Search: Affective Justice: Book Symposium: A Response

level. Firstly, the article, in my view correctly, distinguishes the rule of law from “the existence of, and compliance with, substantive international law obligations” (p. 15). On that ground, it does not include “all human rights in the rule of law”. Later on, however, the definition of international rule of law provided does include “access to justice to protect human rights”. Why only access to justice to protect some substantive rights and not others? Does this definition not imply, contrary to the author’s earlier statements, that human rights are part...

[Jean Galbraith is an Assistant Professor at the University of Pennsylvania Law School] One mechanism through which international law regulates the behavior of states and other actors is deadlines. Although little studied, deadlines appear throughout international law, especially in treaty regimes. Drawing on a future book chapter, in this post I describe some of the roles played by deadlines in international law. I also consider what insights research on the use of deadlines in domestic contexts might have for good and bad ways to use deadlines in international law. Uses...

This week it is our pleasure to host a symposium on Professor Ruti Teitel’s article Transitional Justice and Judicial Activism: A Right to Accountability? (.pdf). After an initial post by Professor Tetitel, we will have comments by Dinah PoKempner of Human Rights Watch, Professor Cesare Romano of Loyola, and Professor Chandra Sriram of the University of East London. We are looking forward to the discussion!...

...August, 2021 on the acceptance of which, full papers shall be submitted by 11:59 PM on 30th November, 2021 (tentatively). All extended abstract submissions must be made through this form by  11:59 PM (Indian Standard Time) on 31st August, 2021. Authors are requested to visit the official website of the Journal for the detailed submission guidelines. In case of any queries, the editorial board can be reached at itlj[at]nliu[dot]ac[dot]in.  GoJIL Symposium – “Does the Exception Swallow the Rule?: The Compulsory Settlement of EEZ Fisheries Disputes under Part XV of UNCLOS”: On 26 August, a GoJIL symposium will be held on the...

This week, we are hosting another book symposium on Opinio Juris. This time, we feature a discussion of William Boothby’s new book, New Technologies and the Law in War and Peace, published by Cambridge University Press. In addition to comments from William himself, we have the honor to hear from a list of renowned scholars and practitioners: Kobi Leins, Robert McLaughlin, Melissa de Zwart, Alejandro Chehtman, Rain Liivoja, Markus Wagner, Cassandra Steer, Rasha Abdul Rahim and Opinio Juris’ own Emeritus contributor, Chris Borgen. From the publisher: Policymakers, legislators, scientists, thinkers,...

[Gregory Shaffer is the Melvin C. Steen Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota Law School. Joel P. Trachtman is the Professor of International Law at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University.] This post is part of the Virginia Journal of International Law Symposium, Volume 52, Issues 1 and 2. Other posts in this series can be found in the related posts below. First, we would like to thank the Virginia Journal of International Law for inviting us to participate in this online discussion and...

[Julie Bardèche is a French lawyer and a legal advisor at REDRESS , an NGO that pursues legal claims on behalf of survivors of torture in the UK and around the world to obtain justice and reparation for the violation of their human rights.] The author represented REDRESS at the Diplomatic Conference that led to the adoption of the Ljubljana-The Hague Convention. The right of victims of core international crimes to an effective remedy and to reparation is well-established both in international human rights and humanitarian law. In essence, a...

...for an internationally wrongful act. In response, some have proposed stretching the law of superior/command responsibility to criminalize negligence by commanders, procurers, and others involved in the design and deployment of AI-enabled weapon systems, but this is a misguided and insufficient response. (Misguided because it threatens to further delegitimize international criminal law, insufficient because it would still not address all unintended civilian harms.) When civilians suffer the horrific consequences of armed conflict, they deserve redress. But neither international criminal law nor state responsibility provides any form of remedy when civilian...

[William Boothby is an Adjunct Professor of Law at La Trobe University, Melbourne. This post is part of our New Technologies and the Law in War and Peace Symposium.] That the pace of technological advance has quickened markedly in recent years is well recognised.  That the law struggles to keep up is frequently pointed out.  Rather than wring one’s hands and blame whose responsibility it is to make the law, it is interesting in a more positive sense to look at the initiatives that are under way or that seem...

...but maybe IHL has a little hesitancy to give sufficient credibility to those statements of one or the other side of the forces. What about alternative methods like a bullhorn. The suspected Palestinian militant once on notice has any of a number of responses available in either case including trying to hold everyone in the building hostage to raise the civilian cost of the military operation in the form of collateral damage. I am just not convinced that the technique suggested protects civilians in a better way than the rule...

[ Jinan Bastak i is Associate Professor of Legal Studies at New York University, Abu Dhabi.] The International Court of Justice’s proceedings in Alleged Breaches of Certain International Obligations in Respect of the Occupied Palestinian Territory (Nicaragua v. Germany) raise questions that extend well beyond the immediate dispute between the two States. At their core is the question of when international law can hold one State responsible for its own conduct, in line with its obligations arising from erga omnes obligations, treaty law, and customary international law, in circumstances where the underlying...

Those of you who, like me, missed this year’s Federalist Society Symposium on National Security can now watch all of the events on-line here. The event was held April 5 in DC and included a morning panel on terrorist-related detentions, interrogations and trials, a lunchtime address by former Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, and an afternoon panel on potential cybersecurity legislation. Participants included Vincent J. Vitkowsky, Nathan A. Sales, Charles D. Stimson, Stephen I. Vladeck, Benjamin Wittes, Glenn M. Sulmasy, Jamil N. Jaffer, Sharon Bradford Franklin, Matthew J. Eggers, and...