Call for Papers: A Code/Charter of Best Practice in International Legal Education?

The Working Group on International Students and Law Schools has issued a call for papers for a conference on "A Code/Charter of Best Practice in International Legal Education? Is it possible? Is it desirable? What would even be included?," to be held at Faculty of Law, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic, on June 25-26, 2020. The call is here.

Call for Papers: Power and the Development of International Law: Asian Perspectives

The Asian Society of International Law has issued a call for papers for a junior scholars' conference on "Power and the Development of International Law: Asian Perspectives," to take place June 6, 2020, in Kathmandu. The call is here.

Heller, Mégret, Nouwen, Ohlin, & Robinson: The Oxford Handbook of International Criminal Law

Kevin Jon Heller (Univ. of Amsterdam - Law), Frédéric Mégret (McGill Univ. - Law), Sarah MH Nouwen, (Univ. of Cambridge - Law), Jens David Ohlin, (Cornell Univ. - Law), & Darryl Robinson (Queen's Univ., Canada - Law) have published The Oxford Handbook of International Criminal Law (Oxford Univ. Press 2020). The table of contents is here. Here's the abstract:

Advertisement

In the past twenty years, international criminal law has become one of the main areas of international legal scholarship and practice. Most textbooks in the field describe the evolution of international criminal tribunals, the elements of the core international crimes, the applicable modes of liability and defences, and the role of states in prosecuting international crimes.

Advertisement

The Oxford Handbook of International Criminal Law, however, takes a theoretically informed and refreshingly critical look at the most controversial issues in international criminal law, challenging prevailing practices, orthodoxies, and received wisdoms. Some of the contributions to the Handbook come from scholars within the field, but many come from outside of international criminal law, or indeed from outside law itself. The chapters are grounded in history, geography, philosophy, and international relations. The result is a Handbook that expands the discipline and should fundamentally alter how international criminal law is understood.

Conference: Women’s Human Rights in the Twenty-First Century: Developments and Challenges under International and European Law

On February 14, 2020, the European Court of Human Rights, in cooperation with Foundation René Cassin-International Institute of Human Rights and with the support of the General Consulate of Japan in Strasbourg, will hold a conference on "Women’s Human Rights in the Twenty-First Century: Developments and Challenges under International and European Law" in Strasbourg. The deadline for the public registration is February 7. See registration details below. The program is here. Here's the idea:

Advertisement

Women have been historically discriminated in society. Based on assumptions about the “natural” gender roles in society, women have been denied important rights from the suffrage, the right to sign contracts or perform work outside the home to custody rights. Over the last century, important developments have taken place. The conceptualization of women’s rights as human rights and their incorporation into international law played an important role in this. Women’s equality became the subject of international documents such as the UN’s Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, the 1995 The Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action, the Inter-American Convention on the Prevention, Punishment, and Eradication of Violence against Women or more recently the Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence. In addition, supranational courts such as the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, the European Court of Human Rights, the International Criminal Court or the Court of Justice of the European Union have responded to women’s demands by an increasingly gender-sensitive reading of different international and regional legal norms. Notwithstanding, women’s full equality has not yet been achieved. Women everywhere are still subject to different forms of violence in war and in times of peace, in the public and the private spheres, they earn less and are facing higher poverty rates than men, are under-represented in positions of power in fields like politics, on the boards of companies and on the benches of the highest national and international courts and face other gender-specific forms of discrimination such as poor access to justice and to sexual, reproductive and maternal care.

This conference aims to discuss a few aspects of the state of women’s human rights and the challenges to achieving gender equality in the twenty-first century. It will do so by looking at developments in the field of gender equality under International and European Law and before regional courts, particularly the European Court of Human Rights.

The conference hopes to provide a forum of reflection on gender equality for members of the judiciary, legal practitioners, academics, representatives of European institutions and non-governmental organizations, as well as other professionals.

The event is open to the public. Should you be interested to register or have any questions, please contact: [email protected] until 7 February 2020 and please bring your ID in the day of the conference. If you have a Council of Europe badge, please register before 12 February. Members of the Council of Europe who did not register are welcome to attend should there be any available places in the room.

Cohen & Meyer: International Law as Behavior: An Agenda

Harlan Grant Cohen (Univ. of Georgia - Law) & Timothy Meyer (Vanderbilt Univ. - Law) have posted International Law as Behavior: An Agenda (in International Law as Behavior, Harlan Grant Cohen & Timothy Meyer eds., forthcoming). Here's the abstract:

Over the past few decades, scholars in a variety of fields – economics, psychology, sociology, anthropology, and international relations, among others – have made enormous strides studying the behavioral roots of international law by exploring individual motivations, describing organizational cultures, and mapping communities of practice. Taken together, the work of these scholars presents a complex, nuanced understanding of how international law works. However, these projects are rarely considered together: often separated by academic enclosures and focused on different subfields within international law, communication among scholars using different methodologies is restricted. The goal of this book is to break down some of these barriers and provide a glimpse of what an international law more focused on behavior and more engaged with these other fields might look like.

This introductory chapter aims to provide a roadmap in this effort by describing international law's long interest in behavior and the past attempts to explore that relationship, exploring the book's approach and laying out the contributions in each chapter, and beginning the process of bringing these insights together and outlining a series of takeaways for future study of international law as behavior.

Sadat, SáCouto, & Sellers: Collective Criminality and Sexual Violence: Fixing a Failed Approach

Leila N. Sadat (Washington Univ. in St. Louis - Law), Susana SáCouto (American Univ. - Law), & Patricia Viseur Sellers have posted Collective Criminality and Sexual Violence: Fixing a Failed Approach (Leiden Journal of International Law, forthcoming). Here's the abstract:

International criminal tribunals have developed a number of legal theories designed to hold individuals responsible for their role in collective criminal conduct. These doctrines of criminal participation, known as modes of liability, are the subject of significant scholarly commentary. Yet missing from much of this debate, particularly as regards the International Criminal Court, has been an analysis of how current doctrine on modes of liability responds to the need to hold collective perpetrators criminally responsible for crimes of sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV). Indeed, many writings in this area of the law address perceived shortcomings in the theoretical underpinnings of modes of liability doctrine in the abstract but ignore the application of this doctrine in concreto. As a result, facially neutral writings on modes of liability may in fact be gendered in application, either because they fail to account for the specific characteristics of sexual and gender-based violence or because they are applied in a manner that requires higher thresholds for finding culpability for the commission of SGBV crimes. This article fills the gap between theory and practice, examining past and present doctrine, and suggesting ways in which the treatment of modes of liability by international criminal courts and tribunals can both properly respond to the need for personal culpability and the dangers of collective criminal activity, particularly as regards SGBV crimes.

New Issue: Revue belge de droit international

The latest issue of the Revue belge de droit international (2018, no. 2) is out. Contents include:

• Special Issue: Arctic and antarctic regions: new challenges for ocean governance
• E. Franckx & P. Gautier, Introduction to the special issue on “Arctic and antarctic regions: new challenges for ocean governance”
• W. Roelants De Stappers, Arctic and antarctic regions: new challenges for ocean governance - Welcoming words
• M. Hasebe, New developments and challenges in Arctic navigation and the Polar Code
• K. Zou, Implementing the Polar Code in the Antarctic waters: progress, problems, and prospects
• A. Chircop, Canada and the Polar Code: balancing unilateralism and multilateralism in the regulation of arctic shipping
• Y. Bobrova, A. Kapustin, & V. Vasilyev, The Northern Sea Route: national legal regime and the Polar Code
• P. Gautier, New developments with respect to fisheries in the Antarctic
• E. Franckx, New developments with respect to fisheries in the Arctic
• Villamizar Lamu, Piracy and whaling in Antarctica p. 483 F. H. Martinsen, Some remarks on the application of “Antarctic International Law” to tourist and non-governmental activities in Antarctica
• F. Borgia, Sustainable tourism development in Arctic region: a risky game
• É. David, The law applicable to the Princess Elisabeth Station
• A. De Vaucleroy, The exercise of jurisdiction in Antarctica: a comparative analysis from the perspective of Belgium, France and The United Kingdom
• Y. Van Der Mensbrugghe, Arctic and Antarctic regions: new challenges for ocean governance - Conclusions
• M. Lismonde, Étude critique du manuel de Tallinn sur la participation directe aux hostilités : du partage d’informations militaires sur les réseaux sociaux
• F. Laurent & J. Braun, La lutte contre le terrorisme par la censure des « contenus à caractère terroriste » : une ingérence justifiée au droit à la liberté d’expression ?

Tamayo-Álvarez: The Strategic Use of International Investment Law in Colombia – Textiles: Navigating within the International Regime Complex for Development

Rafael Tamayo-Álvarez has published The Strategic Use of International Investment Law in Colombia – Textiles: Navigating within the International Regime Complex for Development (Law and Development Review, Vol. 13, no. 1, January 2020). Here's the abstract:

Trade-based money laundering (TBML) is a major concern in Colombia, where criminal organisations employ under-invoicing to conceal drug-trafficking proceeds. In response, Colombia imposed a compound tariff on certain Panamanian importations that were considered linked to this phenomenon. Alleging that the policy measure infringed Colombia’s tariff concessions, Panama activated the World Trade Organisation (WTO) dispute settlement mechanism. The dispute revolved around Article II:1 of the General Agreement on Tariff and Trade 1994. Colombia argued that this norm should be interpreted as to encompass licit trade only. Colombia looked for normative support in the investment treaty regime by establishing a parallel between undervalued imports and illegal investments. Therefore, just as investment treaty tribunals abstain from extending international legal protection to illegal investments, the WTO adjudicating bodies should not extend tariff concessions to importations linked to TBML activities. This article contends that by transplanting a more favourable doctrine of legality from the investment treaty regime to the multilateral trade regime, Colombia engaged in strategic regime shifting. Accordingly, drawing on regime complexes analysis, the article argues that by considering development a common issue-area, it is possible to articulate strategic connections between both regimes.

Kulick: Let’s (Not) (Dis)Agree to Disagree!? Some Thoughts on the ‘Dispute’ Requirement in International Adjudication

Andreas Kulick (Universität Tübingen - Law) has posted Let’s (Not) (Dis)Agree to Disagree!? Some Thoughts on the ‘Dispute’ Requirement in International Adjudication. Here's the abstract:

International courts and tribunals only enjoy jurisdiction to settle a ‘dispute’. ‘Dispute’ requires disagreement. However, what if the parties disagree over whether there actually exists such disagreement? What if, before the International Court of Justice, the respondent argues that there is no ‘dispute’ because it declined to react to the applicant’s contentions? In other words, can a disputing party avoid a dispute by playing dead? On the other hand, where to draw the line in order to prevent the applicant from seizing an international court or tribunal where there is in fact no real disagreement among the parties? This article critically assesses the Court’s case law on the ‘dispute’ requirement and argues for a fragmented approach to ‘dispute’ in international adjudication that carefully defines this jurisdictional requirement along the lines of the judicial function of the respective international judicial dispute settlement forum.

Workshop: Investment Protection, Human Rights, and International Arbitration

The 2020 edition of the Frankfurt Investment Law Workshop will take place on March 6-7 at the Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main. The topic is: "Investment Protection, Human Rights, and International Arbitration." The program is here. The workshop is open to academics, practitioners, and students of investment law and related disciplines. Attendance is free, but subject to registration. If you are interested in participating, please contact Sabine Schimpf by February 21, 2020.

Call for Papers: Child in Migration: Status and Identity

A call for papers has been issued for a conference on “Child in Migration: Status and Identity,” to be held May 28-30, 2020, in Zielona Góra, Poland. According to the organizers, the conference "is devoted to the legal status of migrant children. The conference will provide a forum to address and discuss a number of challenging questions related to this issue, from the perspective of both public and private international law. We are especially interested in the legal obligations arising from the irregular situation of children lacking proper documentation, citizenship and registration." For more information, consult the conference website.

New Issue: Global Trade and Customs Journal

The latest issue of Global Trade and Customs Journal (Vol. 15, no. 1, 2020) is out. Contents include:

• Kirsti McKenzie, Karen Betts, Chief Executive of the Scotch Whisky Association
• Iulianna Romanchyshyna, Mutual Recognition as a Method to Deal with Regulatory Divergence: What Is Its Reach in EU FTAs?
• Anna Dias, Stéphanie Seeuws, & Agnieszka Nosowicz, EU Border Carbon Adjustment and the WTO: Hand in Hand Towards Tackling Climate Change
• Courtney Furner, Nadine Lederer, & Claire Sergaki, The WTO’s Exclusive and Compulsory Jurisdiction v.Dispute Resolution Mechanisms in Regional Trade Agreements: A Clash of Jurisdiction?
• Daniela Menon Rodrigues, Brazilian Path to Trade Facilitation
• Anzhela Makhinova, How to Suspend Trade Defence Remedies Applied in the Eurasian Economic Union: Recent Trends
• Sonia Gupta, The Arbitrary Rejection of the Declared Value by the Customs Administration

Call for Submissions: The Ethiopian Yearbook of International Law

The Ethiopian Yearbook of International Law has issued a call for submissions for its fifth volume. Here's the call:

The Ethiopian Yearbook of International Law (EtYIL) is a peer-reviewed academic book series that focuses on international, regional comparative legal and policy matters that most concern developing countries more generally and Ethiopia and (the Horn of) Africa specifically. The Yearbook is now a well-established and respected source of legal and policy scholarship. It has recently been independently evaluated and included in Scopus. We are pleased to invite interested scholars to consider submitting long or short articles, current development pieces, case reports and book reviews for consideration for the FIFTH (2020) volume of the Yearbook (submission guidelines and other details available here). Submission deadline for this volume is 30 November 2020. We would like to hear your potential ideas and topics at [email protected].

Føllesdal: The Legitimacy of International Courts

Andreas Føllesdal (Univ. of Oslo - PluriCourts) has posted The Legitimacy of International Courts (Journal of Political Philosophy, forthcoming). Here's the abstract:

States are free, yet everywhere live under international courts and tribunals (ICs). As they proliferate and gain power across ever more domains, ICs become targets of resistance and criticism that they are illegitimate authorities. What reasons might a state have to defer to an IC’s judgment or interpretation, even when the state regards it as mistaken, and even when it conflicts with the interests and objectives of government? Section I sketches the multiple tasks of ICs, in complex interdependence with other actors. Their core task is to adjudicate disputes through interpretation and application of international law by legal methods. This may also contribute indirectly to a range of further tasks. Section II addresses some aspects of the relation between normative legitimacy of ICs and descriptive legitimacy - actors’ beliefs therein. Section III shows how a wide range of legitimacy challenges concern ways ICs fail to carry out their tasks. This account does not seek to provide substantive arguments or seek to show that all such criticisms are correct. The aims are rather to make many such criticisms comprehensible as legitimacy concerns, to provide a rationale for popular taxonomies of legitimacy criticisms, and to indicate which premises and arguments are required for such criticisms to be sound.

Lieblich: The Humanization of Jus Ad Bellum: Prospects and Perils

Eliav Lieblich (Tel Aviv Univ. - Law) has posted The Humanization of Jus Ad Bellum: Prospects and Perils. Here's the abstract:

Can violations of jus ad bellum also violate the right to life under international human rights law (IHRL), even in cases where the laws of armed conflict are otherwise followed? In 2018's General Comment 36 (GC 36) the Human Rights Committee (HRC) answered this question, for the first time, in the affirmative. This article uses the HRC's position as a platform for a long needed discussion on the theoretical underpinnings, and implications, of a possible human rights law on the resort to force.

This article identifies three pillars in GC 36’s position, which subject traditional questions of jus ad bellum to IHRL considerations: First, the view that aggression is not only a violation of jus ad bellum, but also an ipso facto violation of the right to life; second, that states bear the "responsibility" to oppose aggression; and third, that failing to reasonably attempt to resolve disputes peacefully could amount to a violation of the duty to ensure the right to life.

The article analyzes these pillars doctrinally, and then moves to discuss the theoretical commitments required to accept each of them, as well as their costs. Namely, they all require breaking with the traditional view that jus ad bellum is strictly an inter-state issue. Although, as the paper argues, this development is a welcomed one, the humanization of jus ad bellum through human rights law carries risks that should not be overlooked: chiefly, the securitization of human rights and the depoliticization of war. The prospects and perils of the humanization of jus ad bellum, as this article demonstrates, open a new area of theoretical inquiry and legal possibilities.

Hakimi: The Integrative Effects of Global Legal Pluralism

Monica Hakimi (Univ. of Michigan - Law) has posted The Integrative Effects of Global Legal Pluralism (in The Oxford Handbook of Global Legal Pluralism, Paul Schiff Berman ed., forthcoming). Here's the abstract:

International lawyers widely understand that legal pluralism is a fact of global life and that it can, in certain settings, be desirable. But many still approach it with some trepidation. A prominent skeptical claim is that pluralist structures lack the integrative resources that unify people around a shared governance project. This claim has been prominent with respect to two kinds of conflicts that are routine in international law: (1) conflicts that play out within particular legal arrangements, and (2) conflicts that cut across legal arrangements. For each kind of conflict, the skeptical claim is directed at the pluralist structure itself. The stated problem -- the thing that is thought to disintegrate the association -- is that competing legal positions are not reconciled or resolved but allowed to coexist, fester, and repeatedly reappear.

This book chapter challenges that skeptical claim. Although other scholars have already argued that it is overdrawn, I aim to contest its central premise. I argue that ineradicable governance conflicts are not necessarily dissociative for the people who partake in them. Creating space for these people to have their conflicts in relatively constructive ways can instead by productive for the group. It is a way for them to engage together and invest in a joint governance project, despite their many disagreements, and thus to preserve the project as a going concern that binds them.

Beinlich: Drones, Discretion, and the Duty to Protect the Right to Life: Germany and its Role in the US Drone Programme before the Higher Administrative Court of Münster

Leander Beinlich (Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law) has posted Drones, Discretion, and the Duty to Protect the Right to Life: Germany and its Role in the US Drone Programme before the Higher Administrative Court of Münster (German Yearbook of International Law, forthcoming). Here's the abstract:

In 2014, three Yemeni claimants filed an administrative complaint against the German government addressing Germany’s role in the US drone programme. Relying on the right to life under the German Basic Law, the claimants argued that German authorities must prevent the US from using its air base in Ramstein, Germany, for purposes of conducting drone strikes that might unlawfully harm the claimants. On 19th March 2019, the Higher Administrative Court of Münster overruled the court of first instance and partly decided in favour of the claimants. In what is a highly interesting and thought-provoking judgment, the Court not only finds strong reasons to suspect that US drone strikes in Yemen, at least partially, violate international law. Even more, it orders the German government to ‘ascertain’ that the US drone strikes conducted via Ramstein Air Base are compatible with international law and, ‘if necessary’, to ‘work towards’ compliance with international law. Remarkable enough, this outcome is not the only reason why the judgment is worth being discussed: It furthermore raises interesting and difficult questions as to the material and territorial reach of fundamental rights under the German Basic Law, their inter-relation with international law, as well as the scope – and limits – of judicial review in matters of international law and foreign affairs.

Deplano: Pluralising International Legal Scholarship: The Promise and Perils of Non-Doctrinal Research Methods

Rossana Deplano (Univ. of Leicester - Law) has published Pluralising International Legal Scholarship: The Promise and Perils of Non-Doctrinal Research Methods (Edward Elgar Publishing 2019). Contents include:

• Rossana Deplano, Introduction
• Marija Đorđeska, General Principles of Law Recognized by Civilized Nations: Method, Inductive-Empirical Analysis and (More) ‘Scientific’ Results
• Sarina Landefeld, The Evolution of Norms and Concepts in International Law: A Social Constructivist Approach
• Josef Ostřanský, A Case for Ethnography of International Investment Law
• Alice Margaria, Going beyond judgements: Exploring the Jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights
• Elizabeth A. Faulkner, The development of child trafficking within international law: a socio-legal and archival analysis
• Giulia Gentile & Luigi Lonardo, Appeals in the field of EU sanctions before the European Court of Justice after Lisbon: A quantitative study
• Gabriel M. Lentner, The Perils of Quantitative Research in International Law
• Huaxia Lai, The Unfulfilled Promises of the Data-Driven Approach to International Economic Law
• Rossana Deplano, Conclusions

de Stefano: Attribution in International Law and Arbitration

Carlo de Stefano (Università degli studi Roma Tre - Law) has published Attribution in International Law and Arbitration (Oxford Univ. Press 2020). Here's the abstract:

Attribution in International Law and Arbitration clarifies and critically discusses the international rules of attribution of conduct, particularly regarding their application to states under international investment law.

It examines the key question of how and to what extent breaches of State obligations, particularly in respect of States' commitments to foreign investors under international investment agreements (IIAs) and bilateral investment treaties (BITs), can be attributed.

Of special interest within this context is the responsibility of States when the alleged breach has been committed by separate legal entities, rather than the state itself. Under domestic law, entities such as state-owned enterprises (SOEs) are considered legally distinct, however the State may still be considered responsible for their actions under international law.

The book addresses the relevant issues systematically, beginning with direct reference to the Draft Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts (ARSIWA) on attribution, finalized by the International law Commission (ILC) in 2001. It then elaborates on the specifics of international investment law, based on a detailed examination of practice and case law, whilst giving due consideration to the academic debate. The result is a full, innovative take on one of the most difficult questions in investment arbitration.

New Issue: American Journal of International Law

The latest issue of the American Journal of International Law (Vol. 114, no. 1, January 2020) is out. The Journal now provides free access to the International Decisions and Contemporary Practice of the United States sections. Contents include:

• Article
• Cosette D. Creamer & Beth A. Simmons, The Proof Is in the Process: Self-Reporting Under International Human Rights Treaties
• Essay
• Cecily Rose, The Creation of a Review Mechanism for the UN Convention Against Transnational Organized Crime and Its Protocols
• Current Developments
• Sean D. Murphy, Peremptory Norms of General International Law (Jus Cogens) and Other Topics: The Seventy-First Session of the International Law Commission
• Editorial Comment
• Richard B. Bilder, On the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence (SETI)
• International Decisions
• Tania Voon, Russia—Measures Concerning Traffic in Transit
• Angela Mudukuti, Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al-Bashir, Judgment in the Jordan Referral re Al-Bashir Appeal
• Tara Van Ho, Vedanta Resources Plc and Another v. Lungowe and Others
• Cameron Miles, The MV “Norstar” Case (Panama v. Italy)
• Contemporary Practice of the United States Relating to International Law
• Jean Galbraith, Contemporary Practice of the United States Relating to International Law
• Recent Books on International Law
• Cesare P.R. Romano, Legitimacy, Authority, and Performance: Contemporary Anxieties of International Courts and Tribunals
• Chiara Giorgetti, reviewing Comparative International Law, edited by Anthea Roberts, Paul B. Stephan, Pierre-Hugues Verdier, and Mila Versteeg
• Rita Guerreiro Teixeira & Jan Wouters, reviewing Research Handbook on the Theory and Practice of International Lawmaking, edited by Catherine Brölmann and Yannick Radi
• Charlotte Ku, reviewing The Changing Practices of International Law, edited by Tanja Aalberts and Thomas Gammeltoft-Hansen
• Andrea Harrison, reviewing Underground Warfare, by Daphné Richemond-Barak

New Issue: International Affairs

The latest issue of International Affairs (Vol. 96, no. 1, January 2020) is out. Contents include:

• Unpacking the Strategic Dynamics of the Indo-Pacific
• Kai He & Mingjiang Li, Understanding the dynamics of the Indo-Pacific: US–China strategic competition, regional actors, and beyond
• Feng Liu, The recalibration of Chinese assertiveness: China's responses to the Indo-Pacific challenge
• Xue Gong, Non-traditional security cooperation between China and south-east Asia: implications for Indo-Pacific geopolitics
• Kei Koga, Japan's ‘Indo-Pacific’ question: countering China or shaping a new regional order?
• Rajesh Rajagopalan, Evasive balancing: India's unviable Indo-Pacific strategy
• Brendan Taylor, Is Australia's Indo-Pacific strategy an illusion?
• Dewi Fortuna Anwar, Indonesia and the ASEAN outlook on the Indo-Pacific
• See Seng Tan, Consigned to hedge: south-east Asia and America's ‘free and open Indo-Pacific’ strategy
• Kai He & Huiyun Feng, The institutionalization of the Indo-Pacific: problems and prospects
• Mingjiang Li, The Belt and Road Initiative: geo-economics and Indo-Pacific security competition
• Ling Wei, Developmental peace in east Asia and its implications for the Indo-Pacific
• Literature Review
• Dahlia Simangan, Where is the Anthropocene? IR in a new geological epoch

Call for Applications: Global Innovation Program Postdoctoral Fellowships

The Global Innovation Program at the University of Pennsylvania’s Perry World House invites applications for its postdoctoral fellowship program during the 2020-2021 academic year. The call is here. The deadline is January 24, 2020.

Call for Submissions: Polish Yearbook of International Law (Reminder)

The Polish Yearbook of International Law has issued a call for submissions for its next volume. The deadline is January 31, 2020. Here's the call:

Call for papers

Polish Yearbook of International Law, vol. XXXIX: 2019

Polish Yearbook of International Law (PYIL) is currently seeking articles for its next volume (XXXIX), which will be published in June 2020. Authors are invited to submit complete unpublished papers in areas connected with public and private international law, including European law. Although it is not a formal requirement for acceptance, we are specifically interested in articles that address issues in international and European law relating to broadly understood Central and Eastern Europe. Authors from the region are also strongly encouraged to submit their works.

Submissions should be between 8.000 and 10,000 words (including footnotes) but in exceptional cases we may also accept longer works. We assess manuscripts on a rolling basis and will consider requests for expedited review in case of a pending acceptance for publication from another journal.

All details about submission procedure and required formatting are available at the PYIL’s webpage. Manuscript should be submitted via the PYIL’s submission system until 31 January 2020. You can also contact us by email ([email protected]).

New Issue: Journal of International Wildlife Law & Policy

The latest issue of the Journal of International Wildlife Law & Policy (Vol. 22, no. 4, 2019) is out. Contents include:

• Ludwig Krämer, Forty Years of EU Measures to Fight Wildlife Crime
• Yashraj Samant & Avani Gupta, Legality of Delisting a Transboundary Ramsar Site to Combat HPAI Outbreak and the Adequacy Standards of Compensatory Sites
• Amanda Whitfort, China and CITES: Strange Bedfellows or Willing Partners?

Call for Papers: International Investment Law & State Capitalism

A call for papers has been issued for a colloquium on "International Investment Law & State Capitalism," which will take place at the Athens Public International Law Center of the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens School of Law on October 15-16, 2020. The call is here.