Suchergebnisse

"The contributions in this collection of the American Classics in International Law series, Peaceful Resolution of Disputes, edited by Lori Fisler Damrosch, present the most influential American ideas about dispute settlement. From Alexander Hamilton's 1794 defense of arbitration, through 20th-century debates over the International Court of Justice and other international courts and tribunals, to contemporary controversies over law-of-the-sea dispute settlement, American leaders and scholars have promoted perspectives on dispute resolution shaped by the American experience. An introductory essay explores American ideas about dispute resolution in relation to war, the judicial role in resolving concrete controversies under law, and problems of institutional design"--

First, I am deeply appreciative of this honor, especially in the presence of so many who encouraged me along the way. I would like to acknowledge previous Hudson honorees who are present, including Charlie Brower, Edie Brown Weiss, and Bernie Oxman. Thanks to Catherine, Patrick, and the Allen & Overy law firm for sponsoring this event.

Our moderator's questions begin with "in what sense is international law and in what sense isn't it universal?" and continue with whether international law may be "different in different places" and what the implications of such differences may be. I am here to defend the "universalist" perspective, as the immediate past president of the American Society of International Law and before that, editor-in-chief of the American Journal of International Law. Though both the Society and the Journal have "American" in their titles and our geographic headquarters is in the United States, the Society's mission statement commits us to pursue "a just world under law," which I interpret as a global vision for a universal system of international law.

The Award on the Merits in the South China Sea Arbitration between the Philippines and China (Award) is the first decision of any tribunal to interpret the provision of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (Convention or UNCLOS) that allows states parties to exclude disputes concerning military activities from the Convention's compulsory dispute settlement regime. That optional exclusion, embodied in Article 298(1)(b) of the Convention, was a central component of the strenuously-negotiated compromise between states that favored compulsory jurisdiction in principle and those that would have preferred a strictly optional system for third-party legal dispute settlement. Its availability has been critical in enabling certain states to ratify the Convention and would be an indispensable condition of eventual U.S. ratification. For these reasons, the Award's treatment of the military activities exception transcends the South China Sea dispute. On balance, the Award articulates a sound approach to the military activities exception, entailing valid legal criteria and objective factual determinations. Even in the procedural posture of nonappearance by the respondent, China, the Award gave the respondent the benefit of the exception in a "quintessentially military situation," thereby alleviating concerns that an UNCLOS dispute settlement organ might intrude upon military activities excluded from its jurisdiction.