Weekend Roundup: October 26-November 1, 2013

by An Hertogen

This week on Opinio Juris, we held a symposium on Chevron and the rise of arbitral power introduced here by Michael D. Goldhaber. Comments were by Christoph Schreuer, Anthea Roberts, and Muthucumaraswamy Sornarajah. Michael’s response is here.

In follow up on earlier symposia, Anupam Chander posted his reply to the comments in last week’s book symposium on The Electronic Silk Road and Anne van Aaken responded to Tomer Broude’s guest posts on behavioral international law and economics.

Peter wondered why Bond v United States came to be prosecuted under the Chemical Weapons Convention, and noted emerging efforts towards a human right to privacy in the wake of the NSA spying scandal. Julian did not think these efforts would lead anywhere, and put more faith in the conclusion of no-spy agreements.

Kevin posted about his recent talk at Chatham House defending the specific direction requirementFollowing reports by The Sudan Tribune that the presiding judge had threatened William Ruto with arrest if he commented publicly on his case, later corrected after a clarification by the ICCKevin examined whether there is any legal basis on which the Court can silence an accused. Kevin also pointed out problems with the appointment of a new judge in the Seselj case, which led to a very active discussion in the comments.

Julian asked whether Japan’s pledge to shoot down Chinese drones violates international law. Maybe the Japanese could learn a thing or two from the British Navy and its use of Britney Spears’ songs to scare away Somali pirates along Africa’s East Coast.

Finally, Sean D. Murphy summarized the International Law Commission’s work in its 65th session, Kristen posted about the ASIL Mid-Year Meeting that we suspect quite a few of our readers will be attending, and Jessica listed the events and announcements and wrapped up the news.

Thank you very much to our guest posters and have a nice weekend!

Weekend Roundup: October 19-25, 2013

by An Hertogen

This week on Opinio Juris, Ken contributed a post on legally distinct corporate entities and agency theory in Bauman v Daimler AGChris wrote about Russia’s Realpolitik towards former USSR members that are seeking closer contact with the EU, and Deborah wrote about due process in targeting.

Julian noticed how Russia had taken a leaf out of China’s book by walking out of an ITLOS arbitration, and responded to Wim Muller who argued that it was merely following a long establish US’ example in ICJ cases.

We held a book symposium on The Electronic Silk Road by Anupam Chander, with comments by Michael Birnhack, Mira Burri, Paul Stephan, Molly LandJoost Pauwelyn, and Jake Colvin.

Chris Jenks wrote a guest post on criminal jurisdiction over US troops in Afghanistan, and Kevin mentioned his guest post at Just Security. Kevin also criticized the ICC’s Appeals Chamber for requiring Ruto’s continuous presence at his trial.

Finally, Jessica rounded up the news and I collated a list of events and announcements.

Many thanks to our guest posters and have a nice weekend!

Weekend Roundup: October 12-18, 2013

by An Hertogen

This week on Opinio Juris, Tomer Broude completed his trilogy on behavioral international law. Also continuing from last week was Carsten Stahn’s rejoinder to Harold Koh on intervention and the use of force, and Jens Iverson’s guest post highlighting the underlying commitments of Professors Stahn and Koh.

We also published guests posts by Faiza Patel on the OPCW and by Adam Steinman on this week’s SCOTUS oral argument in Daimler v Bauman.

Of our regular bloggers, Deborah disagreed with Jack Goldsmith on the rarity of capture operations overseas, but outlined other concerns with this approach to counterterrorism. Julian pointed out how China’s understanding of the peaceful settlement of disputes excludes international adjudication. Despite finding much to like in the PTC’s decision in al-Senussi, Kevin was troubled by the inconsistency with the Gaddafi decision on the right to counsel. He also was not impressed by the PTC invoking Libya’s security situation.

Finally, Jessica wrapped up the news and listed events and announcements.

Many thanks to our guest contributors and have a nice weekend!

Weekend Roundup: October 5-11, 2013

by Jessica Dorsey

This week on Opinio Juris, we had two guest posts from Tomer Broude, the first giving an introduction to behavioral law and the second discussing a methodological framework to behavioral law. Carsten Stahn also delivered a guest post on cautioning against a new affirmative defense to Article 2(4) of the UN Charter, in response to argumentation put forth by Harold Koh’s Just Security contribution.

Kevin discussed Charles Taylor’s disproportionate sentencing in a post examining the Special Court for Sierra Leone’s treatment of customary international law. Duncan posted this week with his analysis on the existential function of interpretation in international law and Roger pointed out “the fact that” we lawyers ought to omit needless words.

Kristen highlighted the recent class action lawsuit filed in the Southern District of New York by the lawyers for the Haiti Cholera victims while Deborah offered insight into the raids in Somalia and Libya recently by the US and their implications on the theories of self defense and responded to Marty Lederman’s Just Security take on her analysis here. Deborah also pointed out an upcoming event on counterterrorism strategies taking place Monday, which she will moderate. Rounding things out, I provided the Weekly News Wrap and you can find An’s Events and Announcements post here.

Many thanks to our guest contributors and have a nice weekend!

Weekend Roundup: September 28 – October 4, 2013

by An Hertogen

This week on Opinio Juris, we organized a book symposium on Investment Law in International Law: Integrationist Perspectives, edited by Dr Freya Baetens. If you enjoyed the symposium, don’t miss CUP’s offer of a 20% discount for our readers. More details are here. Freya introduced the goals of the book, followed by comments by Laurence Boisson de Chazournes.

On Tuesday, Nicolas Hachez and Jan Wouters assessed the need for an alternative to the arbitral model to preserve the public interest. Their reply to Tullio Treves’ comments is here. Vid Prislan addressed how non-investment obligations could be taken into account in investment arbitration, with comments by Kathleen Claussen.

Gleider Hernandez explored the interaction between investment law and the law of international armed conflict, which Bill Burke-White welcomed as a great opening for further research in this area. Philipp Ambach also dealt with the interaction between these two fields of international law in his post on the international criminal responsibility of transnational corporate actors doing business in zones of armed conflict, on which Judge Howard Morrison commented.

Anastasios Gourgourinis discussed the relationship between investment law and WTO law in the minimum standard of treatment of aliens, to which Anne van Aaken responded, followed by Anastasios’ reply. Mary Footer also reflected on the relationship between investment law and trade law. In response, Gabrielle Marceau discussed what dispute settlement in trade and investment systems can learn from each other. Mary’s reply is here.

On the last day, Elisabeth Tuerk and Wolfgang Alschner discussed how international investment treaties could contribute to sustainable development, with comments by Andrea Bjorklund, and Moshe Hirsch looked at the interaction between investment agreements and human rights treaties from a sociological perspective. Andreas Ziegler’s comments rounded up the symposium.

In our regular posts, Julian wondered when the Dutch government would file an ITLOS action after Russia charged Greenpeace activists with piracyKevin asked whether the ICC had learned anything from Melinda Taylor’s detention in Libya and whether The Guardian‘s legal affairs correspondent had read Perisic. He also continued last week’s inter-blog discussion with Ryan Goodman. The inter-blog discussion with JustSecurity continued with Kevin’s four thoughts on Harold Koh’s defense of unilateral humanitarian intervention.

Ken followed up on a post by Roger last week on jurisprudence post-Kiobel, by discussing his recent essay on the resurgence of the traditional bases of jurisdiction in the Alien Tort Statute. A guest post by John Dehn also revisited an earlier post, discussing an article by Sarah Cleveland and Bill Dodge on the Offenses Clause.

Finally, Jessica provided her weekly news wrap and listed events and announcements, while Julian posted a special announcement on the 2013 International Law Weekend.

Many thanks to our guest contributors and have a nice weekend!