Search: Affective Justice: Book Symposium: A Response

[Kateryna Busol is a Ukrainian lawyer and an Associate Professor at the National University of Kyiv-Mohyla Academy] This post forms part of the Opinio Juris Symposium on Reproductive Violence in International Law, in which diverse authors reflect on how the International Criminal Court and other jurisdictions have responded to violations of reproductive health and reproductive autonomy. The symposium complements a one-day conference to be held on 11 June 2024,  in which legal practitioners, scholars, activists, and survivors will meet in The Hague and online to share knowledge and strategies for addressing...

no record of those who submitted abstracts, save for the ones I committed to memory. For this mishap, I apologise. Blunders happen, of course, but it’s vexing when we appear cavalier with this topic, especially since we had received several invaluable abstracts. We are thus re-issuing our call for submissions for the symposium on racism and sexism in legal academia with revised dates (and a different submission email!). The team at Opinio Juris remains committed to running a stimulating symposium that helps us collectively reflect upon and tackle the oppressions...

Time for more self promotion… I will be speaking at a symposium being held this Friday, March 24 at my alma mater the Yale Law School on “The Most Dangerous Branch? Mayors, Governors, Presidents and the Rule of Law”. The symposium is about more than foreign affairs, but the foreign affairs component alone is pretty impressive (I’m not just saying this because of the well-known figures who will be participating, but because I’ve also seen the papers already). For a short preview of some of the foreign affairs issues we...

...where the injustices embodied in existing laws, social and economic arrangements and distributive outcomes can be challenged with reference to the equal dignity and rights of all human beings. Fulfilling this function is essential to the legitimacy, relevance and power not just of the UN but of the fragile ideals of multilateralism and human rights themselves. It is not only appropriate, but essential, then, to seek to establish within the framework of the UN human rights system a universal normative platform to facilitate the evaluation and critique of the collective...

[Kjetil Mujezinović Larsen is Professor of Law, Director of Research, and Deputy Director, at the Norwegian Centre for Human Rights at the University of Oslo. He is the author of «The Human Rights Treaty Obligations of Peacekeepers» (Cambridge, 2012). This post is a part of the Protection of Civilians Symposium.] By way of introduction, let me state that I agree with Marten’s analysis of the legal obligations of peacekeepers. Therefore, rather than rehearsing the arguments raised by the other contributors to this Symposium, I want to address a concrete issue...

There are a few anniversaries of note in 2022, which should prompt us to deeper conversations and more concerted action. It is the 10th anniversary of the forced Rohingya exodus from Myanmar, with 25 August marking the 5th Rohingya Genocide Remembrance Day. This year also marks the 20th anniversary of the entry into force of the Rome Statute, which established the International Criminal Court. This year, the intention of this symposium hosted by the Asia Justice Coalition and Opinio Juris is to bring renewed international attention to the growing and...

[Anthea Roberts is an Associate Professor at the London School of Economics and Political Science and a Professor of Law at Columbia Law School.] This post is part of the HILJ Online Symposium: Volumes 54(2) & 55(1). Other posts in this series can be found in the related posts below. I want to thank Opinio Juris for hosting this symposium and Martins Paparinskis for taking the time to comment on this article. I highly respect Paparinskis’ work in the field, so I am grateful for his substantive engagement. I have...

[José Alvarez is the Herbert and Rose Rubin Professor of International Law at New York University School of Law and is the Co-Editor-in-Chief (along with Benedict Kingsbury) of the American Journal of International Law] As the new co-editor in chief of the AJIL, I, along with my co-EIC, Benedict Kingsbury, are very grateful to Chris Borgen and Opinio Juris for hosting this on-line symposium on the Journal’s April 2013 issue. We also thank the two authors, Eyal Benvenisti and Leila Sadat, for exposing themselves to this trial by fire. It...

[Greg Shill is a Visiting Assistant Professor at the University of Denver Sturm College of Law.] This post is part of the HILJ Online Symposium: Volumes 54(2) & 55(1). Other posts in this series can be found in the related posts below. I thank Professor Christopher Whytock for engaging with the ideas in my article, Ending Judgment Arbitrage: Jurisdictional Competition and the Enforcement of Foreign Money Judgments in the United States, 54 Harv. Int’l L.J. 459 (2013), and the Harvard International Law Journal and Opinio Juris for hosting this symposium....

in the face of genocide, crimes against humanity, and/or war crimes, as this author does (and will explore more fully in her upcoming book). Heieck does question the legality of veto use in the face of genocide, and that part of his book, to this author, has the most appeal, as well as his exploration of what is required of states serving on the Security Council to fulfill their duty to “prevent” genocide (p. 209). A minor additional quibble pertains to Heieck’s extensive reliance on US law; again, to craft...

Last week, the good folks at the American Enterprise Institute and the Federalist Society hosted a book roundtable on Taming Globalization. In addition to John Yoo and myself, we were joined in a very lively discussion by Prof. Martin Flaherty of Fordham and Prof. Jeremy Rabkin of George Mason (with Jennifer Rubin of the Washington Post as moderator). While John and I are certainly used to receiving some criticism from the left, we are both a little surprised when we are attacked from the right. So Prof. Rabkin’s criticism (around...

been avoided. The initial error is a doozy: Turow has the Pre-Trial Chamber (PTC) authorise the investigation into the Roma massacre, despite the fact that Bosnia self-referred the situation to the ICC. The book even contains a mock decision pursuant to Art. 15, the proprio motu provision! That is, of course, completely wrong: because Bosnia self-referred, the PTC did not have to authorise the investigation. The OTP was free to investigate the massacre on its own. And that error, in turn, undermines the entire setup of the book, which opens...