Fake news and international law
In: KFG working paper series no. 18 (August 2018)
In: KFG working paper series no. 18 (August 2018)
In: European Journal of International Law Vol 29 (2018) No 4
SSRN
In: European journal of international law, Band 29, Heft 4, S. 1357-1376
ISSN: 1464-3596
In light of current efforts at addressing the dangers of fake news, this article will revisit the international law relevant to the phenomenon, in particular the prohibition of intervention, the 1936 International Convention on the Use of Broadcasting in the Cause of Peace, and the 1953 Convention on the International Right of Correction. It will be argued that important lessons can be learned from the League of Nations' (LON) efforts in the interwar period and the UN's activities in the immediate post-WWII era, while taking into account the new challenges that arise from modern communication technology. Taking up the LON's and UN's distinction between false and distorted news, the international legal framework will be tested, in particular, against the coverage of the 2016 'Lisa case' by Russian Government-funded media. This coverage is widely considered to be fake news aimed at destabilizing Germany's society and institutions. The article argues that false news can be subject to repressive regulation in a sensible manner. Distorted news, however, will have to be tolerated legally, since prohibitions in this regard would be too prone to abuse. A free and pluralist media, complemented by an appropriate governmental information policy, remains the best answer to fake news in all its forms. Due diligence obligations to fact-check, transparency, and remedies that are effective despite difficulties in attribution, and despite a lack of universal acceptance, could likewise be conducive.
BASE
In: 'Concluding Observations', in B. Baade, L. Mührel, and A. Petrov (eds.), International Humanitarian Law in Areas of Limited Statehood – Adaptable and Legitimate or Rigid and Unreasonable? (Nomos 2018), 217
SSRN
Areas of limited statehood, in which the territorial State lacks effective control, either completely or in part, challenge International Humanitarian Law in various ways. This volume explores if and how the law adapts to these challenges on the basis of mainly two legal issues: detention and investment protection in (non-)international armed conflict. Does a sufficient legal basis exist for the former? Is it International Humanitarian Law that determines what the investor is owed under a 'full protection and security' standard?
More fundamentally, the contributions strive to shed light on these practical legal issues in a manner that is also historically and theoretically informed. How can international law be effective in areas of limited statehood, in particular as regards non-State actors? Can the law provide incentives for compliance? Is it in need of being developed? If so, who enjoys the legitimacy to do so?
Areas of limited statehood, in which the territorial State lacks effective control, either completely or in part, challenge International Humanitarian Law in various ways. This volume explores if and how the law adapts to these challenges on the basis of mainly two legal issues: detention and investment protection in (non-)international armed conflict. Does a sufficient legal basis exist for the former? Is it International Humanitarian Law that determines what the investor is owed under a 'full protection and security' standard? More fundamentally, the contributions strive to shed light on these practical legal issues in a manner that is also historically and theoretically informed. How can international law be effective in areas of limited statehood, in particular as regards non-State actors? Can the law provide incentives for compliance? Is it in need of being developed? If so, who enjoys the legitimacy to do so?
In: Nomos eLibrary
In: Öffentliches Recht
In: Assistententagung Öffentliches Recht
Die persönliche und sachliche Unabhängigkeit gehört zu den Grundpfeilern rechtsstaatlicher Gerichte. Gleichwohl entstehen gerichtliche Entscheidungen nicht in einem Vakuum. Gerichte und ihre RichterInnen sind in ein komplexes Beziehungsgeflecht mit zahlreichen Wechselwirkungen eingebunden – institutionell und funktionell, im konkreten Verfahren und darüber hinaus. Richterliche Rechtsfindung wird von verschiedenen Akteuren aus Gesellschaft, Medien, Politik, Verwaltung und Rechtswissenschaft beeinflusst und hat wiederum Auswirkungen auf diese.Die Beiträge dieses Tagungsbandes dokumentieren die Ergebnisse der 58. Assistententagung Öffentliches Recht in Regensburg 2018. Junge WissenschaftlerInnen des gesamten deutschsprachigen Raums loten aus unterschiedlicher methodischer und sektoraler Perspektive die Möglichkeiten und Chancen, aber auch die rechtlichen Grenzen solcher Wechselbeziehungen aus. Sie zeichnen so ein neuartiges Bild von den Bedingungen richterlicher Rechtsfindung im Öffentlichen Recht.Mit Beiträgen vonDr. Björnstjern Baade; Dr. Tristan Barczak, LL.M.; Jann Ferlemann; Katharina Goldberg; Jannika Jahn; Dr. Raffaela Kunz; Benjamin Märkli, M.A. (Law); Dr. Fabian Michl, LL.M. (Edinburgh); Dr. Anne Mirjam Schneuwly, M.B.L.-HSG; Daniel Toda Castán; Dr. Markus Vašek; Dr. Johann Justus Vasel, LL.M. (NYU); MMag. Dr. Katharina Weiser; Dr. Astrid Wiik.