Suchergebnisse

AbstractIn Chile, many commentators, academics and political leaders have spent years arguing that the limited nature of the social rights in the national constitution is partially responsible for the country's economic and social inequality. It is thus unsurprising that changing the scope of the country's social rights was a major focus of the recently failed constitutional reform effort. However, we argue that the long-running claim that Chile's social problems were due to the limited nature of social rights can be thought of as social rights scapegoating, by which we mean that commentators blamed outcomes on constitutional rights, even though there is little evidence that countries' socio-economic outcomes are a product of their social rights.

AbstractEnforcement of international law is often delegated to national courts, creating a space for them to play a part in international judicialization. Under what conditions can they do so? We argue that the answer depends on the relationship between the political and legal constraints national courts face. National courts must be careful to safeguard their independence in the face of potential backlash, but they face constraints in terms of the legal mechanisms available to them when enforcing international law. We focus on the availability of two legal mechanisms: direct effect, under which courts apply treaties directly, setting aside inconsistent domestic laws; and canons of interpretation, under which courts strive to interpret domestic laws in conformity with treaties. We find that the effects of human rights treaty ratification is greater when courts have the canon available to them than it is when courts have direct effect available to them.

AbstractThe constitutional rules that govern how states engage with international law have profound implications for foreign affairs, yet we lack comprehensive data on the choices countries make and their motivations. We draw on an original dataset that covers 108 countries over a nearly two-hundred-year period to map countries' foreign relations law choices and trace their evolution. We find that legal origins and colonial legacies continue to account for most foreign relations law choices. A small number of models emerged in the nineteenth and early twentieth century in Western Europe, subsequently spread through colonial channels, and usually survived decolonization. Departures from received models are rare and usually associated with major political shifts. Prominent political science accounts that emphasize how states design their foreign relations law strategically to enhance their international credibility or entrench democracy or human rights appear to have limited explanatory power over the bulk of foreign relations law today.

By definition, international law, once agreed upon and consented to, applies to all parties equally. This book explains that states at times adhere to similar, and at other times, adopt different interpretations of the same international norms and standards. This book achieves three objectives. The first is to show that international law is not a monolith. The second is to map the cross-country similarities and differences in international legal norms in different fields of international law, as well as their application and interpretation with regards to geographic differences. The third is to make a first and preliminary attempt to explain these differences. It is organized into three broad thematic sections, exploring: conceptual matters, domestic institutions and comparative international law, and comparing approaches across issue-areas. The chapters are authored by contributors who include leading international law and comparative law scholars with diverse backgrounds, experience, and perspectives.

By definition, international law, once agreed upon and consented to, applies to all parties equally. This book explains that states at times adhere to similar, and at other times, adopt different interpretations of the same international norms and standards. This work achieves three objectives. The first is to show that international law is not a monolith. The second is to map the cross-country similarities and differences in international legal norms in different fields of international law, as well as their application and interpretation with regards to geographic differences

At first blush, "comparative international law" might sound like an oxymoron. In principle, international law—at least when it arises from multilateral treaties or general custom—applies equally to all parties or states. As a result, international lawyers often resist emphasizing local, national, or regional approaches due to the field's aspirations to universality and uniformity. Comparativists, meanwhile, frequently overlook the potential to apply comparative law insights to international law on the basis that "rules which are avowedly universal in character do not lend themselves to comparison."

Conceptualizing comparative international law / Anthea Roberts, Paul Stephan, Pierre-Hugues Verdier & Mila Versteeg -- Methodological guidance : how to select and develop comparative international law case studies / Katerina Linos -- Comparative international law, foreign relations law and fragmentation : can the center hold? / Paul B. Stephan -- Why comparative international law needs international relations theory / Daniel Abebe -- The many fields of (German) international law / Nico Krisch -- Crimea and the South China Sea : connections and disconnects among Chinese, Russian, and western international lawyers / Anthea Roberts -- "Shioki (control)," "fuyo (dependency)," and sovereignty : the status of the Ryukyu kingdom in early-modern and modern times / Masaharu Yanagihara -- Comparative international law within, not against, international law : lessons from the international law commission / Mathias Forteau -- The continuing impact of French legal culture on the International Court of Justice / Mathilde Cohen -- International law in national legal systems: an empirical investigation / Pierre-Hugues Verdier & Mila Versteeg -- Objections to treaty reservations : a comparative approach to decentralized interpretation / Tom Ginsburg -- Intelligence communities and international law : a comparative approach / Ashley S. Deeks -- National legislatures : the foundations of comparative international law / Kevin L. Cope & Hooman Movassagh -- International law in Chinese courts during the rise of China / Congyan Cai -- The democratizing force of international law : human rights adjudication by the Indian Supreme Court / Neha Jain -- Case law in Russian approaches to international law : sovereign cautiousness of a semi-peripheral great power / Lauri Mälksoo -- Doing away with capital punishment in Russia : international law and the pursuit of domestic constitutional goals / Bakhtiyar Tuzmukhamedov -- Comparative views on the right to vote in international law : the case of prisoners' disenfranchisement / Shai Dothan -- When law migrates : refugees in comparative international law / Jill I. Goldenziel -- An asymmetric comparative international law approach to treaty interpretation : the CEDAW committee's tolerance of the Scandinavian states' progressive deviation / Alec Knight -- Comparative international law and human rights : a value-added approach / Christopher McCrudden -- CEDAW in national courts: a case study in operationalizing comparative international -- Law analysis in a human rights context / Christopher McCrudden -- The great promise of comparative public law for Latin America : towards ius commune americanum? / Alejandro Rodiles -- Who cares about regulatory space in bits? : a comparative international approach / Tomer Broude, Yoram Z. Haftel & Alexander Thompson -- Africa and the rethinking of international investment law : about the elaboration of the Pan-African Investment Code / Makane Moïse Mbengue & Stefanie Schacherer -- Not so treacherous waters of international maritime law : Islamic law states and the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea / Emilia Justyna Powell