Suchergebnisse

AbstractThis Reflection starts from the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic as unprecedented occasio to reflect on the approach to international law, which—it is contended—is anthropocentric, and its inadequacy to respond to current challenges. In the first part, the Reflection argues that there is, more than ever, an undeferrable need for a change of approach to international law toward ecocentrism, which puts the environment at the center and conceives the environment as us, including humans, non-human beings, and natural objects. To encourage the incorporation of ecocentrism in the entire discipline, the Reflection will rely on some insight of ecofeminism, whose potential has not been fully investigated in international legal scholarship. In the second part, the Reflection illustrates what an eco-centric international law would mean, imagining three possible applications: first, what the author has called environmental global health, which is connected to the current pandemic and puts into question the proposals dealing with global health that completely miss the theorization of the environment as a whole; second, how actors of international law would change according to an eco-centric perspective; and, third, how the rules prohibiting the use of force might be reconceptualized. The analysis contained in these pages cannot itself exhaust all the possible nuances of the legal reasoning, but it is aimed at being a provocative starting point for a change in the mindset and approach of international legal scholarship.

This article is aimed at assessing the interplay that exists, from a legal point of view, between the precautionary principle and science in front of the Court of Justice of the European Union with regard to two judgments concerning the use of glyphosate (Blaise and others) and the protection of animals under the 1992 Habitats Directive (Tapiola), both decided in October 2019. I will argue that the precautionary principle is more a political rather than a scientific principle that informs the activity of public authorities and that the CJEU – mutatis mutandis, potentially all courts – could examine its application through the lens of the reasonableness of the measures adopted by competent authorities.

The purpose of this research is to analyse UN SC Resolution 2467 (2019)[6] and the subsequent Resolution 2493 (2019) from an international feminist law perspective in light of the women's right to reproductive health, twenty years after the adoption of UN SC Resolution 1325 (2000). This article argues that international law might be the ultimate cause of violence against women's health through resolutions adopted by a strictly inter-governmental 'male' body such as the UN SC that fails to appreciate the gender-based discrimination rooted in society – prior, during and after conflicts – and, by focusing on a notion of military rather than human security, misses the opportunity to address the violation of women's right to sexual and reproductive health.

The purpose of this article is to provide a first comment to the new provisions on virtual currencies included in the European Union Directive 2018/843, amending Directive 2015/849 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purposes of money laundering or terrorist financing, known as Fifth Anti-Money Laundering Directive. The Directive requires States to include, among the obliged entities to respect anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism financing requirements, such as 'knowyour-customer', the 'providers engaged in exchange services between virtual currencies and fiat currencies.' To the big dilemma: 'to regulate or not to regulate' virtual currencies, including Bitcoins, the EU answered that yes, we must regulate. However, what is the meaning of regulating Bitcoins? After presenting what VC are and which challenges they pose to international law, I will argue that regulation is fundamental in order to avoid the exploitation of these currencies for the purposes of money laundering and terrorism financing, but that, at the same time, regulation as it was conceived at EU level might pose numerous challenges because it only concerns the moment in which the 'real' world meets the 'virtual' one, and is applicable only to the obliged entities that fall under the scope of the EU legal instrument.

The article explores the reasons why the EU should ratify the Council of Europe Istanbul Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence against Women and Domestic Violence, adopted in 2011, and the consequences the ratification may entail. In thefirst part, I will make a few remarks on the main provisions of the Convention, which must be considered as the most advanced system of protection of women from violence at the international level in force for the time being, and Iwill comment on the current status of EU gender equality policies. In thesecond part, starting from the European Commission roadmap regarding the EU accession to the Convention (October 2015), and the proposal for a Council decision on the signing of the Convention (March 2016), the Iwill analyse the legal bases for the ratification of the Convention by the EU, and the possible impact this treaty may have on EU policies. I arguefirst that the legal basis of the decision of the Council concluding the agreement cannot be limited to Articles 82 to 84 of the Treaty of the Functioning of the EU (TFEU), but should be extended to – at least – Articles 19 and 168 TFEU. I will then explore the impact of the Convention on future policies of the EU, also providing a comparison with the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, which constitutes the first international treaty on human rights ratified by the European Union. Secondly, I will contend that one of the provisions of the Convention, namely Article 30(2), which requires States to compensate victims of violence who have sustained 'seriousinjury or impairment of health',has direct effect.

This article is aimed at analysing women's tribunals from an international law perspective. I will argue that peoples' and women's tribunals are expression of democracy in international law, where democracy means women's participation in the relevant processes of reconstruction and re-affirmation of social values in a given community. This is a feminist approach to democracy, which goes beyond "quotas" or formal equality, one of the first achievements of feminist movements, to embrace issues of effective participation in decision-making. Questo saggio analizza i tribunali delle donne dalla prospettiva del diritto internazionale. I tribunali dei popoli e i tribunali delle donne sono espressione della democrazia nel diritto internazionale, laddove democrazia significa partecipazione delle donne agli importanti processi di ricostruzione e riaffermazione dei valori sociali in una determinata comunità, una partecipazione che va oltre le "quote" o l'eguaglianza formale – uno dei primi risultati ottenuti dai movimenti femministi – per abbracciare le questioni della partecipazione effettiva ai processi decisionali.

The article explores the reasons why the EU should ratify the Council of Europe Istanbul Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence against Women and Domestic Violence, adopted in 2011, and the consequences the ratification may entail. In thefirst part, I will make a few remarks on the main provisions of the Convention, which must be considered as the most advanced system of protection of women from violence at the international level in force for the time being, and Iwill comment on the current status of EU gender equality policies. In thesecond part, starting from the European Commission roadmap regarding the EU accession to the Convention (October 2015), and the proposal for a Council decision on the signing of the Convention (March 2016), the Iwill analyse the legal bases for the ratification of the Convention by the EU, and the possible impact this treaty may have on EU policies. I arguefirst that the legal basis of the decision of the Council concluding the agreement cannot be limited to Articles 82 to 84 of the Treaty of the Functioning of the EU (TFEU), but should be extended to – at least – Articles 19 and 168 TFEU. I will then explore the impact of the Convention on future policies of the EU, also providing a comparison with the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, which constitutes the first international treaty on human rights ratified by the European Union. Secondly, I will contend that one of the provisions of the Convention, namely Article 30(2), which requires States to compensate victims of violence who have sustained 'seriousinjury or impairment of health',has direct effect. ; The article explores the reasons why the EU should ratify the Council of Europe Istanbul Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence against Women and Domestic Violence, adopted in 2011, and the consequences the ratification may entail. In the first part, I will make a few remarks on the main provisions of the Convention, which must be considered as the most advanced system of protection of ...

This note concerns Part IV of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights ('Part IV') (1966), opened for signature by the United Nations (UN) General Assembly (GA) on 16 December 1966 and entered into force on 23 March 1976. Core Issues 1. Monitoring compliance with human rights obligations. 2. The non-binding character of the Human Rights Committee reports and general comments.

The act under review is the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Core Issues 1. The admissibility requirements for individual complaints according to the Protocol 2. Whether the Human rights committee can be considered as a 'judicial' or 'quasi-judicial' body 3. Whether the views adopted by the Committee are binding or non-binding

Il contributo si inserisce nel dibattito in corso sull'adesione dell'Unione europea alla Convenzione del Consiglio d'Europa sulla prevenzione e la repressione della violenza nei confronti delle donne e la violenza domestica, adottata nel 2011 ed entrata in vigore nel 2014 (Convenzione di Istanbul), lo strumento più avanzato in vigore sul piano internazionale per il contrasto della violenza di genere quale forma di discriminazione nei confronti delle donne. Il Consiglio dell'Unione europea ha firmato la Convenzione mediante due distinte decisioni adottate a maggio 2017, mentre è in discussione l'adozione della o delle decisioni di conclusione dell'accordo medesimo, che risulterà essere il secondo ratificato dall'Unione sulla tutela dei diritti umani fondamentali, dopo la conclusione nel 2010 della Convenzione delle Nazioni Unite sui diritti delle persone con disabilità. L'obiettivo del presente articolo è quello di ricostruire, dal punto di vista giuridico, le fasi del processo, ancora in corso, di adesione dell'Unione europea alla Convenzione di Istanbul, con particolare riguardo alle basi giuridiche utilizzate dalla Commissione europea nella sua proposta del 2016, i riferimenti normativi inclusi nelle decisioni del Consiglio di maggio 2017, l'input fornito dal Parlamento europeo (PE) nella Risoluzione n. 329 del 12 settembre 2017. Ci si propone di esaminare, nello specifico, l'impatto che la Convenzione avrà, avvenuta la ratifica da parte dell'Unione, sulle politiche e il diritto dell'Unione europea. Una volta entrata in vigore per l'Unione, la Convenzione di Istanbul diventerà infatti parte integrante dell'ordinamento giuridico dell'Unione.

Starting from the experience of the Women's Court for the Former Yugoslavia, the article aims to analyse the practice of Peoples' Tribunals, with specific regard to Women's tribunals, from an international law perspective. Peoples' Tribunals are seldom considered by international lawyers, since they are not established by States and do not render binding judgments. However, we will argue that these bodies created by civil society play an important role in the international legal system. First, they represent the process of popular participation which is one of the expressions of democracy. For this purpose, we will also briefly focus on the controversial concept of democracy under international law. Secondly, they represent the collective memory of a group (in this case women) which has been partly or never heard. They hence contribute to fight silence and impunity in cases where neither the International Court of Justice or any other international court has jurisdiction over the States principally involved.