Weekend Roundup: February 25 – March 3, 2019

It was a busy week on Opinio Juris.

Julian Ku kicked things off with an interesting post on the legal ramifications of the status of the “Memorandum of Understanding” (MOU) between the US and China on trade matters. Scholars and students of the law of treaties and the WTO will be especially interested in Julian’s post.

Alonso Gurmendi contributed a thought-provoking piece on the United States’ troubling history of interventionism in Latin America (including Venezuela) from the time of the Monroe doctrine to the present day. Later in the week, Alonso speculated about what a post-Maduro transitional justice scheme might look like, with a particular focus on the role that amnesties might play. Alonso completed the hat trick with a post on how Venezuela’s lawyers in the ongoing ICSID award Rusoro Mining Ltd. v. Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela currently being enforced in the US District Court of the District of Columbia switched sides after Guaidó was controversially sworn in as interim President. He also noted the broader ramifications of the switch on government recognition.

Priya Pillai offered an illuminating post on the latest iteration of cross-border attacks between India and Pakistan, which delved much deeper and more substantively than anything reported on the latest tensions between the two states in the mainstream media this past week.

Kevin Jon Heller wrote a compelling piece on Microsoft’s moral abdication vis-à-vis its recent weapons development for the US Army, which was a first for the company (weapons development, not moral abdication, so as not to confuse the modifier). Kevin was particularly critical of Microsoft’s justification for the development and sale of this advanced technology; namely, that the US is a democracy. “Even great democracies do terrible things.” Indeed.

Rishi Gulati contributed an important post on the possible (if not welcomed) weakening of the immunity of international organizations in domestic litigation resulting from the judgment of the US Supreme Court in Jam v. International Finance Corporation. In the opinion of this assistant editor, such an opinion is long overdue, and Rishi’s post is well worth the read.

Caroline Fish discussed how states have been struggling to develop a strategy on how to deal with ISIS returnees (in particular, ISIS brides and their children), while striving to comply with their obligations under international anti-trafficking and human rights laws.

Katayoun Hosseinnejad and Pouria Askary wrapped up the week by joining forces to highlight the inconsistencies in the ICJ’s recent judgment on preliminary objections in the case of Certain Iranian Assets, in particular as they relate to the problematic relationship between specific treaty provisions and customary international law on state immunities.

Many thanks to our guest contributors and have a great week!