Filter by
  • M Aznar and E Methymaki, 'Article 2 ' in A Zimmermann and CJ Tams (eds), The Statute of the International Court of Justice: A Commentary (Oxford University Press 2019)
  • S von Schorlemer and A Tzanakopoulos, 'Article 46' in A Zimmermann and CJ Tams (eds), The Statute of the International Court of Justice: A Commentary (Oxford University Press 2019)
    Commentary to Article 46 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice
  • S von Schorlemer and A Tzanakopoulos, 'Article 47' in A Zimmermann and CJ Tams (eds), The Statute of the International Court of Justice: A Commentary (Oxford University Press 2019)
    Commentary to Article 47 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice
  • H Jöbstl, 'Article 8(2)(b)(viii)' in Mark Klamberg (ed), Commentary on the Law of the International Criminal Court (TOAEP 2019) (forthcoming)
  • Juan Pablo Perez-Leon Acevedo and Thiago Alves Pinto, 'Enforcing Freedom of Religion or Belief in Cases Involving Attacks Against Buildings Dedicated to Religion: The Al Mahdi Case at the International Criminal Court' (2019) 37 Berkeley Journal of International Law (forthcoming)
  • E Methymaki and A Tzanakopoulos, 'Freedom With Their Exception: Jurisdiction and Immunity as Rule and Exception' in F Paddeu and L Bartels (eds), Exceptions and Defences in International Law (Oxford University Press 2019) (forthcoming)
    The relationship between the rules on state jurisdiction and sovereign immunity, as well as the rules of sovereign immunity between themselves, has been the subject of long-standing debate among international lawyers, as well as international and domestic courts. Although the starting point of any discussion is the jurisdiction of the territorial state, it is also accepted that domestic courts are barred from exercising such jurisdiction over acts of another sovereign. This latter rule has its own exceptions, namely that a foreign state is not entitled to immunity for acts performed in a commercial capacity and certain other limited circumstances. What are the consequences of such a rule-exception-exception to the exception relationship, and do they affect the waiver of immunity, the burden of proof, or the interpretation of these norms? This chapter argues that the relationship between jurisdiction and immunity as rule and exception has, in the final analysis, no particular normative weight in their application and interpretation by courts and other law-applying actors.
  • M Apostolaki and A Tzanakopoulos, 'Greece' in FM Palombino (ed), Duelling for Supremacy: International Law vs National Fundamental Principles (Cambridge University Press 2019)
    After decades of avoiding meaningful engagement with international law, Greek courts engaged more seriously in the years of the crises. Under conditions of ‘normality’, cases ‘at the edge’ are few, and domestic courts may be unwilling in such circumstances to openly contest international law. This chapter demonstrates how Greek courts opted for avoidance in cases they thought that international law somehow left something to be desired when pitted against the Greek Constitution. They avoided international law by mechanistically invoking the Constitution’s normative supremacy even when they did not need to do so. This is undoubtedly resistance, but only formally principled resistance – and certainly not ‘reasonable’ resistance. But when international law is employed by both regulators and challengers as a sword and a shield on matters of high political and legal importance, resistance is no longer cheap, and can no longer be unprincipled. The stakes are too high, but so are the possibilities to influence the content and development of international law. In those circumstances, Greek courts seemed far more comfortable to forget about resisting and fall into line. Resistance here would be costly, not less so in terms of the quality of argument to be put forward. Resistance is not always futile. Sometimes, even if potentially futile, it is direly needed. Unprincipled resistance is always futile, however, and definitely not useful in preparing one for proper contestation when the circumstances call for it.
    ISBN: 978-1108475266
  • E Methymaki, 'Irmgard Marboe, Calculation of Compensation and Damages in International Investment Law (2nd edn, OUP 2017)' (2019) European Yearbook of International Economic Law [Review] (forthcoming)
  • A Tzanakopoulos, 'La Russie et le Conseil de sécurité : les trois époques de la pratique' (2019) 123 Revue générale de droit international public 91
    This paper discusses the three different epochs of Soviet/Russian practice in the Security Council. After recounting the 'switch' from the Soviet Union to the Russian Federation as a permanent member of the Security Council, the paper traces the three epochs it identifies: from the Soviet era of the deadlock during the Cold War, to the era of Russian retreat during the New World Order and US hegemony, to the current paradoxical era of Russian re-engagement, where Russia invokes Western arguments against the West.
    ISBN: 0373-6156
  • E Methymaki and L Bartels, 'Mexico-Tax Measures on Soft Drinks and Other Beverages, WT/DS308' (2019) 181 ILR (forthcoming)
  • A Tzanakopoulos, 'State Responsibility for “Targeted Sanctions”' (2019) 113 American Journal of International Law Unbound 135
    DOI: 10.1017/aju.2019.22
    This short paper discusses legal issues arising out of the imposition of unilateral targeted sanctions, that is sanctions imposed autonomously by states against natural and legal persons. After clarifying the relevant terminology, the essay delves into the legality of the practice of such targeted sanctions, and concludes that the most legally difficult aspect of these measures is their purported extraterritoriality.
  • ABE Bayot, 'The Bangsamoro Peace Process and Hybrid Self-Determination: Reconciling Bangsamoro and Lumad Claims to Self-Determination' (2019) Sui Generis (forthcoming)
  • C Musto and A Tzanakopoulos, 'The International Court of Justice and "Progressive Causes"' in A Skordas (ed), Research Handbook on the International Court of Justice (Edward Elgar 2019) (forthcoming)
    In this chapter we consider whether the International Court of Justice (‘ICJ’ or ‘the Court’) has developed its judicial policy so as to embrace ‘progressive causes’. We investigate how the Court responds when faced with proceedings involving divisive issues of interest to the international community as a whole and how such causes reach the Court. We assess whether the Court’s handling of proceedings involving such causes has evolved over time and whether the Court should be viewed as a ‘progressive’ or a ‘conservative’ institution (and whether such categorisation is helpful).
  • A Tzanakopoulos, 'The Secretary-General's Trust Fund to Assist States in the Settlement of Disputes through the International Court of Justice' in H Ruiz-Fabri (ed), Max Planck Encyclopedia of International Procedural Law (Oxford University Press 2019) (forthcoming)
    The Secretary-General’s Trust Fund to Assist States in the Settlement of Disputes through the International Court of Justice was established in 1989 and inspired the creation of similar funds to financially assist states in the resolution of their disputes within the context of the Permanent Court of Arbitration and the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. In this entry for the Encyclopedia of International Procedural Law, I review the structure and operation, and the practice of the ICJ Trust Fund, comparing it occasionally to the other funds inspired by it, and offering a brief evaluation of the endeavour.
  • A Zimmermann, CJ Tams, F Boos and E Methymaki (eds), The Statute of the International Court of Justice: A Commentary (3rd edn Oxford University Press 2019)
  • MM Jackson, 'Virtuous Accomplices in International Criminal Law' (2019) International and Comparative Law Quarterly (forthcoming)
  • T de Souza Dias and Dapo Akande, 'A new approach to the Interests of Justice in the 10 years ahead of the Rome Statute: Why and when the Prosecutor should use her discretion under Art. 53(1)(c) and 2(c) to defer investigations or prosecutions in favor of peace negotiations' (2018) UCLA ICC Forum
    We believe that a key reform that has the potential to make the international criminal justice project stronger, more efficient, and more effective is the consideration of peace negotiations as an additional factor in the Prosecutor’s decision of whether or not to pursue an investigation or prosecution “in the interests of justice,” in accordance with Article 53(1)(c) and 2(c) of the Rome Statute. At present, this would require a revision of the Policy Papers issued on this question, in particular, the 2013 Policy Paper on Preliminary Examinations and the 2007 Policy Paper on the Interests of Justice. Significantly, we believe that this reform has the potential to prevent or alleviate, at least in part, some of the most pressing problems mentioned by the International Criminal Court’s (ICC) Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) in its question for this issue of the ICC Forum, namely, the lack of state cooperation, limited budget, and lengthy or complex proceedings.
  • D. Akande and Talita de Souza-Dias, 'A New Approach to the"Interests of Justice” in the Ten Years Ahead of the Rome Statute' (2018) ICCForum.com
    We believe that a key reform that has the potential to make the international criminal justice project stronger, more efficient, and more effective is the consideration of peace negotiations as an additional factor in the Prosecutor’s decision of whether or not to pursue an investigation or prosecution “in the interests of justice,” in accordance with Article 53(1)(c) and 2(c) of the Rome Statute. At present, this would require a revision of the Policy Papers issued on this question, in particular, the 2013 Policy Paper on Preliminary Examinations and the 2007 Policy Paper on the Interests of Justice. Significantly, we believe that this reform has the potential to prevent or alleviate, at least in part, some of the most pressing problems mentioned by the International Criminal Court’s (ICC) Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) in its question for this issue of the ICC Forum, namely, the lack of state cooperation, limited budget, and lengthy or complex proceedings.
  • MM Jackson, 'Amnesties in Strasbourg' (2018) 38 Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 451
    DOI: 10.1093/ojls/gqy017

Pages