Search

You searched for: Content Type Journal Article Remove constraint Content Type: Journal Article Publication Year within 5 Years Remove constraint Publication Year: within 5 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: Ye. Zinkov
  • Publication Date: 01-2020
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: International Affairs: A Russian Journal of World Politics, Diplomacy and International Relations
  • Institution: East View Information Services
  • Abstract: ThE PROBLEM of the acquisition and sale of Alaska, and to whom it belongs, excites the minds of researchers to this day. There are supposi- tions that once the first Russians had traversed Siberia, they settled in Alaska during the second half of the 16th century.1 The next period, in which Alaska gets mentioned by Russian people, dates to 1648, in connection with the names of the Cossack Semyon Dezhnev and his associate Fedot Popov, who circumvented the Asian continent, then passed from the Arctic Ocean to the Pacific Ocean basin.2 Later on, an official expedition was organized; its commander, Vitus Bering, announced in 1728 his discovery that Asia and America did not have a land bridge between them.3 The first legal documentation of Alaska’s coastline took place on August 21, 1732, when the crew of the St. Gabriel, under the leadership of surveyor Mikhail Gvozdev and navigator Ivan Fyodorov (or K. Moshkov, according to other sources), recorded its contours without going ashore. From this date began the jurisdictional affiliation of Alaska with the Russian Empire. however, the territory for a long time contin- ued to be developed on the basis of civil law. The bureaucrats of the Russian Empire did not duly administer the land in Alaska. This situation contributed to the consolidation of legal relations within civil society on the territory along the lines of the Novgorod Republic.
  • Topic: International Law, Law, Land, Jurisdiction
  • Political Geography: Russia, Europe, North America, Alaska, United States of America
  • 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: Burak Çakirca
  • Publication Date: 10-2020
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: Journal of Academic Inquiries
  • Institution: Sakarya University (SAU)
  • Abstract: Balkanlardaki birçok farklı unsuru bünyesinde barındıran Bosna Hersek, bu karmaşık yapı nedeniyle bazı sıkıntılı süreçler geçirmiştir. Yirminci yüzyılın son döneminde en büyük trajediler arasında sayılan Sırplar ile Boşnaklar arasındaki savaş bölgede birçok yıkım ve tahribata sebep olmuştur. Bosna’da Uluslararası hukukun diplomatik yöntemler, uluslararası örgütlerin ve uluslararası yargının müdahalesi vasıtasıyla tüm imkanlarının kullanıldığı görülmektedir. Ancak bu imkanların çatışmaları engellemedeki başarısı tartışmalı olmuştur. Bu çalışma, söz konusu methotların hangi düzeyde etkide bulunduğu sorunsallaştırmaktadır. Uluslararası hukukun eksik uygulanışının meydana getirdiği büyük sorunların gösterilmesi çalışmanın amacını oluşturmaktadır.
  • Topic: International Law, Military Intervention, Conflict
  • Political Geography: Turkey, Middle East, Eastern Europe, Bosnia and Herzegovina
  • Author: Mubeen Adnan, Fakhara Shahid
  • Publication Date: 07-2020
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: Journal of Political Studies
  • Institution: Department of Political Science, University of the Punjab
  • Abstract: South China Sea (SCS) is a part of Pacific Ocean and is the most strategic and important waterway in the world containing large deposits of hydrocarbons and fossil oil. Due to its unquestioned importance it has become bone of contention among many East Asian nations and China regarding its sovereignty and control of the territory. Two Islands Parcel and Spratly in the SCS are the flashpoints of the dispute because countries like, Philippine, China, Vietnam, Brunei and Malaysia are claiming their rights over some parts or sovereignty over all the above mentioned Islands. Primary concern of the dispute lies in U shaped nine- dashed demarcation line by China in the SCS. A decision of international court of Arbitration in “Philippines v. china arbitration case” showed that China U-shaped nine dash line demarcation is uneven with UNCLOS 1982. This verdict has been rejected by China on the grounds that it has no binding forces because China controls 90% area of the SCS through nine dashed line by having historical claim of the sea and this line was drawn in 1946 by the help of USA prior to the 1982 UNCLOS. China wants to solve the dispute bilaterally without any third party interference while due to the importance of the region many other actors are getting involved in to the dispute. A permanent and lasting solution of the dispute is a dire need of the time to solve the complex issue.
  • Topic: Foreign Policy, International Law, Territorial Disputes
  • Political Geography: China, Asia-Pacific, South China Sea
  • 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: Oğuzhan Çakır, Ayça Eminoğlu
  • Publication Date: 09-2020
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: Novus Orbis: Journal of Politics & International Relations
  • Institution: Department of International Relations, Karadeniz Technical University
  • Abstract: The main purpose of this study is to understand what motives the Russian Federation, a regional power, uses military force against its neighbor, Ukraine, and annexes Crimea. As a result of the literature review conducted for this purpose, this approach of Russia was generally interpreted from two different theoretical perspectives. Some of the critics evaluated Russia's attitude during the crisis process under the name of defensive realism, while the other group, on the contrary, evaluated Russia's attitude under the name of offensive realism. The work is addressed in the context of these two theories, with a deductive approach. The great powers do not refrain from using hard power when it comes to their security. The answer has been searched to the arguments that the Revisionist movement that Russia displayed in this crisis was caused by international developments rather than domestic political developments and that there is no sanctioning power against the great powers that have become a chronic problem of international law. When the relevant study concluded, and the previous crisis experiences of Russia taking in the consideration, it is observed that Russia has similar characteristic features in this crisis as well. It has been concluded that Russia has not been able to get rid of the sense of the siege it experienced during the Cold War and has pursued aggressive policies when it feels such a threat in its nearby geography. On the other hand, what happened in Crimea has clearly shown that the great powers do not refrain from using force and ignoring international law when it comes to their benefits and security. | Bu çalışmanın temel amacı, bölgesel bir güç olan Rusya Federasyonu’nun, komşusu olan Ukrayna’ya karşı hangi saiklerle askeri güç kullandığı ve Kırım’ı ilhak ettiğidir. Bu amaç doğrultusunda yapılan literatür çalışması sonucunda, Rusya’nın bu yaklaşımı genel olarak iki farklı teorik perspektiften yorumlanmıştır. Düşünürlerin bir kısmı Rusya’nın kriz sürecindeki tutumunu defansif realizm bağlamında değerlendirmekteyken diğer grup ise tam aksine Rusya’nın tutumunu ofansif realizm bağlamında ele almışladır. Çalışma, bu iki teori bağlamında, tümdengelimci bir yaklaşımla ele alınmıştır. Büyük güçler, güvenlikleri söz konusu olduğunda sert güç kullanmaktan kaçınmamaktadırlar. Rusya’nın bu krizde sergilemiş olduğu revizyonist hareketin, iç politik gelişmelerden ziyade uluslararası gelişmelerden kaynaklandığı ve uluslararası hukukun kronik sorunu haline gelen büyük güçlere karşı bir yaptırım gücünün olmadığı argümanlarına cevap aranmıştır. İlgili çalışma sonuçlandığında, Rusya’nın geçmişte yaşadığı krizler de ele alındığında, bu krizle benzer karakteristik özelliklere sahip olduğu gözlemlenmiştir. Rusya’nın, Soğuk Savaş dönemi yaşadığı kuşatılma algısından kurtulamadığı ve yakın coğrafyasında bu şekilde bir tehdit hissettiği zaman saldırgan politikalar izlediği sonucu varılmıştır. Öte yandan Kırım’da yaşananlar, büyük güçlerin kendi menfaatleri ve güvenlikleri söz konusu olduğunda güç kullanmaktan ve uluslararası hukuku hiçe saymaktan kaçınmadıklarının açıkça göstermiştir.
  • Topic: International Law, Territorial Disputes, Realism, Annexation
  • Political Geography: Russia, Ukraine, Crimea
  • 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: Jacques Singer-Emery
  • Publication Date: 01-2019
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: Harvard Journal of Middle Eastern Politics and Policy
  • Institution: The John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University
  • Abstract: This is the third of a three-part essay series on the different paths the U.S. Congress might take to limit Washington’s support for the Saudi-led coalition in Yemen. Credible allegations of Saudi war crimes and human rights abuses in Yemen should trigger the FAA and Leahy Laws to prevent U.S. aid from reaching the Saudi-led coalition, as discussed in part 2 of this series. However, the U.S. Constitution forbids Congress from unilaterally issuing orders to any executive agency, including the Defense and State Departments. Accordingly, both the Foreign Assistance Control Act (FAA) and the Leahy laws place the onus on the executive to identify and respond to gross violations of human rights. Thus far, the executive has turned a blind eye to the Saudi coalition’s actions. Congress could independently find that Saudi Arabia has engaged in a “consistent pattern of gross violations of internationally recognized human rights” by commissioning its own investigations. But if the executive remains unconvinced, Congress only has two options to enforce the FAA and the Leahy laws: impeach the President, or obtain a court order requiring the executive withhold aid and arms pursuant to these laws. The first action is unlikely to occur here, but the second is a viable option. To secure a court order, Congress must show that the executive’s refusal to follow the FAA and the Leahy laws uniquely injures the legislative branch in a way that only the courts can remedy.
  • Topic: Government, International Law, Law, War Crimes, Weapons , Courts, Legislation
  • Political Geography: Yemen, Saudi Arabia, North America, United States of America, Gulf Nations
  • Author: A. Vyleghanin, K. Kritsky
  • Publication Date: 01-2019
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: International Affairs: A Russian Journal of World Politics, Diplomacy and International Relations
  • Institution: East View Information Services
  • Abstract: FIVE YEARS AGO, a coup d’état took place in Kiev. Following demon- strations and arson attacks, a mob seized several government institutions, including the administration building and residence of the constitutional- ly elected president of Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovich. Some members of the Ukrainian president’s security detail who were protecting his residence from illegal seizure were wounded and killed.1 Alexander Turchinov, one of the coup leaders, began serving as the president of Ukraine even though no Ukrainian presidential election had been held. The coup in Kiev led primarily to the U.S. assuming a leading role in Ukraine’s governance – something it had neither during the period of the Russian Empire nor the Soviet era. The February 2014 overthrow of the president in Kiev that took place without elections and in violation of the Ukrainian Constitution de facto divided the country into regions that recognized the new authorities in Kiev and those that opposed the coup (primarily the southern and eastern regions of Ukraine). This occurred not only because the Ukrainian presi- dent was unconstitutionally removed from power but primarily because the “installation” of the putschist government was accompanied by vio- lence, and ethnic and linguistic persecution. In March 2014, the Autonomous Republic of Crimea left the new, “post-coup” Ukraine in accordance with the provision of the UN Charter on the right of peoples to self-determination. Subsequently, following a referendum in Crimea, a treaty on Crimea’s reunification with Russia was signed. A confrontation between the new regime in Kiev* and residents of Donetsk and Lugansk Regions turned into a protracted armed conflict. The forcible replacement in Kiev of a constitutionally elected head of state (Yanukovich) with an unconstitutional leader (Turchinov) directly impacted Russia’s national interests. Russians and Ukrainians lived together within a single state, the Russian Empire, from the 17th century until 1917. During the Soviet period, the border between the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic and the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic did not have international legal significance. It was an administrative bor- der. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the independent UN member states (Russia and Ukraine) that replaced them continued to maintain close economic and other ties. Their continued integration, including through joint participation in the Customs Union, objectively met the strategic interests of Ukraine and Russia. A friendly Ukraine is also important to Russia from a national securi- ty standpoint, considering NATO’s expansion toward Russia’s borders that began in the early 1990s – i.e., NATO’s absorption of all former member states of the Warsaw Pact, including Poland and even the former Soviet republics of Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia. Russia’s leadership has repeatedly stressed the inadmissibility of dragging Ukraine into NATO. Words about “fraternal” relations between the peoples of Russia and Ukraine are no exaggeration: Millions of family members (both Russians and Ukrainians) live on opposite sides of the Russian-Ukrainian border,2 and at least one-third of Ukraine’s population speaks Russian as a native language. In this context, it is not surprising that Moscow considered the U.S.- orchestrated seizure of power from the head of state in Kiev an event affecting its vital interests. Something else is remarkable: The U.S. administration said that the events in Ukraine, far away from the American mainland, “constitute an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States.”4 Westerners promulgated a very different assessment of the forced ouster of Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovich in 2014. The U.S. called it a “people’s rev- olution” and said that the mob action organized in part by the U.S. ambas- sador in Kiev (including the killing of Berkut fighters, the state guard of the Ukrainian president) was a legitimate way of expressing the will of the “Ukrainian people.”
  • Topic: International Cooperation, International Law, Military Strategy, Conflict
  • Political Geography: Russia, Europe, Ukraine, Middle East, South America, Syria, Venezuela, North America, United States of America
  • Author: Edith Vanspranghe
  • Publication Date: 08-2019
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: The Goettingen Journal of International Law
  • Institution: The Goettingen Journal of International Law
  • Abstract: The United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in the Central African Republic (MINUSCA) has been mandated to implement “urgent temporary measures” in the form of arrests and detentions of individuals. This rather innovative mandate brings about several legal and conceptual consequences that the article addresses, focusing on the compatibility of these measures with UN peacekeeping norms and principles and with past UN practice. In addition, the measures are said to contribute to law and order, public safety, the fight against impunity, and to the rule of law. This sheds light on the UN’s interesting conception of the rule of law in the Central African Republic and in conflict and post-conflict settings in general.
  • Topic: International Law, United Nations, Conflict, Rule of Law
  • Political Geography: Africa, Central African Republic
  • Author: Severin Meier
  • Publication Date: 12-2019
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: The Goettingen Journal of International Law
  • Institution: The Goettingen Journal of International Law
  • Abstract: This article examines the extraterritorial application of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) during international armed conflict. After a brief discussion of the different historic origins of international human rights law and international humanitarian law (IHL), the article examines the test for establishing jurisdiction under Article 1 of the ECHR. A critical analysis of some contentious legal issues regarding derogations completes the picture of when jurisdiction is established. Subsequently, the article considers the interaction between the ECHR and IHL in international armed conflicts and concludes by arguing that a balance must be found between protecting human rights in international armed conflicts while not interfering unduly with IHL.
  • Topic: Human Rights, International Law, Conflict
  • Political Geography: Europe
  • 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
  • Publication Date: 12-2019
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: Uluslararasi Iliskiler
  • Institution: International Relations Council of Turkey (UİK-IRCT)
  • Abstract: Criminal justice response to terrorism and to the support for terrorism is still a hot topic in Turkey due to ongoing American military support for the PYD, which is Syrian wing of the internationally designated terrorist organization PKK whose indiscriminate attacks in Turkey has claimed lives of thousands of civilians. This article first discusses, in light of recent developments, whether exclusion of a separate crime of terrorism from the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court can be a valid argument against Turkey’s accession to it. After discovering some of the possible contributions of Turkey’s Rome Statute accession to its decades-long struggle against terrorism, this study concludes that Turkey’s all other concerns regarding the accession should be periodically reevaluated.
  • Topic: International Law, Terrorism, International Criminal Court (ICC), Rome Statute
  • Political Geography: Turkey, Middle East, Mediterranean
  • 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: Ophir Falk
  • Publication Date: 05-2019
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: American Diplomacy
  • Institution: American Diplomacy
  • Abstract: Today, after years of modern terrorism and counterterrorism, the international community still does not agree on a single definition of terrorism. Despite the daily threats posed to many states, the definition conundrum prevents an agreed classification that could better facilitate the fight against terrorism and thwart the public legitimacy that most terrorist organizations seek. When a problem is accurately and acceptably defined, it should be easier to solve. Terrorism is an overly used term often heard in different discourses and contexts. It is used by the general public and in the course of academic, political, and legal debates, not to mention constantly referenced in the media. It may not be feasible to verse one universal definition for all discourses, but the term’s key criteria can and should be agreed upon.
  • Topic: International Law, Politics, Terrorism, Military Affairs, Violence, Hezbollah, White Supremacy
  • Political Geography: Middle East, Israel, North America, United States of America
  • 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: Swe Zin Linn Phyu
  • Publication Date: 12-2019
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: Review of Human Rights
  • Institution: Society of Social Science Academics (SSSA)
  • Abstract: In many non-Western societies there are still challenges to the legibility, and hence applicability, of international human rights law. This is partly due to the gap between Western legal regime and local cultural contexts. However, with the process of vernacularization some of this gap has been bridged, especially in issues of relating to women rights. This paper explores how NGOs and Human Rights defenders in Bangkok have adopted the process of vernacularization to enhance disability rights.
  • Topic: Human Rights, International Law, Disability, NGOs
  • Political Geography: Asia, Thailand, Southeast Asia, Bangkok
  • 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: Ziad Al Achkar
  • Publication Date: 09-2018
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: The Journal of Diplomacy and International Relations
  • Institution: School of Diplomacy and International Relations, Seton Hall University
  • Abstract: The Arctic region has not traditionally been the focus of international politics and world economics; however, recently environmental scientists have flooded the news with the effects of global warming in the region concerning the significant melting ice caps, dramatic ecological degradation, and potential irreversible loss of many species. Climate change is manifesting around the world through floods, ecological degradation, and potentially driving violence and conflict; in the Arctic, all these risks are compounded. The nature of the Arctic pole means that what will happen in the region is guaranteed to have an impact elsewhere. While environmentalists have sounded the alarm about the risks to the environment in the region, there is an ever-growing security danger that faces the Arctic. With ice caps melting and retreating to unprecedented levels, the arctic seabed is now open for nations to explore its reported vast amount of natural resources. This article will identify issues that will shape the twenty-first century of the Arctic. The scope of the article is not meant to be exhaustive of the problems and challenges but offer a thematic overview of the problems. There are three broad categories covered in this article. First, an overview of the changing climate, its ecological and environmental impact, and the challenges of operating in the Arctic. Second, an overview of the economics and international law implications that are a result of climate change and of increased activity in the region. Third, the geopolitics of the Arctic region.
  • Topic: Climate Change, Environment, International Law, Treaties and Agreements
  • Political Geography: Russia, Canada, Norway, Denmark, Greenland, Arctic, United States of America
  • 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: Till Patrik Holterhus
  • 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 demonstrates that Arts. 21 and 3 (5) of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) as well as Arts. 205, 207 (1), 208 (1), 209 (2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), legally oblige the European Union (EU) to promote the rule of law in its foreign trade and development policy. Furthermore, it is shown that, in the context of such promotion, the EU applies not a rudimentary but a sophisticated concept of the rule of law – quite similar to the concept of the rule of law that has developed within the Union. To fulfill the legal obligation to promote the rule of law abroad, the EU employs, as a key instrument, the legal mechanism of conditionality, not only through autonomous instruments but also in its contractual international relationships (carrot-and-stick policy). The EU’s foreign policy in the trade and development nexus, in particular when it comes to the promotion of the rule of law, can, therefore, be considered a process, to a large extent, determined and organized the of law.
  • Topic: International Law, International Trade and Finance, Sovereignty, European Union
  • Political Geography: Europe
  • Author: Floris Tan
  • 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 examines an underexplored avenue for the protection of the rule of law in Europe: Article 18 of the European Convention on Human Rights. This provision prohibits States from restricting the rights enshrined in the European Convention for any other purpose than provided for in the Convention. In this contribution, the author argues, based on a combination of textual, systematic and purposive interpretations of Article 18, that the provision is meant to safeguard against rule of law backsliding, in particular because governmental restrictions of human rights under false pretenses present a clear danger to the principles of legality and the supremacy of law. Such limitations of rights under the guise of legitimate purposes go against the assumption of good faith underlying the Convention, which presupposes that all States share a common goal of reinforcing human rights and the rule of law. Article 18 could therefore function as an early warning that European States are at risk of becoming an illiberal democracy or even of reverting to totalitarianism and the destruction of the rule of law. The article then goes on to assess the extent to which the European Court’s case-law reflects and realizes this aim of rule of law protection, and finds that whereas the Court’s earlier case-law left very little room for an effective application of Article 18, the November 2017 Grand Chamber judgment in Merabishvili v. Georgia has made large strides in effectuating the provision’s raison d’être. As the article shows, however, even under this new interpretation, challenges remain.
  • Topic: Human Rights, International Law, Rule of Law
  • Political Geography: Europe
  • Author: Astrid Wiik, Frauke Lachenmann
  • Publication Date: 12-2018
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: The Goettingen Journal of International Law
  • Institution: The Goettingen Journal of International Law
  • Abstract: Rule of law (RoL) promotion has become a go-to-tool in the complex process of stabilizing and rebuilding (post-)conflict States. The process is driven by a heterogeneous group of national, foreign, and international actors who define and prescribe RoL norms and standards, who programme, finance, implement, and eventually monitor RoL reforms. While the legitimacy and effectiveness of RoL promotion has undergone scrutiny, particularly within the overall context of international development assistance, an aspect that has so far received little attention is the legality of RoL promotion. This concerns both the mandate of the various actors and the execution of RoL activities on the ground. Since 2001, the international community has intensely supported the RoL in Afghanistan rendering it a veritable testing ground for RoL promotion. The article explores the legal framework for actors in RoL promotion in Afghanistan from 2001 up to the present day, with a focus on the German Government, its development cooperation agencies, and private non-governmental organizations (NGOs). The article shows that while detailed rules bind the monitoring and evaluation of RoL activities in line with the existing international frameworks for development assistance, few laws and principles guide the programming and implementation of RoL promotion. The existing standards are generally too abstract to guide specific RoL promotion activities. Further concretization and harmonization is necessary in the interest of the sustainability of RoL promotion in Afghanistan – and elsewhere.
  • Topic: International Law, Non State Actors, Governance, Rule of Law
  • Political Geography: Afghanistan, Middle East
  • 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
  • Author: Tuğçe Kelleci, Marella Bodur Ün
  • Publication Date: 01-2018
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: Uluslararasi Iliskiler
  • Institution: International Relations Council of Turkey (UİK-IRCT)
  • Abstract: Third World Approaches to International Law (TWAIL) points to the interactions between international law and colonial legacy and problematizes the concepts of humanitarian intervention and the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) within this framework. Humanitarian intervention is usually discussed in relation to its legitimacy in international law and the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) resolutions. TWAIL, however, analyzes those interventions that are constructed through discourses of human rights and democracy, highlighting the importance of issues other than legality and legitimacy. A historical reading of the Libyan case through the prism of TWAIL not only provides us with an opportunity to assess TWAIL’s assumptions in relation to international law, humanitarian intervention and R2P but also reveals how international law and R2P are used to legitimize interventions of the West into the Third World.
  • Topic: International Law, Humanitarian Intervention, Responsibility to Protect (R2P), UN Security Council
  • Political Geography: Libya, North Africa
  • Author: José Ángel López Jiménez
  • Publication Date: 12-2018
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: Journal on International Security Studies (RESI)
  • Institution: International Security Studies Group (GESI) at the University of Granada
  • Abstract: The abrupt Soviet Union´s dissolution came accompanied by a whole of different typology of conflicts causing high complexity in the convulsed independent statehood construction process. Secessionism in cascade of territorial and administrative entities have been a useful tool in Kremlin´s hand in order to enhance their interests in the post-soviet space. Russian Foreign Policy in shared neighborhood with Eastern European Union borders has an absolute priority in their interests-defined in strategic documents- infringing the main Contemporary International Law principles. Russian interventionism in the independent republics acquires different modalities since the 2008 summer- with Russian armed forces penetrating in Georgia and supporting Abjasia and South Ossetia secessionist movements- are even increasing these actions. In 2014, with Crimea´s annexation and the conflict in Ukraine -Eastern districts-, Russian expansionism seems to be reached a road without return. Specially due to international community inaction and Russia´s return to a protagonist role in a multipolar order in construction.
  • Topic: Foreign Policy, International Law, Territorial Disputes, Conflict
  • Political Geography: Russia, Eurasia
  • Author: Jumoke Adegbonmire
  • Publication Date: 12-2018
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: Review of Human Rights
  • Institution: Society of Social Science Academics (SSSA)
  • Abstract: State responsibility is a cardinal principle of international law. The doctrine of State sovereignty under international law accords States’ legal personality and requires that they fulfill international obligations. International law imposes obligations on States to perform their duties in ensuring that a breach of international law does not go unpunished. Consequences for such actions means that States need to adhere to procedural and substantive law in addition to offering reparation for the violation of an international obligation. In the past, violation of an international obligation was only attributed to States as they were considered to be the only entity that could possess rights and duties within the international sphere. Therefore States were considered to be the only ones that could be criminally liable for acts that could be attributed to them. But the development in human rights law and the advent of rules governing personal criminal responsibility has extended the scope of international obligations under international law to include States and individuals as being liable for international crimes. The international law disallows immunity from prosecution in foreign domestic courts for the most serious crimes: Re-Pinochet case. This means State responsibility and individual responsibility for wrongful acts are not mutually exclusive.
  • Topic: Crime, Human Rights, International Law, Torture, Extradition
  • Political Geography: Turkey, Saudi Arabia
  • Author: Joseph P. Alessi
  • Publication Date: 03-2018
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: Studies of Changing Societies Journal (SCS)
  • Institution: Studies of Changing Societies Journal (SCS)
  • Abstract: To be successful in today's world, leaders must understand the idea of culture. When the word culture is associated with leadership, many might first think of the culture that leadership creates within the framework of an organization. But for leaders who must operate in a tumultuous world connected by modern media, the word literally refers to the understanding of the people and places where they intend to inject themselves. Where Fools Rush In is a study of the failed U.N. and U.S. interventions to create stability and political reconciliation in Somalia from 1992 to 1995, due to the cultural misunderstanding of U.N. and U.S. leaders that created flawed mission objectives. World leaders must make difficult decisions when intervening in the political and social strife of nations when faced with the reality of human catastrophe and genocide. The questions will always remain as to if, how much, and what kind of intervention must occur. The choices are simple: standby, do nothing and watch, or intervene. What international leaders must understand is that, regardless of the boundaries and governmental systems implanted in former colonial and Cold War territories, the people developed their own systems of social organization and governance that predated European or U.S intrusion. When chaos erupts in these areas and the vestiges of these former systems collapse, the indigenous people more often than not return to their deeply entrenched cultural systems to create stability in these regions. Therefore, it is paramount for intervening parties to fully understand these cultural systems and implications if they hope to achieve any level of success. Ultimately, U.N. and U.S. leaders failed in Somalia because they failed to understand the people and their culture. Rather, they ignored it and viewed the situation from purely an ethnocentric western political perspective.
  • Topic: International Law, United Nations, Humanitarian Intervention, Conflict, Violence
  • Political Geography: Africa, Europe, North America, Somalia, United States of America
  • Author: Monica M. Ruiz
  • Publication Date: 07-2017
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: Fletcher Security Review
  • Institution: The Fletcher School, Tufts University
  • Abstract: There are often misunderstandings among member states in international organizations (IO) regarding the legal nature of certain acts. Issues of privileges and immunities based on the principle of functional necessity, both inherent and implied powers, and the principle of good faith under common law are continuously criticized and debated by both member states and IOs alike. For this reason, international legal order can be a process of continuous transition and constant evolution. This essay analyzes the development and changes of legal norms in the European Union’s (EU) Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP). On that basis, it will unfold by looking at the EU’s legal structure to create a solid framework for understanding the current challenges for common European defense policy in relation to Russia’s involvement in Ukraine. Although there have been substantial legal improvements introduced by the Treaty of Amsterdam (effective 1999) and by the Treaty of Nice (effective 2003) to help clarify the ambiguous nature of the CFSP, its objectives remain wide and abstract. This further precludes the EU from formulating a joint and coherent stance on issues related to defense...
  • Topic: Security, Defense Policy, International Law, International Organization, Treaties and Agreements
  • Political Geography: Russia, Ukraine, European Union
  • Author: Tim Kluwen
  • Publication Date: 12-2017
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: The Goettingen Journal of International Law
  • Institution: The Goettingen Journal of International Law
  • Abstract: This article addresses the legality and desirability of States asserting universal jurisdiction without the suspect being present on their territory when prosecuting international crimes before domestic courts. First the legality under international law of States asserting universal jurisdiction in absentia (or absolute universal jurisdiction) will be discussed. No comprehensive regulation in this regard appears to exist in codified international law. Based on State practice, it would seem that no customary law either fully permits or entirely prohibits States asserting absolute universal jurisdiction. Applying the Lotus paradigm, it could arguably be concluded that the lack of a prohibition under international law results in States being allowed to assert universal jurisdiction in absentia when prosecuting certain international crimes. Having established its legality, this article will consequently approach absolute universal jurisdiction from a normative point of view, i.e. whether States should assert it. Although a tool in ending impunity of perpetrators of international crimes, it will be concluded that it is undesirable for States to assert absolute universal jurisdiction. Its use is likely to compromise fundamental rights of the accused and has a destabilizing effect on international relations while only suboptimally serving the goals of criminal prosecution.
  • Topic: International Law, Territorial Disputes, Courts, Jurisdiction
  • Political Geography: Global Focus
  • Author: Ezequiel Heffes, Brian E. Frenkel
  • Publication Date: 12-2017
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: The Goettingen Journal of International Law
  • Institution: The Goettingen Journal of International Law
  • Abstract: In the last few decades, the role of non-state armed groups has become an essential topic of analysis and discussion to better understand international humanitarian law dynamics. While their increasing importance is uncontroversial, their place and regulation in specific areas of international law still remains unclear or insufficiently explored. Chief among these is the possible non-state armed groups’ international responsibility. Although it is undisputed that some of these entities breach their international law obligations, others seemingly engage with certain rules on the topic. This article addresses some legal consequences of such scenarios. Taking into account the principle of equality of belligerents in non- international armed conflicts, two issues are dealt with: i) the existence of “non- state” organs that could trigger the attribution of violations of international rules to non-state armed groups; ii) possible reparations owed by these non-state entities for their breaches during armed conflicts.
  • Topic: International Law, Non State Actors, Armed Conflict
  • Political Geography: Global Focus
  • Author: Tomas Restrepo
  • Publication Date: 12-2017
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: The Goettingen Journal of International Law
  • Institution: The Goettingen Journal of International Law
  • Abstract: Nearly half of the claims brought under the Energy Charter Treaty1 raise issues related to the modification of the Renewable Energy Support Schemes (RESs), but only two decisions have been published: Charanne and Eiser. This paper evaluates these decisions in light of the existing general practice on expropriation and Fair and Equitable Treatment, as well as from a pragmatic perspective in the context of climate change. The article concludes that tribunals should recognize reinforced stability to RESs under the ECT.
  • Topic: Climate Change, Energy Policy, Environment, International Cooperation, International Law, Renewable Energy
  • Political Geography: Global Focus
  • Author: Michal Pietkiewicz
  • Publication Date: 12-2017
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: Nowa Polityka Wschodnia
  • Institution: Faculty of Political Science and International Studies, Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń
  • Abstract: In the article the international legal status of the territory, and the territory of the state was ascertained, and the features of the legal status of a state border were identified. The main problem of the thesis is to show the causes of conflicts in determining the borders of the Central Asian states from the perspective of Russian scholars. The main issues of regulating international relations in the sphere of the delimitation of state borders under the international law in Central Asia are outlined.
  • Topic: International Law, Borders, State, Territory
  • Political Geography: Russia, Central Asia
  • Author: Pedro A. Villarreal
  • Publication Date: 06-2016
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: The Goettingen Journal of International Law
  • Institution: The Goettingen Journal of International Law
  • Abstract: The institutional decisions regarding the 2009–2010 influenza A(H1N1) pandemic displayed how the World Health Organization’s (WHO) role as the international organization in charge of coordinating the pandemic response amounts to an exercise of authority. Notably, the 11 June, 2009 Pandemic Declaration was grounded in the WHO’s guidelines that do not have a binding nature according to international law. However, this is not an obstacle for considering them as an act of authority, since their effects can constrain the decision-making of States. If these non-binding acts have an authoritative nature, then it is necessary to address various legitimacy issues that may be present. This is where the concept of international public authority (IPA) can prove useful, since it enables to combine the non-binding nature of Pandemic Declarations and the respective guidelines with broad legally-oriented figures such as transparency and accountability. The controversies surrounding the 2009 Pandemic Declaration illustrate how the strictly technical-scientific elements that led to such a decision were not necessarily harmonious with other aspects more related to political decision making in general, such as transparency and accountability. This can be considered as an example of how so-called ‘technocratic legitimacy’ sometimes generates friction with lato sensu ‘political legitimacy’. As the 2009–2010 pandemic period unraveled, it became clear that expertise-based legitimacy is not sufficient in itself to consider the act as generally legitimate. On the contrary, the strongest criticisms directed at the decision-making process of the WHO during this event were leveled against deficits of transparency and accountability. This article purports to discuss the issue of how both types of legitimacies, technical-scientific and political, are necessary components for deeming Pandemic Declarations as legitimate enough, since they amount to an exercise of international public authority.
  • Topic: International Law, World Health Organization, Public Health, H1N1
  • Political Geography: Global Focus
  • Author: Clemens A. Feinaugle
  • Publication Date: 06-2016
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: The Goettingen Journal of International Law
  • Institution: The Goettingen Journal of International Law
  • Abstract: The UN Declaration on the rule of law at the national and international levels seems to open new possibilities for listed terrorist suspects claiming legal protection or those seeking damages for harm caused by UN peacekeepers because the Declaration provides that the rule of law applies to the United Nations itself. However, the Declaration raises questions regarding the elements of the rule of law, its legal basis, and binding nature. This paper attempts a reconstruction of the UN Declaration and relevant UN practice under an international public authority perspective to explain and develop elements of the rule of law applicable to the UN, to determine its legal basis, and to investigate its binding nature. It argues, that since measures under Chapter VII must be effective if the UN wants to fulfil its purpose (Article 1 (1) UN Charter), the UN is bound by the rule of law insofar as “effective” measures require that related legitimacy concerns are addressed by rule of law safeguards.
  • Topic: International Law, Terrorism, United Nations, Peacekeeping, Legitimacy
  • Political Geography: Global Focus
  • Author: Peter H. Sand, Jonathan B. Wiener
  • Publication Date: 11-2016
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: The Goettingen Journal of International Law
  • Institution: The Goettingen Journal of International Law
  • Abstract: Inclusion of the topic ‘protection of the atmosphere’ in the current work programme of the UN International Law Commission (ILC) reflects the long overdue recognition of the fact that the scope of contemporary international law for the Earth’s atmosphere extends far beyond the traditional discipline of ‘air law’ as a synonym for airspace and air navigation law. Instead, the atmospheric commons are regulated by a ‘regime complex’ comprising a multitude of economic uses including global communications, pollutant emissions and diffusion, in different geographical sectors and vertical zones, in the face of different categories of risks, and addressed by a wide range of different transnational institutions. Following several earlier attempts at identifying cross- cutting legal rules and principles in this field (by, inter alia, the International Law Association, the UN Environment Programme, and the Institut de Droit International), the ILC has now embarked on a new codification/restatement project led by Special Rapporteur Shinya Murase – albeit hamstrung by a highly restrictive ‘understanding’ imposed by the Commission in 2013. This article assesses the prospects and limitations of the initial ILC reports and debates in 2014 and 2015, and potential avenues for progress in the years to come.
  • Topic: Climate Change, Environment, International Law, United Nations, Space
  • Political Geography: Global Focus
  • Author: Sondre Torp Helmersen
  • Publication Date: 11-2016
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: The Goettingen Journal of International Law
  • Institution: The Goettingen Journal of International Law
  • Abstract: This article examines the use of scholarship by the WTO Appellate Body. While it is not possible to say definitively how the Appellate Body views the legal status of scholarship in WTO dispute settlement, its use of scholarship will in practice determine its status. The article identifies three overall trends: the Appellate Body’s use of scholarship has declined, the Appellate Body uses scholarship mostly for matters of general international law (as opposed to WTO law), and the Appellate body has generally been careful in its use of scholarship. Possible explanations for these trends may include an increase in available precedents, the Appellate Body’s specialized role, criticism of the Appellate Body, and its members’ backgrounds.
  • Topic: International Cooperation, International Law, International Trade and Finance, World Trade Organization
  • Political Geography: Global Focus
  • Author: Tom Coppen
  • Publication Date: 11-2016
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: The Goettingen Journal of International Law
  • Institution: The Goettingen Journal of International Law
  • Abstract: Although the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) has the potential to create an effective international legal framework for controlling the international arms trade, much depends on the subsequent development of its legal framework. This article therefore analyzes how the ATT, as a multilateral arms control treaty, can develop its own legal framework in accordance with international law and what role the organs established by it can play in that process. It will be shown that in its current form the ATT has significant shortcomings that may prevent it from achieving this goal, but there certainly is room for the lawful development of its norms, which will depend on amassing political will and the establishment of practice.
  • Topic: Arms Control and Proliferation, Diplomacy, International Law, Treaties and Agreements, Military Affairs
  • Political Geography: Global Focus
  • Author: Valentin J. Schatz
  • Publication Date: 11-2016
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: The Goettingen Journal of International Law
  • Institution: The Goettingen Journal of International Law
  • Abstract: Illegal fishing in the Exclusive Economic Zones [EEZs] of developing coastal States is an urgent problem for the marine environment, global food security, and local economies. While past academic debate has predominantly focused on obligations of flag States to tackle so called IUU-fishing in the High Seas, the recent request for an advisory opinion submitted by the Sub-Regional Fisheries Commission to the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS, Case No. 21) has drawn attention to the fisheries regime of the EEZ. This article argues that the primary responsibility for fisheries management in the EEZ rests on the coastal State and that, so far, flag States have no obligation under customary international law to exercise their jurisdiction and control over vessels flying their flag which fish in the EEZ of other States. The article first gives an account of coastal State regulatory and enforcement jurisdiction. It outlines recent developments of the law by drawing on the jurisprudence of the ITLOS, particularly the recent M/V “Virginia G” Case. Further, the article undertakes to identify potential flag State obligations to combat illegal fishing in the EEZ. To that end, it provides an in-depth analysis of relevant binding and non-binding legal instruments such as the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, other multilateral treaties, bilateral fisheries treaties, and relevant soft-law instruments of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. The article also discusses the relevance of principles of international environmental law. Next, the article analyzes the nature and scope of potential flag State obligations, qualifying them as obligations of due diligence. Finally, the article concludes that, de lege lata, no persuasive evidence of established flag State obligations exists. The author suggests that the situation should be remedied by a new, fully binding legal instrument.
  • Topic: International Law, United Nations, Maritime Commerce, Fishing
  • Political Geography: Global Focus
  • Author: Michał Krotoszyński
  • Publication Date: 06-2016
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: Polish Political Science Yearbook
  • Institution: Polish Political Science Association (PPSA)
  • Abstract: As an interdisciplinary field of scholarship, transitional justice is still in its pre-theoretical stage, focusing mainly on the case and comparative studies, supported by general considerations concerning justice in the times of transition. To entrench the field as a distinct area of studies, a theory of transitional justice needs to be formulated. The article explores the possibility of making a step towards such a theoretical basis with the use of the tools of analytical philosophy, methodology and legal theory. First, drawing on Leszek Nowak’s procedure of idealisation, three basic models of responses to a painful past are formulated. Then, distinct transitional justice values are attributed to each of the models. Finally, with the use of Jerzy Kmita’s concept of humanistic interpretation, the article seeks to conceptualize the way in which these values – among other factors, such as the need to uphold the rule of law or to preserve the stability of a democratic system – influence the choice of a model of transitional justice response. Thus, the aim of the presented models – which I described in more detail elsewhere (Krotoszyński 2017) – is to provide a sound theoretical basis for some of the fundamental claims formulated in the field of transitional justice.
  • Topic: International Law
  • Political Geography: Global Focus
  • Author: Bistra Netkova
  • Publication Date: 01-2016
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: Journal of Liberty and International Affairs
  • Institution: Institute for Research and European Studies (IRES)
  • Abstract: Discrimination against women based on the fact that they are women is a deeply rooted practice in all societies. However, the level of discrimination varies greatly with the level of development of the given society and strongly influences and vice versa it is influenced by the status of women in a given society. Addressing this gender-based discrimination is a difficult task because it is closely linked to the concept of equality, and the state's action and inactions. The article establishes that the state parties' obligation is to ensure that there is no direct or indirect discrimination against women in their laws, sanctions, and other remedies, and those women are protected against discrimination in the public, as well as, in the private spheres.
  • Topic: Gender Issues, Human Rights, International Law, Discrimination, Affirmative Action
  • Political Geography: Global Focus