magnify

Announcements: Human Rights Post-Docs at Hebrew Univ. Jerusalem & Freie Universität Berlin; Cultural Heritage Law Summer School in Geneva; Research/Team Lead Job at Red Cross; Whewell Professorship at Cambridge; New Additions to UN AV Library; New EJIL:Live! Extra!

Published on January 24, 2015        Author: 

1.  The Hebrew University of Jerusalem and the Freie Universität Berlin are now accepting applications for the second round  of Post-Doctoral Fellowships in their joint interdisciplinary program “Human Rights under Pressure – Ethics, Law and Politics” (HR-UP), funded by the German Research Foundation (DFG) and the Einstein Foundation Berlin. HR-UP offers researchers a unique opportunity to conduct cutting-edge research on the most pressing contemporary challenges for human rights, including issues arising from crises and emergencies, globalization and diversity. Post-doctoral fellows will participate in the full HR-UP program curriculum, including interdisciplinary colloquia and annual summer schools. The fellowship includes a monthly stipend of 1416 € + 103 € for material expenses awarded for a period of 12 months, with a possibility of extension up to 24 months. The deadline for applications is February 20th, 2015. For further information, and to apply, please visit here.

2.  The Geneva Summer Schools at the University of Geneva is excited to announce a 2015 summer school on “International Cultural Heritage Law” (22 June to 3 July 2015). The 2 week course taught in English is aimed at upper-year undergraduates, master’s degree students and PhD candidates in law and all other faculties, including art history, archaeology and anthropology. Practitioners, non-specialists and art enthusiasts may also apply. The summer school aims to develop the students’ awareness and general understanding of the main substantive themes of international cultural heritage law, namely: the trade in cultural objects; the restitution of stolen or looted artworks; the protection of cultural property in the event of armed conflict; the protection of the built heritage from natural and human-induced disasters; the safeguarding of the intangible cultural heritage and of the diversity of cultural expressions; the relationship between cultural heritage law and the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO); the settlement of cultural heritage disputes. The course will be taught by brilliant young scholars, renowned professors from various prestigious universities, as well as professionals from governmental agencies and international organizations. The University of Geneva staff comprises the team of the Art-Law Centre and of the UNESCO Chair in the International Law of the Protection of Cultural Heritage. Students must apply online. Course places are limited and enrollment is on a rolling basis so students are encouraged to apply early.

3.  In the framework of the co-operation between the ICRC and the British Red Cross to update the collection of practice of the ICRC’s study on customary international humanitarian law, the ICRC and the British Red Cross seek to recruit a senior research fellow/team leader to join the research team. To apply and for further information on the position, please visit here and search for the job title “Senior Research Fellow/Team Leader – International Humanitarian Law”.

4.  The University of Cambridge has announced a call for applications for the Whewell Professorship in International Law. See details here.

5.  New additions to the UN Audiovisual Library of International LawThe Codification Division of the UN Office of Legal Affairs is pleased to announce the launch of the European Union Lecture Series, which is now available on the UN Audiovisual Library of International Law website. It contains 13 lectures given by eminent European law practitioners on various subjects of the European Union. All interested parties are invited to visit the website.

6.  In case you missed it, a new episode of EJIL: Live Extra! is now online. In the new episode, EJIL Editor-in-Chief Joseph Weiler and Professor Andrew Clapham of the Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, Geneva, discuss Prof. Clapham’s new edition of Brierly’s Law of Nations. They touch on the process of writing in Brierly’s “voice”, what has changed in the 50 years since Brierly wrote his last edition, and the great achievement of this important and concise book.

Print Friendly
Filed under: Announcements and Events
 
 Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
Comments Off on Announcements: Human Rights Post-Docs at Hebrew Univ. Jerusalem & Freie Universität Berlin; Cultural Heritage Law Summer School in Geneva; Research/Team Lead Job at Red Cross; Whewell Professorship at Cambridge; New Additions to UN AV Library; New EJIL:Live! Extra!

The EU’s Human Rights Obligations in Relation to Policies with Extraterritorial Effects: Rejoinder to Enzo Cannizzaro

Published on January 23, 2015        Author: 

This post is a continuation of the EJIL:Debate! in EJIL vol. 25: 4 between Lorand Bartels and Enzo Cannizzaro on “The EU’s Human Rights Obligations in Relation to Policies with Extraterritorial Effects.”

I thank Professor Cannizzaro warmly for his thoughtful reply to my article, which extends it in several interesting directions. Professor Cannizzaro’s main point is that Article 3(5) and Article 21 TEU do not add anything to the EU’s existing human rights obligations insofar as they apply to conduct with mere extraterritorial effects. In some respects I agree with him. However, I would argue that there are some gaps that these provisions plug.

I agree, first of all, that there is some conduct with mere extraterritorial effects that is already covered by the EU’s fundamental rights obligations. Most obviously, there is a Soering-inspired obligation not to remove a person to a third country in which he or she would be at risk of harm (NS v. Secretary of State for the Home Department). But this is a special case, and I do not think that it follows, as does Professor Cannizzaro, that other conduct with mere effects in third countries is also covered. There is to my mind something particular about the EU’s (or a state’s) obligations in relation to a person that is at the relevant time on its territory, and this cannot so easily be translated into an obligation to prohibit exports of death penalty drugs or not to adopt an economic embargo on third states.

At a more general level, the problem is that in practice the high level of fundamental rights protection applicable domestically cannot automatically be extended to policies with mere extraterritorial effects. As my article details, with the exception of Soering scenarios, there have not been any CJEU decisions on whether fundamental rights obligations apply to measures with mere extraterritorial effects, and while the European Court of Human Rights has dealt with this, it has done so very inconsistently (Cf the contrasting decisions in Kovačič (ECtHR, admissibility, 9 Oct 2003) and Ben El Mahi (ECtHR, 11 Dec 2006)). My suspicion is that the CJEU will avoid the problem of extending domestic levels of protection to measures with extraterritorial effects not by applying a dual standard, but rather by not applying fundamental rights obligations to measures in the first place. Read the rest of this entry…

Print Friendly
 
 Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
Comments Off on The EU’s Human Rights Obligations in Relation to Policies with Extraterritorial Effects: Rejoinder to Enzo Cannizzaro

The EU’s Human Rights Obligations in Relation to Policies with Extraterritorial Effects: Rejoinder to Enzo Cannizzaro

Published on January 23, 2015        Author: 

This post is a continuation of the EJIL:Debate! in EJIL vol. 25: 4 between Lorand Bartels and Enzo Cannizzaro on “The EU’s Human Rights Obligations in Relation to Policies with Extraterritorial Effects.”

I thank Professor Cannizzaro warmly for his thoughtful reply to my article, which extends it in several interesting directions. Professor Cannizzaro’s main point is that Article 3(5) and Article 21 TEU do not add anything to the EU’s existing human rights obligations insofar as they apply to conduct with mere extraterritorial effects. In some respects I agree with him. However, I would argue that there are some gaps that these provisions plug.

I agree, first of all, that there is some conduct with mere extraterritorial effects that is already covered by the EU’s fundamental rights obligations. Most obviously, there is a Soering-inspired obligation not to remove a person to a third country in which he or she would be at risk of harm (NS v. Secretary of State for the Home Department). But this is a special case, and I do not think that it follows, as does Professor Cannizzaro, that other conduct with mere effects in third countries is also covered. There is to my mind something particular about the EU’s (or a state’s) obligations in relation to a person that is at the relevant time on its territory, and this cannot so easily be translated into an obligation to prohibit exports of death penalty drugs or not to adopt an economic embargo on third states.

At a more general level, the problem is that in practice the high level of fundamental rights protection applicable domestically cannot automatically be extended to policies with mere extraterritorial effects. As my article details, with the exception of Soering scenarios, there have not been any CJEU decisions on whether fundamental rights obligations apply to measures with mere extraterritorial effects, and while the European Court of Human Rights has dealt with this, it has done so very inconsistently (Cf the contrasting decisions in Kovačič (ECtHR, admissibility, 9 Oct 2003) and Ben El Mahi (ECtHR, 11 Dec 2006)). My suspicion is that the CJEU will avoid the problem of extending domestic levels of protection to measures with extraterritorial effects not by applying a dual standard, but rather by not applying fundamental rights obligations to measures in the first place. Read the rest of this entry…

Print Friendly
 
 Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
Comments Off on The EU’s Human Rights Obligations in Relation to Policies with Extraterritorial Effects: Rejoinder to Enzo Cannizzaro

ICJ to Hand Down Croatia v. Serbia Genocide Judgment on 3 February

Published on January 22, 2015        Author: 

As reported in Serbian and Croatian media yesterday, and officially confirmed by the Court today (press release). As for what the Court will decide, it will most likely find that no crime in the conflict in Croatia constitutes genocide, that it lacks the jurisdiction to decide on the responsibility of either state for any other crime, and that accordingly it has to reject both Croatia’s claim and Serbia’s counterclaim. By ‘most likely’ read ‘virtually inevitable, so that I would fall of my chair if the Court did anything else’ – see more here.  We’ll see whether the Court will say something interesting on various ancillary substantive questions before it reaches its main conclusion.

Print Friendly
 

Guest Editorial: Ten Years of ESIL – Reflections

From time to time, we are asked about the relationship between EJIL and the European Society of International Law (ESIL). That relationship is simple: the Journal and the Society are two separate, but mutually supportive and complementary entities. Indeed, past and present EJIL Editors can boast, with parental pride, of having been present at the conception, as well as the birth, of the Society! From its inception, membership in ESIL has included automatic online and print subscriptions to EJIL – including very soon a tablet version. The relationship has only strengthened in recent years, with ESIL Presidents and Presidents-elect serving ex officio on the EJIL Board. It is in the spirit of that growing bond that we wholeheartedly share in ESIL’s 10-year celebrations, and have invited the following Guest Editorial from its leadership.

Ten years ago, the European Society of International Law (ESIL) organized its Inaugural Conference in Florence. Some papers were later published in the Baltic Yearbook of International Law but, other than that, most presentations at the event have long been forgotten. Yet that event was one of those moments where the participants still proudly recall that they were there: yes, I was there in Florence when ESIL started, I was there when the seed was planted.

Ten years later, although ESIL has matured rapidly with the development of a wide array of activities, the Society is still in its formative stage. There is a real sense that ESIL is beginning to realize its enormous potential for understanding and influencing international law in Europe and throughout the world. But this is not a self-propelling process. On a day-to-day basis, critical choices have to be made on the directions in which the Society can and should evolve. Read the rest of this entry…

Print Friendly
Filed under: Editorials, EJIL, EJIL Analysis
 
 Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
Comments Off on Guest Editorial: Ten Years of ESIL – Reflections

European Hypocrisy: TTIP and ISDS

Published on January 21, 2015        Author: 

I

For some, the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) in and of itself has become in many European (and American) circles, the enemy: another manifestation of unchecked globalization, the march of Capital trumping social, environmental and other  rights, an unhealthy embrace of the Americans from whose clutches we have painfully managed to extricate ourselves, et cetera. Yes, there is some sarcasm or irony in the above, but visit the blogs and you will see where it comes from. My sarcasm should not be taken as a dismissal of all or any of these concerns. TTIP is far from Snow White. The concerns are not entirely fanciful. It is the final objective I oppose: a no-holds-barred attack on TTIP with the objective of tanking the whole agreement. If this is your view, do not waste your time here and skip to another item.

A wholesale defeat of TTIP, if achieved, will, I believe, be a big time Pyrrhic victory ̶ a hugely missed opportunity for the polities and the peoples of these polities.

I support the TTIP for two obvious and banal reasons. First, there is every reason to believe that on aggregate it will contribute significantly to an increase in welfare in both polities, enhance growth, contribute to stability and constitute another tool, in an embarrassingly empty toolkit, to combat future transatlantic-generated economic shocks. A large and often unspoken asset of TTIP rests not with the content of the various substantive disciplines but in establishing a culture of joint conversation, regulation and management. It will counter the litigious and confrontational culture of the WTO, where the EU and the USA find themselves typically as rivals and antagonists. Constructivist theory actually has something to say here as do the insights of Global Administrative Law scholarship. Read the rest of this entry…

Print Friendly
 
Tags:

New Issue of EJIL (Vol. 25: No. 4) Published; New EJIL:Live! Extra!

Published on January 21, 2015        Author: 

The latest issue of the European Journal of International Law (Vol. 25, No. 4) is out today. As usual, the table of contents of the new issue is available at EJIL’s own website, where readers can also access those articles that are freely available without subscription. The free access article in this issue is Kristina Daugirdas’s Reputation and the Responsibility of International Organizations. We will hold a discussion of the article on the blog in the coming months. This week on the blog, we will continue this issue’s EJIL:Debate! on “The EU’s Human Rights Obligations in Relation to Policies with Extraterritorial Effects” with a rejoinder by Lorand Bartels. Subscribers have full access to the latest issue of the journal at EJIL’s Oxford University Press site. Apart from articles published in the last 12 months, EJIL articles are freely available on the EJIL website.

Also, a new episode of EJIL: Live Extra! is now online. In the new episode, EJIL Editor-in-Chief Joseph Weiler and Professor Andrew Clapham of the Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, Geneva, discuss Prof. Clapham’s new edition of Brierly’s Law of Nations. They touch on the process of writing in Brierly’s “voice”, what has changed in the 50 years since Brierly wrote his last edition, and the great achievement of this important and concise book.

Print Friendly
 
 Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
Comments Off on New Issue of EJIL (Vol. 25: No. 4) Published; New EJIL:Live! Extra!

Roll of Honour and Masthead Changes

Published on January 20, 2015        Author: 

Roll of Honour

EJIL relies on the good will of colleagues in the international law community who generously devote their time and energy to act as peer reviewers for the large number of submissions we receive. Without their efforts our Journal would not be able to maintain the excellent standards to which we strive. A lion’s share of the burden is borne by members of our Boards, but of course we also turn to many colleagues in the broader community. We thank the following colleagues for their contribution to EJIL’s peer review process in 2014:

Tilmann Altwicker, Dia Anagnostou, Stelios Andreadakis, Asli Bâli, Arnulf Becker Lorca, Catherine Brölmann, Gian Luca Burci, Damian Chalmers, Cai Congyan, Kristina Daugirdas, Richard Gardiner, Lech Garlicki, Matthias Goldmann, Hans Morten Haugen, Laurence Helfer, Ian Johnstone, Alexandra Kemmerer, Jan Komárek, Dino Kritsiotis, Jürgen Kurtz, Ulf Linderfalk, David Malone, Petros Mavroidis, Frédéric Mégret, Carrie Menkel-Meadow, Joanna Mossop, Jens Ohlin, Jacqueline Peel, Cecily Rose, Arie Rosen, Nicole Roughan, Martin Scheinin, Iain Scobbie, Ingo Venzke, Steven Wheatley, Nigel White.

Masthead Changes

The growth and development of any organization, even a journal, depends on the strength of its foundations. In the case of EJIL, those foundations are represented by its Board of Editors and its Scientific Advisory Board. To maintain their strength, the EJIL Boards benefit from change and renewal. Thus, I would like to sincerely thank Anne Peters, who has stepped down from the Board of Editors, for her dedicated commitment and service to the Journal. Anne has now assumed a leadership role in the newly established Journal of the History of International Law. We wish the new journal (and Anne) every success. Thanks also go to Francesco Francioni and Hélène Ruiz Fabri who have come to the end of their term on the Board of Editors, but will continue their valuable contribution to the Journal in the Scientific Advisory Board. Dapo Akande, Anthea Roberts and the newly-elected ESIL President, André Nollkaemper, have joined the Board of Editors. Finally, we welcome Jean d’Aspremont, Jan Klabbers, Sarah Nouwen and Anne van Aaken to the Scientific Advisory Board.

Print Friendly
Filed under: Editorials, EJIL
 

EJIL Volume 25:4–In This Issue

Published on January 20, 2015        Author: 

This issue opens with a short, reflective article by Jochen von Bernstorff on the proper role of international legal scholarship. Recapitulating themes and concerns sounded in other articles published earlier in this volume – see, especially, Anne Orford’s ‘Keynote’ and the article by Tilmann Altwicker and Oliver Diggelmann, both in issue 2 – von Bernstorff points to the problematic legacies of positivist 19th-century legal thought and argues that scholarship has the potential to act as a ‘cooling medium’ for international law and politics. In the next article in the issue, Kristina Daugirdas makes a not-dissimilar case for the importance of the Draft Articles on the Responsibility of International Organizations. Taking the 2010 cholera outbreak in Haiti as a case study, Daugirdas argues that the Articles may turn out to provide a useful focal point for ‘transnational discourse’ among states and non-state actors about the compliance of international organizations with international law, thereby ultimately accruing to their legitimacy and effectiveness.

Our third article, by Richard Bellamy, continues with the theme of the legitimacy of international organizations. Bellamy takes on political constitutionalist objections that international human rights courts, such as the European Court of Human Rights, lack democratic legitimacy. Rather than reject the premises of those objections he shows how an argument consistent with those premises may be constructed in favour of the European Court of Human Rights. The fourth article in this issue also relates political philosophy to international law. In his article, Oisin Suttle bridges the gap between global justice theory and international economic law, developing a typology of international coercion that promises to illuminate a variety of problems and positions in the regulation of international trade. Look out for the EJIL: Live! interview with Oisin Suttle in which we discuss some of the issues raised by this stimulating article.

Under our regular EJIL: Debate! rubric, Lorand Bartels brings us back to the legal obligations of international organizations. Bartels’ article considers the human rights obligations imposed on the European Union under EU law, in particular in relation to the extraterritorial effects of EU policy measures; and Enzo Cannizzaro provides a thoughtful Reply. The debate will continue on EJIL: Talk! with a Rejoinder by Lorand Bartels to Enzo Cannizzaro. Readers are invited to join the discussion there.

Read the rest of this entry…

Print Friendly
Filed under: Editorials, EJIL
 
 Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
Comments Off on EJIL Volume 25:4–In This Issue

New Issue of EJIL (Vol. 25: No. 4) Out Wednesday

Published on January 19, 2015        Author: 

The latest issue of the European Journal of International Law will be published Wednesday. Beginning tomorrow, we will have a series of posts by Joseph Weiler – Editor in Chief of EJIL – plus a Guest Editorial by Laurence Boisson de Chazournes and André Nollkaemper, respectively, former and current Presidents of ESIL. These posts will appear in the Editorial in the upcoming issue. Here is the Table of Contents:

Editorial

Guest Editorial: Ten Years of ESIL – Reflections; European Hypocrisy: TTIP and ISDS; Masthead Changes; Roll of Honour; In this Issue; Christmas Reading? Christmas Gifts? Some Suggestions from the Editor-in-Chief

Articles

Jochen von Bernstorff, International Legal Scholarship as a Cooling Medium in International Law and Politics

Kristina Daugirdas, Reputation and the Responsibility of International Organizations

Richard Bellamy, The Democratic Legitimacy of International Human Rights Conventions: Political Constitutionalism and the European Convention on Human Rights

Oisin Suttle, Equality in Global Commerce: Towards a Political Theory of International Economic Law

EJIL: Debate!

Lorand Bartels, The EU’s Human Rights Obligations in Relation to Policies with Extraterritorial Effects

Enzo Cannizzaro, The EU’s Human Rights Obligations in Relation to Policies with Extraterritorial Effects: A Reply to Lorand Bartels

Roaming Charges: Places of Permanence and Transition: On the Mekong River

The European Tradition in International Law

Helmut Philipp Aust, From Diplomat to Academic Activist: André Mandelstam and the History of Human Rights

Reut Yael Paz, A Forgotten Kelsenian? The Story of Helen Silving-Ryu (1906-1993)

Critical Review of International Governance

Thomas Schultz and Cédric Dupont, Investment Arbitration: Promoting the Rule of Law or Over-empowering Investors? A Quantitative Empirical Study

Review Essay

Elizabeth Stubbins Bates, Sophisticated Constructivism in Human Rights Compliance Theory. Review of Ryan Goodman and Derek Jinks, Socializing States: Promoting Human Rights Through International Law; Courtney Hillebrecht, Domestic Politics and International Human Rights Tribunals: The Problem of Compliance; Thomas Risse, Stephen C. Ropp, and Kathryn Sikkink (eds), The Persistent Power of Human Rights: From Commitment to Compliance

 Impressions

 Hanne Sophie Greve, A Dictionary of Maqiao – In Medias Res

 Book Reviews

Friedrich Kratochwil. The Status of Law in World Society: Meditations on the Role and Rule of Law (Jan Klabbers)

Isabel V. Hull. A Scrap of Paper. Breaking and Making of International Law during the Great War (Oliver Diggelmann)

Mark Levene. The Crisis of Genocide. Vol. I: Devastation. The European Rimlands 1912–1938. Volume II: Annihilation. The European Rimlands 1939–1953 (Peter Hilpold)

Marc Jacob. Precedents and Case-based Reasoning in the European Court of Justice: Unfinished Business; Valériane König. Präzedenzwirkung internationaler Schiedssprüche: Dogmatisch-empirische Analysen zur Handels- und Investitionsschiedsgerichtsbarkeit[The precedential effect of international arbitral awards: Doctrinal and empirical analyses of the Commercial and Investment Arbitration] (Niels Petersen)

The Last Page

 Jonathan Shaw, A Pronunciation Lesson

 

Print Friendly
 
 Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
Comments Off on New Issue of EJIL (Vol. 25: No. 4) Out Wednesday