Search: Affective Justice: Book Symposium: A Response

[Tom Ginsburg is a Professor at the University of Chicago Law School] Thanks for this opportunity to respond to the Article by Professors Abebe and Masur. My learned colleagues are certainly correct that, notwithstanding its status as a unitary and authoritarian state, China is an internally complicated place, with substantial de facto control at the provincial level. Besides the East-West cleavages that Professors Abebe and Masur focus on, there are other internal tensions among different levels of government, different governmental agencies at each level, and different ideological groups...

on this blog here, on EJIL: Talk! here and OxHRH here). Whilst acknowledging that the majority of the derogations notified to the Council of Europe have now been withdrawn, the judges nevertheless expressed concerns over their usage. They remarked that ECHR derogations should not become commonplace and reaffirmed that they do not provide states with carte blanche to adopt any measures they wish in response to the pandemic. The ECtHR judges set down four general principles to be followed by states adopting measures in response to the pandemic: 1) Measures...

...Court of Justice pertaining to declaration of the unilateral declaration of independence in respect of Kosovo: http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/141/15738.pdf) as well as the contention that self-determination has grown into a principle that regulates secession. There is no doubt that self-determination has significantly impacted the creation of states in the second half of the 20th century. That legal principle bears upon factual developments which are the essence of the political project behind international law. It is however going one step too far to claim that the factual effect that self-determination can bear automatically...

...the US government had used the law for centuries to systematically persecute Black Americans and had committed unspeakable acts of violence against them. If that mistreatment differed from the Nazis’ mistreatment of Jews and other groups, it was a difference of intensity, not kind. To his lasting credit, Taylor eventually charged purely peacetime crimes against humanity in two of the 12 NMT cases. None of those charges were successful, but they led the Justice tribunal (albeit only in dicta) to affirm their legitimacy, paving the way for the modern nexus-less...

Bobby Chesney has graciously responded at Lawfare to my post about detention in non-international armed confilct (NIAC). Unfortunately, I think Chesney’s response not only misconstrues what Steve Vladeck and I have been arguing, but also demonstrates some important misconceptions about IHL. To begin with, we need to understand exactly what we are arguing about. As Steve pointed out in one of his early posts, Sen. Lindsey Graham’s proposed “Terrorist Detention Review Reform Act would permit the government to detain without trial anyone who “has purposefully and materially supported hostilities against...

...both case law and scholarly discussion, including this online symposium of the Leiden Journal of International Law, have shown that this is, indeed, not the case. Two main reasons could be identified underlying the different positions: (1) the one relates to the dimension one focuses on in the definition of genocide and the conceptualization of the relationship between the two dimensions, and (2) the other concerns the question of interpretation and the role of the judiciary. Dimensions of genocide The definition of genocide, arguably, has two dimensions: the ‘collective’ and...

...the Advisory Opinion on the Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), Israel  invoked the right to self-defence under the UN Charter and the provisions of UNSC Resolutions 1368 (2001) and 1373 (2001) issued in response to the attack on 9/11 in order to argue it had a right to defend itself against terrorist attacks waged by non-state actors. A quick reading of these resolutions will show, however, that they have not established new norms that extend...

...oversimplified claims of the legal origins theoretical framework that underlines the DB project, in which economic progress is equated with common law regimes (seen as “flexible”) and economic backwardness is associated with civil law regimes (seen as “rigid”). Even more useful is Santos’ demonstration that by focusing only on formal written law, the DB indicators badly mischaracterize the labor law regimes they purport to describe. Many factors make the law “in action” depart from the “law on the books,” as legal sociologists have long known. Santos uses examples from Mexico...

...international reaction, with the immediate adverse consequences for our conduct of foreign policy. It will undermine public support among critical allies, making military cooperation more difficult to sustain. Europeans and others will likely have legal problems with extradition or other forms of cooperation in law enforcement, including in bringing terrorists to justice. It’s hard to be more prescient than that. Eric is of course right that personalities and closeness to the President (or, importantly in this administration, the Vice President) can affect who wins or loses the policy fight. But...

...limits and take note of their responsibilities towards staff. It is my personal view that the landscape of international criminal justice institutions, the closing of institutions and poor coordination between them is largely to blame for the issues before the ICC that have been highlighted by Professor Guilfoyle and the IER. I am certain that creating more opportunities is a better route forward than cutting staff benefits and undermining job security. This approach reflects fairness to them and to their years of dedication to the field, and it provides institutional...

Alexander Panayotov I agree with the argument that extraterritorial regulation creates a danger of democratic deficit. Prof. Ryngaert tackles this argument in details in his superb book “Jurisdiction in International Law” (pp.188-190). This is one of the aspects of normative theorizing about extraterritoriality that is worth debating. What I see as a problem, however, is the fact that democracy in itself is an essentially contested concept. There are several theories of democracy: participatory, minimalist, and deliberative to begin with. If we make a claim about extraterritorial regulation’s effect on democratic...

I’m grateful to Professor Ochoa for her thoughtful contribution. By way of reply to her post, I want to mention a couple of issues that I think are difficult puzzles for those of us who write in this area. First, I particularly like Professor Ochoa’s suggestion that I include information about corruption and governance when assessing whether a SWF should be permitted to invest abroad. Doing this would help sharpen my point nicely. This comment—and the weakness in my paper that the comment helps to address—shows the problem...