Search: {search_term_string}

[Professor Alanna O’Malley is Chair of Global Governance & Wealth at Erasmus University and an ERC Laureate with a research project entitled: ‘Challenging the liberal world order from within, the Invisible History of the United Nations and the Global South.’ Her second book, Decolonising Global Order is forthcoming.] Among proclamations of the ‘crisis’ of multilateralism and the peril facing the rules-based international order, one note rings clear: international law is on the brink of a renaissance. On one hand, flagrant violations of basic principles such as the prohibition to use...

...is preferable to war, cooperation is preferable to conflict and that all human beings are entitled to the protection of some basic rights. Those of us who believe that such an institution has served and will continue to serve the long-term interests of the United States (as well as the long-term interests of all actors in the international system) must work to ensure that the institution is capable of carrying out that mandate. That means paying attention to “little” things, such as fiscal corruption and incompetence within the bureaucracy, as...

...remains a popular query at Jessup competitions, one that has been answered in a variety of ways. Some argue that, in light of Article 38, paragraph 3(d) of the ICJ Statute, the references to the Commission’s work in judicial decisions constitute a subsidiary means for the determination of international law. Others maintain that the Commission could be considered as a “highly qualified publicist”. In addition, the outcomes of the Commission’s work often reflect customary international law. Nonetheless, in recent years no outcome of the Commission’s work has been taken up...

[Philip Alston, John Norton Pomeroy Professor of Law at New York University School of Law, describes his recently published article, Hobbling the Monitors: Should U.N. Human Rights Monitors be Accountable?. This post is part of the Second Harvard International Law Journal/Opinio Juris Symposium.] The critical issue I examine in this Article is whether a group of independent experts, or monitors, explicitly created to hold governments to account in terms of their human rights obligations, can be subjected to a strong accountability regime controlled by those same governments, without destroying the...

...international law would have been formally more convincing. “Special Military Operation” Notably, President Putin has euphemistically referred to Russia’s attack as a “special military operation”. This concept does not exist under international humanitarian law (IHL). The proper terms would have been “war” or “international armed conflict” in the sense of Article 2 common to the 1949 Geneva Conventions. However, obviously, Putin could not use any of these terms, because the aggressive term “war” would not have been approved by his supporters, and the meaning of the technical legal phrase “international...

conditions for resilient and thriving societies. When people are free from discrimination, can access education and health care, and are shielded from exploitation, they are in a position to contribute to and benefit from economic systems. But the stark data of how far short the world is falling in realizing these rights underscore the failure of a development model that prioritizes short-term growth over long-term resilience, that inadequately measures the total cost of economic activity, and that skews incentives toward financial return instead of contributions to the sustainability of the...

...toward using military commissions to prosecute some detainees, perhaps including those charged with coordinating the Sept. 11 attacks. “The more they look at it,” said one official, “the more commissions don’t look as bad as they did on Jan. 20.” My WCL colleague, Darrin Hutchinson, sums up one (unhappy) view of this from the left, here. But I want to skip over the charges of hypocrisy and walk-backs and address a longer term issue. Part of the idea of national security court has been the issues of evidence and all...

which international norms penetrate domestic legal systems on the local level. Ethnographic research involves case-oriented study, including long-term fieldwork and in-depth interviews. In the context of studying international law, fieldwork is frequently multi-sited to allow researchers to analyze such phenomena as the transnational circulation of global norms and local settings where multiple legal orders intersect—or what scholars call “global legal pluralism.” By tracking the flow of laws, institutions, people, and ideas across locales and jurisdictions, multi-sited “deterritorialized” ethnography is a useful tool in the study of international law. Anthropological research...

...unilaterally released prisoners held by the Vietcong – the communist insurgent group in the south that would under today’s usage almost certainly be described as terrorists. We did this by taking a calculated risk that any short term tactical burden we might bear by some individuals’ release was outweighed by the long term strategic benefit to the United States of acting, and being seen to act, in a manner consistent with the prevailing law. When and how such exchanges may be carried out in the existing conflict with Al Qaeda...

...while Ukraine too might seek to rebuild its arsenal with Western support. At best, a highly unstable situation would obtain, where a renewal of hostilities would be easily possible or even likely. The alternative is a broader settlement that might meet the interests of both sides, at least for the mid-term. This would allow for a stabilization of the situation, the management of issues that arise in the immediate wake of the armed confrontation, and international steps supporting implementation of a settlement.  This might be followed by a broader, pan-European...

...is currently attached to these rules. Precise rules provide clarity in determining what conduct is lawful versus conduct that is unlawful. A caveat is that if attempts at making a rule precise results in overprecision, then the law may fall into the ‘trap of over-exhaustiveness’ (p. 91), meaning conduct not explicitly mentioned becomes legally permissible, even if it results in the same or similar outcomes as conduct that is unlawful according to that same rule. It is therefore crucial to strike a balance that avoids creating ambiguity regarding what conduct...

...it will be giving a big green light to Kris Kobach et al and depriving opponents of an important argument (namely, that the laws are unconstitutional). A win for Arizona at the Court would probably spur at least a short term uptick in state and local activity. If, on the other hand, the Court quashes SB 1070, it will energize restrictionists in Washington, running the risk of unfavorable federal immigration legislation. (More on that in a subsequent post.) So why did the Court take the case? A veteran Supreme Court...