During the Kosovo War Affected Peace Efforts

Author:
Jacqueline R. McAllister
Publication Date:
09-2019
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Brown Journal of World Affairs
Institution:
Brown Journal of World Affairs
Abstract:
On 24 May 1994, the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY or Yugoslav Tribunal) made history by becoming the first international court to indict a sitting head of state: Yugoslav President Slobodan Milošević. Since Milošević’s rise to power roughly a decade before, forces either directly or indirectly under his control had unleashed a reign of terror first in Croatia, then in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and finally in Kosovo. Indicting Milošević was no small feat: he did everything in his power to cover his tracks. Moreover, in order to secure crucial evidence (e.g., intelligence and satellite imagery linking Serb forces to crime sites) and the support necessary to actually put Milošević on trial, the ICTY required the backing of Western powers, which—until the Kosovo War in 1999—viewed Milošević as a vital, yet unsavory guarantor of peace in the region. Reactions to the indictment were mixed. While the Yugoslav Tribunal’s supporters heralded the indictment as a legal triumph that brought Milošević to his knees, its critics emphasized that, at best, the indictment was irrelevant and, at worst, an extraordinary gamble that had the potential to thwart an end to hostilities.1
Topic:
NATO, Ethnic Conflict, International Law, Peace, and Slobodan Milosevic
Political Geography:
Kosovo, Yugoslavia, Serbia, and Balkans