Pharmaceutical Patents and the Human Right to Health: The Contested Evolution of the Transnational Legal Order on Access to Medicines
In: Transnational Legal Orders (Terence C. Halliday & Gregory Shaffer, eds. 2015)
In: Transnational Legal Orders (Terence C. Halliday & Gregory Shaffer, eds. 2015)
SSRN
In: Proceedings of the annual meeting / American Society of International Law, Band 109, S. 27-30
ISSN: 2169-1118
In a working paper based on extensive field research and interviews, Karen Alter, James Gathii, and I analyze three recent backlash attempts against sub-regional courts in East, West, and Southern Africa. Our paper analyzes credible proposals by African governments to restrict the jurisdiction of these courts in response to politically embarrassing rulings. These events are not widely known, and they are at odds with the prevailing view that it is difficult to sanction international judges.
In: iCourts Working Paper Series, No. 32
SSRN
Working paper
In: Custom's Future: International Law in a Changing World (Curtis Bradley ed., 2015 Forthcoming).
SSRN
In: 79:1 Law & Contemporary Problems 1-36 (2016).
SSRN
In: International organization, Band 68, Heft 1, S. 77-110
ISSN: 1531-5088
Do international court judgments influence the behavior of actors other than the parties to a dispute? Are international courts agents of policy change or do their judgments merely reflect evolving social and political trends? We develop a theory that specifies the conditions under which international courts can use their interpretive discretion to have system-wide effects. We examine the theory in the context of European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) rulings on lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) issues by creating a new data set that matches these rulings with laws in all Council of Europe (CoE) member states. We also collect data on LGBT policies unaffected by ECtHR judgments to control for the confounding effect of evolving trends in national policies. We find that ECtHR judgments against one country substantially increase the probability of national-level policy change across Europe. The marginal effects of the judgments are especially high where public acceptance of sexual minorities is low, but where national courts can rely on ECtHR precedents to invalidate domestic laws or where the government in power is not ideologically opposed to LGBT equality. We conclude by exploring the implications of our findings for other international courts. Adapted from the source document.
In: 68:1 International Organization 77-110 (2014)
SSRN
In: 107 American Journal of International Law 737-779 (2013)
SSRN
In: Critical concepts in intellectual property law 7
In: Oxford Handbook of International Adjudication, Karen J. Alter, Cesare Romano and Yuval Shany, eds., 2013
SSRN
In: INTERDISCIPLINARY PERSPECTIVES ON INTERNATIONAL LAW AND INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS, Jeffrey Dunoff & Mark A. Pollack, eds., Cambridge University Press, 2013, pp. 175-196
SSRN
In: International organization, Band 68, Heft 1, S. 77-110
ISSN: 0020-8183
In: International organization, Band 68, Heft 1, S. 77-110
ISSN: 1531-5088
AbstractDo international court judgments influence the behavior of actors other than the parties to a dispute? Are international courts agents of policy change or do their judgments merely reflect evolving social and political trends? We develop a theory that specifies the conditions under which international courts can use their interpretive discretion to have system-wide effects. We examine the theory in the context of European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) rulings on lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) issues by creating a new data set that matches these rulings with laws in all Council of Europe (CoE) member states. We also collect data on LGBT policies unaffected by ECtHR judgments to control for the confounding effect of evolving trends in national policies. We find that ECtHR judgments against one country substantially increase the probability of national-level policy change across Europe. The marginal effects of the judgments are especially high where public acceptance of sexual minorities is low, but where national courts can rely on ECtHR precedents to invalidate domestic laws or where the government in power is not ideologically opposed to LGBT equality. We conclude by exploring the implications of our findings for other international courts.
In: 14 Theoretical Inquiries in Law 479 (2013)
SSRN
In: American journal of international law: AJIL, Band 107, Heft 4, S. 737-779
ISSN: 2161-7953
The Community Court of Justice of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS Court) is an increasingly active and bold adjudicator of human rights. Since acquiring jurisdiction over human rights complaints in 2005, theECOWASCourt has issued numerous decisions condemning human rights violations by the member states of the Economic Community of West African States (Community). Among this Court's path-breaking cases are judgments against Niger for condoning modern forms of slavery and against Nigeria for impeding the right to free basic education for all children. TheECOWASCourt also has broad access and standing rules that permit individuals and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) to bypass national courts and file suits directly with the Court. Although the Court is generally careful in the proof that it requires of complainants and in the remedies that it demands of governments, it has not shied away from politically courageous decisions, such as rulings against the Gambia for the torture of journalists and against Nigeria for failing to regulate multinational companies that have degraded the environment of the oil-rich Niger Delta.