My subject today is "International Organizations and Customary International Law"--that is, the role of international organizations in relation to the formation and determination of rules of customary international law. Charney devoted a good part of his well-known article on "Universal International Law" to what he termed "contemporary international law-making." By that, he meant chiefly law-making within "international forums"--that is, within organs of international organizations and at international conferences. He starts the discussion from the somewhat heretical position that "[w]hile customary law is still created in the traditional way, that process has increasingly given way in recent years to a more structured method, especially in the case of important normative developments. Rather than state practice and "opinio juris," multilateral forums often play a central role in the creation and shaping of contemporary international law." Charney's conclusions, however, are perhaps not as radical as his premise. He acknowledged that "[s]ome may question the authority to legislate universally, even in the face of some dissent, because it appears to be inconsistent with the sovereignty and autonomy of states. Such apprehension is not unreasonable. The international legal system, however, will invoke this authority sparingly."
Cities have long been the pioneers of and driving force behind the development and evolution of human societies. The significance of cities as drivers of the sustainable development agenda received its strongest recognition to date with the adoption of, amongst others, the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development in 2015, and the UN Habitat III Declaration (the New Urban Agenda) in 2016. These international policy instruments frame the context in terms of which urban sustainability, or sustainable cities, must be pursued across the globe. Of the many fields of law that are applicable to cities, several scholars and research groups increasingly maintain that planning law and policy has a specific role to play in addressing the challenges that cities face, and in guiding them towards a more sustainable development trajectory. Notably, South Africa's planning law system has recently been transformed by a new planning law framework. In contrast with the pre-1994 legislation, the country's new framework legislation for planning prioritises the transformation of South Africa's cities into more efficient, equal, resilient and sustainable spaces. It also places municipalities at the heart of urban planning and enables them to develop and implement a number of governance instruments that can be used to integrate social, economic, and environmental factors into the development and reshaping of the country's urban areas. While much research pertaining to South Africa's apartheid planning history and its shaping of human settlements and cities has been disseminated over the years, significant research and enquiry remains necessary to better comprehend and apply the country's new planning system. This is particularly true in the context of municipal planning and rapid urbanisation, and the extent of local government's legal responsibilities and authority for planning to promote sustainability in their areas of jurisdiction. The original contribution of this thesis lies in its use of a mixed method research. The approach consists of employing both legal research methodology and qualitative empirical research methodology towards analysing the municipal planning function, both in theory and in practice. The research also provides a detailed inquiry into the understanding of the sustainable city concept, and the scope of local governments' responsibility to promote sustainability through planning. For this purpose, the research critically questions and analyses the extent to which municipal planning law and policy promotes the development of sustainable cities in South Africa. The Gauteng province is employed as the subject of a case study to illustrate the role and function of municipal planning law and policy in promoting the development of sustainable cities in the country's smallest yet most urban province. Specific emphasis is placed on the planning law and policy instruments of three municipalities in the Province, namely the City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality (a category A municipality); the Emfuleni Local Municipality (a category B municipality); and the Sedibeng District Municipality (a category C municipality). Each of the municipalities, despite their differences in size, faces unique sustainability challenges which include, amongst others, spatial segregation, service backlogs, high levels of poverty and inequality, and conflicting interests in terms of the protection of environmentally sensitive areas and responsible resource use on the one hand and the promotion of economic development on the other. The municipalities also differ in terms of their institutional and financial capacity. While these municipalities do not represent the entire Gauteng province, they do serve as a meaningful lens through which to consider the extent to which municipal planning law and policy currently promote sustainability in varying urban contexts.
Award date: 30 November 2015 ; Supervisor: Professor Loïc Azoulai, European University Institute ; This thesis considers the Europeanisation of English administrative law, in the specific context of the principle of protection of legitimate expectations. It assesses whether, how and to what extent the way in which the way in which legitimate expectations are protected in EU law has influenced the protection of legitimate expectations in English law. To make this assessment, a thorough analysis is conducted of case law in both jurisdictions. The thesis is structured into five main Chapters. Chapter A provides an introduction and looks at some general issues surrounding the concept of legitimate expectation, including which expectations are protectable and what is meant by legitimacy. Chapter B traces the development of the protection of legitimate expectations in English and EU law, and considers certain particular features in more detail for each jurisdiction, with the aim of establishing some parameters against which more recent case law can be tested and compared. In Chapter C an in-depth analysis of recent case law of the English courts, both falling within and outside the scope of EU law, is undertaken, and comparisons are drawn between these cases and with the traditional position of EU law on the protection of legitimate expectations. Chapter D contains a similar analysis in respect of recent cases of the Court of Justice of the European Union. Finally, Chapter E draws these analyses together and concludes that while there is limited convergence in the way English and EU courts approach the protection of legitimate expectations, both jurisdictions remain wary of external influence.
The 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees (&ldquo ; Refugee Convention&rdquo ; ) defines &lsquo ; persecution&rsquo ; based on five enumerated grounds: race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, and political opinion. This list of protected groups has not changed in the nearly 70 years since its inception, although the political and social context that gave rise to the Refugee Convention has changed. This article examines how &lsquo ; membership in a particular social group&rsquo ; (&ldquo ; MPSG&rdquo ; ) has been interpreted, then surveys international human rights law, transnational criminal law, international humanitarian law, and international criminal law instruments to determine whether MPSG can encompass the broader protections afforded under other international law regimes. It concludes that the enumerated grounds are largely consistent with other instruments and protects, or at least has the potential to protect, many of the other categories through MPSG. However, as this ground is subject to domestic judicial interpretation and various analytical approaches taken in different countries, protection could be enhanced by amending the Refugee Convention to explicitly include additional protected groups from these other areas of international law, specifically international human rights law and international criminal law.
Volume 2 by the National Institute of Municipal Law Officers. ; Vol. 1, Municipal experience, legislation, administration, judicial decisions, proposed model ordinance; vol. 2, Summary of latest cases; model ordinance annotated, prepared and edited by John A. 12 ; Mode of access: Internet.
As with any rapid technological development, the biotechnology revolution is putting great strains on the ability of law to adapt to new challenges and threats. Although there is general agreement on the need to regulate biotechnology in many different fields of human activity (agriculture, life sciences, forensic science) domestic law remains deeply divided over the best approach to take. This book is the first attempt at covering the most pressing legal issues raised by the impact of biotechnologies on different categories of international norms. Through the contribution of a selected group of international scholars and experts from international organizations, the book addresses 1) the international status of genetic resources, both in areas of national jurisdiction and in common spaces such as the international sea bed area and Antarctica; 2) the relevance of environmental principles in the governance of modern biotechnologies; 3) the impact of biotechnologies on trade rules, including intellectual property law; 4) the human rights implications, especially in the field of human genetics; and 5) the intersection between general international law and regional systems, especially those developed in Europe and Latin America. The overall objective of the book is to provide an up-to-date picture of international law as it stands today and to stimulate critical reflection and further research on the solutions that will be required in years to come ; Part I. The international legal regime of biotechnology : general aspects. -- 1. International law for biotechnology : basic principles / F. Francioni. -- 2. Biodiversity and biotechnology : consolidation and strains in the emerging international legal regimes / R. Pavoni. -- Part II. Biotechnology and the protection of the environment. -- 3. Biotechnology, biodiversity and sustainable development : conflict and congruence? / C. Redgwell. -- 4. Bioprospecting on the deep seabed : a legal gap requiring to be filled / T. Scovazzi. -- 5. Biotechnology and marine biogenetic resources : the interplay between UNCLOS and the CBD / G. Cataldi. -- 6. Antartic bioprospecting : is it compatible with the value of Antarctica as a natural reserve? / P. Vigni. -- 7. Bioprospecting in Antarctica : a new challenge for the Antarctic treaty system / A. Guyomard. -- Part III. Biotechnology and international trade issues. -- 8. The WTO dispute over genetically modified organisms : interface problems of international trade law, environmental law and biotechnology law / E.-U. Petersmann. -- 9. Traditional knowledge, biodiversity, benefit-sharing and the patent system : romantics v. economics? / H. Ullrich -- 10. International trade in GMOs : legal frameworks and developing country concerns / S. Zarrilli. -- Part IV. Biotechnology and human rights. -- 11. Agricultural biotechnology, food security and human rights / M. E. Footer. -- 12. Biotechnology, human dignity and the human genome / F. Lenzerini. -- 13. Indigenous peoples' rights, biogenetic resources and traditional knowledge : the case of the Sateré-Mawé people / M. Fraboni and F. Lenzerini. -- Part V. Biotechnology and regional economic integration systems. -- 14. The EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and the governance of biotechnology in the European Union / P. Šturma. -- 15. The EU risk management of genetically modified organisms and the Comission's defence strategy in the biotech dispute : are they inconsistent? / S. Poli. -- 16. Biotechnology and regional integration systems; legislation and practices in the Andean community countries / F. Novak
"[I]n all of our operations involving the use of force, including those in the armed conflict with Al-Qaeda, the Taliban, and associated forces, the Obama Administration is committed by word and deed to conducting ourselves in accordance with all applicable law…[I]t is the considered view of this Administration…that US targeting practices, including lethal operations conducted with the use of unmanned aerial vehicles, comply with all applicable law, including the laws of war." - Harold Koh, US State Department Legal Adviser. "My concern is that these drones, these Predators, are being operated in a framework which may well violate international humanitarian law and international human rights law." - Philip Alston, United Nations Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary, or Arbitrary Executions. The use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs), commonly referred to as "drones", in lethal targeting operations, is one of the most topical and controversial issues in international law. The writer's interest in this area, the relationship between technological developments in warfare and settled principles of international law, developed from his attendance at a lecture given by Professor Harold Koh at Queen's University in Belfast back in May 2013. Professor Koh's now seminal speech to the American Society of International Law in 2010, while serving as Legal Adviser to the US Department of State, set out the US Government's position on the legality of drone strikes under international law. In recent years, the United States has increasingly utilised drone technology to target and kill enemy operatives in its counter-terrorism operations – against Al-Qaeda and Taliban forces in Afghanistan and North West Pakistan, and against militants affiliated with Al-Qaeda in Somalia and Yemen. UAVs have taken on an ever more prominent role in the US's current military and counter-terrorism operations, given their relative low cost, greater accuracy and precision, reduced blast radius, advanced surveillance capabilities, and greater flight time than conventional manned aircraft. The recent proliferation of armed UAV technology, and its deployment in situations of asymmetrical conflict for the purpose of conducting targeted killing operations, has fuelled a public and academic debate, centrally focused on issues regarding the compatibility of such technology and current targeting practices with established norms of international law. The term "targeted killing" does not yet have an agreed definition under international law, although Murphy and Radsen have formulated the following useful definition: extra-judicial, premeditated killing by a state of a specifically identified person not in its custody. Targeted killings by means of unmanned drone strikes have proven to be a successful counter-terrorism strategy, not only in terms of locating, targeting and eliminating enemy operatives, but also, and perhaps more importantly, given public discontent at long-standing military deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan, in avoiding many of the challenges that flow from the use of traditional military forces, such as public hostility to the deployment of traditional ground forces, the detention of enemy forces, as well as security threats to military personnel from insurgent attacks. In the context of the US drone program, three discrete areas of international law are of particular relevance: 1. the jus ad bellum, which sets out the narrow circumstances in which a state can lawfully resort to the use of armed force; 2. international human rights law, the corpus of which is of universal application, particularly in situations of armed violence falling below the threshold of an armed conflict; 3. the jus in bello, international humanitarian law, which regulates the conduct of hostilities in situations of armed conflict. What follows in this work is an analysis of the legality of US drone strikes in key target states through the prism of each of the three aforementioned paradigms. What shall become clear is that, while the use of armed drones per se may not violate international law as an unlawful means and method of warfare, the broad interpretation of the jus ad bellum favoured by the United States in the years since the 9/11 attacks, in particular those rules relating to the resort to force by a victim state in self-defence in response to an armed attack, as well as current US targeting practices, in particular the controversial use of Signature Drone Strike Protocol (SDSP), have been the subject of rigorous academic debate, and for the most part have proven difficult to reconcile with established principles of international law. This debate remains far from settled, and in consequence the entire US drone program, shrouded in a veil of secrecy, remains of dubious legality, particularly when examined through the prisms of international human rights law and international humanitarian law.
World War II aggravated one of our most troublesome municipal problems--the growth of urban fringe areas around the outskirts of towns and cities. Many municipalities are finding their natural development either frustrated or completely strangled by choker necklaces of satellite settlements. Parent cities are surrounded by slum areas which they cannot control and wealthy suburban sections which they cannot tax. For it is common that the poorest and the most prosperous tend to live in the outskirts--the former to avoid the sanitation and anti-nuisance standards of urban life, the latter to escape their share of the cost of government in the mother city where they earn their livelihood. In short, for all practical purposes of everyday life, the fringe is a part of the mother city's social and economic existence, yet it is beyond her regulatory and taxing jurisdiction. Thus the suburbanites are able to enjoy the benefits of urban life and to avoid many of its burdens. Conversely, city dwellers bear the major cost of municipal facilities which the outsiders enjoy and are also compelled to pay county taxes--often a major share of them --that inure primarily for the benefit of fringe dwellers. Only if the whole metropolitan region can be treated as the socio-economic unit, which in fact it is, can fringe slums be controlled and tax burdens equalized. The final stage in the fringe cycle comes with the sudden realization by the community as a whole that it has a fringe problem. But by then it is usually one that can no longer be solved short of the most heroic measures. Bureau of the Census figures tell the whole bleak story in direct and simple terms.
ÖZ Uluslar arası terörizm, 21. yüzyılda devletlerin karşı karşıya olduğu en ciddi tehdit algılamalarından biri haline geldi. Geride bıraktığımız yüzyılın son çeyreğinde yaşananlar ve özellikle 11 Eylül'le zirveye çıkan terör olayları, terörizmle bilhassa uluslar arası terörizmle mücadelede geleneksel yöntemlerin başarısızlığını bir kez daha ortaya koydu. Bu dönemde uluslar arası terör faaliyetleri hızla artmaya başlayınca, uluslararası toplumda daha etkin bir işbirliği talebi yüksek sesle dile getirilmeye başlandı. Buna ilişkin çalışmalar, başta bölgesel ve uluslararası anlaşmaların imzalanması suretiyle gerek BM ve gerekse bölgesel örgütler nezdinde hızla hayata geçirildi. Terörizm günümüzde yeni dünya düzenine, demokrasiye, evrensel insan haklarına ve ülkelerin ekonomik ve sosyal gelişmişliklerine karşı ciddi bir tehdit unsuru olarak önümüzde durmakta. Teröristlerin hareket kabiliyetini artıran yeni teknolojik gelişmeler, kitle iletişim araçlarının yaygınlaşması ve devletlerin bu soruna ilişkin uluslar arası ortak bir çözüm geliştirmedeki başarısızlığı gibi etmenler terörizmin önümüzdeki yüzyılda da etkisini hissettireceğini ve uluslar arası toplumun gündeminde önemli bir yer işgal edeceğini açık bir şekilde ortaya koymaktadır.ABSTRACTInternational terrorism has been one of the most serious threats to the states in the twenty first century. The events that took place in the last quarter of the twenteeth century especially the 9-11 terrorist activities have proved that the traditional suppression methods of terrorism are not successful enaugh to overcome the problem. In this process an effective coordination between national states was demanded more heavily in the international community because of the increased number of terrorist activities. By the way there have been made so many attempts against terrorism by either United Nations or international governmental organizations. Terrorism is a serious threat to the new world order to democrasy to universal human rights and to social and economical developments of states. New technological developments which improve the mobility of terrorists, the diffusion of communication possibilities between terrorist organizaations and the unachievment of a common international response to terrorism at international level prove that terrorism will increase its effect and is going to be on the agenda of the international community in the new century.
SUMARIOIntroducción. 2.- Estado de derecho y Estado social de derecho. 3.- Los elementos del Estado de derecho. 4.- Las potestades públicas. 5.- La potestad reglamentaria municipal. 6. Conclusiones.RESUMEN.Dentro del Estado de derecho, cuáles potestades públicas corresponde ejercer al gobierno municipal y cuál es su importancia en la construcción de un verdadero Estado de derecho? Esta es la pregunta sobre la cual se desarrolla el presente trabajo, llegando a la conclusión de que no puede ejercerse potestad pública alguna, al margen del Estado de derecho, por lo cual es imprescindible su definición y delimitación en el orden de gobierno municipal.Palabras clave: Municipio, potestades públicas, Estado de derecho, facultad reglamentaria de los ayuntamientos. ; Under the rule of law, which is responsible for exercising publicpowers to the municipal government and what is itsimportance in the construction of a genuine rule of law? This is the question on which this work takes place,concluding that no public authority can be exercised any, outside the rule of law,which is essential to its definition and delimitation of the order of the municipalgovernment.
The article deals with the correlation between the European Union law and international law. Constant participation of the European Union and its members in international organizations gave a rise to the need for establishment of interrelation between the sources of international law particularly international agreements and customs and sources of European Union law such as regulating agreements and acts of the EU institutions as well as necessity to identify which norms should be applied in a certain case and which hierarchical connections exist in these sources. This issue was research by numerous Ukrainian and foreign scholars such as T.V. Komarova, O.V. Plotnikov, K. Zigler, I.I. Maryniv, R. Jennigs, K. Tomushat and others. But unlike scientific research EU agreements do not have any provisions which would identify the type of relations between EU law and international law. It is also necessary to note that the only subject which position is important in this sphere is EU Court. In order to answer the mentioned questions decisions of the EU Court which had an impact on the formation of a new law and order on international level such as the one of the European Union (for example decision in case Van Gend en Loos) and decision of the Court which established fundamental positions regarding correlation of EU law and international law (for example in case Kadi v Council and Commission) were researched into. Provisions of EU regulating agreements related to international agreements and their place in the system of norms of the European Union were analyzed. To see the procedure of applying customary law in European law case law of the EU Court was researched. The article provides modern position of the EU Court regarding interaction between European and international law.
Security law, or more comprehensively conflict and security law, on the international level represents the intersection of three distinct but interrelated fields: international humanitarian law (the law of armed conflict, jus in bello), the law of collective security (most identified with the United Nations (UN) system, jus ad bellum) and arms control law (including non-proliferation). Security in this sense is multifaceted - interest security, military security and, as is often referred to in the context of the EU, human security. As such, the law covers a wide range of specific topics with respect to conflict, encompassing the use of force, including choice of weapons and fighting techniques, extending to the rules applicable in peacekeeping and peace enforcement, and yet also dictating obligations outside the context of conflict, such as safeguarding and securing dual-use materials (those with both peaceful and military applications) to prevent malicious use.
Security law, or more comprehensively conflict and security law, on the international level represents the intersection of three distinct but interrelated fields: international humanitarian law (the law of armed conflict, jus in bello), the law of collective security (most identified with the United Nations (UN) system, jus ad bellum) and arms control law (including non-proliferation). Security in this sense is multifaceted - interest security, military security and, as is often referred to in the context of the EU, human security. As such, the law covers a wide range of specific topics with respect to conflict, encompassing the use of force, including choice of weapons and fighting techniques, extending to the rules applicable in peacekeeping and peace enforcement, and yet also dictating obligations outside the context of conflict, such as safeguarding and securing dual-use materials (those with both peaceful and military applications) to prevent malicious use.
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.
http://doc.rero.ch/record/32540?ln=fr ; International audience ; In my reply to Jeremy Waldron's article \textquoteleftAre Sovereigns Entitled to the Benefit of the International Rule of Law?\textquoteright, I draw upon and in some ways expand Waldron's important contribution to our understanding of the international rule of law. First of all, I suggest that Waldron's argument about the international rule of law can be used to illuminate how we should understand the legitimate authority of international law over sovereign states, but also how some of sovereign states\textquoteright residual independence ought to be protected from legitimate international law. Secondly, I argue that the democratic pedigree of the international rule of law plays a role when assessing how international law binds democratic sovereign states and whether the international rule of law can and ought to benefit their individual subjects. Finally, I emphasize how Waldron's argument that the international rule of law ought to benefit individuals in priority has implications for the sources of international law and for what sources can be regarded as sources of valid law.
