International Court of Justice Handbook
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
The Legitimacy of Economic Sanctions As Countermeasures for Wrongful Acts
The Legitimacy of Economic Sanctions as Countermeasures for Wrongful Acts Lori Fisler Damrosch* INTRODUCTION This essay offers aN iNstallmeNt of what would have beeN a coNtiNuiNg conversation with David D. Caron, a close colleague in the field of international law, oN themes that eNgaged both of us across multiple phases of our intersecting careers. The issues are fundamental ones for both the theory and the practice of internatioNal law, involving such core coNcerns as how iNterNatioNal law caN be enforced in an international system that is not yet adequately equipped with institutioNs to determine the existeNce aNd coNsequeNces of violatioNs or to impose saNctioNs against violators; aNd how to eNsure that self-help enforcement measures iN a largely deceNtralized aNd still iNcomplete system are coNsisteNt with the priNciples aNd values uNderlyiNg the iNterNatioNal legal order. David CaroN was uNiquely positioNed to speak aNd write oN these issues, Not oNly with a mature scholar’s authority, but also with the authoritativeness conferred by the judicial appointmeNts he held in receNt years aNd the cases oN which he would have deliberated and rendered judgments, but for his untimely death. Without his eloquent voice to provide wisdom aNd reach decisioNs iN the coNtext of coNcrete disputes, I venture still-evolving thoughts on what may well seem unanswerable questions. The topic of ecoNomic saNctioNs as couNtermeasures for iNterNatioNally wroNgful acts provides the opportuNity to revisit questioNs that I eNcouNtered for the first time as a braNd-new international lawyer in the Office of the Legal Adviser of the U.S. DepartmeNt of State; these questioNs would later eNgage David CaroN’s iNterest as well. -
The International Emergency Economic Powers Act: Origins, Evolution, and Use
The International Emergency Economic Powers Act: Origins, Evolution, and Use Updated July 14, 2020 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov R45618 SUMMARY R45618 The International Emergency Economic Powers July 14, 2020 Act: Origins, Evolution, and Use Christopher A. Casey, The International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) provides the President broad Coordinator authority to regulate a variety of economic transactions following a declaration of national Analyst in International emergency. IEEPA, like the Trading with the Enemy Act (TWEA) from which it branched, sits at Trade and Finance the center of the modern U.S. sanctions regime. Changes in the use of IEEPA powers since the act’s enactment in 1977 have caused some to question whether the statute’s oversight provisions Ian F. Fergusson are robust enough given the sweeping economic powers it confers upon the President during a Specialist in International declared emergency. Trade and Finance Over the course of the twentieth century, Congress delegated increasing amounts of emergency power to the President by statute. TWEA was one such statute. Congress passed TWEA in 1917 Dianne E. Rennack to regulate international transactions with enemy powers following the U.S. entry into the First Specialist in Foreign Policy World War. Congress expanded the act during the 1930s to allow the President to declare a Legislation national emergency in times of peace and assume sweeping powers over both domestic and international transactions. Between 1945 and the early 1970s, TWEA became the central means Jennifer K. Elsea to impose sanctions as part of U.S. Cold War strategy. Presidents used TWEA to block Legislative Attorney international financial transactions, seize U.S.-based assets held by foreign nationals, restrict exports, modify regulations to deter the hoarding of gold, limit foreign direct investment in U.S. -
Transboundary Damage in International Law
This page intentionally left blank Transboundary Damage in International Law The Chernobyl disaster, the Amoco Cadiz oil spill and the Colorado River dispute are examples of an activity conducted by one State which has serious adverse effects in the territory of another, or in global common areas. This book details the international rules and compensation procedures, and is intended for use by governmental officials, international lawyers and jurists. It discusses existing laws on international liability and considers the underlying legal issues that require further development. It is one of the few books on the subject written from the perspective of a developing country with rapid economic and social development. xue hanqin is Director-General of the Law and Treaty Department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of China. She is one of the first women members of the International Law Commission. She has broad experience in both bilateral and multilateral negotiations of international treaties on various subjects of public international law. She is also a professor of law at the Beijing University School of Law and the College of Foreign Diplomacy of China, and Vice-President of the Chinese Society of International Law. She has written extensively on different issues of contemporary international law. cambridge studies in international and comparative law Established in 1946, this series produces high quality scholarship in the fields of public and private international law and comparative law. Although these are dis- tinct legal sub-disciplines, developments since 1946 confirm their interrelation. Comparative law is increasingly used as a tool in the making of law at national, regional, and international levels. -
Thesis Reference
Thesis The role of national courts in applying international humanitarian law: from apology to judicial activism WEILL, Sharon Abstract My PhD aims to set a method of analysis evaluating the manner in which national courts enforce international humanitarian law in light of the core principles of the international rule of law (which require courts to be independent, impartial, accessible and effective). This methodology offers a useful tool for understanding the function of national courts and provides a mapping of courts' rulings, within which each category can then be legally (and politically) justified or delegitimized in light of the principles of the rule of law. The scale according to which the court's function is assessed varies from apology to judicial activism, and it identifies four functional roles: (1) the apologist role of courts, in which they serve as a legitimating agency of the state's actions; (2) the avoiding role of courts, in which they, for policy considerations, avoid exercising jurisdiction over a case; (3) the normative application role of courts, in which they apply international humanitarian law as required by the rule of law. In that category, a deferral technique is identified – courts may defer back to the other branches of [...] Reference WEILL, Sharon. The role of national courts in applying international humanitarian law: from apology to judicial activism. Thèse de doctorat : Univ. Genève, 2012, no. D. 852 URN : urn:nbn:ch:unige-235753 DOI : 10.13097/archive-ouverte/unige:23575 Available at: http://archive-ouverte.unige.ch/unige:23575 Disclaimer: layout of this document may differ from the published version. -
MEMORANDUM To: Catherine Amirfar President, American Society
OFFICERS Catherine Amirfar MEMORANDUM President Patrick Robinson Honorary President Mark David Agrast To: Catherine Amirfar Executive Vice President Andrea Bjorklund President, American Society of International Law David W. Bowker Marinn Carlson David J. Scheffer Vice Presidents From: Sean D. Murphy, Chair, 2020–2021 Nominating Committee James A.R. Nafziger Secretary Nancy L. Perkins Treasurer Date: October 29, 2020 Ronald J. Bettauer Assistant Treasurer Susan L. Karamanian Audit Committee Chair Re: ASIL 2020–2021 Nominating Committee Report Lori Fisler Damrosch Lucinda A. Low Sean D. Murphy Honorary Vice Presidents Nominees for Election at the 2021 Annual Meeting EXECUTIVE COUNCIL Members Julian Arato Perry S. Bechky The Nominating Committee proposes for election by the members of the Society pursuant Marney L. Cheek Kathleen E. Claussen to Section III (11) of the ASIL Regulations the following slate of Officers, Executive Council Jacob Katz Cogan Steven A. Crown Members, and Counsellors: Melissa J. Durkee Rebecca Hamilton Steven Hill 1 Christina Hioureas President-Elect Gregory Shaffer Rebecca Ingber Eric Talbot Jensen Aloysius Llamzon 2 Tiyanjana Maluwa Honorary President Hon. Patrick Robinson David H. Moore Tafadzwa Pasipanodya Patrick W. Pearsall 2 Mark A. Pollack Vice-Presidents Mark D. Agrast (Executive Vice President) Catherine Powell 2 Bruce C. Rashkow David W. Bowker Caroline S. Richard Sonia E. Rolland Anna Spain Bradley Elizabeth Trujillo Jarrod Wong James Thuo Gathii 2 Counsellors Hon. David J. Scheffer Diane Marie Amann Laurence Boisson de Chazournes Nicola Bonucci 3 John R. Crook Honorary Vice Presidents Sean D. Murphy Marcella David Timothy L. Dickinson Lucinda A. Low Brian Egan James T. Gathii Lori Fisler Damrosch Peter Mason M. -
CHAPTER 7 International Organizations
Table of Contents CHAPTER 7 .................................................................................................................................. 215 International Organizations ..................................................................................................... 215 A. UNITED NATIONS .......................................................................................................... 215 1. Upholding International Law while Maintaining International Peace and Security ........ 215 2. Rule of Law...................................................................................................................... 217 3. Charter Committee ........................................................................................................... 218 B. INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE ................................................................... 220 1. Alleged Violations of the 1955 Treaty of Amity (Iran v. United States) ..................... 220 2. Certain Iranian Assets (Iran v. United States) ................................................................. 227 3. Relocation of the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem (Palestine v. United States) ..................... 234 4. Request for Advisory Opinion on the British Indian Ocean Territory ............................ 235 C. INTERNATIONAL LAW COMMISSION .................................................................... 251 1. ILC Draft Conclusions on the Identification of Customary International Law ............... 251 2. ILC’s Work at its 70th Session ........................................................................................ -
Ccg-Nlud-Technology-And-National
CENTRE FOR COMMUNICATION GOVERNANCE AT NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY DELHI TECHNOLOGY AND NATIONAL SECURITY LAW AND POLICY SEMINAR COURSE (FEBRUARY - JUNE 2020) B.A. LL.B. (HONS.) PROGRAMME NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY DELHI Course Facilitator Gunjan Chawla Programme Manager, Technology and National Security, Centre for Communication Governance at National Law University Delhi; email: [email protected] ABOUT THE COURSE Given the rapidly evolving landscape of international security issues and the challenges and opportunities presented by new and emerging technologies, Indian lawyers and policymakers need to acquire the capacity to engage effectively with national security law and policy. However, curricula in Indian law schools do not engage adequately with issues of national security. National security threats, balance of power, issues of secrecy and political accountability, terrorism and surveillance laws tend to be discussed in a piece-meal manner within various courses or electives. To fill this knowledge gap within the legal community, the Centre for Communication Governance at National Law University Delhi (CCG-NLU) is offering this seminar course to fourth and fifth-year students of the B.A. LL.B. (Hons.) Programme. The course will explore interdisciplinary approaches in the study of national security law and policy, with a particular focus on issues in cybersecurity and cyberwarfare. Through this course curriculum, we aim to (1) recognize and develop National Security Law as a discrete discipline of legal studies, and (2) impart -
Petitioner, V
No. IN THE Supreme Court of the United States ———— BANK MELLI, Petitioner, v. MICHAEL BENNETT, et al., Respondents. ———— On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ———— PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI ———— LISA W. BOHL JEFFREY A. LAMKEN MOLOLAMKEN LLP ROBERT K. KRY 300 N. LaSalle St. Counsel of Record Chicago, Illinois 60654 MOLOLAMKEN LLP (312) 450-6700 The Watergate, Suite 660 600 New Hampshire Ave., N.W. Washington, D.C. 20037 (202) 556-2000 [email protected] Counsel for Petitioner :,/621(3(635,17,1*&2,1&± ±:$6+,1*721'& QUESTIONS PRESENTED The Terrorism Risk Insurance Act (“TRIA”) provides that “the blocked assets of [a] terrorist party (including the blocked assets of any agency or instrumentality of that terrorist party)” are subject to execution to satisfy certain terrorism judgments. 28 U.S.C. §1610 note §201(a). In the decision below, the Ninth Circuit allowed plaintiffs with default judgments against Iran to execute against funds that Visa owes to Bank Melli, an Iranian state-owned bank. It did so even though Visa rather than Bank Melli is the owner of the assets, and even though Bank Melli is a separate entity distinct from the Iranian government that had no role in the underlying disputes. The questions presented are: 1. Whether TRIA requires that the respondent actu- ally own the assets at issue, as the D.C. Circuit has held and as the United States has repeatedly urged, or whether the statute instead permits execution even absent owner- ship, as the Ninth Circuit held below. -
International Court of Justice
INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE Peace Palace, Carnegieplein 2, 2517 KJ The Hague, Netherlands Tel.: +31 (0)70 302 2323 Fax: +31 (0)70 364 9928 Website: www.icj-cij.org Press Release Unofficial No. 2010/29 10 September 2010 Swearing-in of two new Members of the Court at a public sitting on Monday 13 September 2010 at 10 a.m. THE HAGUE, 10 September 2010. The two Members of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) elected this year will be officially sworn in at a public sitting which will take place on Monday 13 September 2010 from 10 a.m., at the Peace Palace in The Hague, the seat of the Court. Ms Xue Hanqin, of Chinese nationality, and Ms Joan E. Donoghue, of American nationality, will each make before the Court the solemn declaration provided for in Article 20 of the Statute of the Court. Article 20 stipulates that “[e]very Member of the Court shall, before taking up his duties, make a solemn declaration in open court that he will exercise his powers impartially and conscientiously”. It is the first time in the Court’s history that two female judges will serve simultaneously. Elected as a Member of the Court on 29 June 2010 with immediate effect, Ms Xue Hanqin succeeded Mr. Shi Jiuyong (China), who resigned as of 28 May 2010. Pursuant to Article 15 of the Statute of the Court, Ms Xue will hold office for the remainder of Mr. Shi’s term, which will expire on 5 February 2012. Elected on 9 September 2010 with immediate effect, Ms Joan E. -
CERTAIN IRANIAN ASSETS (ISLAMIC REPUBLIC of IRAN V
Summaries of Judgments, Advisory Opinions and Orders of the International Court of Justice 231. CERTAIN IRANIAN ASSETS (ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA) [PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS] Summary of the judgment of 13 February 2019 On 13 February 2019, the International Court of Justice rendered its Judgment on the preliminary objections raised by the United States of America in the case concerning Certain Iranian Assets (Islamic Republic of Iran v. United States of America). The Court was composed as follows: President Yusuf; Vice-President Xue; Judges Tomka, Abraham, Bennouna, Cançado Trindade, Gaja, Bhandari, Robinson, Crawford, Gevorgian, Salam, Iwasawa; Judges ad hoc Brower, Momtaz; Registrar Couvreur. * * * History of the proceedings (paras. 1-17) The Court recalls that, on 14 June 2016, the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran (hereinafter “Iran” or the “Applicant”) filed in the Registry of the Court an Application instituting proceedings against the United States of America (hereinafter the “United States” or the “Respondent”) with regard to a dispute concerning alleged violations by the United States of the Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations, and Consular Rights, which was signed by the two States in Tehran on 15 August 1955 and entered into force on 16 June 1957 (hereinafter the “Treaty of Amity” or “Treaty”). The Court notes that, in its Application, Iran seeks to found the Court’s jurisdiction on Article 36, paragraph 1, of the Statute of the Court and on Article XXI, paragraph 2, of the Treaty of Amity. The Court further recalls that, after Iran filed its Memorial in the case, the United States raised preliminary objections to the admissibility of the Application and the jurisdiction of the Court. -
Procedural Developments at the International Court of Justice
The Law and Practice of International Courts and Tribunals 20 (2021) 395–441 brill.com/lape Procedural Developments at the International Court of Justice Fernando Lusa Bordin Sidney Sussex College, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK [email protected] Abstract The present column covers procedural developments at the International Court of Justice for the period 1 February 2019 to 31 March 2021. Those developments comprise jurisdiction ratione materiae under compromissory clauses; procedural preconditions in compromissory clauses; expert opinions; admissibility challenges based on abuse of process and the “clean hands” doctrine; conditions for the indication of provisional measures; and the Court’s discretion to give advisory opinions in cases where a request overlaps with a dispute between States. Keywords International Court of Justice – compromissory clause – jurisdiction ratione materiae – admissibility – abuse of process – “clean hands” doctrine 1 Introduction The present column covers procedural developments at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) for the period 1 February 2019 to 31 March 2021. The Court had the occasion to consider several procedural matters in its judg- ments on preliminary objections in Certain Iranian Assets (Islamic Republic of Iran v. United States of America), Application of the International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism and of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (Ukraine v. Russian Federation), Arbitral Award of 3 October 1899 (Guyana v. Venezuela), © Fernando Lusa Bordin, 2021 | doi:10.1163/15718034-12341451 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC BY 4.0Downloaded license. from Brill.com09/28/2021 02:39:38PM via free access 396 Bordin Alleged Violations of the 1955 Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations, and Consular Rights (Islamic Republic of Iran v. -
International Law Asian Journal Of
THE JOURNAL OF THE ASIAN SOCIETY OF INTERNATIONAL LAW VOLUME 5 ISSUE 1 JANUARY 2015 ISSN 2044-2513 Asian Journal of International Law Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 170.106.33.14, on 28 Sep 2021 at 01:22:03, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S2044251314000381 Asian Journal of International Law The Asian Journal of International Law is the journal of the Asian Society of International Law. It publishes peer-reviewed scholarly articles and book reviews on public and private international law. The regional focus of the journal is broadly conceived. Some articles may focus specifically on Asian issues; others will bring one of the many Asian perspectives to bear on issues of global concern. Still others will be of more general interest to scholars, practitioners, and policy-makers located in or working on Asia. The journal is published in English as a matter of practical convenience rather than political endorsement. English language reviews of books in other languages are particularly welcomed. The journal is produced for the Asian Society of International Law by the National University of Singapore Faculty of Law and succeeds the Singapore Year Book of International Law. For further information, forthcoming pieces, and guidelines on how to submit articles or book reviews, please visit www.AsianJIL.org. instructions for contributors The Asian Journal of International Law welcomes unsolicited articles and proposals for book reviews. For details, visit www.AsianJIL.org. © Asian Journal of International Law ISSN 2044-2513 E-ISSN 2044-2521 This journal issue has been printed on FSC-certified paper and cover board.