Suchergebnisse

The defences available to an agent accused of wrongdoing can be considered as justifications (which render acts lawful) or excuses (which shield the agent from the legal consequences of the wrongful act). This distinction is familiar to many domestic legal systems, and tracks analogous notions in moral philosophy and ordinary language. Nevertheless, it remains contested in some domestic jurisdictions where it is often argued that the distinction is purely theoretical and has no consequences in practice. In international law too the distinction has been fraught with controversy, though there are increasing calls for its recognition. This book is the first to comprehensively and thoroughly examine the distinction and its relevance to the international legal order. Combining an analysis of state practice, and historical, doctrinal and theoretical developments, the book shows that the distinction is not only possible in international law but that it is also one that would have important practical implications.

Introduction to the human rights dimension of state corporate ownership -- State-owned entities as a Sui generis 'participant' in international law -- State-owned entities and norm development in international law : international, regional and domestic approaches to regulation -- Fundamental change in international law : state immunity and state-owned entities -- The continued relevance of general international law : state responsibility and state-owned entities -- Concluding remarks.

The monograph focuses on the human rights challenges that are associated with the involvement of States in economic activities and on the role that international law has to play in addressing and understanding some of those challenges. State-owned entities are looked at through the lens of several topics of international law that have been found to hold particular relevance in this context, such as the concept of legal personality in international law, the process of normativity in international law, State immunity and State responsibility. The monograph shows how SOEs have had a significant role in shaping the evolution of international law and how, in turn, international law is currently shaping the evolution of State-owned entities. By focusing on State-owned or State-controlled business entities, rather than private corporations, the monograph aims to offer an alternative perspective on the challenges associated with corporations and human rights.

State responsibility in international law is considered one of the cornerstones of the field. For a long time it remained the exclusive responsibility system due to the primacy of States as subjects of international law. Its unique position has nonetheless been challenged by several developments both within and outside the international legal order, such as the rise of alternative responsibility ideas and practices, as well as globalization and its consequences. This book adopts a critical and holistic approach to the law of State responsibility and analyzes the functionality of the general rules of State responsibility in a changed international landscape characterized by the fragmentation of responsibility. It is argued that State responsibility is not equally relevant across the broad spectrum of international obligations, and that alternative constructions of responsibility, namely international criminal law and international liability, have increased in standing.

International Documents on Environmental Liability brings together 30 official full-text documents in the field of international environmental liability into an easily accessible, practical handbook, details the work of the International Law Commission on this topic, and provides the latest versions of international liability conventions and their statuses – including the latest on: (1) 2003 UNECE Kyiv Liability Protocol, (2) 2004 EC Directive on Environmental Liability, (3) 2005 Antartica Liability Annex. The authors' combined capacity as an academic, policy advisor, and practitioner have helped bring forth a publication that reflects their experience of being involved in the development, negotiations and implementation of environmental liability regimes at both an international and European level.

Purpose – The purpose of this article is to provide the reader with some information on the development of liability of legal persons for violations of international criminal law, its implementation practice in common and civil law countries as well as its perspectives of development in the European Union.

The worldwide populist wave has contributed to a perception that international law is currently in a state of crisis. This article examines in how far populist governments have challenged prevailing interpretations of international law. The article links structural features of populism with an analysis of populist governmental strategies and argumentative practices. It demonstrates that, in their rhetoric, populist governments promote an understanding of international law as a mere law of coordination. This is, however, not entirely reflected in their legal practices where an instrumental, cherry-picking approach prevails. The article concludes that policies of populist governments affect the current state of international law on two different levels: In the political sphere their practices alter the general environment in which legal rules are interpreted. In the legal sphere populist governments push for changes in the interpretation of established international legal rules. The article substantiates these propositions by focusing on the principle of non-intervention and foreign funding for NGOs.