Search

Begin New Search Topic International Law Publication Year within 3 Years

11. Examining the Gap Between EU Fundamental Values in Theory and Practice: A Case Study of Macedonia’s Journey Toward EU Accession

Author:
Larisa Vasileska
Publication Date:
04-2024
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal of Liberty and International Affairs
Institution:
Institute for Research and European Studies (IRES)
Abstract:
The objective of this paper is to assess the gap between the EU’s commitment to its values and the fairness of its accession process, in particular the Macedonian journey to the EU, which is not only contradictory to the EU’s core values but also contradictory to the principle of equal rights and self-determination. For this purpose, the methodology consists of conducting qualitative analysis based on two bilateral agreements and analyzing the evolution of EU requirements and their implications. The paper argues that rather than enforcing the Copenhagen criteria and making the country’s pre-accession progress contingent on the strengthening of the rule of law, the EU has expended enormous effort in what was essentially a political bilateral dispute between states, with the resolution of the dispute to be replaced as a pre-accession criterion. The paper concludes that the EU should return to its fundamental values and prioritize merit-based criteria in the enlargement process, not a politically based decision.
Topic:
International Law, Bilateral Relations, European Union, Rule of Law, Values, Disputes, and Enlargement
Political Geography:
Europe and Macedonia

12. The Challenges of Normalizing Relations Between Belgrade and Pristina: Implications of the “Agreement on the Path to Normalization”

Author:
Mihajlo Vucic and Dragan Djukanovic
Publication Date:
04-2024
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal of Liberty and International Affairs
Institution:
Institute for Research and European Studies (IRES)
Abstract:
The article analyzes the process of normalizing relations between Belgrade and Pristina after adopting the Agreement on the Path to Normalization. The analytical framework of neorealism was used to explain that the normalization process was accelerated due to the war crisis in Eastern Europe. The international legal aspects of the agreement were scrutinized, based on the method of content analysis and comparative studies, to argue that the agreement is a legally binding treaty between two sides that respect each other’s international legal personality. The authors concluded that the European Union and the United States attempted to create new momentum in the decade-long and rather unsuccessful process by adopting the Agreement and the Annex on implementation. Thus, these documents were put in the context of relations between Belgrade and Pristina and broader European and regional levels of complex relations. In addition, the analysis concluded that the documents serve as new impulses in normalization as a continuous legal formalization of relations between the two sides based on international legal rules.
Topic:
International Law, Bilateral Relations, European Union, and Normalization
Political Geography:
Europe, Kosovo, Serbia, and Balkans

13. When the Exception Overtakes the Rule: COVID-19, Security Exemption Clauses, and International Investment Agreements

Author:
Kayla Maria Rolland
Publication Date:
02-2024
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Goettingen Journal of International Law
Institution:
The Goettingen Journal of International Law
Abstract:
In the trade and investment law regimes built in the post-war period, “security exemption clauses” were included within trade and investment agreements as a safety valve, permitting States to deviate from their commitments in the event that their security interests were implicated. Initially, these clauses were understood to be narrowly limited to instances of war and interstate conflict. With the rise of the national security state in the decades since, however, the concept of security interests has ballooned to encompass an ever-growing set of issues, with some fearing that the rules may become irrelevant. This has been particularly facilitated through “third generation” security exemption clauses and their inclusion of self-judging language. The COVID-19 pandemic in particular adds a new dimension to this phenomenon. As a case study analysis of the text of the Chile-Hong Kong, China SAR bilateral investment treaty (BIT) will demonstrate, it may be feasible for States to invoke security exemption clauses to justify measures taken in response to the COVID-19 pandemic in some contexts, particularly with third generation, self-judging security exemption clauses. The expanding notions of security exemption clauses have significant implications for the investor-State dispute system as a whole.
Topic:
Security, International Law, International Trade and Finance, Treaties and Agreements, COVID-19, and International Investment Agreements
Political Geography:
China and Global Focus

14. A Right to Come Within State Jurisdiction Under Non-Refoulement? Interpreting Article 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights in Good Faith Within the Context of Extraterritorial Migration Control

Author:
Laura Goller
Publication Date:
02-2024
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Goettingen Journal of International Law
Institution:
The Goettingen Journal of International Law
Abstract:
Externalizing borders for the purpose of shifting and avoiding responsibilities under human rights law is not a new phenomenon in the context of migration control. In the Mediterranean, European States have increasingly sought new measures of extraterritorial migration control to avoid being held responsible under cornerstones of international refugee law such as non-refoulement. In the precedent Hirsi Jamaa and Others v. Italy, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) established that the exercise of effective control over persons on the high seas amounts to the exercise of jurisdiction within the meaning of Art. 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). As a result, European States began to find new ways of controlling their borders. The focus on physically controlled ‘push-backs’ shifted to administratively controlled ‘pull-backs’. Cooperation with third States by equipping and training their coast guards has become a way for European States to avoid any direct contact with migrants, thereby avoiding triggering jurisdiction as defined by the current case law of the ECtHR. This paper focuses, first, on how ECtHR jurisprudence responds to new forms of extraterritorial migration control and, second, on how this concept of jurisdiction relates to the obligation of States to fulfill their international obligations in good faith. How can the object and purpose of an obligation be undermined if that obligation does not apply in the first place? While the realization of Hannah Arendt’s concept of ‘the right to have rights’ seems to depend in practice on the geographical location of the individual, this paper addresses the question of whether there might be a right to come within the jurisdiction of a State, in the sense of gaining access to a legal system, applying a good faith reading to non-refoulement.
Topic:
International Law, Migration, Borders, Jurisdiction, Non-refoulement, European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), and European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)
Political Geography:
Europe

15. Containing the Containment: Using Art. 16 ASR to Overcome Accountability Gaps in Delegated Migration Control

Author:
Almut Möller
Publication Date:
02-2024
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Goettingen Journal of International Law
Institution:
The Goettingen Journal of International Law
Abstract:
When the European Court of Human Rights found Italy responsible for push-backs on the high seas in Hirsi Jamaa based on Italy’s effective control over the individuals, it simultaneously solidified the concept of jurisdiction as a prerequisite of human rights obligations and provided States with deeper knowledge on how to avoid responsibility. Since then, instead of pushing the migrants back themselves, destination States increasingly delegate the task of migration control to third States. Under the guise of “capacity building”, they fund, train, and equip third States to exercise containment measures and carry out pull-backs. By way of bilateral agreements, destination States remain in control of the migration flow while avoiding any direct contact with the migrants that would trigger their human rights obligations. One example for this is the Italian-Libyan cooperation under the 2017 Memorandum of Understanding, which was renewed in 2020. Migrants intercepted by Libya are systematically detained in prisons under horrific conditions, which is in clear violation of their human rights. The present article explores ways to allocate responsibility on destination States for their involvement in those human rights violations notwithstanding the lack of jurisdiction. In particular, the article deals with the question whether the general international law of State responsibility is applicable alongside international human rights law. Responsibility for complicity, as lined out in Art. 16 of the Articles on State Responsibility for Internationally Wrongful Acts, is compared to the concept of due diligence obligations in international human rights law, dismissing the claim that the latter poses lex specialis. Subsequently, Art. 16 ASR’s substantive requirements are applied to the case study in order to test the provision’s capability to overcome the accountability gap.
Topic:
Human Rights, International Law, Migration, Accountability, and European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR)
Political Geography:
Europe, Libya, and Italy

16. Nigerien Law 2015-36: How a New Narrative in the Fight Against Smugglers Affects the Right to Leave a Country

Author:
Sarah Isabel Pfeiffer
Publication Date:
02-2024
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Goettingen Journal of International Law
Institution:
The Goettingen Journal of International Law
Abstract:
In 2015, the Republic of the Niger adopted an anti-migrant smuggling law (Law 2015-36) with direct involvement of the European Union (EU). Since then, concerns have been raised that this law constitutes a de facto travel ban for anyone moving northwards from Niger. Rather than addressing the involvement of the EU, this article will focus on the direct obligations of Niger, including those set by regional human rights agreements, as the country where the so-called cooperative migration control takes place. People on the move towards Libya will be a special focus as the most affected by the Nigerien law. First, the Nigerien law and its provisions will be described, in order to then assess whether the law and its application infringe the human right to leave any country including one’s own. Drawing from the findings of non-governmental organizations and the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights of Migrants, this article argues that Law 2015- 36 renders it impossible for non-Nigerien nationals to leave the country without risking their life and safety. Thus, Law 2015-36 infringes the right to leave. The third part explores possible justifications for the law with a focus on the interests of people on the move, the interests of bordering States, and national interests. It finds that Law 2015-36 is disproportionate and, in fact, impairs the essence of the right to leave, resulting in an unjustified interference. The concluding fourth part contains recommendations for possible amendments to the law.
Topic:
Human Rights, International Law, Migration, European Union, Smuggling, and Irregular Migration
Political Geography:
Africa, Europe, and Nigeria

17. Prosecuting Russia’s Crime of Aggression: A critical reflection

Author:
Sonia Boulos
Publication Date:
06-2024
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal on International Security Studies (RESI)
Institution:
International Security Studies Group (GESI) at the University of Granada
Abstract:
Since the beginning of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, international law has become a center piecein Ukraine’s war efforts. The Hyper response of legal and other international institutions have prompted some to call these developmentsas the “Ukraine moment”. Theterm suggeststhat the legal response to the war represents,potentially,atransformative moment for international law in its pursuit of justice. Focusing on the crime of aggression, the aim of this article is to answer the question whether the international response to the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine symbolizesgenuinelya transformativeinternational law moment
Topic:
International Law, Russia-Ukraine War, Aggression, and Double Standards
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, and Ukraine

18. Taiwan’s International Legal Standing: Navigating the Fragile Status Quo

Author:
Mahir Al Banna
Publication Date:
04-2024
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal of Liberty and International Affairs
Institution:
Institute for Research and European Studies (IRES)
Abstract:
This study aimed to discuss the legal limbo of Taiwan, whose political situation lies in a grey area of international law. Its legal status is ambiguous: while meeting the characteristics of a State, it is not recognized by other States so long as China claims it as a Chinese territory. The methodology developed in this study adopted the descriptive analytical approach to the different principles of international law, in addition to quantitative methods, which involved gathering data on cases, courts, and resolutions of international organizations, followed by thorough analysis. This research provided an in-depth investigation to critically assess Taiwan’s fragile status quo, threatened by a potential Chinese military intervention. The study found that the idea that Taiwan is deprived of legal status points out the shortcomings of international law. This study concluded that to overcome this tricky situation, Taiwan should take bold moves, such as making constitutional reforms to facilitate its independence.
Topic:
International Law, Status Quo, Recognition, and Use of Force
Political Geography:
China, Taiwan, and Asia

19. The Politics behind the EU-Rwanda Deal(s) and its Consequences

Author:
Kristof Titeca
Publication Date:
11-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
EGMONT - The Royal Institute for International Relations
Abstract:
On the 14th of October, the news emerged that the EU is in the final stages of a discussion to award €20 million to the Rwandan army for its operations in Mozambique – where it is fighting insurgents in the oil-rich Gabo Delgado province. It would be the second time in two years that the EU awards this amount under the European Peace Facility (EPF): it also did so in December 2022. At that time, the decision was met with anger in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), as it was already documented by the UN how the Rwandan Defense Forces (RDF) were supporting the M23 rebellion in Eastern DRC. In the meantime, this support has become clearer, with the last report from the UN Group of Experts from June 2024 extensively documenting the RDF operations with M23 in Eastern DRC. The news of potentially another €20 million is therefore met with anger in Congolese politics and society, primarily directed at the EU. It is a question which puzzles many: why does the EU want to award €20 million to the Rwandan army, in the midst of its violations of international law in Eastern DRC? This piece will unpack this question and reflect on the consequences for the regional dynamics and the EU.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, International Law, Politics, and European Union
Political Geography:
Africa, Europe, and Rwanda

20. The Practice, Promise and Peril of EU Lawfare

Author:
Steven Blockmans
Publication Date:
05-2024
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
International Centre for Defence and Security - ICDS
Abstract:
Power generates law and its interpretation, irrespective of whether it serves the cause of international justice. Despite its many shortcomings, the rules-based international order (RBIO) tries to advance that cause. But as a concept, the RBIO is now being rejected by China, Russia and parts of the so-called “Global South” for what they claim is the Western hegemonism and liberal values that underpin it. The fact that these countries have voluntarily signed up to the international covenants that enshrine the legal doctrines to strengthen the sovereign rights of weaker countries, especially in the context of economic relations, makes it hard to sympathise with the argument that the RBIO should be replaced by another concept, especially one that is advanced by autocracies. The RBIO has been partially shaped by the European Union (EU), a community of law that encodes the aspiration of “good global governance” in its constitutional DNA. With the waning “Brussels effect”—the soft power of EU law in shaping international rules and standards, the EU should consider how to instrumentalise the law to protect and promote its foreign policy interests, first and foremost the protection and promotion of the RBIO. This report unpacks the notion of “lawfare” and conducts a comparative analysis of such practices by the US, China, Russia, Ukraine, Turkey and others to assess the promise and peril of the EU using the power of the law to its strategic advantage.
Topic:
International Law, Sanctions, European Union, International Order, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Russia, China, Europe, Turkey, Ukraine, and United States of America