Search: Affective Justice: Book Symposium: A Response
12 Nov A Response to Dov Jacobs on the Burundi Investigation
At Spreading the Jam, Dov Jacobs defends the Pre-Trial Chamber’s conclusion in the Burundi situation that the OTP is not required to notify a state until after the PTC has authorized an investigation. Here are the critical paragraphs from his post: Note the different language used [in Art. 18] depending on whether there is a referral under 13(a) (state referral) or 13(b) (proprio motu): in the former case, the notification must come when “the Prosecutor has determined that there would be a reasonable basis to commence an investigation”,...25 Jan Guest Post: A Response to Kevin Jon Heller
...fact, I did mean “lawfare” in the sense Kevin’s discussants (Dov, el roam, and Mendieta) are using it: “lawfare” as strategic utilization of the law, which for me isn’t negative but rather value-neutral, and this is why in the post I contrasted it with “the quest for justice” or “embracing the law.” Strategy is simply neither of those, just as it isn’t “good” or “bad” – Strategy is only successful or unsuccessful. And as my original post indicated, to me the only plausible strategic role for the ICC in the...08 Mar A Response to Milanovic and Verdier on Rights Beyond Borders
First and most importantly, my sincere thanks to Marko Milanovic and Pierre-Hugues Verdier for taking the time to offer such careful and insightful reactions to my work. I’m extremely fortunate to have them as “virtual” colleagues, and I appreciate the efforts of the YJIL editors and folks at Opinio Juris in creating a forum for this online exchange. As Marko and Pierre-Hugues note, I focus on the interpretation and application of constitutional and quasi-constitutional rights — what I call “domestic rights regimes” — by domestic courts. This is...29 Sep Freedom From Religion Response – Four Points
As a pastor of a church I find Professor Guiora’s words both challenging and problematic. Here are four points: 1. Professor Guiora writes, “Society has historically – unjustifiably and blindly – granted religion immunity.” What society? Separating “society” from “religion” is very much a modern issue. Society didn’t grant immunity to anything. Rather, society was shaped by religion and was pretty much identified religiously in the West and in the East until the beginnings of the critical/historical/scientific “Age of Reason” stirrings. In the West it was the Church...05 Feb AJIL Symposium: Is the Vienna Convention Hostile to Drafting History? A Response to Julian Davis Mortenson, Part 2
[Dr. Ulf Linderfalk is a Professor of International Law at the Faculty of Law at Lund University, Sweden. The first part of his comments can be found here.] In what sense does the VCLT give a description of the way to understand a treaty? The way Julian describes prevailing legal doctrine, the presumption against preparatory work is effectuated “by a set of threshold restrictions that relegate drafting history to ‘a carefully bounded and contingent role’, for use only … ‘when the text [of a treaty] cannot, in itself,...23 Nov A Response to Frans G von der Dunk by Steven Freeland
I would like to thank Professor von der Dunk – who is a close friend and highly respected colleague – for taking the time to provide his thoughtful responses to my article ‘Fly Me to the Moon: How Will International Law Cope with Commercial Space Tourism’, published recently in the Melbourne Journal of International Law. Professor von der Dunk and I have worked in collaboration on several research projects and he is a very highly regarded scholar in matters relating to the international, and national, regulation of the use and...22 Feb Israel Does Not Have a Sovereign Claim to the West Bank: A Response to IJL’s Legal Opinion
Jonathan Turner Many of the points made in this post were addressed in the Statement submitted by ELNET and UKLFI to the ICJ under Practice Direction 12, particularly at paras 36-74: https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/engprq05vstavki5829h9/ELNET-Submission-to-ICJ-29-9-23-final.pdf?rlkey=sihxdzppww1wrw6i9ac2ptqlh&dl=0 Tamás Hoffmann I mostly agree with the analysis, but I have one minor correction. I think that the reference to Hungary is not really appropriate. Unfortunately I haven't read Wheatley's book yet but this short allusion to Hungary's statehood during the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy misses a crucial point: it was a monarchy, to be more precise, an Empire where...24 Jan A Response to Kevin Jon Heller by Carsten Stahn
view.. (iv) ‘Higher sentence’ – ‘better justice’ Finally, Heller’s theory operates on the critical assumption that a justice system based on ‘higher sentences’ provides better and more efficient justice than a system with potentially lower sentences. This vision appears to go against the very rationales of sentencing which typically preserves a great degree of flexibility in order to pay adequate tribute to individual interests. It is further ill-suited to provide an appropriate logic for forum choices in situations in which sentence and penalties may be of lesser importance, such as...