Search: Affective Justice: Book Symposium: A Response

book is divided into three main parts looking at the evolution of the notions of sovereignty, intervention, and human rights (Part I), the interventions in favour of governments (Part II), and the interventions in favour of opposition groups (Part III). Since my area of research has focused on armed opposition groups, I am going to restrict my comments to some of the questions discussed in Part III of the book. One particular issue I find fascinating is the examination of the legitimacy of rebels in international law (in Chapter 6)....

as well as most legal scholars. The book also does something almost unprecedented: tell the story of the IMT and NMTs together, which is necessary for understanding both. The book’s only competitor in that regard is Telford Taylor’s wonderful book The Anatomy of the Nuremberg Trials: A Personal Memoir — but Taylor’s book is, as the title indicates, a memoir, not an “objective” legal history. Anyone interested in Nuremberg, international criminal law, or transitional justice will want to pick up a copy of The Betrayal. To appropriate Larry Solum: read...

...the notion – perhaps held intuitively by many – that individuals are (or at least, should be) the ultimate beneficiaries of the modern jus contra bellum. Redaelli’s book highlights these increasing connections between human rights and jus ad bellum with respect to military intervention on invitation. Human rights and consent to armed intervention In her book, Radaelli argues that ‘human rights have been affecting jus ad bellum in a pervasive and profound fashion’. (p251) This is due to the importance of human rights in determining who may consent to armed...

I agree with Professor Cheng that legal theory does not have to be predictive to be successful. But I wonder if he sets the bar a bit too low. In his previous post, he writes: Providing a framework of analysis to address international problems, to guide but not control, is perhaps the best that can be done. It may also be the most that ought to be done. But two of the leading alternative theories that Professor Cheng discusses in his book claim to do more than simply guide. One,...

[Yasmine Nahlawi is an independent researcher specialising in R2P and its applicability to the Syrian and Libyan conflicts. She holds a PhD in Public International Law from Newcastle University, LLM in International Legal Studies from Newcastle University, and BSc in Political Science from Eastern Michigan University.] I would like to begin my response post by expressing my deepest gratitude to the distinguished reviewers of my book, Shannon Raj Singh, Anjali Manivannan, and Jessica Peake, for bringing in their diverse and insightful perspectives while reviewing ‘The Responsibility to Protect in Libya...

I wanted to flag for readers an on-line discussion that we are planning for next Monday-Wednesday, March 2-4. We will be pleased to host Richard Gardiner (University College London) for a discussion of his book, Treaty Interpretation. In addition to comments by the regular contributors, we will have several distinguished guest bloggers, all of whom know a thing or two about treaties: Isabelle van Damme (Clare College, Cambridge), Malgosia Fitzmaurice (University of London, Queen Mary), and Jan Klabbers (Helsinki). Among the potential topics will be discussion of the continuing vitality...

...ECtHR caselaw in the area of extraterritoriality that Marko exposes in his book serves as a reminder of the delicate balance that any rights adjudicator must strike between adherence and respect for its rulings and the institutional bounds set out for it by the treaty states. While the delegations problems are not unique to international human rights institutions, they raise different concerns and dangers than do other international judicial delegations. The experience of the U.S. Supreme Court on the extraterritoriality of American constitutional rights (see Kal Raustiala’s fine book, discussed...

...when we shouldn’t. In those cases, we should find a way to do the right thing without undermining the overall international legal system, which has an inherent moral value in maintaining minimum world order. If this account of Professor Cheng’s policy-oriented theory is accurate, then one might think he is simply updating the New Haven School for the 21st Century. But this (far from small) accomplishment is only one part of his book. What makes WILW so unusual is that it attempts to apply its framework to an astonishingly wide...

[Laura Dickinson is the Oswald Symister Colclough Research Professor of Law at the George Washington University Law School in Washington DC.] This is the sixth day in our discussion of Professor Dickinson’s book Outsourcing War and Peace: Preserving Public Values in a World of Privatized Foreign Affairs. Links to the related posts can be found below. Steve Vladeck’s post focuses on the interesting question of whether prosecutions of contractor employees abroad under MEJA might sometimes result in indictments for activities that are sufficiently unrelated to the US military mission that...

[Elvina Pothelet is a Ph.D. candidate at the University of Geneva. Her research interests focus on the international law governing the use of force, the law of armed conflict and war crime law.] Kubo Mačák’s book is a rich and thought-provoking contribution to the scholarship on IHL applicability. The writing style and structure of the book make it a smooth and enjoyable read – to the extent this is possible for a book dealing with armed conflicts. The author’s expert analysis of the law is enriched with plenty of historical...

[Ramses Wessel is Professor of the Law of the European Union and other International Organizations at the University of Twente] In Part II we focus on the legal nature of informal international lawmaking. Perhaps ironically the question of whether IN-LAW should be perceived as forming part of the ‘legal universe’ is one of the most prominent ones addressed in this book. The project started off under the working title ‘Informal International Public Policy-Making’. However, on the basis of the empirical analysis we found that it is quite often difficult not...

[Kristina Daugirdas is Assistant Professor of Law at Michigan Law] I’m delighted to have the opportunity to comment on Professor Curt Bradley’s excellent new book. Before getting to the question of how the decisions and orders of international institutions are integrated into U.S. law—Professor Bradley’s main focus in this chapter—it’s worth pausing to consider why states bother to create international institutions at all. States could have drafted a series of treaties that simply codified substantive obligations relating to various issue areas. Instead, they created institutions and delegated authority to them...