Publications

Showing all 400 relevant publications currently held in our database
Change to sort them by year | name | type OR
Show only Recent | Selected publications

Abstract: A translation of the ILC Articles on the Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts into Greek, along with a collection of relevant case law and bibliography.

ISBN: 960-15-1218-7

Abstract: This book deals with the binding force of provisional measures of protection indicated by international courts and tribunals.

ISBN: 960-15-1599-2

Commentary to Article 67 of the 1969 VCLT.

ISBN: 978-0-19-954664-0

Commentary to Article 68 of the 1969 VCLT.

ISBN: 978-0-19-954664-0

DOI: 10.1163/170873811X563947

This article assesses the African Union’s (AU) concerns about Article 16 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC). It seeks to articulate a clearer picture of the law and politics of deferrals within the context of the AU’s repeated calls to the United Nations Security Council (UNSC, or the Council) to invoke Article 16 to suspend the processes initiated by the ICC against President Omar Al Bashir of Sudan. The UNSC’s failure to accede to the AU request led African States to formally withhold cooperation from the ICC in respect to the arrest and surrender of the Sudanese leader. Given the AU’s continued concerns, and the current impasse, fundamental questions have arisen about the Council’s authority to exercise, or not exercise, its deferral power. This culminated into a November 2009 African proposal for an amendment to the Rome Statute to empower the UN General Assembly to act should the UNSC fail to act on a deferral request after six months. Although ICC States Parties have so far shown limited public support for the AU’s proposed amendment to the deferral provision, this article examines its merits because a failure to engage the “Article 16 problem” could impact international accountability efforts in the Sudan, and further damage the ICC’s credibility in Africa. This unresolved issue also has wider significance given that the matters underlying the tension – how ICC prosecutions may be reconciled with peacemaking initiatives and the role and power of the Council in ICC business – will likely arise in future situations from around the world.

ISBN: 2210-9730

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0922156510000361

The article revisits the Barcelona Traction judgment of the International Court of Justice, rendered forty years ago. It evaluates the lasting influence of the Court's pronouncements on the nationality of corporations and on obligations erga omnes, and uses the case to illustrate the Court's role as an influential agent of legal development. In this respect, it identifies a number of factors that can help to explain under which circumstances judicial pronouncements are likely to shape the law.

ISBN: 0922-1565

This compendium of documents brings together, for the first time in an affordable format, the essential documents needed to gain a thorough knowledge of the laws of the sea. There has been a long felt need for such a collection to provide students, scholars and practitioners with a working library of the key materials. This collection integrates documents of the International Maritime Organisation (which are not available anywhere on the web in consolidated form), of regional fisheries organizations, security related documents, treaties concerning resource exploitation, environmental protection measures and much more, into the framework created by the Law of the Sea Convention. The book is aimed at teachers and practitioners in the area and can be used as a class room companion for law of the sea courses.

ISBN: 1841138231/97818411

An extensive updated collection of key documents covering all elements of the subject, plus commentary and bibliographic annotation. Organized by reference to UN instruments, UN sponsored conventions, ILO, UNESCO, and regional instruments.

ISBN: 978-0-19-956404-0

International humanitarian law governs the conduct of participants in an armed conflict. In order to determine whether it applies to situations of violence it is necessary to assess first of all whether the situation amounts to an ‘armed conflict’. However, international humanitarian law does not recognize a unitary concept of armed conflict but, rather, recognizes two types of armed conflicts: international and non-international. This chapter examines the history of the distinction between these two categories of armed conflict, the consequences of the distinction and whether it still has validity. The chapter then discusses legal concepts relevant to the two categories, including the differences between a non-international conflict and other violence, extraterritorial hostilities by one State against a non-state armed group and conflicts in which multinational forces are engaged. All these concepts are relevant to the understanding of the case studies which are the focus of the rest of the book.

ISBN: 978-0-19-965775-9

DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199647071.003.0003

When the Security Council imposes binding obligations through decisions adopted under Chapter VII of the UN Charter it may impact on internationally protected human rights and the corresponding obligations of UN member states to respect these rights. Member states are then faced with potentially conflicting obligations. This contribution surveys the respective position of Security Council measures and human rights obligations in the (emergent) normative hierarchy of international law. It defines normative conflict and discusses state practice in order to establish whether Article 103 of the UN Charter is a conflict or a hierarchy rule and whether human rights obligations are subordinate to Security Council measures.

ISBN: 978-0-19-964707-1

The paper assesses the legal regime governing recourse to force from the perspective of 'contemporary positivism'. It provides a basic introduction to positivist international law and its critique and charts how positivism, faced with decades of anti-positivist critique, has adjusted itself. More specifically, it analyses how in response to criticism, positivism has embraced a more 'liberal' approach to the identification of sources. Applying these findings to the specific problem of military force, the paper outlines the main challenges facing a positivist understanding of the jus ad bellum. These are (i) the loss of predictability of the legal rules (''anything goes"), which is a consequence of the liberalisation of sources; and (ii) the attraction, even among positivist scholars, to invoke "quasi-legal" arguments based on legitimacy, morals or political necessity.

Following recent denunciations of (withdrawals from) the ICSID Convention by Bolivia and Ecuador and the spate of academic commentary that followed, this paper considers denunciation from the ICSID Convention under the general international law of treaties. It is argued that self-contained interpretation of the provisions on denunciation of the ICSID Convention do not yield any compelling results, leaving contrary positions plausible. The general international law of treaties offers the decisive argument with respect to the effects of denunciation of the Convention, and helps determine whether ICSID jurisdiction can be established after the date of effective withdrawal from the Convention.

ISBN: 978-3-8329-6729-1

DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199600762.001.0001

This book examines how the United Nations Security Council, in exercising its power to impose binding non-forcible measures ('sanctions') under Article 41 of the UN Charter, may violate international law. The Council may overstep limits on its power imposed by the UN Charter itself and by general international law, including human rights guarentees. Such acts may engage the international responsibility of the United Nations, the organization of which the Security Council is an organ. Disobeying the Security Council discusses how and by whom the responsibility of the UN for unlawful Security Council sanctions can be determined; in other words, how the UN can be held to account for Security Council excesses.

ISBN: 978-0-19-960076-2

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199595297.003.0003

This paper attempts to trace, analyze, and justify, the reactions of domestic courts when these are faced with a challenge to domestic measures implementing Security Council sanctions regimes, in particular the regime under SCRs 1267 (1999) seq. It discusses the method in which domestic courts engage with the measures before them, as well as the standard of review they apply, and the usual outcomes of the challenge, ie abstention, low-intensity review, interpretation or annulment of the domestic measure. Interpretation and annulment of the domestic measure in particular may force the State in breach of its international obligations under the relevant SCRs and Article 25 of the UN Charter. The final section attempts to legal qualify and justify this potential breach.

ISBN: 978-0-19-959529-7

The introductory paper to a symposium issue of the Leiden Journal of International Law, edited by the authors, dealing with the function of domestic courts as agents for the development of international law. The paper 'sets the scene' for the contributions to the symposium, which seek to trace the impact of domestic courts in the development of canonical areas of international law, such as jurisdiction, immunity, state responsibility, the law of international organisations/human rights, and the law of armed conflict/conduct of hostilities. It discusses the formal quality and actual influence of domestic court decisions on the development of international law, and introduces the concept of 'agents' of international law development. This is the analytical perspective that the contributions to the symposium adopt.

ISBN: 0922-1565

This paper examines whether domestic courts can be cast as the ‘natural judges’ of international law. ‘Natural judge’ is meant here in the sense of the ‘immediate,’ ‘ordinary’ judge of international law, who can only be removed through a centrally instituted judge. Given the lack of a centrally organized international judicial system, the suggestion that domestic courts are the ‘ordinary judges’ of international law has significant repercussions on the physiognomy of the international legal system. Despite the fact that in some of the decisions the reasoning of the courts is based solely on domestic law, the domestic law relied on - typically fundamental rights - is of universal radiance, as evidenced by almost universally ratified treaties and customary international law. Domestic courts are then in fact applying law based on internationally agreed standards as the immediate judges, offering effective remedies for the violation of rights influenced or shaped by, or interpreted under, international law. This trend can signify the move to a more effective application of international law, one taking place in court, even if a domestic court, rather than by a decision of the executive to invoke responsibility of another actor, or bring an international claim.

ISBN: 9781849462020

As the title suggests, this paper does not deal with 'international law in domestic courts' but rather with 'domestic courts in international law'. It seeks to ascertain whether domestic courts are assigned an international judicial function by international law, and whether and to what extent they are in fact assuming and exercising that function. The paper attempts to define the concept of an ‘international judicial function’ and argues that, because of the peculiar ‘directionality’ of a great many international obligations (which require implementation within the domestic jurisdiction), domestic courts are the first port of call and the last line of defense for the interpretation and application of international law. However, as organs of States, courts may engage the international responsibility of the State if their conduct results in the breach of an international obligation. This is why the exercise of the international judicial function of domestic courts is supervised by States, either through the submission of disputes to international courts, or, more usually, through decentralized reactions.

ISBN: 1533-5860

This entry discusses economic measures which aim at reducing or destroying the enemy's war-fighting capability during armed conflict ('traditional' economic warfare) as well as peacetime measures which closely resemble traditional economic warfare, such as embargoes and collective economic sanctions.

ISBN: 978-0-19-929168-7

A Report prepared for the KROC Institute's Sanctions and Security Research Program, assessing reforms to the 1267/1989 sanctions regime of the Security Council against the standards required by European Courts, including the Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Court of Human Rights.

This entry discusses 'humanitarian intervention' as an autonomous justification for the use of force in international law.

ISBN: 978-0-19-929168-7

Abstract: Short comment on the ICJ's Kosovo Advisory Opinion in German.

ISBN: 0042-384X

DOI: 10.1093/ejil/chq080

This article examines the extent to which state officials are subject to prosecution in foreign domestic courts for international crimes. We consider the different types of immunity that international law accords to state officials, the reasons for the conferment of this immunity and whether they apply in cases in which it is alleged that the official has committed an international crime. We argue that personal immunity (immunity ratione personae) continues to apply even where prosecution is sought for international crimes. Also we consider that instead of a single category of personal immunity there are in fact two types of such immunity and that one type extends beyond senior officials such as the Head of State and Head of Government. Most of the article deals with functional immunity (immunity ratione materiae). We take the view that this type of immunity does not apply in the case of domestic prosecution of foreign officials for most international crimes. However, we reject the traditional arguments which have been put forward by scholars and courts in support of this view. Instead we consider the key to understanding when functional immunity is available lies in examining how jurisdiction is conferred on domestic courts.

ISBN: 0938-5428

This 2005 hardback edition of this book was awarded the 2006 Myres S. McDougal Prize by the American Society for Policy Sciences, and also the 2006 American Society of International Law book prize (Preeminent Contribution to Creative Scholarship).

ISBN: 978-0-19-922577-4

This paper surveys and analyses the case law of United Kingdom courts on questions of personality and immunity of international organizations, as well as on the question of liability of members for the acts of the organization, focusing in particular on the various cases surrounding the collapse of the International Tin Council in the 1980s.

ISBN: 978-0-19-967940-9

The case study of investment treaty arbitration provides an opportunity to examine whether and how the invocation of responsibility by a non-state actor has affected secondary rules of state responsibility. This article takes the analytical perspective of investors, capable of being perceived as right-holders (by reference to human and consular rights), beneficiaries (by reference to the law of treaties rules on third states), or agents (by reference to diplomatic protection). The shift from the state to the investor as the entity invoking responsibility for the breach of investment treaties seems to have influenced the law of state responsibility in a number of distinct ways. The apparent disagreement about the law of state responsibility may sometimes properly relate to questions of treaty interpretation, while in other cases rules from an inter-state context are applied verbatim. In other cases, the different perspectives lead to importantly different conclusions regarding circumstances precluding wrongfulness, elements of remedies, waiver of rights, and, possibly, interpretative relevance of diplomatic protection rules. The overall thesis is that conceptual challenges faced by investment arbitration may be illuminated by the solutions provided by the regimes that formed the background for its creation.

States increasingly 'contract out' their governmental authority in favour of international organizations. As a result, remedies available under domestic law to individuals and legal entities may no longer be available, leaving them without redress. (Domestic) courts have devised a method to react to such diminution of their jurisdiction, which at the same time comprises a message for various addressees and engages a dialogue on multiple levels. This method is shaped by the spirit and thrust of the argument the German Constitutional Court put forward in its Solange jurisprudence, and has the potential of fostering a harmonization of domestic and international law, as well as that of establishing a rudimentary normative hierarchy at the international level.

ISBN: 9781849462471

This paper discusses (in French) whether countermeasures can be invoked as a justification for disobeying binding decisions of the Security Council under Chapter VII of the UN Charter. The first part establishes how the Security Council may engage the international responsibility of the UN and who should be allowed to determine that such engagement has in fact taken place. The second part argues that disobedience of illegal sanctions adopted by the Council may be justified under international law as a countermeasure in response to the Council's (the UN's) internationally wrongful act.

ISBN: 0035-0788

A comparative submission by Oxford Pro Bono Publico to the Special Representative of the UN Secretary-General on Business and Human Rights.

DOI: 10.1007/s12180-011-0018-6

Scientific and technological development necessitates often legal regulation, to be achieved through an interaction between science and law during the decision-making process. Taking as an example the case of underwater noise pollution, the examination of which is underway in many international organisations with a view towards its regulation, the article proposes to comment upon some aspects of this interaction. It is finally submitted that law provides sufficient legal principles and institutionalised frameworks for cooperation, which however have not been sufficiently put in use so far.

The Oxford Companion to International Criminal Justice is the first major reference work to provide a complete overview of this emerging field. Its nearly 1100 pages are divided into three sections. In the first part, 21 essays by leading thinkers offer a comprehensive survey of issues and debates surrounding international humanitarian law, international criminal law, and their enforcement. The second part is arranged alphabetically, containing 320 entries on doctrines, procedures, institutions and personalities. The final part contains over 400 case summaries on different trials from international and domestic courts dealing with war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide, torture, and terrorism. With analysis and commentary on every aspect of international criminal justice, this Companion is designed to be the first port of call for scholars and practitioners interested in current developments in international justice.

ISBN: 978-0-19-923832-3

Abstract: Also published in English ‘Cultural Heritage and Human Rights’ as Oxford Legal Studies Research Paper No. 26/2007, (SSRN).

Abstract: Commentary of the Preamble of the League of Nations Covenant in French.

This is the Preliminary Report of the Study Group on Principles on Engagement of Domestic Courts with International Law. It sets out the Study Group's underlying considerations and seeks to distill a set of principles which guide domestic court engagement with international law. It will be used by the Study Group as guidance for the completion of a number of national and thematic studies, which will then feed into the Study Group's final report.

In recent years, the International Court of Justice has been increasingly asked to adjudicate upon claims of State responsibility that raise or at least touch upon the possibility of international responsibility of multiple entities. In different substantive contexts, these cases raise similar conceptual questions that might be articulated by reference to the concept of ‘shared responsibility’. The focus of this article is on procedural matters, and in particular on how shared responsibility may be implemented in the ICJ. The argument will be made in three steps, dealing in turn with the manner in which cases concerning shared responsibility could be brought before the Court, the way how such cases could be handled, and the challenges raised in such cases by absent parties. The article argues for a nuanced consideration of the rationale of the procedural challenges: some are unremarkable in conceptual terms and reflect the broader judicial architecture of the Court, while others are of particular importance for shared responsibility, even though the particular legal issue might be mutatis mutandis relevant to other multilateral disputes.

This paper focuses on the conditions which ought to exist before the International Criminal Court can exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression. In particular, it addresses (i) whether the Court should be competent to exercise jurisdiction where the alleged aggressor State has either not accepted the amendment on aggression, or is not a party to the ICC Statute and (ii) whether ICC jurisdiction on aggression should be made dependent on the prior approval of the United Nations Security Council. The first issue is referred to here as the “consent problem” and the second the “Security Council problem/issue”. This paper argues that the consent problem raises a fundamental question of deeper significance than the textual or perhaps technical issues concerning the way in which the amendment concerning aggression might come into force under Article 121 of the Statute. The consent problem raises fundamental issues about the nature of the ICC as an international tribunal and about the principles governing the competence of international tribunals under international law. In particular, the consent issue raises important questions about the jurisdiction of international tribunals over non-consenting States and whether the ICC is to be regarded as bound by rules of international law that would ordinarily bind other international tribunals. This paper, outlines and explains the principle of consent as applied to the competence of international tribunals. There is a detailed discussion, in Section 2, of the application of the principle to cases before international tribunals where the tribunal is called upon to determine the rights and obligations of States not before the tribunal. In particular, this section discusses the Monetary Gold principle enunciated by the International Court of Justice. According to that principle, the Court will not adjudicate on a case where the Court would be required, as a necessary prerequisite, to adjudicate on the rights or responsibilities of a non-consenting and absent third State. It is argued that this principle is simply an application of the more general principle of consent and that the principle is derived from the more fundamental principle of the independence of States, i.e. the idea that States are not subject to external authority of other States or institutions created by other States. The paper argues, in Section 3, that because a determination that an individual has committed the crime of aggression requires a prior determination that a State has committed an act of aggression and a breach of the UN Charter, the ICC would act in violation of the consent principle in cases contemplated by the aggression amendment. The paper then turns, in Section 4, to an examination of whether the consent principle and the Monetary Gold principle (which is an application of that more general principle) are applicable to international criminal tribunals in general and to the ICC in particular. Referring to the case law of other tribunals, it is argued that these principles apply to all international tribunals and that the form in which the proceedings involving adjudication of the responsibilities of other States takes place is irrelevant to their application. Section 5 examines which States are to be regarded as non-consenting States for the purpose of the application of the consent principle. I then turn to the Nuremberg and Tokyo precedents in Section 6. I argue that the establishment and operation of these tribunals would not support the view that a rule has developed permitting departure from the consent principle in international criminal tribunals. I argue that neither tribunal was truly international and that in any event, in both cases, there was the consent of the relevant sovereign authority. The paper considers, in Section 7, whether the jurisdiction of the ICC over aggression can be justified on the basis of a transfer of authority from the State that is the alleged victim of aggression. It is argued that though victim States can prosecute for aggression and though transferred jurisdiction is an appropriate justification for the jurisdiction of the ICC in general, the principles and precedents which support transfers of jurisdiction to international tribunal do not apply to aggression. Section 8 returns to the Security Council issue and considers whether prior determination by the Council (or by the General Assembly or ICJ) would fall within an exception to the Monetary Gold principle. It is argued that the best way to expand the jurisdiction of the Court to non-consenting States while respecting the principle of consent is by referral of situations to the Court by the Council. When the consent problem is taken into account, the role of the Security Council in making referrals to the ICC with regard to aggression is not a limit on the competence of the Court. Rather the Security Council comes to the aid of the Court and expands its jurisdiction to situations where the ICC would otherwise be legally incompetent to act. On this view, giving the Security Council almost exclusive competence with regard to aggression cases is not to be regarded as a problem to be overcome, but rather as a means of overcoming an existing problem. The final section is the main theoretical contribution of the piece, considering whether the deviation from the consent principle contemplated with regard to the ICC’s jurisdiction over aggression is to be regarded as an evolution of the law or instead a violation.

This blog entry is based on a talk delivered at the University of Amsterdam in the framework of the SHARES (shared responsibility) project. It discusses how responsibility is shared between the UN and member-States for the adoption and implementation of UN sanctions under Chapter VII of the Charter.

This entry surveys the right of visit and search of foreign merchant ships on the high seas under the traditional law of war, in the context of collective security, and during peacetime.

ISBN: 978-0-19-929168-7

Jeff McMahan’s challenge to the longstanding orthodoxy about the right way to conduct war has fallen on fertile grounds because it is an attempt to apply to the use of force between states a moral standard whose pertinence to international relations is decreasingly contestable and which regulation by international law (IL) is, therefore, under pressure to afford: the preservation of individual rights. This compelling endeavour is at an impasse given the admission of many ethicists that it is currently impossible for international humanitarian law (IHL) to regulate killing in war with a view to individuals’ liability. IHL’s failure to consistently protect individual rights, specifically its shortfall compared to human rights law, has led to challenges also by international lawyers. This paper identifies the features of war that ground the inability of IL to regulate it to a level of moral acceptability and characterises such situations as presenting an epistemically cloaked forced choice regarding the preservation of individual rights. Commitment to the above moral standard then means that IL should not prejudge the outcome of such quintessential wars and must, somewhat paradoxically, diverge from morality. In showing that many confrontations between states inevitably take the form of such epistemically cloaked forced choices, the paper contests the argument by revisionist just war theories that the failure of IL to track a deep morality of war is merely a function of contingent institutional desiderata. Symmetrical IHL with its current moral limitations has a continuing role to play in international relations.

Starting from the observation that traditionally the law of State responsibility has hardly interacted with the law applicable to territorial and boundary disputes, the article examines how these two fields of international law may relate in the case of State action in contested areas, be they terrestrial or marine. Assessing recent international practice, particularly the case law of the International Court of Justice and arbitral tribunals, and differentiating between land and maritime disputes, it identifies the primary obligations incumbent upon States when acting in contested areas – relating to State sovereignty and sovereign rights, ius ad bellum, ius in bello, procedural obligations pending the final settlement of the dispute – and it examines the consequences of the breach of those primary norms, in terms of secondary obligations, as well as third States’ duties and obligations. The legal framework specifically created for disputed maritime areas by Art. 74 para. 3 UNCLOS and Art. 83 para. 3 UNCLOS, including its implications for land disputes, is specifically analysed. The authors submit that, at a time of increasingly pro-active policies and robust actions taken by States in contested areas, more attention should be devoted to the extent to which the law of State responsibility, especially with regard to relevant forms of reparation, has to adapt to the content and scope of primary norms applicable to that specific context

An introduction to, and commentary of, the main findings of the Tribunal in the Abyei Arbitration between the Government of Sudan and the Sudan People's Liberation Movement/Army (Award of 22 July 2009), along with a brief consideration of the Award's (and the dispute's) aftermath.

ISBN: 978-94-91021-02-2

This short study in memory of Sir Ian Brownlie QC discusses the countermeasure of disobedience as a means of implementation of the responsibility of international organisations. Focusing on Security Council sanctions under Chapter VII of the Charter, it argues that actions of the Security Council may be illegal and thus engage the responsibility of the UN. It then argues that disobedience of such sanctions on the part of States may qualify as a countermeasure against the Organisation. This legal characterisation of disobedience has significant advantages over the 'invalidity theory' in that it subjects decentralised reaction to a specific legal framework.

ISBN: 9789004256071

This paper surveys and evaluates the contribution of the International Court of Justice to the development of the (public international) law of the sea. It does so by comparing the Court's contribution as against other 'competing' agents of development of international law, ie other adjudicators, codifiers, regulators, and lawmakers. It concludes that the impact of the Court on the law of the sea has not been great, and is now diminishing. However, it argues that the more important contribution of the Court lies less in its influence on the development of the law, and more in its authority in consolidating it.

ISBN: 978-0-19-965321-8

Abstract:

The article considers whether the obligations of states, which have been referred to the International Criminal Court (ICC) by the United Nations Security Council, are the same as the cooperation obligations of states parties to the ICC Statute. It is argued that despite the lack of clarity in the resolutions referring the situation in Darfur and in Libya to the ICC, the better view is that the obligation imposed on Sudan and Libya to �cooperate fully� with the ICC should be regarded as an obligation to cooperate in accordance with the provisions of the ICC Statute. This means that those states are entitled to benefit from those limited provisions of the ICC Statute that permit a refusal to cooperate with the Court or permit the state to postpone the execution of a request by the Court for assistance. The article also considers the interaction between the obligations of states to cooperate with the ICC and domestic proceedings against those sought for ICC prosecution. It considers the extent to which the obligation of cooperation may be suspended by an admissibility challenge and addresses whether the permission to suspend the obligation of cooperation may extend to a suspension of the obligation to surrender an accused person to the ICC.

ISBN: 1478-1387

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has held that Article VI of the Genocide Convention imposes an implicit obligation on Contracting Parties to cooperate with an “international penal tribunal” that has jurisdiction over persons charged with genocide. Although it was envisaged in the drafting of the Convention that acceptance of such jurisdiction would occur by treaty, the ICC is to be regarded as a competent international penal tribunal under the Genocide Convention even in cases where the ICC exercises jurisdiction on the basis of a Security Council referral. This creates an obligation on parties to cooperate with the ICC where an accused person is charged with genocide. However, under the jurisprudence of the ICJ this obligation of cooperation only arises where the contracting party in question has not only accepted the jurisdiction of the tribunal but also has a pre-existing obligation to cooperate. Applying this precedent would mean that in the Bashir case, only those States that are parties to the ICC Statute have an obligation of cooperation under the Genocide Convention. However, a teleological interpretation of the Convention would permit use of the Genocide Convention as a basis for creating an obligation of cooperation for non-parties since they must be deemed to have accepted the jurisdiction of the ICC over the case by virtue of a binding Security Council resolution conferring such jurisdiction. Relying on the Genocide Convention as a basis for a cooperation would open up alternative arguments allowing ICC parties (and non-parties if the teleological interpretation were adopted) to bypass immunities otherwise provided for in international law.

This article examines the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court (ICC) over nationals of states not party to the ICC Statute. The article first addresses the US argument that the exercise of ICC jurisdiction over nationals of non-parties without the consent of that non-party would be contrary to international law. The author considers the principles which support the delegation of criminal jurisdiction by states to international tribunals and discusses the precedents for such delegations. It is further argued that the exercise of ICC jurisdiction over acts done pursuant to the official policy of a non-party state would not be contrary to the principle requiring consent for the exercise of jurisdiction by international tribunals. Finally, the article explores the limits to the jurisdiction of the ICC over non-party nationals. In particular, the article addresses the circumstances in which ICC parties are precluded from surrendering nationals of non-parties to the ICC.

DOI: 10.1093/jicj/mqp034

This article considers whether states are obliged or permitted to arrest Sudanese President Omar al Bashir pursuant to a warrant of arrest issued by the International Criminal Court (ICC). The article considers the extent to which the ICC Statute removes immunities which would ordinarily be available to state officials. It is argued that the removal of the immunity by Article 27 of the ICC Statute applies also at the national level, when national authorities act in support of the ICC. The article examines the application of Article 98 of the ICC Statute and considers the legal nature of Security Council referrals to the ICC. It is argued that the effect of the Security Council referral is that Sudan is to be regarded as bound by the ICC Statute and thus by Article 27. Given that the Statute operates in this case not as a treaty but by virtue of being a Security Council resolution, the removal of immunity operates even with regard to non-parties. However, since any (implicit) removal of immunity by the Security Council would conflict with customary international law and treaty rules according immunity to a serving head of state, the article considers the application of Article 103 of the United Nations (UN) Charter in this case.

ISBN: 1478-1387

The purpose of this brief study is to gauge what the Permanent Court of Internation-al Justice might have had to say about the nebulous concept of the ‘international community’, as the Court administering the law of that community, but also developing it, thereby contributing to the stabilization and further integration of that community. This is done by ‘reverse-engineering’ the jurisprudence of the PCIJ, seeking to canvass how the Court understood the concept of the 'international community' and how it would have wanted it to evolve. The study surveys the Court’s case law for what are commonly accepted as the ‘hallmarks’ of an (international) community, or at least those commonly associated with the idea: the make-up of the community; the concept of obligations and action in the ‘general’ interest; and the existence of institutions providing protection of the community interest.

ISBN: 9789004244931

This publication reproduces, in a collection of seminal works on collective security, an article first published in (1996) 8 African Journal of International Comparative Law. The chapter examiners the role and record of the international court in the settlement of disputes which are likely to affect international peace.

This collection of documents brings together a large number of primary sources on the peaceful settlement of disputes in a usable and affordable format. The documents included reflect the diverse techniques of international dispute settlement, as recognised in Articles 2(3) and 33 of the UN Charter, such as negotiation, mediation, arbitration and adjudication. The book comprises the most relevant multilateral treaties establishing dispute settlement regimes, as well as examples of special agreements, compromissory clauses, optional clause declarations and relevant resolutions of international organisations. It covers both diplomatic and adjudicative methods of dispute settlement and follows a basic division between general dispute settlement mechanisms, and sectoral regimes in fields such as human rights, WTO law, investment, law of the sea, environmental law and arms control. The book is the first widely-available collection of key documents on dispute settlement. It is aimed at teachers, students and practitioners of international law and related disciplines.

ISBN: 9781849463034

Article-by-article commentary of the 2004 UN Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and their Property.

ISBN: 978-0-19-960183-7

This paper discusses transparency in the working method of the United Nations Security Council. It describes the institutional design of the organ and the evolution of Security Council powers, and seeks to identify whether there is an obligation for the Council to act in a transparent manner in the exercise of its powers. The paper argues that transparency is an 'ancillary' obligation incumbent on the Council, to allow for decentralised control over the exercise of its powers by Member States of the UN. Transparency having no independent normative charge, we do not how much of it is good -- this is determined by a pattern of protest and reaction between the Security Council and the Member States called upon to implement its decisions.

ISBN: 978-1107021389

DOI: 10.1093/jicj/mqq006

Domestic courts are increasingly being seized by persons subjected to or affected by sanctions imposed by the UN Security Council, particularly through the regime established under Resolution 1267. In Abdelrazik v. Canada, the Canadian Federal Court ‘interprets away’ the obligations of Canada under the 1267 regime, potentially forcing upon the state a breach of its international obligations under the resolution and the UN Charter. But at the same time it offers an important — if implicit — justification for that breach under international law.

ISBN: 1478-1387