The Effectiveness of International Adjudicators
In: Oxford Handbook of International Adjudication, Karen J. Alter, Cesare Romano and Yuval Shany, eds., 2013
18 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Oxford Handbook of International Adjudication, Karen J. Alter, Cesare Romano and Yuval Shany, eds., 2013
SSRN
In: INTERDISCIPLINARY PERSPECTIVES ON INTERNATIONAL LAW AND INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS, Jeffrey Dunoff & Mark A. Pollack, eds., Cambridge University Press, 2013, pp. 175-196
SSRN
In: The Oxford Guide to Treaties (Duncan Hollis ed., 2012), pp. 634-650
SSRN
In: Duke Journal of Comparative & International Law, Band 21, S. 65
SSRN
In: Perspectives on politics, Band 7, Heft 1, S. 39-44
ISSN: 1541-0986
The international intellectual property system provides an important illustration of how regime complexity shapes domestic and international strategies of states and non-state actors. This article describes and graphically illustrates the multifaceted nature of the international intellectual property system. It then analyzes the consequences of regime complexity for international and domestic politics, emphasizing the strategy of regime shifting and its consequences for chessboard politics and the domestic implementation of international rules.
In: International organization, Band 68, Heft 1, S. 77-110
ISSN: 1531-5088
AbstractDo international court judgments influence the behavior of actors other than the parties to a dispute? Are international courts agents of policy change or do their judgments merely reflect evolving social and political trends? We develop a theory that specifies the conditions under which international courts can use their interpretive discretion to have system-wide effects. We examine the theory in the context of European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) rulings on lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) issues by creating a new data set that matches these rulings with laws in all Council of Europe (CoE) member states. We also collect data on LGBT policies unaffected by ECtHR judgments to control for the confounding effect of evolving trends in national policies. We find that ECtHR judgments against one country substantially increase the probability of national-level policy change across Europe. The marginal effects of the judgments are especially high where public acceptance of sexual minorities is low, but where national courts can rely on ECtHR precedents to invalidate domestic laws or where the government in power is not ideologically opposed to LGBT equality. We conclude by exploring the implications of our findings for other international courts.
In: Supreme Court Review, p. 213, 2011
SSRN
In: 14 Theoretical Inquiries in Law 479 (2013)
SSRN
In: Cambridge University Press, 2011
SSRN
In: European Law Journal, Band 17, Heft 5, S. 701
SSRN
In: BALANCING WEALTH AND HEALTH: GLOBAL ADMINISTRATIVE LAW AND THE BATTLE OVER INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND ACCESS TO MEDICINES IN LATIN AMERICA , Rochelle Dreyfuss & César Rodríguez-Garavito, eds. (2013)
SSRN
In: International organization, Band 64, Heft 4, S. 563-592
ISSN: 1531-5088
AbstractAre international courts power-seeking by nature, expanding the reach and scope of international rules and the courts' authority where permissive conditions allow? Or, does expansionist lawmaking require special nurturing? We investigate the relative influences of nature versus nurture by comparing expansionist lawmaking in the European Court of Justice (ECJ) and the Andean Tribunal of Justice (ATJ), the ECJ's jurisdictional cousin and the third most active international court. We argue that international judges are more likely to become expansionist lawmakers where they are supported by substate interlocutors and compliance constituencies, including government officials, advocacy networks, national judges, and administrative agencies. This comparison of two structurally identical international courts calls into question prevailing explanations of ECJ lawmaking, and it suggests that prevailing scholarship puts too much emphasis on the self-interested power-seeking of judges, the importance of institutional design features, and the preferences of governments to explain lawmaking by international courts.
In: International Organization, Band 64, Heft 4
SSRN
Working paper
In: N.Y.U Journal of International Law and Politics, Band 41, S. 871
SSRN
Working paper
In: American journal of international law: AJIL, Band 107, Heft 4, S. 737-779
ISSN: 2161-7953
The Community Court of Justice of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS Court) is an increasingly active and bold adjudicator of human rights. Since acquiring jurisdiction over human rights complaints in 2005, theECOWASCourt has issued numerous decisions condemning human rights violations by the member states of the Economic Community of West African States (Community). Among this Court's path-breaking cases are judgments against Niger for condoning modern forms of slavery and against Nigeria for impeding the right to free basic education for all children. TheECOWASCourt also has broad access and standing rules that permit individuals and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) to bypass national courts and file suits directly with the Court. Although the Court is generally careful in the proof that it requires of complainants and in the remedies that it demands of governments, it has not shied away from politically courageous decisions, such as rulings against the Gambia for the torture of journalists and against Nigeria for failing to regulate multinational companies that have degraded the environment of the oil-rich Niger Delta.