Search

You searched for: Content Type Journal Article Remove constraint Content Type: Journal Article Political Geography Global Focus Remove constraint Political Geography: Global Focus Publication Year within 3 Years Remove constraint Publication Year: within 3 Years Topic International Law Remove constraint Topic: International Law
Number of results to display per page

Search Results

  • Author: Nihal Eminoglu, K. Onur Unutulmaz, 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, Health Crisis
  • Political Geography: Global Focus
  • Author: Britta Sjostedt, 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, Non State Actors
  • Political Geography: Global Focus
  • 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, Red Cross
  • Political Geography: Global Focus
  • Author: Daniella Dam-de Jong, Saskia Wolters
  • Publication Date: 07-2020
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: The Goettingen Journal of International Law
  • Institution: The Goettingen Journal of International Law
  • Abstract: Corporate activities take place in a variety of social contexts, including in countries affected by armed conflict. Whether corporations are physically present in these regions or merely do business with partners from conflict zones, there is an increased risk that their activities contribute to egregious human rights abuses or serious environmental harm. This is especially so for corporations active in or relying on the extractives sector. It is against this background that the ILC included two principles addressing corporate responsibility for environmental harm in its Draft Principles on the protection of the environment in relation to armed conflict. Both principles explicitly call on the home States of these corporations to give effect to their complementary role in regulating and enforcing corporate social responsibility. Draft Principle 10 addresses the responsibility of home States to regulate multinational corporations under the heading of “corporate due diligence”, while Draft Principle 11 addresses the responsibility of home States to hold multinational corporations liable for environmental damage caused in conflict zones. The current contribution engages with the potential normative foundations underpinning extraterritorial responsibilities for the home States of multinational corporations with respect to the prevention and remediation of environmental harm in conflict zones, focusing on international humanitarian law and international human rights law. It concludes that the Draft Principles are certainly indicative of the direction in which the law is evolving, but that no firm obligations beyond treaty law can be discerned as of yet. It was therefore a wise decision to phrase the respective Draft Principles as recommendations instead of obligations. At the same time, there are sufficient indications to conclude that it seems a matter of time before it is accepted that States have distinct obligations under customary international law for which their responsibility may be engaged. It is argued that the ILC Draft Principles provide an important impetus to these developments, not in the least because they provide a reference to States regarding the state-of-the-art and guidance for future action.
  • Topic: International Law, Conflict, Multinational Corporations
  • Political Geography: Global Focus
  • Author: Marie Davoise
  • Publication Date: 07-2020
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: The Goettingen Journal of International Law
  • Institution: The Goettingen Journal of International Law
  • Abstract: In July 2019, the International Law Commission (ILC) provisionally adopted, on first reading, a series of draft principles on the protection of the environment in relation to armed conflict (the Draft Principles). The role of businesses in armed conflict is addressed in Draft Principle 10 and Draft Principle 11. The latter, in particular, requires States to implement appropriate measures to ensure that corporations operating in or from their territories can be held accountable for environmental harm in the context of armed conflict. The inclusion of those two Draft Principles reflects increasingly vocal calls for corporate accountability, which has been the focus of the growing field of Business and Human Rights (BHR), an umbrella term encompassing a variety of legal regimes from tort law to criminal law. This contribution will look at the link between businesses, the environment, and armed conflict. Using the newly adopted Draft Principle 11 as a starting point, it explores three major liability regimes through which businesses could be held accountable for damage to the environment in armed conflict: State responsibility, international criminal law, and transnational tort litigation. Using case studies, the article discusses some of the challenges associated with each of those regimes, before concluding that the cross-fertilization phenomenon observed in this article (between public/private law, domestic/international level, and across various jurisdictions) is making BHR an increasingly salient discipline and useful tool in the fight against impunity for corporate environmental harm in armed conflict.
  • Topic: Human Rights, International Law, Business , Conflict
  • Political Geography: Global Focus
  • Author: Dieter Fleck
  • Publication Date: 07-2020
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: The Goettingen Journal of International Law
  • Institution: The Goettingen Journal of International Law
  • Abstract: The existing treaty law on the protection of the natural environment during armed conflicts is less than adequate. Treaty provisions relating to international armed conflicts are limited to the prohibition of damage of an extreme kind and scale that has not occurred so far and may hardly be expected from the conduct of hostilities unless nuclear weapons would be used. Even in such a scenario, States possessing nuclear weapons have explicitly objected to the applicability of that treaty law. For internal wars, no pertinent treaty provisions exist in the law of armed conflict. Yet multilateral environmental agreements concluded in peacetime stand as an alternative approach to enhance environmental protection during war. As a civilian object, the environment may not be targeted nor attacked in an armed conflict, but this does not exclude collateral damage, nor does this principle as such offer specific standards for proportionality in attacks. In an effort to close these apparent gaps of treaty law, the present contribution looks into other sources of international law that could be used. In this context, the author revisits the role of the famous Martens Clause in the interplay of international humanitarian law, international environmental law, and human rights law. The role of the Clause in closing gaps caused by the indeterminacy of treaty law is reviewed and customary rules, general principles, and best practices are considered to this effect. For the protection of the natural environment during armed conflicts, the Martens Clause may, indeed, be used as a door opener to facilitate the creation and application of uncodified principles and rules. Particular standards for proportionality in attacks can be derived from the Martens Clause. Pertinent soft law instruments need to be developed in international practical cooperation and by academia. Yet it deserves further study to explore whether, and to what extent, the Martens Clause, which was adopted in the law of armed conflict, may also apply in post-conflict peacebuilding as a case of interaction between the jus in bello and the jus post bellum, at least as far as the protection of the natural environment is concerned.
  • Topic: International Law, Treaties and Agreements, Humanitarian Intervention, Conflict
  • Political Geography: Global Focus
  • Author: Michael Bothe
  • Publication Date: 07-2020
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: The Goettingen Journal of International Law
  • Institution: The Goettingen Journal of International Law
  • Abstract: The protection of the environment in relation to armed conflict, in particular during armed conflict is a complex problem as it involves at least two different fields of international law, the law of armed conflict (international humanitarian law) and international environmental law. Their mutual relationship is a delicate issue. International humanitarian law is not necessarily lex specialis. Three principles deserve particular attention in this connection: as to general international environmental law, the principle of prevention and the precautionary principle, as to international humanitarian law the duty to take precautions. The terms prevention and precaution are used in different contexts in environmental law (both national and international) and in the law of armed conflict. The duty, imposed by international humanitarian law, to take precautions has much in common with, but must be distinguished from, the precautionary approach of general environmental law. This paper shows what these principles mean and how they relate to each other. It answers the question to what extent the rules based on these concepts are effective in restraining environmental damage being caused by military activities. The application of these principles in peace and war serves intergenerational equity and is thus an important element of sustainable development.
  • Topic: Environment, International Law, Humanitarian Intervention, Conflict
  • Political Geography: Global Focus
  • 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, Mining
  • Political Geography: Turkey, Middle East, Global Focus
  • 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, Khmer Rouge
  • Political Geography: Cambodia, Southeast Asia, Global Focus
  • Author: Rafael Biermann
  • Publication Date: 03-2019
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Institution: Carnegie Council
  • Abstract: This roundtable debates how norms, values, and interests are balanced and harmonized in a world of conflict. My contribution focuses on one specific policy field: secessionist conflict. Like Megan Bradley’s contribution on the international refugee regime,1 this essay takes a metaperspective and does not investigate any one specific case or actor.2 I assume a political science perspective, paying attention first to social norms (as standards of appropriate behavior), which encompass but go beyond legally codified norms of international law;3 and second to interests, whether they be national, group, personal, or other. My perspective here is a critical social constructivist one, investigating the dialectic relationship of norms, interests, and power. I introduce the concept of “norm selection” in a policy field, which offers choice within a cluster of competing norms. Finally, following Bernd Bucher’s call to bring back agency into what he terms international “norm politics,” this contribution prioritizes agency, arguing that it is actors with diverging interests who do the balancing of norms, values, and interests.4 This was one of the major insights we gained from the workshop preceding this roundtable.5 The central argument of my contribution is that the policy field of secessionist conflict is structured around a set of five rival norms, of which territorial integrity and self-determination form the core. This normative structure permits the parties involved in a secessionist conflict to select from a menu of norms those that best suit their interests. The selection displays remarkable regularities, indicating default positions for each type of actor. However, significant outlier cases signal that interests do not simply trump norms but that actors accord different values to those norms. This attribution is influenced by the dynamics of a normative environment in which norms rise and fall. In particular, since the Cold War ended, discourse as well as state practice have shifted away from the traditional taboo on secession toward more revisionist concepts, such as remedial secession or earned sovereignty, providing an opening for the secessionist wave that started with the breakup of the Soviet Union and of Yugoslavia. I present my argument in three steps. First, I introduce the above-mentioned cluster of norms that shape discourse and policies on secession, distinguishing the two core norms and the three circumjacent ones of noninterference, human rights, and democratic good governance. Second, I identify five major types of actors in secessionist conflicts and investigate how each balances those norms. Since this balancing is actor-specific and conforms to the interests that each pursues, I arrive at distinct default positions for each actor type. Whereas this analysis suggests that norms serve primarily as legitimation devices to advance the diverging interests of various actors, the last section discusses outlier cases where norms and interests do not match as presumed.
  • Topic: International Law, Self Determination, Norms, Secession
  • Political Geography: Global Focus
  • Author: Deepak Mawar
  • Publication Date: 12-2019
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: The Goettingen Journal of International Law
  • Institution: The Goettingen Journal of International Law
  • Abstract: The article analyzes the International Court of Justice and its approach to judicial decision-making. By investigating the Court’s jurisprudence over its seventy years of activity, the article seeks to outline, that if given the choice, the ICJ tends to prioritize judicial restraint over judicial activism. In fact, the Court maintains a strict adherence to judicial restraint, which stems from a fear of losing its legitimacy when facing the issue of consent-based jurisdiction. The article purports that although judicial restraint is an important facet of sound judicial decision-making, the ICJ should not be so reluctant to adopt judicial activism when it is suitable to utilize such an approach. Such a position is strengthened when analyzing the criticisms made of judgments delivered by the Court, which fail to serve the international community beneficially.
  • Topic: International Law, International Court of Justice (ICJ)
  • Political Geography: Global Focus
  • Author: Aynur Demirli, Ali Murat Özdemir
  • Publication Date: 09-2019
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: Uluslararasi Iliskiler
  • Institution: International Relations Council of Turkey (UİK-IRCT)
  • Abstract: Although the international law itself has changed over time, the definition of international law by the positivist discourse used as a means to understand it remains constant. From this paradigm, which conceptualizes itself historically rootless in one sense and detaches itself from its current periodic ties, it is very difficult to construct an explanatory narrative about the forms of international law. For this purpose the study firstly investigates the elements of the classical definition of international law in a socio-historical context. Secondly, it will propose a starting date and a periodicization style for the work area defined as international law. Lastly in this study the periodization of international law in its modern history will be evaluated.
  • Topic: Imperialism, International Law, Political Economy
  • Political Geography: Turkey, Global Focus
  • Author: Elvan Çokişler
  • Publication Date: 08-2019
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: Uluslararasi Iliskiler
  • Institution: International Relations Council of Turkey (UİK-IRCT)
  • Abstract: This research deals with the historical development of the regime for protecting cultural properties during armed conflicts. The historical development is addressed in three sections: The first section explains the process from antiquity through the 18th century in light of the views that form the philosophical background of the regime. The second section discusses the initial tangible efforts which appeared in the 19th century with regard to the establishment of customary law, while the third section handles the 20th century endeavors in terms of the codification of the regime. The research has shown that, throughout history cultural property has been open for strategic use, efforts for protecting it accelerated particularly after great wars and codification efforts improved as a reaction to big damages stemming from changing nature of armed conflicts. These findings may be interpreted as indicating that today’s protection efforts are bound to be insufficient for the future strategic uses of cultural property that are unpredictable from today’s vantage point.
  • Topic: International Law, Treaties and Agreements, Culture, Conflict
  • Political Geography: Global Focus
  • Author: Mehmet Halil Mustafa Bektaş
  • Publication Date: 08-2019
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: Uluslararasi Iliskiler
  • Institution: International Relations Council of Turkey (UİK-IRCT)
  • Abstract: A state rarely considers leaving an international organization when negotiating the conditions of its entry. Among such organizations is the United Nations (UN), an institution of obvious global importance. The issue of withdrawal, neglected though it often is (whether deliberately or unintentionally), could however be equally as significant as that of entry. By contrast with the Covenant of the League of Nations, the UN Charter makes no provision for withdrawal. The procedure to be followed should a state request to withdraw is therefore left uncertain. The current study therefore examines three primary instruments: the proposal of the Committee of the San Francisco Conference, the Indonesian example and the inclusion of the relevant provisions of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. The study aims to determine whether these instruments provide an explicit procedure for withdrawal from the UN. The current study contributes to the Turkish literature by providing insight into this largely ignored topic.
  • Topic: International Law, Treaties and Agreements, United Nations
  • Political Geography: Global Focus
  • Author: Vahit Güntay
  • Publication Date: 12-2019
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: Novus Orbis: Journal of Politics & International Relations
  • Institution: Department of International Relations, Karadeniz Technical University
  • Abstract: The studies in the base of international relations and security have revealed a different research subject with the developments of technology. Cybersecurity that is in the focus of the technical area has also been argued in the political base. The cyber dimension of security with discussing concepts like cyber politics, cyber deterrence or cyberwar has succeeded to remain on the agenda of states. As a central actor of the international system, states’ interest in cybersecurity has carried this subject to the international law research area. In this study, the historical process and theoretical approach have been evaluated in the base of international relations discipline and it is practised to detail problems about international law. Different data have also supported the approach to the core of this study. | Uluslararası ilişkiler ve güvenlik temelindeki çalışmalar teknolojik gelişmelerle birlikte farklı bir araştırma konusunu karşımıza çıkarmıştır. Teknik bir alanın ilgi odağında olan siber güvenlik politik bir temelde de tartışılmaya başlanmıştır. Siber politikalar, siber caydırıcılık ya da siber savaş gibi isimlerle tartışılmaya başlanan güvenliğin siber boyutu devletlerin de siyasi ajandalarına girmeyi başarmıştır. Uluslararası aktörlerin merkezinde olan devletlerin ilgisi siber güvenliği uluslararası hukukun inceleme alanına taşımıştır. Bu çalışma dahilinde siber güvenliğe ilişkin tarihsel süreç ve teorik yaklaşım uluslararası ilişkiler disiplini temelinde ele alınmış ve uluslararası hukuka dair sorunlar detaylandırılmaya çalışılmıştır. Çalışmanın özüne dair yaklaşım farklı verilerle de desteklenmiştir.
  • Topic: International Relations, Crime, International Law, Cybersecurity
  • Political Geography: Global Focus
  • Author: Mazhar Ali Khan
  • Publication Date: 12-2019
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: Review of Human Rights
  • Institution: Society of Social Science Academics (SSSA)
  • Abstract: The question of ratification of the Rome Statute of International Criminal Court is one of the most debated questions in public international law. Because it involves strict commitment to human rights many states often see it as a hurdle to their national interests. Nevertheless a number of states have ratified the statute except a few. Pakistan is one of those states that have not ratified the Rome Statute even though it has been a party to various other treaties on human rights. This article focuses on the question why Pakistan did not ratify the statute? The article also provides recommendations how the ratification can be made possible.
  • Topic: Human Rights, International Law, Islamic State, International Community, International Criminal Court (ICC), Rome Statute, Universal Jurisdiction
  • Political Geography: Pakistan, South Asia, Global Focus
  • Author: Andreas L. Paulus, Johann Ruben Leiss
  • Publication Date: 12-2018
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: The Goettingen Journal of International Law
  • Institution: The Goettingen Journal of International Law
  • Abstract: This article explores rule of law transfers from an international perspective. Based on the observation that the proposal of an emerging international constitutional order seems to have lost momentum this article emphasizes a global legal reality that is characterized by a complex and rather non-hierarchical interplay between various (fragmented) international legal orders and suborders as well as national legal orders. This article discusses four legal mechanisms that are of pivotal relevance with respect to global rule of law transfers. These mechanisms include, first, so-called “hinge provisions” as doorways between different legal orders, second, harmonious interpretation as a legal tool of integration, third the sources of international law enabling transmission of norms and providing a framework for judicial interaction and, fourth, judicial dialogue as an informal means of rule of law transfer.
  • Topic: International Cooperation, International Law, Sovereignty, Rule of Law
  • Political Geography: Global Focus
  • Author: Peter-Tobias Stoll
  • Publication Date: 12-2018
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: The Goettingen Journal of International Law
  • Institution: The Goettingen Journal of International Law
  • Abstract: International investment law appeals to a lawyer’s appetite for the rule of law by disciplining the exercise of power between States and foreign investors through legalization and judicialization. Originally supposed to serve as a fix to promote foreign investments in developing countries in times of legal uncertainties, now, thousands of bilateral investment agreements exist, and the number of cases in investment arbitration has exploded in the last decade. Further, there is a tendency of generalization, as investment protection now features as a standard element of international trade agreements, far beyond the original focus on developing countries. A number of flaws and shortcomings of the rules and procedures became apparent in the course of the more frequent use of the system and resulted in much discussion within the expert community, which resulted in some changes. Furthermore, the long neglected possibility became apparent, that investment claims could be directed against industrialized countries and that the conduct of their authorities could be subjected to review by international arbitration tribunals. This sparked heated public debates, particularly so in the EU. These two developments have in common, that they implicitly as well as explicitly raised the issue of the rule of law. This paper will assess the system of international investment law as it stands, its critique and its reform, through the lens of the rule of law. It will also make a highly idealistic proposal on the further development of international investment protection. In concluding, it will reflect on the proper use of the rule of law in legal analysis, by setting out the different perspectives in which the term may be employed, and the methodological consequences.
  • Topic: International Law, International Trade and Finance, Rule of Law, Investment
  • Political Geography: Global Focus