Filter by
  • L Rajamani, 'Due Diligence in International Climate Change Law' in H Krieger, A Peters, L Kreuzer (ed), Due Diligence in International Law (Oxford University Press 2021) (forthcoming)
  • E Methymaki and A Ozcelik, 'Europe' in R Geiß and N Melzer (eds), The Oxford Handbook of the International Law of Global Security (Oxford University Press 2021) (forthcoming)
  • Katie A. Johnston, 'Identifying the jus cogens norm in the jus ad bellum' (2021) International and Comparative Law Quarterly (forthcoming)
  • L Rajamani and J Peel (eds), The Oxford Handbook of International Environmental Law (2nd edition Oxford University Press, UK 2021) (forthcoming)
  • Thiago Alves Pinto, 'An Empirical Investigation of the Use of Limitations to Freedom of Religion or Belief at the European Court of Human Rights' (2020) 15 Religion & Human Rights 96
    DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/18710328-BJA10005
    Most literature on freedom of religion or belief argues that there should be a high threshold for the imposition of limitations to the manifestation of the right. However, the practice of the European Court of Human Rights shows that the bar is much lower than academics suggest. This article explores this issue by analysing a plethora of cases and on the basis of interviews with lawyers connected to the Court. While the Court often considers the requirements of legality, legitimacy, and necessity, it does so briefly; focusing mostly on the analysis of proportionality and the margin of appreciation to the State in question. This approach makes the decisions exceedingly subjective and leads to little legal certainty in the area. Therefore, it is suggested that if the Court would analyse all criteria to impose limitations strictly, it could become more efficient while providing greater protection for persons to manifest their religion or belief.
  • C Redgwell and L Rajamani, 'And Justice for All? Energy Justice in International Law ' in Iñigo del Guayo et al (ed), Energy Law and Distributional Justice (Oxford University Press 2020)
  • L Rajamani, Innovation and Experimentation in the International Climate Change Regime (Collected Courses of the Hague Academy of International Law/ Receuil des Cours, Brill 2020)
  • Thiago Alves Pinto and Rodrigo Vitorino Souza Alves, 'Investigations on the Use of Limitations to Freedom of Religion or Belief in Brazil' (2020) 15 Religion & Human Rights 77
    DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/18710328-BJA10004
    The present article analyses cases from top Brazilian courts and has received contributions from several scholars, practitioners, and public officials to better understand the use of limitations to freedom of religion or belief in the country. The Brazilian Constitution provides for the right to freedom of religion or belief as a fundamental right, and other domestic legislation regulates the right, including those implementing international human rights treaties that Brazil has ratified. These laws are easily accessible. Nevertheless, domestic courts seldom rely on such international instruments or the case-law of international bodies in their judgments. Therefore, although these instruments are in force in Brazil, domestic courts do not expressly use or refer to the clauses of permissible limitations of the relevant international and regional human rights instruments, creating a scenario with low levels of legal certainty for those seeking the protection of the right to freedom of religion or belief.
  • A Tzanakopoulos, 'Les sanctions extraterritoriales : Les réactions des États affectés' in Société française pour le droit international (ed), Extraterritorialités et droit international – Colloque d’Angers (Pedone 2020) (forthcoming)
    French abstract: Cette étude très brève examinera les réactions des Etats « affectés » par les sanctions extraterritoriales. Plus précisément, elle examinera les réactions des Etats « directement ciblés » par les sanctions extraterritoriales, et non les Etats tiers affectés. Je discuterai du fait que les sanctions (viz., les contre-mesures) extraterritoriales ne sont utilisées que comme une alternative aux sanctions collectives, notamment les sanctions que le Conseil de sécurité a le pouvoir d’imposer au titre du chapitre VII de la Charte des Nations Unies, et plus précisément au titre de l’article 41. J’analyserai, d'après, la légalité des sanctions extraterritoriales. Enfin, j’examinerai brièvement les possibilités pour l’Etat ciblé de réagir aux sanctions illicites, qui ne sont, en réalité, rien d’autre que les possibilités offertes à tout Etat lésé par un fait internationalement illicite. English abstract: This brief paper, based on a presentation at the Annual Meeting of the French Society of International Law in 2019, discusses the reactions of states that have been directly targeted by extra-territorial sanctions to such sanctions. It explains that unilateral extraterritorial sanctions are essentially used as an alternative to collective sanctions, esp. those imposed by the Security Council under Article 41 of the UN Charter. The legality of such unilateral extraterritorial sanctions is assessed, and the possibilities of reaction by directly targeted states is discussed. These are but the possibilities that exist for every state that is injured by an internationally wrongful act.
  • Nazila Ghanea and Thiago Alves Pinto, 'Parliamentarians and Freedom of Religion or Belief' (2020) OxHRH Blog
    Parliamentary networks for human rights are not unheard of. Several networks exist which draw attention to the role of parliaments and parliamentarians in the promotion and protection of human rights, for example, the ASEAN Parliamentarians for Human Rights and the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU)’s Committee on the Human Rights of Parliamentarians. The UN General Assembly, the Human Rights Council and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights have also drawn attention to parliaments’ engagement with human rights. The idea of a parliamentary network focused on a particular human right, however, is very novel.
  • ABE Bayot, 'The Bangsamoro Peace Process and Hybrid Self-Determination: Reconciling Bangsamoro and Lumad Claims to Self-Determination' (2020) 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 2020) (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).
  • G S Goodwin-Gill, 'The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and the Sources of International Refugee Law' (2020) 69 International and Compararive Law Quarterly 1
    DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S002058931900054X
    The role of international organizations in international law-making tends to be downplayed in this largely State-centric world. The practice of UNHCR, however, is reason enough for a more sophisticated appreciation of the role that operational entities can play in stimulating State practice, and of how they may interact with and guide domestic courts in treaty interpretation and application. The ILC’s recently completed projects on customary international law and subsequent agreements and practice encourage a cautious approach, but the high degree of judicialization in refugee decision-making, the strong legal content in the international protection regime and the impact of UNHCR’s operational activities open the way for institutional and grass-roots developments, keeping the law in closer touch with social and political realities and with the needs of those displaced.
    ISBN: 0020-5893 (Print), 1471-6895 (Online)
  • C J Tams and E Methymaki, 'The World Court’s Influence on Contemporary Investment Law' in H Ruiz Fabri and E Stoppioni (eds), International Investment Law: An Analysis of Major Decisions (Hart 2020) (forthcoming)
  • A Tzanakopoulos, 'We Who Are Not as Others: Sanctions and (Global) Security Governance' in R Geiß and N Melzer (eds), The Oxford Handbook on the International Law of Global Security (Oxford University Press 2020) (forthcoming)
    This paper deals with sanctions as a (global) security governance tool. It discusses the terms of the debate—the meaning of sanctions and (global) security and then traces the historical trajectory in the use of collective and unilateral sanctions in the service of security. The argument is that global security is nothing but national security projected unto the international plane. When a hegemonic concept of security, that is to say, of the existential threats ‘we’ need to protect against is imposed and accepted, and for as long as it is accepted, collective sanctions rule supreme, and can be particularly effective (but also destructive). When there is fragmentation and antagonism as to what the threats are, when there is no hegemonic national security accepted as synonymous to international security, there is a return to unilateral sanctions and a concomitant side-lining of collective security mechanisms.
  • Katie A. Johnston, '‘Force’ and ‘Déplorer’' in Valère Ndior (ed), Dictionnaire de l’actualité internationale (Pedone 2020) (forthcoming)
  • 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)

Pages