Search: extraterritorial sanctions

...“solidarity” – that is, “national, international, multilateral, bilateral, and multisectoral collaboration, coordination and cooperation in order to achieve a fairer, more equitable and better prepared world” (art. 4). Other experts of international law and relations argue that global solidarity encompasses not only pandemic preparedness, but espouses broader obligations, including the notion of common but differentiated responsibility, the denouncing of charitable assistance, and intergenerational equity – providing for manifestations of solidarity in pandemic prevention, preparedness, response, and recovery. Aligning this clear commitment to global solidarity with extraterritorial human rights obligations of...

...proposition that the Rome Statute obligates state parties to enact universal jurisdiction for ICC crimes Step 2: the decision to code a state as having enacted universal jurisdiction if it (a) is a party to the Rome Statute and (b) its domestic law provides for jurisdiction over crimes obligated by international treaty As I explained in my original post, Step 1 is flawed. The Rome Statute does not include universal jurisdiction, and has no obligation whatsoever for state parties to provide (extraterritorial) jurisdiction for ICC crimes. I suspect that the...

...Since the 1980s, the southern neighbor has served as a buffer zone to prevent mass movement up north (FitzGerald, David Scott Refuge Beyond Reach (OUP 2019), pp. 123-159). To halt and decrease the rapidly rising numbers of asylums seekers from Central America in the last months, the US government has pushed for the above-described policies. Both policies, the extraterritorial asylum processing (‘Remain in Mexico-policy’) and the safe-third-country concept, were implemented after a combination of immense pressure from the US government and good coaxing. President Trump had used the threat to...

...of human rights committees (General Comment No. 14 on the Right to Health; the General Comment No. 5 on the Rights of the Child; Maastricht Principles on Extraterritorial Obligations of States in the Area of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights 2011). This provision has become more relevant in the context of demand of developing countries to address the issue of ‘the transformation of global governance’ as  a new and old dimension of the realisation of the right o development (Chimni and Balakrishnan). In pursuance to Article 13(4), States Parties have...

...— it’s unclear from the fact sheet — its new understanding of the use of lethal force applies only to the current conflict. Second, although I don’t imagine that the US much cares, the jus ad bellum-like targeting standards announced in the fact sheet do not necessarily satisfy the limitations on lethal force imposed by international human rights law. As I have pointed out ad nauseum on the blog (see here for an example), whether an extraterritorial use of force is legitimate under the jus ad bellum says nothing about...

...are much less well known. Regardless, until now these parts have not been put together and treated as an interconnected, if occasionally wide-ranging, narrative. My third aim is to advance several more specific claims about this legal evolution. First, the central concept of extraterritoriality has shown surprising continuity in its purpose even as its form has changed dramatically. Extraterritoriality meant very different things to nineteenth-century lawyers than it does to contemporary lawyers. But the primary function of extraterritoriality has remained, at a fundamental level, the same. That function, I argue,...

...and standards, the Commission addresses several other important aspects of the Charter’s application to the rights of Climate Migrants and Climate Refugees. First, the Guiding Principles affirm that, necessarily, migrants have a right to development that must include climate-resilient development ( Principle 32). The Commission thus urges States party to the Charter to take action to address the extraterritorial effects of climate change. And, in the context of the right to climate resilient development, second, the Commission notes that States must adopt mitigation measures in addition to adaptation and resilience...

...cases will be determined in the future according to the detailed statutory scheme Congress has enacted. Other cases may arise with allegations of serious violations of international law principles protecting persons, cases covered neither by the TVPA nor by the reasoning and holding of today’s case; and in those disputes the proper implementation of the presumption against extraterritorial application may require some further elaboration and explanation. UPDATE: In the annals of amusing moments in OJ history, looks like Julian and I had much the same thought at the same moment....

Here is the bottom line of the Roberts’ opinion, which makes it sound like this whole ATS thing is really a simple application of Morrison v. National Australia Bank. On these facts, all the relevant conduct took place outside the United States. And even where the claims touch and concern the territory of the United States, they must do so with sufficient force to displace the presumption against extraterritorial application. See Morrison, 561 U. S. ___ (slip op. at 17–24). Corporations are often present in many countries, and it would...

...urge the Obama administration, and offer it advice, on how to preserve the legal category of targeted killing as an aspect of inherent rights of self-defense and US domestic law. As such, this paper runs sharply counter to the dominant trend in international law scholarship, which is overwhelmingly hostile to the practice. It urges the Obama administration to consider carefully ways in which apparently unrelated, broadly admirable human rights goals, such as accepting extraterritorial application of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, or accepting its standards as a...

...this event particularly welcome papers addressing one of the following sets of issues: rules and norms of responsible State behaviour in cyberspace, in particular in the context of the new OEWG and GGE proceedings; Western and non-Western approaches to international law in cyberspace; the application of international humanitarian law to cyber armed conflicts; sovereignty in cyberspace; aspects of “digital sovereignty”; State responsibility in cyberspace; individual and collective reactions to cyberattacks, cyber restrictive measures, countermeasures etc.; supply chain security and international trade law (vide 5G, Huawei, etc.); and extraterritorial jurisdiction (U.S....

...contemporary realities are placing unprecedented strain on these foundations. Climate change threatening statehood; non-state actors exercising de facto territorial control; contested maritime and land boundaries; extraterritorial jurisdiction; and the enduring legacies/challenges of decolonisation and self-determination. In parallel, the prohibition on the use of force, the resilience of territorial integrity, and the role of international adjudication mechanisms in deciding territorial disputes are increasingly being tested by ongoing military conflicts and deeply contested geopolitical contexts. Against this backdrop, an overarching question emerges: Does international law’s understanding of territory remain fit for purpose...