magnify
Home Archive for category "EJIL"

New Issue of EJIL (Vol. 30 (2019) No. 1) – Now Published

Published on May 29, 2019        Author: 
Twitter
Facebook
Google+
LinkedIn
Follow by Email

The latest issue of the European Journal of International Law (Vol. 30 (2019) No. 1) is now out. As usual, the table of contents of the new issue is available at EJIL’s own website, where readers can access those articles that are freely available without subscription. The free access articles in this issue are Martti Koskenniemi’s Imagining the Rule of Law: Re-reading the Grotian ‘Tradition’ and Hannah Woolaver’s From Joining to Leaving: Domestic Law’s Role in the International Legal Validity of Treaty Withdrawal. EJIL 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.

 

 

 

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
 
Tags: ,

The EU – A Community of Fate, at Last; Vital Statistics

Published on May 28, 2019        Author: 
Twitter
Facebook
Google+
LinkedIn
Follow by Email

The EU – A Community of Fate, at Last

I have great sympathy for the outburst of Donald Tusk on special places in Hell. I believe I was just as harsh or even worse in writing about the Cameron folly. At the time of writing, the final act in the Brexit farce is still unfolding. I am one of those Europeans who genuinely regret the departure of the United Kingdom – and I am not thinking just of the material consequences, as most are prone to do. A Europe without the UK is diminished. But I also respect the sovereign decision of the British people and, equally, I will of course respect a sovereign decision to change course, should that happen. Responsibility for the current shambles rests primarily on the very issue which so taxed Tusk: going into the referendum without any serious governmental assessment of the hows and whats and whens.

Some responsibility also falls on the Union. I thought that the decision to postpone any discussion of future relations before the divorce terms were settled wasted a precious year of joint reflection, negotiations and preparations. I thought then and still think that there was no reason not to run both tracks in parallel so as to avoid the very crunch that we now face. In private, some European leaders have admitted such to me.

And finally, I continue to find it not credible that the combined public authorities of the Union, the UK and the Republic of Ireland cannot come up with a Frontstop solution on the lines proposed here, thus diffusing the most explosive stumbling block for some semblance of an orderly exit. Read the rest of this entry…

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Filed under: Editorials, EJIL
 
Tags: ,

EJIL at 30; The Birth of EJIL

Published on May 28, 2019        Author: 
Twitter
Facebook
Google+
LinkedIn
Follow by Email

Some things never seem to change. It was, I believe, with a keen eye on emerging talent, that we published Martti Koskeniemmi as the lead article in Volume I, Issue 1 of EJIL. We thought it was appropriate when we celebrated our 20th anniversary to invite him to revisit what had by then become a classic. And for our 30th anniversary we had known for some time that we would invite Koskenniemi to be the author of our annual Foreword article. Have we lost our keen eye for emerging talent? I do not think so (see our Vital Statistics below). Koskeniemmi is like a good wine or spirit that loses nothing of its bite and yet offers a particular savour and mellowness as it ages.

We debated how to mark EJIL’s 30th anniversary: after all, we published a special issue at 20 and another celebration at 25. I looked at my Editorial for our EJIL at 20 issue. In some ways, it is a bit like all living creatures. There is something in their defining characteristics that remains constant. There is not much that I would add to that Editorial.

Still, there has been some innovation in the last 10 years: Think EJIL: Talk! (celebrating its 10th Anniversary) EJIL: Live!, The Foreword, Roaming Charges and the Last Page, the Debates, and more.

For the sake of nostalgia we reproduce here the earliest letter we can find from the birth of EJIL. Please be sitting when you take a look and kindly suppress the guffaws. (Yes, what happened to the English/French idea…?) It was all in earnest and good faith. But has your life turned out to be as your parents thought and maybe hoped when you were born? Read the rest of this entry…

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Filed under: Editorials, EJIL
 
Tags: ,

EJIL Vol. 30 (2019) No. 1: In this Issue

Published on May 27, 2019        Author: 
Twitter
Facebook
Google+
LinkedIn
Follow by Email

This issue opens, as noted in the introductory Editorial, EJIL at 30, with Martti Koskenniemi’s Foreword.

In our Articles section Valentina Vadi focuses on the evolving field of international legal history, exploring the adequate scale and perspective in this realm and stressing the importance of a pluralist, inclusive approach based on micro-histories in contrast to the still prevailing macro-histories. Hannah Woolaver analyses the intricate interplay between the domestic and international levels with regard to states’ treaty consent both in relation to treaty entry and exit. Focusing on three prominent examples – Brexit, the possible US abandonment of the Paris Agreement, and South Africa’s potential departure from the International Criminal Court, she fills a research lacuna regarding international legal recognition for domestic rules of treaty withdrawal and argues for an invalidation of withdrawal in the event of manifest violation of domestic law. Claire Jervis concludes this section with her article, which scrutinizes the questionable substantive-procedural dichotomy in international law. Taking the International Court of Justice’s famous Jurisdictional Immunities case as a starting point, she points towards the fallacies inherent in this binary approach.

We introduce a new occasional Series – The Theatre of International Law – with a piece by Lorenzo Gradoni and Luca Pasquet, ‘Dialogue concerning Legal Un-certainty and other Prodigies’. Further submissions in this vein are welcome. Read the rest of this entry…

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Filed under: Editorials, EJIL
 
Tags: ,

New Issue of EJIL (Vol. 30 (2019) No. 1) Out Next Week

Published on May 25, 2019        Author: 
Twitter
Facebook
Google+
LinkedIn
Follow by Email

The latest issue of the European Journal of International Law will be published next week. Over the coming days, we will have a series of editorial posts by Joseph Weiler, Editor in Chief of EJIL. These posts will appear in the Editorial of the new issue. 

Here is the Table of Contents for this new issue:

Editorial

Editorial: EJIL at 30; The EU – A Community of Fate, at Last; Vital Statistics; In this Issue; The Birth of EJIL 

The EJIL Foreword

Martti Koskenniemi, Imagining the Rule of Law: Re-reading the Grotian ‘Tradition’

Articles

Valentina Vadi, Perspective and Scale in the Architecture of International Legal History

Hannah Woolaver, From Joining to Leaving: Domestic Law’s Role in the International Legal Validity of Treaty Withdrawal

Claire E.M. Jervis, Jurisdictional Immunities Revisited: An Analysis of the Procedure Substance Distinction in International Law Read the rest of this entry…

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
 
Tags: ,

Additions to the EJIL:Talk! Editorial Team

Published on March 19, 2019        Author: 
Twitter
Facebook
Google+
LinkedIn
Follow by Email

We area delighted to announce additions to the EJIL:Talk! team. From this month, we welcome three new Contributing Editors (well, 2 brand new contributing editors and one who is returning to the team):

Freya Baetens is Professor of Public International Law at the University of Oslo and affiliated with the Europa Institute at the Faculty of Law, Leiden University. As a member of the PluriCourts Centre at Oslo, she works on an interdisciplinary research project evaluating the legitimacy of international courts and tribunals.  Freya has acted as counsel or expert in international and European disputes and is listed on the Panel of Arbitrators and Conciliators of the International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), the South China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission (Shenzhen Court of International Arbitration) and the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre (HKIAC). She is a member of the Executive Council of the Society of International Law (SIEL).

Michael Fakhri is an Associate Professor at the University of Oregon School of Law where he teaches in the areas of international economic law, commercial law, and food and agriculture. He is a faculty member of the Environmental and Natural Resource Program where he co-leads the Food Resiliency Project .  His current research focuses on questions of food sovereignty, indigenous sovereignty, and agroecology – all in an effort to work through legal accounts of imperialism, race, and capitalism. Professor Fakhri’s other research interests include Third World Approaches to International Law (TWAIL) and international legal history. 

Douglas Guilfoyle, Associate Professor of International and Security Law at the University of New South Wales, Canberra returns to the blog as a Contributing Editor, having served in a similar capacity from 2012 to 2013. He was previously a Professor of Law at Monash University, Reader in Law at University College London, and has worked as a judicial associate in the Australian Federal Court and the Australian Administrative Appeals Tribunal. He has also practised as a commercial litigation solicitor in Sydney. His principal areas of research are maritime security, the international law of the sea, and international and transnational criminal law. Particular areas of specialism include maritime law-enforcement, the law of naval warfare, international courts and tribunals, and the history of international law. His research work is informed by his consultancy to various government and international organisations

The three new Contributing Editors will join Professors Monica Hakimi, Lorna McGregor and Anthea Roberts who will remain on the editorial team. 

Rotating off the team of Contributing Editors are Professors Anne Peters, Christian Tams and Andreas Zimmermann. We are greatly appreciative of their service to the blog over the past few years. The quality and quantity of their contributions have been of great significance. We hope that they will continue to contribute posts to the blog. Read the rest of this entry…

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
 

The Risk and Opportunity of the Humanisation of International Anti-Corruption Law: A Rejoinder to Kevin E. Davis and Franco Peirone

Published on February 18, 2019        Author: 
Twitter
Facebook
Google+
LinkedIn
Follow by Email

Editor’s note: In the EJIL: Debate! section of the latest issue of EJIL (Vol. 29 (2018) No. 4), Anne Peters presents her provocative and disrupting idea of corruption as a violation of international human rights. Kevin Davis and Franco Peirone respond to this challenging thesis and Anne Peters rejoins in this post. 

1. Doctrine and Policy

The two comments on my article “Corruption as a Violation of International Human Rights” challenge various elements of both the doctrinal analysis and the normative assessment. I had developed and defended two propositions: First, corrupt acts or omissions can under certain conditions technically be qualified as violating international human rights (notably social rights), although the difficulty to establish causality remains the most important doctrinal obstacle. Second, I argued normatively that the principal added value of a reconceptualization of corruption as a human rights violation is to offer complementary forums for redress, notably the international human rights mechanisms.

The two commentators raise very valuable points for which I am thankful. In this rejoinder, I focus only on two arguments which appear in both comments. Their first critical observation relates to the doctrinal analysis and to the problem of causation. Franco Peirone finds that “[t]he idea of identifying citizens as victims of corruption in a one-to-one relationship with the state is particularly problematic”, and he asks: “How is it possible to maintain that an individual has suffered a human rights violation because of state corruption?“ Along the same line, Kevin E. Davis points out that if a:

“national health care system is so underfunded that the state has clearly failed to satisfy its obligation to fulfil the right to health [, t]his does not necessarily mean that corruption is the cause of the human rights violation. For instance, it is possible that, if the funds had not been diverted, they would have been allocated to the military or to higher education. In this case, it cannot be said that the corruption has caused the failure to realize the right.”

The second critique relates to my policy assessment. Both commentators point out that the human rights sanctions and state responsibility for human rights violations will ultimately burden members of the general population of the corrupt state (as opposed to the criminal individual, e.g. bribe-taker or receiver of kick-backs). Read the rest of this entry…

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Filed under: EJIL, EJIL: Debate!, Human Rights
 
Tags:
Comments Off on The Risk and Opportunity of the Humanisation of International Anti-Corruption Law: A Rejoinder to Kevin E. Davis and Franco Peirone

New EJIL: Live! Interview with Dr Veronika Fikfak

Published on February 15, 2019        Author: 
Twitter
Facebook
Google+
LinkedIn
Follow by Email

In this episode of EJIL: Live! the Editor-in-Chief of the Journal, Professor Joseph Weiler, speaks with Dr Veronika Fikfak, Senior Lecturer in Law at the University of Cambridge, whose article “Changing State Behaviour: Damages before the European Court of Human Rights”, appears in EJIL’s 29:4 issue.

In her pioneering article, Dr Fikfak analyses the ECtHR’s practice of awarding damages. She and a team of researchers spent three years coding 12,000 decisions of the Court, seeking to understand which variables in a case – relating to the victim, the state and the events that occurred – affect the amount of damages awarded and subsequent compliance. In this conversation Dr Fikfak talks about her motivation for undertaking this study, the premises upon which it is based and the surprising results that emerged. The interview was recorded at the IE Law School, Madrid.

EJIL: Live! is the official podcast of the European Journal of International Law (EJIL), one of the world’s leading international law journals. Regular episodes of EJIL: Live! are released following the publication of each quarterly issue of the Journal, and include interviews with the authors of articles appearing in that issue as well as news and reviews when possible. Additional episodes, EJIL: Live! Extras, are also released from time to time to address a range of topical issues. Episodes of EJIL: Live! can be accessed via the EJIL website and this blog. Comments and reactions to EJIL:Live! episodes are welcome, and may be submitted below. 

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Filed under: EJIL, EJIL: Live!, Human Rights
 
Tags:
Comments Off on New EJIL: Live! Interview with Dr Veronika Fikfak

New Issue of EJIL (Vol. 29 (2018) No. 4) Published Today

Published on February 13, 2019        Author: 
Twitter
Facebook
Google+
LinkedIn
Follow by Email

The latest issue of the European Journal of International Law (Vol. 29, 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 access those articles that are freely available without subscription. The free access article in this issue is Veronika Fikfak’s Changing State Behaviour: Damages before the European Court of Human Rights. EJIL 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.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
 
Tags:
Comments Off on New Issue of EJIL (Vol. 29 (2018) No. 4) Published Today

The European Dream Team

Published on February 12, 2019        Author: 
Twitter
Facebook
Google+
LinkedIn
Follow by Email

There will be a major ‘Changing of the Guards’ next year with the departures of Juncker, Tusk and Draghi – each of them remarkable in their own way – from the leadership team of the European Union. The incoming team will be facing a Europe that poses unprecedented challenges. Commissioner Oettinger went as far as characterizing Europe as facing ‘mortal danger’ from both within and without. I don’t exactly share the doomsday predictions as regards the Union, but the international and internal challenges are truly immense and require leadership commensurate with such.

Here is my Dream Team to lead the Union in the face of these challenges:

President of the Commission: Frans Timmermans

President of the Council: Angela Merkel

President of the European Central Bank: Christine Lagarde

At this point many readers might be chortling. Not because they necessarily disagree that this would be a formidable team to face off the likes of Trump and Putin, Salvini and Orbán. Or to face the truly daunting socio-economic challenges of the Union. But rather because it seems to defy any realistic vision of the European politics of appointments. Does it really? Suspend your disbelief for just a while. Read the rest of this entry…

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Filed under: Editorials, EJIL
 
Tags:
Comments Off on The European Dream Team