...Supreme Court affirmed the dismissal of claims against the company but on different grounds: because the alleged conduct, which occurred in Nigeria, did not “touch and concern” the United States with sufficient force to displace the presumption against the extraterritorial application of a U.S. statute. The Court did not opine on the justiciability of claims against corporations, leaving the question for another day. This lopsided circuit split on the question of whether foreign corporations are immune from civil suits under the ATS led the Supreme Court to grant certiorari in Jesner, the...
...the situation violates both the Charter and general international law. Any support or cooperation with an apartheid state contravenes both the AU Constitutive Act and the Charter. When the OAU was formed, it called for sanctions against apartheid South Africa and called on its member states to contribute 1% of their budget to the liberation struggle. Other countries suspended their diplomatic relations with South Africa, boycotted its companies, and refrained from doing business with South Africa. Second, the right to self-determination has an extraterritorial reach in the sense that States...
...arrival of Ansar Dine/AQIM in Timbuktu; it was, Judge Mindua states, therefore allowed (Separate Opinion [58]). Amputation and flogging were, however, more problematic. They had not really applied in Mali [56] and, as Judge Mindua acknowledges, they appear as torture to many international lawyers [64]. Nevertheless, Judge Mindua points out, they are legal sanctions in states which belong to the United Nations. As such, Judge Mindua will not state that these sanctions are necessarily illegal, even though he notes their incongruency with human rights and international law. He remains equivocal...
...Law Much of my reflection revolves around critical questions to consider when engaging with the topic of double standards in international law. I acknowledge that much of my thinking was shaped by the rich discussions we had. Do ‘Double Standards’ Exist in International Law? Absolutely, and countless examples highlight this issue. Intervention in Conflicts: Western leaders have been quick to condemn Russia’s aggression against Ukraine. The international community has rallied robust support for Ukraine, including economic sanctions against Russia and significant military aid. However, this stands in stark contrast to...
...governments and corporations to cease military collaborations. Advocate for Trade Sanctions: Advocate for trade sanctions against Israel and all businesses that support Israel’s occupation. Pressure governments to implement these sanctions and target companies complicit in violating Palestinian rights. Suspend Israel from International Events: Campaign for the suspension of Israel from international sports and cultural events. Encourage cultural institutions and workers to boycott collaborations with Israeli entities to undermine the normalisation of apartheid. Boycott Israeli Academic Institutions: Advocate for a comprehensive boycott of Israeli academic institutions. Support Palestinian educators and students by...
...territorial sea. The UK seized the vessel because it was believed to be transporting Iranian oil to Syria in breach of sanctions responding to international crimes. While this act violated the ship’s (or Panama’s) passage rights under the law of the sea, the law governing countermeasures arguably offered avenues for precluding its wrongfulness. In casu, the British action must be seen within the broader context of Western sanctions then aimed at dissuading the Assad regime from persisting in international crimes and other human rights violations. But this argumentative option is...
...further executions. Several states, including members of the European Union, imposed targeted sanctions on Iranian officials and institutions allegedly responsible for the crackdown. These measures included asset freezes, travel bans, and financial restrictions. Sanctions serve both expressive and instrumental functions: they publicly condemn unlawful conduct and raise the economic and political costs of repression. However, they do not immediately halt ongoing violence, nor do they resolve the underlying structural problem of enforcement when atrocity crimes are alleged. A politically significant development occurred on January 13, 2026, when the President of...
...Torture, and the ICC statute’s article 14, which allows ICC members to make referrals and immediately prompt a preliminary examination. Instead, States have either lacked the political will or otherwise missed rare opportunities to exercise jurisdiction over Sri Lankan perpetrators. Yes, some have imposed sanctions, but sanctions aren’t enough; in the words of the latest UN report, sanctions “remain limited in scope and cannot in themselves substitute for criminal prosecutions and trials” (para. 55). The UN continues to keep silent on whether there are reasonable grounds to believe genocide occurred,...
...have caused harm, such as by leading to deaths at distribution points. To my knowledge, there is no direct precedent of this nature. However, the essence of the plea is in line with earlier resolutions and with the UN’s work to mitigate humanitarian suffering, even when caused indirectly. A striking example is the case of the UN comprehensive sanctions on Iraq in the 1990s. Comprehensive sanctions were blamed for causing widespread humanitarian harm, particularly to children. In response, the Assembly urged exemptions and adjustments, and its continued pressure contributed to...
...will shed light on ELI’s eponymous project, which explores and addresses the legal complexities of constraining assets in response to reprehensible state conduct. Confirmed Speakers include: Sir Geoffrey Vos (ELI First Vice-President; Master of the Rolls and Head of Civil Justice in England and Wales),Philippa Webb (Professor, University of Oxford), Burkhard Hess (Professor, University of Vienna), Oxana Gisca(President of the Conference of the Parties to CETS 198 (COP CETS 198), Council of Europe), Michael Stelzer(Head of Unit, Financial Sector Stability and Security, Enforcement and Sanctions – Sanctions, European Commission), and...
...‘‘savages’,’ and even international law. It must be pointed out that the UK, and the US, the core of Israel defence in international platforms, were the last supporters of Apartheid South Africa, a support they gave despite stiff opposition from African countries. Incidentally, it was during those years that the West purported to impose sanctions on countries that were accused of tolerating or undertaking ethnic cleansing, human rights violations, or violations of international law. Western sanctions, that were construed in terms of human rights protection, thus became tools of enforcing...
...omnes partes to prevent genocide and/or their objectives of imposing unilateral sanctions, the omission of revealing the methodological issues or supporting evidence may lead to the assumption of political use or divulge a lack of legal utility before international courts and tribunals. As illustrated by the Ukrainian Genocide Allegations case, an unsubstantiated determination of genocide by a third State and/or its (mis)use to justify other actions of that State may lead to proceedings before the Court. Additionally, the practice of imposing unilateral sanctions on the basis of a third-State determination...