Another week has gone by at Opinio Juris with much to say about current events in international law and international relations. In fact, this week, we hosted an online symposium on the recent book by Jeffrey Dunoff and Mark Pollock, Interdisciplinary Perspectives on International Law and International Relations.
In other coverage this week, Julian argued on how the UN Charter does not necessarily constrain China in starting territorial disputes that involve sovereignty claims. He also commented here and here on the proposed visa application of Sudan’s President Omar Al-Bashir, who is trying to enter the United States for the upcoming UN General Assembly meetings, despite the arrest warrant for him from the ICC. Kevin also weighed in here on that subject, and Kristen argued that travel sanctions should be used against Bashir.
Kevin also pointed out the erroneous Al-Jazeera news report from Thursday that reported Saif al-Islam Gaddafi would appear in Tripoli, and pointed out that he appeared in Zintan instead (with his trial being adjourned until December in order to allow other defendants to be present). Kevin additionally discussed the current “score” in Syria events of Putin & Assad: 1, US: 0, and took issue with Eric Posner’s column in Slate on the coming death of the ICC.
As usual, we featured our news wraps and our conferences and events. Thanks for following us at Opinio Juris and have an enjoyable weekend!
Calls for Papers
- A call for papers has been issued for the 2014 Barcelona Workshop on Global Governance, happening January 9-10, 2014. The theme is Networks in Global Governance and the call is here.
- The Society of International Economic Law has posted a call for papers ahead of its Fourth Biennial Global Conference, to be held in Bern, Switzerland and hosted by the World Trade Institute (WTI) of the University of Bern, Switzerland on 10-12 July 2014. The Conference Theme will be Regulatory Challenges in International Economic Law: Convergence or Divergence? Paper, poster and panel proposals must be submitted by Monday 4th November by Noon GMT via email to siel14 [at] wti [dot] org.
- RGNUL Financial and Mercantile Law review, is a student run, peer review online review, published bi-annually. We have issued a call for papers, which can be accessed on our website (rfmlawreview.org). Our review primarily focuses on South Asian, International and South East Asian laws. We are looking for articles (25 to 30,000 words), notes (8-10,000 words), reviews (10,000 words) and essays (5,000 words). The last date for submissions is the 15th of November. The review is published by Rajiv Gandhi National University of Law, Patiala, India. You can find out more on the website here.
- On September 20th, Fordham University Law School will host a symposium on the complex and shifting nature of citizenship rights in a post 9/11 world, which will address the following questions: How have the post 9/11 legal and policy battles affected the legal rights of citizens and non-citizens? How can we best understand the tensions between the state’s duty to protect its citizens and its desire to protect individual rights and liberties? Has the vigilance about terrorism weakened the protections associated with citizenship, particularly with respect to ethnic and religious minorities? One of the panelists is our own Peter Spiro. More information can be found here and you can register here.
- On September 27-28, 2013, the World Trade Institute will host World Trade Forum 2013. The theme is Trade Cooperation: The Purpose, Design and Effects of Preferential Trade Agreements and the program is here.
- On November 15, iCourts will host a conference on The Future Role of the European Court of Human Rights in Copenhagen. The program is here.
Last week’s events and announcements can be found here. If you would like to post an announcement on Opinio Juris, please contact us.
Syria dominated (and continues to dominate) the headlines this week, and we featured many takes on the developing situation through our Syria Insta-Symposium.
From our regular contributors, Julian pondered whether President Obama would reveal the international law justification on his position regarding intervention in Syria and Kevin questioned US Secretary of State John Kerry’s classification of Syria as the United States’ “Munich Moment.”
Peter and Deborah both discussed US domestic/constitutional implications at length. Peter called President Obama’s decision to consult Congress on military intervention a “watershed moment” and wondered if his lawyers were consulted in this apparent about-face move, while Deborah classified it as a wise decision by Obama. They both offered commentary on the text of the Senate draft AUMF (Peter here, and Deborah here) and Deborah also pointed to a discussion she took part in among scholars on the Huffington Post. Julian also weighed in on the AUMF, concluding that the UN Charter does not matter to the US Senate’s deliberations on authorizing force in Syria and Ken discussed the role of the Security Council in light of his recent ASIL Insight and posting at Lawfare.
From our guest contributors, Jennifer Trahan started off the symposium by taking on contentious subject matter in a post discussing the legality of a strike by the United States. John Quigley weighed in with his thoughts on intervention while Andre Nollkaemper sketched out the two paths States might choose to take for intervening: either acting inside or outside of international law. Marty Lederman weighed in with a two-part posting, the first talking about the intersection of the UN Charter and the US Constitution, and the second addressing the role of the UN Charter in the US Congressional debate. The former theme of Marty’s two posts was also featured in Charlie Kels‘ contribution discussing the intersection of the two legal regimes. Stephanie Carvin urged readers to bring practical judgment back in rather than solely relying on legal solutions, while Sondre Torp Helmersen crafted a reply to Stephanie’s post. Krista Nelson offered an analysis on the significance of using chemical weapons in international law.
Otto Spijkers offered a perspective on whether states could stand idly by in the Syria situation by comparing bystander obligations at the international level to Dutch domestic law. Ezequiel Heffes and Brian Frankel talk about the decision-making process in R2P situations, and Mark Kersten wonders whose R2P it is, anyway.
And in non-Syria news this week, Julian pointed out that Japan has threatened to take Korea to the ICJ over victims’ compensation claims in the Second World War, Kevin described why Kenya won’t withdraw from the ICC and Kristen covered Friday’s verdict in the Dutchbat case from the Dutch Supreme Court holding the Netherlands responsible for the deaths of three men at Srebrenica.
As usual, we provided our Weekday News Wraps as well as upcoming Events and Announcements. Have a great weekend!