In association with the International Commission of Jurists

Topics

18 Mar

[Cecile Aptel is Associate Professor of International Law at the Fletcher School, Tufts University] Among the many legal and factual issues raised by the landmark Lubanga judgment rendered by the ICC this week, a central one concerns the definition of “the use [of children under 15] to participate actively in hostilities” qualified as war crimes under both article 8(2)(b)(xxvi) and 8(2)(e)(vii)...

|
17 Mar

I don't have any particular insights to add on the very interesting and detailed roundtable discussion folks are having on the Lubanga judgment.  But I can't resist pointing out this op-ed by Ian Paisley (the son of a leading figure on the Northern Irish settlement) in the New York Times slamming the ICC as a obstruction to national reconciliation and...

|
17 Mar

In his recent guest post, Doug Cassel attempts to portray Chevron as the innocent victim of illegal and unethical conduct by the lawyers for the plaintiffs harmed by its predecessor's dumping of 16.8 million gallons of crude oil and 20 billion gallons of toxic waste into the Ecuadorian rainforest.  Cassel writes as an advocate for Chevron, so he can hardly...

|
17 Mar

[Doug Cassel is Professor of Law at Notre Dame Law School] In an environmental suit brought by lawyers for some residents of the Amazon, an Ecuadorian court last year issued an $18.2 billion judgment against Chevron. Readers who follow the case only casually may have the impression that this is a classic case of David vs. Goliath, and that Ecuadorian courts...

|
17 Mar

Welcome to the second edition of our Weekend Roundup. Last week’s edition can be found here. Last weekend, Claude Bruderlein’s guest post discussed the growing tension on the means and methods to provide humanitarian protection in Syria. Two posts built on posts from last week. Picking up on Anthony Colangelo’s guest post arguing against applying the presumption against extraterritoriality to the...

|
16 Mar

I'll have much to say about various legal aspects of the Lubanga judgment in the days to come, but I wanted to start by discussing the relatively narrow -- though critically important -- point that Jens addressed in his post: the dispute between the majority and Judge Fulford concerning the correct interpretation of co-perpetration in Article 25(3)(a) of the Rome...

|
16 Mar

With characteristic perspicuity, Professor Osofsky has offered a magnificent synthesis of my book and this week’s roundtable, all informed by her perspective about international law. I thank her for her remarks. Professor Osofsky raises a question of how my theory would help less powerful decisionmakers in the international legal system. Let it not be mistaken, and Profssor Osofsky does not...

|
16 Mar

[Chester Brown is Associate Professor at the Faculty of Law, University of Sydney] Thanks to Professor Cheng for his thoughtful response. As a follow-up comment, this discussion should not conclude without mention of another hard case, being the International Court of Justice’s advisory opinion in Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons. In its advisory opinion of...

|
15 Mar

[Jens Ohlin is Associate Professor of Law at Cornell Law School] Cross-posted at LieberCode. So the ICC has released its first verdict and it only took 10 years.  Most media reports are concentrating on the substantive crime – the use of child soldiers – because that issue has suddenly gained popular currency with the Kony2012 viral video. But the Lubanga decision is also...

|
15 Mar

[Chester Brown is Associate Professor at the Faculty of Law, University of Sydney] In international life, decision-makers face difficult problems on a regular basis. What should decision-makers do, for instance, when international rules that “promote minimum world order and universally-desired values” run counter to, or threaten, “basic values or essential interests of communities” that those decision-makers serve (p. 2)? ...

|