Featured

Feature post image

The European Court’s Admissibility Decision in Ukraine and the Netherlands v Russia: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly – Part II

In the first part of this post I talked about the (many) good things about the European Court’s admissibility decision in Ukraine and the Netherlands v Russia. In particular, the conclusion that Russia controlled the separatist areas of Eastern Ukraine from 2014 up to the oral hearing in the case in 2022 and (as the Court will inevitably find) to this day is legally and factually unimpeachable. It will be applied in all future cases dealing with the Ukrainian conflict. In this good category we can also include, albeit with a bit of hesitation, the Court’s approach to the jurisdiction issue regarding the downing of the MH17. Essentially the Court found that the missile that downed the MH17 was fired from Russian-controlled territory and that the plane was hit in the airspace above Russian-controlled territory, so that the spatial model of jurisdiction could apply here as well. It is therefore clear from the ample evidence before the Court that, unlike in the case of the artillery attacks discussed above, both the…

Read more

Recent Comments

Read the full article Read the full article Read the full article Read the full article

The European Court’s Admissibility Decision in Ukraine and the Netherlands v Russia: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly – Part I

Yesterday the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights delivered its much-anticipated decision on jurisdiction and admissibility in the interstate case of Ukraine and the Netherlands v. Russia (nos 8019/16, 43800/14 and 28525/20 – decision; press release). The Court declared the applications admissible, in a clear win for the applicant…

Read more

US – Origin Marking Requirement: Did the WTO Panel Get the Balance Right between Trade Security and National Security?

On 21 December 2022, the WTO Dispute Settlement Panel ruled against the United States (US) on the product labeling requirement for all goods from Hong Kong to be marked “China” as their country of origin. This requirement came from the executive order that then US President Donald Trump signed on 14 July…

Read more

Announcements: EU-Charter of Fundamental Rights and National Fundamental Rights Conference; CfS Canadian Yearbook of International Law; Internally Displaced Persons and International Refugee Law Event; CfP Irish Yearbook of International Law; Armed Conflicts and the Environment Webinar

1. Online Conference On the Relationship Between the EU-Charter of Fundamental Rights and National Fundamental Rights. The Wilhelm Merton Center for European Integration and International Economic Order at the Goethe University Frankfurt is is hosting their Online Conference “On the Relationship between the EU-Charter of Fundamental Rights and National Fundamental Rights” on 2 February 2023. Find…

Read more

The (Non-)Judicialisation of War: German Constitutional Court Judgment on Rescue Operation Pegasus in Libya of 23 September 2015 (Part 1)

Editor’s Note: This is the first of two posts discussing the ‘Rescue Operation Pegasus’ Judgment of the German Federal Constitutional Court. In the middle of the civil war in Libya in 2011 (before the start of the UN authorised military operation), the German…

Read more

Yanukovych Confirms He Invited Russian Intervention

In an interview with AP today, the ousted Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovych confirmed that he invited Russian military intervention in Ukraine. Readers will remember the Russian ambassador waiving of a letter to that effect in the Security Council, without actually making the copies of the letter available.

Read more

Holding States to Account for Gender-Based Violence: The Inter-American Court of Human Rights’ decisions in López Soto vs Venezuela and Women Victims of Sexual Torture in Atenco vs Mexico

In two recent decisions, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR) has affirmed the existing binding obligations of States to address gender-based violence against women by State and non-State actors. The López Soto vs Venezuela decision (published in November 2018) is the IACtHR’s first ruling on State…

Read more

Prolonged Occupation and Article 6(3) of the Fourth Geneva Convention: Why the International Court Got It Wrong Substantively and Procedurally

I recently gave a paper on prolonged occupation at a UN Roundtable on Legal Aspects of the Question of Palestine.  In the law of armed conflict, the notion of “prolonged occupation” is absent from the governing international instruments.  It has been little discussed…

Read more

Beyond the State: Our Shared Duties to Cooperate to Realize Human Rights during the Evolving Risks of a Global Pandemic

I was not expecting my University to land in global news reports this week (see here, here, here, and here, among others), because of its decision yesterday to temporarily move to online instruction after seeing a surge in COVID-cases barely two weeks into reopening…

Read more

Secondary Sanctions: A Weapon Out of Control? Part II: The legality of secondary sanctions under conventional law and the IMF’s tacit approval procedure for payment restrictions inspired by security concerns

The legality of so-called ‘non-UN’ or ‘autonomous’ sanctions has been amply debated in recent years. Discussion has arisen, for instance, on their compliance with the principle of non-intervention (see here), or their potential qualification as ‘third-party countermeasures’ (see e.g. here and…

Read more

Explore

Dapo Akande

Editor

Marko Milanovic

Editor

Diane Desierto

Editor

Devika Hovell

Editor

Tal Gross

Associate Editor

Mary Guest

Associate Editor

Gail Lythgoe

Associate Editor

Francisco-José Quintana

Associate Editor

Freya Baetens

Contributing Editor

Michael Fakhri

Contributing Editor

Douglas Guilfoyle

Contributing Editor

Monica Hakimi

Contributing Editor

Lorna McGregor

Contributing Editor

Anthea Roberts

Contributing Editor