Hague Academy of International Law 2021 Winter Courses

Registration is now open for the Hague Academy of International Law's 2021 Winter Courses. Here are the courses:

• Malcolm N. Shaw (Univ. of Leicester), Inaugural Lecture: A House of Many rooms: The Rise, Fall and Rise Again of Territorial Sovereignty
• Maurice Kamto (Université de Yaoundé), Cours général : Le droit international et le polycentrism normatif
• Alan Boyle (Univ. of Edinburgh), International Law-Making for the Environment
• Chester Brown (Univ. of Sydney), Evidence in International Adjudication
• Olivier de Schutter (Université catholique de Louvain), L'émergence de la souveraineté alimentaire en droit international
• Jose Angelo Estrella Faria (United Nations), La protection des biens culturels religieux en droit international public et en droit international privé
• Anne Orford (Univ. of Melbourne), Civil War and the Transformation of International Law
• William Schabas (Middlesex Univ. London; Leiden Univ.), Relationships Between International Criminal Law and Other Branches of International Law

New Podcast: Hablemos de Derecho Internacional

The inaugural episode of the Hablemos de Derecho Internacional podcast is now available. Here's the idea:

HDI es un podcast jurídico en español donde se abordan temas de derecho internacional, y de relevancia mundial, en compañía de expertos. El formato es conversacional, va dirigido a la audiencia hispanohablante, y el objetivo es que en cada episodio los oyentes puedan aprender, a través de la palabra de nuestros invitados, sobre el complejo mundo del derecho internacional.

New Issue: International Legal Materials

The latest issue of International Legal Materials (Vol. 59, no. 3, June 2020) is out. Contents include:

• Application of the International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism and of the International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination (Ukraine v. Russian Federation) (Preliminary Objections) (I.C.J.), with introductory note by Iryna Marchuk
• United Nations Security Council Resolution 2498, with introductory note by Milena Sterio
• Google LLC v. Commission Nationale de l'Informatique et des Libertés (CNIL) and Eva Glawischnig-Piesczek v. Facebook Ireland Ltd. (C.J.E.U.), with introductory note by Kenneth Propp
• Joined Cases A. K. v. Krajowa Rada Sądownictwa (C-585/18) and CP (C-624/18), DO (C-625/18) v. Sąd Najwyższy (C.J.E.U.), with introductory note by Joelle Grogan
• Resolution 2300 (Council of Eur. Parl. Assembly), with introductory note by David Lewis
• Ilias and Ahmed v. Hungary (Eur. Ct. H.R.), with introductory note by Vladislava Stoyanova

New Issue: Climate Law

The latest issue of Climate Law (Vol. 10, no. 2, 2020) is out. Contents include:

• Phillipa C. McCormack, Jan McDonald & Kerryn A. Brent, Governance of Land-based Negative-emission Technologies to Promote Biodiversity Conservation: Lessons from Australia
• Rolf H. Weber & Andreas Hösli, Climate Change Liability: Comparing Risks for Directors in Jurisdictions of the Common and Civil Law
• Alena V. Kodolova & Alexander M. Solntsev, Application of the Polluter-pays Principle in Russian Legislation on Climate Change: Problems and Prospects
• Morten Broberg, State of Climate Law: The Third Pillar of International Climate Change Law: Explaining ‘Loss and Damage’ after the Paris Agreement

Tzevelekos & Berkes: Sociological Objectivism: Still Relevant?

Vassilis P Tzevelekos (Univ. of Liverpool - Law) & Antal Berkes (Brunel Univ. London - Law) have posted Sociological Objectivism: Still Relevant? (in Research Methods in International Law: A Handbook, R Deplano & N Tsagourias eds., forthcoming). Here's the abstract:

The sociological objectivism school of thought situates itself within legal positivism but squarely rejects the key principles and assumptions of the voluntarist conceptualization of international law. Sociological objectivism denies state sovereignty and considers law as stemming, not from sovereign will, but from social necessity. For objectivists, positive law cannot produce normative effects unless it is aligned with an ideal, namely objective law. This raises questions regarding the interrelationship between objective law and natural law. Although the reality of contemporary international law disproves the extreme and ‘full-bodied’ version of sociological objectivism, certain precepts of this theory remain fairly germane. The chapter situates sociological objectivism within the broader design of legal positivism, discusses the key tenets of objectivism and explores how, outside of a ‘philosophy’ of international law, this theory can be translated into (a set of) method(s).

Powderly: Judges and the Making of International Criminal Law

Joseph Powderly (Leiden Univ. - Grotius Centre for International Legal Studies) has published Judges and the Making of International Criminal Law (Brill | Nijhoff 2020). Here's the abstract:

Advertisement

In Judges and the Making of International Criminal Law Joseph Powderly explores the role of judicial creativity in the progressive development of international criminal law. This wide-ranging work unpacks the nature and contours of the international criminal judicial function. Employing empirical, theoretical, and doctrinal methodologies, it interrogates the profile of the international criminal bench, judicial ethics, and the interpretative techniques that judges have utilized in their efforts to progressively develop international criminal law.

Advertisement

Drawing on the work of Hersch Lauterpacht, it proposes a conception of the international criminal judicial function that places judicial creativity at its very heart. In doing so it argues that international criminal judges have a central role to play in ensuring that modern international criminal law continues to adapt to a volatile global environment, where accountability for crimes that shock the conscience of humanity is as much needed as at any moment in recent history.

Davidson: American Transitional Justice: Writing Cold War History in Human Rights Litigation

Natalie R. Davidson (Tel-Aviv Univ. - Law) has published American Transitional Justice: Writing Cold War History in Human Rights Litigation (Cambridge Univ. Press 2020). Here's the abstract:

Natalie Davidson offers an alternative account of Alien Tort Statute litigation by revisiting the field's two seminal cases, Filártiga (filed 1979) and Marcos (filed 1986), lawsuits ostensibly concerned with torture in Paraguay and the Philippines, respectively. Combining legal analysis, archival research and ethnographic methods, this book reveals how these cases operated as transitional justice mechanisms, performing the transition of the United States and its allies out of the Cold War order. It shows that US courts produced a whitewashed history of US involvement in repression in the Western bloc, while in Paraguay and the Philippines the distance from US courts allowed for a more critical narration of the lawsuits and their underlying violence as symptomatic of structural injustice. By exposing the political meanings of these legal landmarks for three societies, Davidson sheds light on the blend of hegemonic and emancipatory implications of international human rights litigation in US courts.

Gaffield: The Racialization of International Law after the Haitian Revolution: The Holy See and National Sovereignty

Julia Gaffield (Georgia State Univ. - History) has published The Racialization of International Law after the Haitian Revolution: The Holy See and National Sovereignty (American Historical Review, Vol. 125, no. 3, pp. 841–868, June 2020). Here's the abstract:

The Haitian state shaped international definitions of sovereignty and national legitimacy after the Declaration of Independence in 1804. Haiti’s nineteenth century was not a period of isolation and decline; its first six decades were globally connected because the country’s leaders challenged their postcolonial inequality with diplomacy and state formation. This strategy aimed to establish Haiti’s membership in the “family of nations,” a central metaphor in European and American diplomatic, legal, and religious decision-making. In doing so, the Haitian state forced the Atlantic powers to redefine the boundaries of international relations. Haiti’s decades-long negotiations with the Catholic Church were tied to the racialization of the global hierarchy. After its Declaration of Independence, the Haitian state began clearing a theoretical path toward recognized sovereignty based on the dominant narrative that a society must be considered “civilized” on the world stage. But, as it cultivated internal policies and practices that rejected the dominant racist assumptions, these discriminatory ideologies became increasingly more explicit in international law.

Mann: Border Crimes as Crimes against Humanity

Itamar Mann (Univ. of Haifa - Law) has posted Border Crimes as Crimes against Humanity (in The Oxford Handbook for International Refugee Law, Cathryn Costello, Michelle Foster & Jane McAdam eds., forthcoming). Here's the abstract:

What does it mean to cast border violence as a crime against migrants, specifically as an international crime? Some instances of border violence satisfy the legal definition of crimes against humanity. However, so far, almost no investigations or prosecutions have been brought forth to hold the perpetrators of such crimes accountable. The Chapter therefore elucidates the moral and political assumptions required for international criminal law to do just that. These are divided into three groups: (1) interpretations focused on the way that border policies employ violence against migrants to send a message to other would-be migrants; (2) interpretations revealing that prosecuting border crimes allows criminal law to address ‘structural violence’; (3) interpretations stressing the social desirability of porous borders and the harms of hermetic separations between national groups. The Chapter concludes by a call to make explicit the moral and political commitments undergirding advocacy through international criminal law.

Bradford: The Brussels Effect: How the European Union Rules the World

Anu Bradford (Columbia Univ. - Law) has published The Brussels Effect: How the European Union Rules the World (Oxford Univ. Press 2020). Here's the abstract:

Advertisement

For many observers, the European Union is mired in a deep crisis. Between sluggish growth; political turmoil following a decade of austerity politics; Brexit; and the rise of Asian influence, the EU is seen as a declining power on the world stage.

Columbia Law professor Anu Bradford argues the opposite in her important new book The Brussels Effect: the EU remains an influential superpower that shapes the world in its image. By promulgating regulations that shape the international business environment, elevating standards worldwide, and leading to a notable Europeanization of many important aspects of global commerce, the EU has managed to shape policy in areas such as data privacy, consumer health and safety, environmental protection, antitrust, and online hate speech. And in contrast to how superpowers wield their global influence, the Brussels Effect - a phrase first coined by Bradford in 2012- absolves the EU from playing a direct role in imposing standards, as market forces alone are often sufficient as multinational companies voluntarily extend the EU rule to govern their global operations.

The Brussels Effect shows how the EU has acquired such power, why multinational companies use EU standards as global standards, and why the EU's role as the world's regulator is likely to outlive its gradual economic decline, extending the EU's influence long into the future.

Blank: Irreconcilable Differences: The Thresholds for Armed Attack and International Armed Conflict

Laurie R. Blank (Emory Univ. - Law) has posted Irreconcilable Differences: The Thresholds for Armed Attack and International Armed Conflict (Notre Dame Law Review, forthcoming). Here's the abstract:

This article explores the gap between the definition of armed attack and the threshold for international armed conflict to identify possible consequences of the different definitions for the application of either or both bodies of law and to consider whether efforts to reconcile the different meanings are feasible and, more importantly, desirable or problematic. Although the dangers of conflating jus ad bellum and LOAC are well-known and thoroughly examined in jurisprudence and academic literature, the interplay between these two foundational concepts in the two bodies of law remains unexplored. These two definitions or concepts are the building blocks on which much of the international law authority regarding the use of force resides. Armed attack is the threshold for the use of force in self-defense and therefore forms an essential component of the jus ad bellum and, in effect, serves as a gatekeeper for the acceptable use of force. The existence of an international armed conflict triggers the application of LOAC, with all of its attendant authorities, obligations, rights and protections. Both terms are central to understanding the parameters for the use of force in various ways — and yet each has a different meaning, a different pedigree, and potentially consequential effects on the ability of the other term to serve its purpose. The interplay and different thresholds for armed attack and for international armed conflict raise challenging questions about the co-existence of the two bodies of law, namely the consequences of an international armed conflict triggered by acts or force that lie below the threshold for armed attack or other triggering of jus ad bellum. Can force be used and how should it be judged in such circumstances?

The first section briefly presents the definition of armed attack and the threshold for international armed conflict, with a focus on the purpose of the particular thresholds and definitions for the two terms in order to provide a foundation for the main comparisons and discussion in the rest of the article. Part II examines the gap between the respective meanings of the two concepts and the potential legal consequences. In particular, this section analyzes two primary, but opposing, interpretive effects of the gap between the meanings of armed attack and international armed conflict: first, the use of force in situations falling below the threshold of armed attack; and second, the possibility that an international armed conflict could exist without the states engaged in such conflict having the authority to use force against the adversary. Each of these possibilities raises a red flag within one body of law but at the same time hews closely to the basic concept or goals of the other, raising the question of whether this gap matters and, if so, whether some reconciliation is appropriate. The third section addresses this final question, that of reconciliation between the two definitions and examines what such reconciliation might look like. More important, attempts at reconciliation could cause a severely damaging blow to one or the other body of law, such that preserving the gap — that is, agreeing to disagree, in effect — is the better course of action.

Viterbo: Sovereign Debt Restructuring: The Role and Limits of Public International Law

Annamaria Viterbo (Università degli Studi di Torino - Law) has published Sovereign Debt Restructuring: The Role and Limits of Public International Law (G. Giappichelli Editore 2020). Here's the abstract:

The monograph “Sovereign Debt Restructuring: The Role and Limits of Public International Law” fills in a gap in recent literature focussing on the most important rules of public international law applicable to sovereign indebtedness. After providing a brief overview of the main debt restructuring vehicles that have been developed over time, the book traces a distinction between the rules of public international law that are relevant for debtor States (State succession in respect of debts, the odious debt doctrine, sovereign immunity and economic necessity) and creditor States (diplomatic protection and the conclusion of treaties specifically aimed at providing debt relief to a country). The book not only covers in detail the law and practice of the two international organisations that are mostly involved in sovereign debt issues (the IMF and the United Nations), but also examines the increasing role played by financial industry associations in the field (IIF, ICMA, ISDA).

Eslava & Hill: Cities, Post-Coloniality and International Law

Luis Eslava (Univ. of Kent - Law) & George Hill (Univ. of Cambridge) have posted Cities, Post-Coloniality and International Law (in Elgar Research Handbook on International Law and Cities, Helmut Aust & Janne Nijman eds., forthcoming). Here's the abstract:

In recent decades, the local, the municipal and the city have emerged as virtuous spaces where development and global integration can finally be achieved in the postcolony. In this chapter, we locate this emergence within a broader history of international attempts to organise and regularise urban life through multi-scalar governance structures. We identify these structures as having developed from a paradigm of direct imperial control over colonial cities, to a moment in which local life came to be organised through national logics, to the present resurgence of the local and municipal in more decentralised and indirect ordering processes. These transformations, which remind us that global governance has always been a hands-on project, have been fuelled by the intensification of the global economic order and the concomitant need to discipline lands, peoples and their fellow non-humans accordingly. The resurgence of the city as a locus of international discourse has created a dynamic interaction between international and local urban laws and development policies, which we identify in this chapter as ‘international urban law’. Our analysis points, however, not only to hegemonic forces in this interaction between the international and the local but also to the counter-hegemonic voices of resistance that have always punctuated debates about colonialism, decolonisation and cities in international law. As we demonstrate through a series of case studies, from Bogotá to Rio de Janeiro, and from Ulaanbaatar to Nairobi, today’s development programmes revive the colonial typology of cities as key nodes in global governance networks through euphemistically diverse yet still quite standardised patterns of disciplining. These case studies illuminate the socio-political (dis)arrangements underlying the present impetus towards making urban life legible and amenable to international prescriptions and the global economic order. Here we show how this reinvented brand of localised disciplining, and the resistance to it, are part and parcel of a post-colonial normative order that struggles to leave its imperial origins behind.

Todres & King: The Oxford Handbook of Children's Rights Law

Jonathan Todres (Georgia State Univ. - Law) & Shani M. King (Univ. of Florida - Law) have published The Oxford Handbook of Children's Rights Law (Oxford Univ. Press 2020). The table of contents is here. Here's the abstract:

Children's rights law is a relatively young but rapidly developing discipline. The U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child, the field's core legal instrument, is the most widely ratified human rights treaty in history. Yet, like children themselves, children's rights are often relegated to the margins in mainstream legal, political, and other discourses, despite their application to approximately one-third of the world's population and every human being's first stages of life. Now thirty years old, the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) signalled a definitive shift in the way that children are viewed and understood—from passive objects subsumed within the family to full human beings with a distinct set of rights. Although the CRC and other children's rights law have spurred positive changes in law, policies, and attitudes toward children in numerous countries, implementation remains a work in progress. We have reached a state in the evolution of children's rights in which we need more critical evaluation and assessment of the CRC and the large body of children's rights law and policy that this treaty has inspired. We have moved from conceptualizing and adopting legislation to focusing on implementation and making the content of children's rights meaningful in the lives of all children. This book provides a critical evaluation and assessment of children's rights law, including the CRC. With contributions from leading scholars and practitioners from around the world, it aims to elucidate the content of children's rights law, explore the complexities of implementation, and identify critical challenges and opportunities for children's rights law.

Fox-Decent: Transnational Law's Legality

Evan Fox-Decent (McGill Univ. - Law) has posted Transnational Law's Legality. Here's the abstract:

In this essay, I argue that transnational law does indeed have formal legal character. To do so, I depart from the trend of socio-legal scholarship, instead applying a jurisprudential perspective. Specifically, I argue that public fiduciary theory is well-placed to explain both the nature of authority evoked by transnational legal orders, and the broader character of the law these orders purport to represent. This theory claims that the fiduciary character of an organization, namely its other-regarding purpose and adherence to certain procedural standards, is necessary for its claim to legitimate authority. By addressing these jurisprudential questions, public fiduciary theory enables the formulation of a persuasive rebuttal vis-à-vis scholars who deny transnational law its formal legal character. Ultimately, I argue that despite the private constitution of transnational law-making bodies, and their lack of express public authorization, by fulfilling a transnational fiduciary role they exercise authority which either is or closely resembles public authority. This, in turn, contributes to the legal character of the transnational norms these bodies generate. I use the International Organization for Standardization as an illustrative case study. The implications of this approach include acknowledging that law can exist beyond state regulation, either national or international, as well as denying coercion to be an essential element of law.

Perez-Leon-Acevedo & Nicholson: Defendants and Victims in International Criminal Justice: Ensuring and Balancing Their Rights

Juan Pablo Perez-Leon-Acevedo (Univ. of Oslo - Pluricourts) & Joanna Nicholson (Univ. of Oslo - Pluricourts) have published Defendants and Victims in International Criminal Justice: Ensuring and Balancing Their Rights (Routledge 2020). The table of contents is here. Here's the abstract:

This volume considers a variety of key issues pertaining to the rights of defendants and victims at International Criminal Courts (ICTs) and explores how best to balance and enhance the rights of both in order to ensure the effectiveness and efficiency of international criminal proceedings.

The rights of victims are becoming an increasingly important issue at ICTs. Yet, at the same time, this has to be achieved without having a detrimental impact upon on the rights of the defence and the efficiency of the courts. This book provides analyses of issues on the rights of both the accused and the victims. By discussing matters concerning these two pivotal actors in international criminal justice within the same volume, the work highlights that there are intrinsic and intense conflicting and converging relationships between victims and the accused, particularly in terms of their rights. While most of the chapters focus mainly on either the accused or the victims, others discuss both at the same time. The work strikes a fine balance between, on the one hand, classic topics on the rights of the accused and the rights of the victims and, on the other, topics which have been largely unexplored and/or which require new angles or perspectives. Additionally, there are some chapters which approach both the rights of the accused and the rights of the victims in new contexts and/or under novel perspectives. The book as a whole provides a discussion of the two sides of this important coin of international criminal justice.

Kassoti: The Extraterritorial Applicability of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights: Some Reflections in the Aftermath of the Front Polisario Saga

Eva Kassoti (T.M.C. Asser Institute - Centre for the Law of European External Relations) has posted The Extraterritorial Applicability of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights: Some Reflections in the Aftermath of the Front Polisario Saga (European Journal of Legal Studies, forthcoming). Here's the abstract:

The Front Polisario cases before the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) brought to the forefront the question of whether the EU is bound by the Charter of Fundamental Rights when it concludes trade agreements with third states that may affect the enjoyment of fundamentalrights abroad.This isclosely linked to the broader issue of the extraterritorial application of the Charter. In light of these developments, the article purports to revisit this question with a view to ascertaining the current state of the law. It examines and rejects the argument in favour of transposing the extraterritoriality standard developed by the European Court of Human Rights. Against this backdrop, the article continues by focusing on Article 51 of the Charter, which prescribes the Charter's field of application. The main argument advanced is that territorial considerations are immaterial in the context of determining the Charter's applicability; what seems to matter in this context is whether the situation in question is covered by an European Union (EU) competence.

New Blog: Blog – Droit International Pénal (BDIP)

A new blog on international criminal law is now available: Blog – Droit International Pénal (BDIP). From the announcement:

Nous avons l'honneur et le plaisir de vous annoncer la mise en ligne du Blog – Droit International Pénal (BDIP), premier blog en langue française entièrement dédié à la justice pénale internationale.

L'objectif du blog est d’offrir aux professionnels du droit, enseignants, chercheurs, étudiants et experts francophones un forum d’information, d'échange et de discussion en droit international pénal.

Le blog vise également à contribuer à l’avancement du droit international pénal en offrant la possibilité aux experts intéressés de publier leur analyse de la justice pénale internationale.

Fitzmaurice & Merkouris: Treaties in Motion: The Evolution of Treaties from Formation to Termination

Malgosia Fitzmaurice (Queen Mary Univ. of London - Law) & Panos Merkouris (Rijksuniversiteit Groningen - Law) have published Treaties in Motion: The Evolution of Treaties from Formation to Termination (Cambridge Univ. Press 2020). Here's the abstract:

The law of treaties is in constant motion, understood not only as locomotion, but also as motion through time and as change. Thus, kinesis and stasis, two sides of the same concept of 'motion', are the central themes of Treaties in Motion. The concept of motion adopted in this book is based on the philosophy of Aristotle. He identified six types of motion: creation (genesis), increase (auxesis), diminution (meiosis), alteration (alloiosis), destruction (phthora), and change of place (kata topon metabole), which has been amended by the authors to change in space-time (kata topon kai chronon metavole) to reflect our modern scientific understanding of time as a dimension through which motion and change occurs. Each chapter's analysis proceeds by focusing on a specific area of a treaty's 'life-cycle', where each type of motion shines through and is described through three different frames of reference: treaties, the Vienna Convention of the Law of Treaties, and customary law.

Higgins: The Protection of Cultural Heritage During Armed Conflict: The Changing Paradigms

Noelle Higgins (Maynooth Univ. - Law) has published The Protection of Cultural Heritage During Armed Conflict: The Changing Paradigms (Routledge 2020). Here's the abstract:

This book analyses the current legal framework seeking to protect cultural heritage during armed conflict and discusses proposed and emerging paradigms for its better protection. Cultural heritage has always been a victim of conflict, with monuments and artefacts frequently destroyed as collateral damage in wars throughout history. In addition, works of art have been viewed as booty by victors and stolen in the aftermath of conflict. However, deliberate destruction of cultural sites and items has also occurred, and the Intentional destruction of cultural heritage has been a hallmark of recent conflicts in the Middle East and North Africa, where we have witnessed unprecedented, systematic attacks on culture as a weapon of war. In Iraq, Syria, Libya, Yemen, and Mali, extremist groups such as ISIS and Ansar Dine have committed numerous acts of iconoclasm, deliberately destroying heritage sites, and looting valuable artefacts symbolic of minority cultures. This study explores how the international law framework can be fully utilised in order to tackle the destruction of cultural heritage, and analyses various paradigms which have recently been suggested for its better protection, including the Responsibility to Protect paradigm and the peace and security paradigm.

New Issue: Human Rights Law Review

The latest issue of the Human Rights Law Review (Vol. 20, no. 2, June 2020) is out. Contents include:

• Theodor Schilling, The Recognition of Human Rights: A Threefold Myth
• David Keane, Mapping the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination as a Living Instrument
• Amrei Müller, Can Armed Non-state Actors Exercise Jurisdiction and Thus Become Human Rights Duty-bearers?
• Annick Pijnenburg, Containment Instead of Refoulement: Shifting State Responsibility in the Age of Cooperative Migration Control?
• Jonathan Collinson, Reconstructing the European Court of Human Rights’ Article 8 Jurisprudence in Deportation Cases: The Family’s Right and the Public Interest
• Shu-Perng Hwang, Margin of Appreciation in Pursuit of Pluralism? Critical Remarks on the Judgments of the European Court of Human Rights on the ‘Burqa Bans’

Bath & Nottage: International Investment Agreements and Investor-State Arbitration in Asia

Vivienne Bath (Univ. of Sydney - Law) & Luke R. Nottage (Univ. of Sydney - Law) have posted International Investment Agreements and Investor-State Arbitration in Asia. Here's the abstract:

States across Asia have long engaged in international investment treaty making, and to a lesser extent in investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) proceedings. Engagement has intensified partly as bilateral investment treaties (BITs) proliferated especially from the 1990s, but also Asian states started to conclude more comprehensive bilateral and then regional free trade agreements (FTAs), including within and with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). Some nations have been more cautious historically, and recent experiences with ISDS claims have led Indonesia and especially India to terminate many old BITs and press out in new directions. This paper details Asia’s trajectory towards becoming more of a “law maker” by focusing on multilateral initiatives (through soft and hard law), ASEAN and its key member states, China and the “Belt and Road” initiative, India, Japan and Korea, Australia and New Zealand.

Ryngaert: Selfless Intervention: The Exercise of Jurisdiction in the Common Interest

Cedric Ryngaert (Utrecht Univ. - Law) has published Selfless Intervention: The Exercise of Jurisdiction in the Common Interest (Oxford Univ. Press 2020). Here's the abstract:

Should states intervene in situations outside of their own territory in order to safeguard or promote the common good? In this book, Cedric Ryngaert addresses this key question, looking at how the international law of state jurisdiction can be harnessed to serve interests common to the international community. The author inquires how the purpose of the law of jurisdiction may shift from protecting national interests to furthering international concerns, such as those relating to the global environment and human rights. Such a shift is enabled by the instability of the notion of jurisdiction, as well as the interpretative ambiguity of the related notions of sovereignty and territoriality. There is no denying that, in the real world, 'selfless intervention' by states tends to combine with more insular considerations. This book argues, however, that such considerations do not necessarily detract from the legitimacy of unilateralism, but may precisely serve to trigger the exercise of jurisdiction in the common interest.

Núñez: Territorial Disputes and State Sovereignty: International Law and Politics

Jorge E. Núñez (Manchester Metropolitan Univ. - Law) has published Territorial Disputes and State Sovereignty: International Law and Politics (Routledge 2020). Here's the abstract:

Many sovereignty conflicts remain unresolved around the world. Current solutions in law, political science and international relations generally prove problematic to at least one of the agents part of these differences. Arguing that disputes are complex, multi-layered and multi-faceted, this book brings together a global, inter-disciplinary view of territorial disputes. The book reviews the key conceptual elements central to legal and political sciences with regards to territorial disputes: state, sovereignty and self-determination. Looking at some of the current long-standing disputes worldwide, it compares and contrasts the many issues at stake and the potential remedies currently available in order to assess why some territorial disputes remain unresolved. Finally, it offers a set of guidelines for dispute settlement and conflict resolution that current remedies fail to provide.

New Issue: Jus Gentium: Journal of International Legal History

The latest issue of Jus Gentium: Journal of International Legal History (Vol. 5, no. 1, 2020) is out. Contents include:

• Articles
• David K. C. Huang & Nigel N. T. Li, Bu-Fu-Zhou: A Lesson from Ancient China: Degeneration of the Institution of Zhou from Constitution to International Law and on to Anarchy
• Sean Morris, The Private Foundations of International Law: Intellectual Property Rights and Pashukanis
• O. V. Kresin, Ukrainian Statehood in the Mid-Seventeenth to Early Eighteenth Centuries in Treaties with Foreign States: Principal Legal Models (Part One)
• V. S. Ivanenko, Aleksandr Pilenko: International Law and Invention Law in Russia
• Notes and Comments
• Mohsen Nikbin, On the Origins of the Earliest Lecture on International Law In Persia
• Documents and Other Evidence of State Practice
• William E. Butler, Thomas Baty: Legal Adviser to the Government of Japan
• Thomas Baty, Enemy Allegiance, Domicile, and “House of Trade”
• Peter Macalister-Smith & Joachim Schwietzke, A Brief Calendar of State Practice for Shandong: 1897-1924: Part One (1897-1904): Open Door to China