Search

Business actors create and operate in global production networks that bring them in contact with regulatory frameworks across multiple levels and domains. Importantly, they also participate in shaping those regulatory frameworks. But what are the specific interests they pursue in their involvement in regulation? Traditionally, scholars tended to assume that the focus of business actors is primarily on avoiding (stringent) public regulation. Recent developments have highlighted a broader range of business interests, however. Accordingly, this paper investigates business positions on the ascription of duties and rights in regulation, specifically in the fields of due diligence, supply chain liability, and extraterritorial jurisdiction. The paper explores these issues in the context of business regulation in the field of Human Rights, looking at the United Nations Guiding Principles on human rights, their German implementation in the 'Nationaler Aktionsplan Wirtschaft und Menschenrechte' and the associated processes, in particular. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper we explore how a public national media outlet, the British BBC, represents an international legal case which has a highly political nature. The case is US versus Huawei/Meng Wanzhou, which took place between 2018 and 2021. Accusations were that the Chinese technology company committed fraud, leading the global HSBC bank to breach US sanctions against Iran. The charges were made by the US using what is called an 'extraterritorial law', which, while rejected as law by governments around the world, is policed by US economic powers and control over international finance. Using Critical Discourse Analysis we show that, while the BBC presents much detail of legal process, the actual nature of the law the US uses to bring criminal charges against international companies and banks, is neither considered nor questioned. Our interest is how such a law, which has a huge influence over global trade and politics, is presented to the public in this particular case. We contribute to the position that the nature of laws, how they are used and known, must always be understood within the prevailing discourses of the moment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

With the increasing internationalization of its securities market, China has recently introduced Article 2(4) of the 2019 Securities Law, in order to deal with the important issue of extraterritorial jurisdiction over cross-border securities transactions. While it represents an important development, the provision is couched in very broad terms, bringing uncertainties and difficulties to its application in practice. This article proposes a phased reform agenda for improvement: in the short run, the effect test under Article 2(4) should be clarified with more guidance; in the long run, China should go beyond the effect test to consider other relevant tests such as the conduct test and the transactional test. The recent high-profile case of Luckin Coffee is carefully studied to show the factors that China may consider in applying Article 2(4), including the test of national interests, the principle of international comity, and the issue of judicial recourse constraints. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Geneva Declaration on Human Rights at Sea was officially launched on 1 March 2022. The document was produced by the nongovernmental organization Human Rights at Sea, and responds to an undoubted need to prevent human rights violations at sea and to provide redress to victims of such abuses. Connecting the international human rights regime with the law of the sea has been one of many challenges to respond to this issue. This article explores the content of the Geneva Declaration and its alignment with existing law of the sea. Beyond the jurisdictional complexities presented, it is important to consider how this informal instrument holds relevance for international lawmaking. While there are obstacles, the Geneva Declaration creates a needed opportunity to bring attention to and clarity around the legal protections of human rights at sea. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article considers two recent developments in Singapore private international law: the establishment of the Singapore International Commercial Court and the enactment of the Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements 2005 into Singapore law. These two developments are part of Singapore's strategy to promote itself as an international dispute resolution hub and are underscored by giving an enhanced role to party autonomy. This article examines the impact of these two developments on the traditional rules of private international law and whether they achieve the stated aim of positioning Singapore as a major player in the international litigation arena. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A number of human rights have come to play a material role in UK extradition law. An exception is that found in article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights 1950 protecting the right to a fair trial. It plays only a partial and limited role. That role has experienced contrasting fortunes. Whilst the right has come to have a degree of applicability within the UK in extradition hearings its extraterritorial operation has been further restricted. This article analyses the limited role of the right to a fair trial in extradition and highlights that contrasting evolution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Port-state jurisdiction has been used as a means of circumventing the inadequacies of enforcement on the high seas and of flag states’ ineffectiveness, but also the absence of international rules due to lack of consensus at the international level. Pressing and complex problems related to the global environment and global commons, such as depletion of fisheries, marine and atmosphere pollution, and climate change, and foot-dragging in the international community to effectively cooperate to tackle these problems have brought the concept of unilateral regulation of extraterritorial activities to the forefront. In this respect, the role of the port state, as a first point of contact for industries engaged in activities harmful to the global commons (i.e., fishing and shipping), is increasingly important. This article examines the scope and limits of port-state jurisdiction with respect to measures that may have an extraterritorial impact in the light of the law of the sea and international rules on jurisdiction. The aim of the article is to assess whether the practice of port states in exercising jurisdiction has contributed to developments regarding the exercise of (extraterritorial) jurisdiction as a regulatory tool for the protection of global commons. By identifying elements of current state practice regarding exercise of port-state jurisdiction, the article advances a framework for the most effective exercise of port-state jurisdiction for the protection of global commons with reference to the principle of common concern. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]