Search

This article traces ROK–US negotiations for the termination of the ROK's nuclear weapons program. It was not solely an issue of ROK–US relations; France and Canada, other allies of the United States, were also involved in the ROK's nuclear weapons development. When an ally (ROK) attempted to develop nuclear weapons and another ally (France) pursued commercial interests by exporting nuclear technology, the US-led non-proliferation regime was put at risk. Therefore, the US had to coordinate the interests of its allies. In particular, it attempted to dissuade France from exporting nuclear technology with the support of another ally (Canada). By examining how the US endeavored to coordinate diverse interests, this study ultimately demonstrates that one of the prerequisites for establishing a successful non-proliferation regime led by the US was how to dissuade its ally from seeking financial gain through the export of nuclear technology and instead persuade them to support US-led non-proliferation regime building. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Between 1895 and 1916, a Conference on International Arbitration met annually at Lake Mohonk, New York, seeking to implement arbitration as a substitute for war. This article considers the aims, effects, and limitations of these conferences, including the problematic assumptions underpinning their apparent progressivism. The belief that an enlightened public opinion would play a decisive role in advancing arbitration will be interrogated, as will the conviction that the Mohonk group provided a mouthpiece for an emergent "international mind." The article shows how these conferences evoked a "global" public opinion that was simultaneously (and paradoxically) expansive, exclusionary, forcible, and manipulable. It reveals too how American conceptions of internationalism took shape, anticipating aspects of Wilsonianism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper is a study of the gender-based stigmatisation process of elite professionals in an international legal field. It uses commercial arbitration as an example of an international profession and adds to the prevalent understanding of gender inequality by developing a framework called 'invisible stigmatisation'. The main theoretical framework is supported by twenty-two semi-structured interviews conducted across five international arbitration jurisdictions and two original datasets. These data have helped to contextualise the nuances of gender-based stigmatisation in prestigious arbitral appointments and at the echelons of international arbitration law firms. The paper establishes that the stigmatising experiences drive elite female professionals and their gender-equality consciousness. These experiences also lead to them devise innovative strategies to minimise the effects of gender inequality on their professional lives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

EU Internal Market law and international arbitration increasingly interact with each other but there are important areas of conflict between the two that represent an obstacle to market integration in a common area of justice. The article examines, from the perspective of EU public economic law, these areas of conflict to assess the extent to which the Internal Market needs harmonised rules on commercial arbitration to support dispute resolution and access to an efficient delivery of justice within its operation. The current state of affairs is unsatisfactory and it lacks legal certainty. If properly regulated, commercial arbitration can become an important instrument functional to EU market efficiency. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Over the last few years, the United States has been pressuring the World Trade Organization (WTO) to reform the Appellate Body by refusing proposals to fill vacancies. On December 10, 2019, the terms of two Appellate Body members expired, leaving one member left for the seven-member body. This has brought new appeals to a standstill, as an appeal from a panel established by the Dispute Settlement Body must be heard by three Appellate Body members. In February of 2020, the United States elaborated on its complaints about the Appellate Body in a report published by the Office of the United States Trade Representative. In the spring of 2020, in response to the continued U.S. resistance to filling vacancies on the Appellate Body, a group of WTO members established an interim arrangement to handle appeals through arbitration. Also in the spring of 2020, the United States described as invalid a recent Appellate Body report regarding a dispute between Canada and the United States, asserting that none of the three persons who issued the report were in fact bona fide Appellate Body members. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 1822, the Russian czar resolved a dispute over compensation for slaves fleeing to British lines during the War of 1812. American observers have long asserted that this canonical decision favored the United States. But new debate has recently arisen among historians. Uncovering evidence from diplomatic archives, this Article concludes that the czar did indeed side with the United States. Moreover, the case demonstrates how nineteenth-century American statesmen pressed international law into service in support of slavery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

National governments have signed and ratified over three thousand International Investment Agreements (IIAs), which for the first time give multinational firms standing to sue host governments in international arbitration tribunals. IIAs have led to a host of high-profile and controversial legal disputes that have led to claims that investor state arbitration may be impeding governments in their ability to regulate and to protect their citizens’ well-being, a phenomenon known as “regulatory chill.” To understand the normative implications of regulatory chill, I analyze investor state arbitration over tobacco in Australia and Latin America. I examine legislative discussions over possible regulatory changes in Australia and Uruguay, the two cases that have faced disputes over tobacco laws, as well as in Latin American countries that provide access to the legislative debates and had legislative initiatives that sought to strengthen tobacco legislation. These cases demonstrate that tobacco packaging laws in a number of countries have been delayed or reduced as a result of fears of potential arbitration among the government and legislators. This regulatory chill is normatively problematic as it suggests that states may be giving up more of their regulatory authority than they initially believed they would have to under IIAs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses two reportedly unanimous arbitration award rulings in February and December 2013 by a seven-member tribunal in the case In Re Indus Waters Kishenganga Arbitration (Pakistan v. India) which deals with India's apparent development of a hydroelectric plant in Kashmir, India. The 1960 Indus Waters Treaty and India's preferred method for controlling sediment in reservoirs are mentioned, along with a tributary of the Jhelum River that apparently flows into Pakistan.

This article problematises international heritage interventions in divided cities through exploring UNESCO's role in Jerusalem's Old City. It examines the tension between universal heritage values and protocols and nationalist agendas which often involve politicised archaeological responses. Drawing on comparative case studies of UNESCO-affiliated projects in Fez and Aleppo, and in the violently divided cities and regions of Mostar and Kosovo, it assesses future challenges and possibilities facing UNESCO in Jerusalem. While the article confirms an increased need for an international arbitrator and protector for the city's sacred sites and divided cultural heritage, it also underscores the limitations of UNESCO's legal remit and the political sensitivities which hinder its praxis. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

In this article, we explain the role of international law in the resolution of territorial disputes from 1945 to 2000. In doing so, we focus on three outcomes of interest. First, when do states choose to revise the territorial status quo through negotiations instead of force? Second, when are states able to reach a final settlement? Third, when do states prefer a process of legal dispute resolution (i.e., adjudication or arbitration) to bilateral negotiations? To answer these questions, we argue that when the legal principles relevant to the dispute are unambiguous and clearly favor one side, a law-based focal point will emerge. This focal point, in turn, facilitates the settlement process by helping leaders overcome distribution problems, a central obstacle in reaching a final agreement. We find strong and consistent empirical support for our hypotheses regarding international law and peaceful dispute resolution. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The article discusses the case of the Grand River Enterprises Six Nations Ltd. which raises concerns surrounding investment arbitration under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) chapter 11 for the tobacco industry. It offers an overview of the U.S. regulatory context and the investors' claim and further looks into the treatment of the standards of the international law. It highlights the effectiveness of the schemes of the investment arbitration for the protection of public health.

The author discusses the application of limitation tribunals to talk subsequent agreements and practice for the interpretation of treaties which focuses on investor-state disputes in the U.S. She examines the nature of investment treaties and the interpretive balance of power between treaty parties and tribunals. He cites legal doctrine to consider how analysis of subsequent agreements and practice can help to both parties and tribunals to engage in constructive dialogues about the interpretation of the treaties. She also investigates how the evidence is applied in public international law to develop a theory that might be used for limitation in the investment context.

The article offers information on the practices adopted by the European Commission's high-ranking officials to lead negotiations on behalf of Europe. It is stated that negotiators are given a clear strategic vision so that they can act efficiently. Before the negotiation process they are asked to set an agenda so that they can negotiate accordingly. They are also advised to communicate efficiently during the whole process so as to clearly communicate their views.

The article presents a case Romania v. Ukriane wherein the questions surround the maritime delimitation in the Black Sea. It notes that the International Court of Justice (ICJ) delivered a unanimous decision concerning the delimitation of their respective maritime boundaries within the Black Sea. It mentions that the court used the equidistance method to delimit five point boudnary of Romanian and Ukrainian territorial seas on the outer limits adjacent to mainland coasts. It mentions cites that the court analysis the relevant coasts and maritime area to determine entire coast of Romania and Ukraine.

The article offers information on the judicial activity of the International Court of Justice (ICJ)in 2008. It notes that ICJ issued three judgments in 2008 including the Sovereignty over Pedra Branchal Pulau Batu Putch, Middle Rocks and South Ledge (Malaysia/Singapore), Djibouti v. France in Certain Questions of Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters and the Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in Croatia v. Serbia case. It notes that the judgments were made in May 23, 2008, July 16, 2008 and October 15, 2008 under the presidency of judge Rosalyn Higgins.

The article provides information on the 2007 judicial activities of the International Court of Justice (ICJ). It states that the ICJ has issued four judgments including the Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Servia and Montenegro) and the request of the Uruguay for the indication of provisional measures in Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (Argentina v. Uruguay), which was denied by the Court. Meanwhile, the court has also interpreted various substantive and procedural provisions of the Vienna Convention.

A political leader's temptation to deny costly debts to past supporters is a central moral-hazard problem in politics. This paper develops a game-theoretic model to probe the consequences of this moral-hazard problem for leaders who compete to establish political regimes. In contests for power, absolute leaders who are not subject to third-party judgments can credibly recruit only limited support. A leader can do better by organizing supporters into a court which could cause his downfall. In global negotiation-proof equilibria, leaders cannot recruit any supporters without such constitutional checks. Egalitarian norms make recruiting costlier in oligarchies, which become weaker than monarchies. The ruler's power and limitations on entry of new leaders are derived from focal-point effects in games with multiple equilibria. The relationships of trust between leaders and their supporters are personal constitutions which underlie all other political constitutions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article highlights the three judgments issued by the International Court of Justice in 2005. In February, the Court upheld a protest to its jurisdiction in the case Certain Property (Liechtenstein v. Germany). In July, a chamber of the Court released its decision on the merits in the case Frontier Dispute (Benin/Niger). In December, the full Court issued its decision on the merits in the case Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Uganda).

This article seeks to advance thinking about contextual theories of justice as found in Carens' Culture, Citizenship, and Community and Parekh's Rethinking Multiculturalism by considering the suggestion that such theories would be enhanced by the incorporation of an element of international adjudication. It explores possible advantages and disadvantages of this proposal both theoretically and by reflecting on Canadian experience with the UN Human Rights Committee (HRC) in its Lovelace, Ballantyne and Waldman views. The article concludes that international adjudication would enhance contextual theories of justice if it incorporated key elements of the HRC's individual communication procedure, including the non-binding nature of its decisions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We use a formal bargaining model to examine why, in many domestic and international bargaining situations, one or both negotiators make public statements in front of their constituents committing themselves to obtaining certain benefits in the negotiations. We find that making public commitments provides bargaining leverage, when backing down from such commitments carries domestic political costs. However, when the two negotiators face fairly similar costs for violating a public commitment, a prisoner's dilemma is created in which both sides make high public demands which cannot be satisfied, and both negotiators would be better off if they could commit to not making public demands. However, making a public demand is a dominant strategy for each negotiator, and this leads to a suboptimal outcome. Escaping this prisoner's dilemma provides a rationale for secret negotiations. Testable hypotheses are derived from the nature of the commitments and agreements made in equilibrium. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Highlights the judicial activity of the International Court of Justice in 2004. Court's decision that the United States violated the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations with respect to a number of Mexican nationals sentenced to death in U.S. state court proceedings; Israel's construction of a security wall or fence in occupied Palestinian territory; North American Treaty Organization's 1999 bombing campaign aimed at halting the conflict in Kosovo.

Examines some of the themes that are crucial to the notions of judicial independence and impartiality in international courts, especially in international criminal tribunals. Focus on the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY); Role of judicial independence; Strategies to ensure the independence of the judiciary; Selection of judges; Role of the ICTY president; Situations wherein judges should recuse themselves.

Reports on the decision by the International Court of Justice of the European Communities on September 30, 2003 regarding the effect of World Trade Organization (WTO) agreements. Dispute settlement rulings in European Community law; Liability of European Community for nonimplementation of WTO dispute settlement rulings.

Reports on the decision by the European Court of Human Rights on April 8, 2004 regarding the imputability of breaches of European Convention on Human Rights. Right to liberty and security; Right to fair trial; Effective interpretation of human rights treaties; Just satisfaction under Article 41 of the European Convention; Forms of reparation; Remedial competence.

Discusses the advisory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice and the dissolution of distinction between the political and the judicial. Key issues of interest; Analysis of pertinent topics and relevant issues; Implications on studies of international law.

This article explains how the institutional context of international negotiations influences their out-comes. I argue that issue linkage counteracts domestic obstacles to liberalization by broadening the negotiation stakes. Institutions bolster the credibility of the linkage to make it more effective. I test the argument in the agricultural sector, which has been among the most difficult sectors for governments to liberalize. Statistical analysis of U.S. negotiations with Japan and the EU from 1970 to 1999 indicates that an institutionalized linkage between agricultural and industrial issues encourages agricultural liberalization in both Japan and Europe. Through case studies of key negotiations, I first examine why countries choose to link issues, then show how the linkage changes interest group mobilization and shifts the policy process to promote liberalization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Focuses on international arbitration. Treaty of Medina of 622 A.D.; Arbitration of any disputes by the Prophet Muhammad; Phases of modern international arbitration.

Focuses on the Southern Bluefin Tuna case, which arose out of a dispute under the trilateral Convention for the Conservation of Southern Bluefin Tuna between Australia and New Zealand, on one hand, and Japan, on the other. Arbitration of the case; Jurisdictional effect of different settlement provisions in related treaties; Relationship with the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.

Examines the extent to which enforcement of vacated awards comports with the expectations of parties and treaty framework of international arbitration. Options for enforcement of vacated awards; Interaction of national statutes, international law and dispute resolution; Enactment of statute on federal judicial supervision of international arbitration.

Examines the implications of the trial and execution of consular officer Angel Francisco Breard for the foreign relations of the United States. Application filed by the Paraguay government to the United Nations International Court of Justice seeking proceedings against the US for violation of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations; Refusal of the Virginia state government to issue a stay of execution.

Focuses on the dispute settlement rules established by the Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU) for the World Trade Organization (WTO). Question on whether the international law obligation gives the choice to compensate or obey; Provisions of the DSU clauses on dispute settlement; Effect of the international law `bindingness' to domestic United States jurisprudence.

The article reports that a tribunal created under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) ordered the Canadian firm Tembec to pay the United States $271,844.24 for costs and arbitration expenses. The said tribunal is created to hear similar NAFTA claims against the United States by several Canadian softwood lumber producers. It is cited that Tembec was one of the three Canadian softwood lumber producers that brought NAFTA claims against the United States, accusing that U.S. measures imports of softwood lumber from Canada.