Transplanting international courts: the law and politics of the Andean Tribunal of Justice
In: International courts and tribunals series
27 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: International courts and tribunals series
In: Michigan Journal of International Law, 2016 Vol. 37(4): 563-609
SSRN
In: Book published by Oxford University Press, this working paper includes the table of contents and introductory chapter of the book.
SSRN
Working paper
In: 42(6) European Intellectual Property Review 332-340 (2020)
SSRN
In: International Court Authority, Oxford University Press, ISBN: 9780198795582, Forthcoming
SSRN
In: Filling the Gaps in Governance: The Case of Europe 127-150 (European University Institute 2016)
SSRN
In: International courts and tribunals series
An innovative, interdisciplinary and far-reaching examination of the actual reality of international courts, International Court Authority challenges fundamental preconceptions about when, why, and how international courts become important and authoritative actors in national, regional, and international politics. A stellar group of scholars investigate the challenges that international courts face in transforming the formal legal authority conferred by states into an actual authority in fact that is respected by potential litigants, national actors, legal communities, and publics. Alter, Helfer, and Madsen provide a novel framework for conceptualizing international court authority that focuses on the reactions and practices of these key audiences. Eighteen scholars from the disciplines of law, political science and sociology apply this framework to study thirteen international courts operating in Africa, Latin America, and Europe, as well as on a global level. Together the contributors document and explore important and interesting variations in whether the audiences that interact with international courts around the world embrace or reject the rulings of these judicial institutions. Alter, Helfer, and Madsen's authority framework recognizes that international judges can and often do everything they 'should' do to ensure that their rulings possess the gravitas and stature that national courts enjoy. Yet even when imbued with these characteristics, the parties to the dispute, potential future litigants, and the broader set of actors that monitor and respond to the court's activities may fail to acknowledge the rulings as binding or take meaningful steps to modify their behaviour in response to them. For both specific judicial institutions, and more generally, the book documents and explains why most international courts possess de facto authority that is partial, variable, and highly dependent on a range of different audiences and contexts - and thus is highly fragile.
World Affairs Online
In: European journal of international law, Band 27, Heft 2, S. 293-328
ISSN: 1464-3596
World Affairs Online
In: 27 European Journal of International Law, 293-328 (2016)
SSRN
In: International studies quarterly: the journal of the International Studies Association, Band 63, Heft 3, S. 449-463
ISSN: 1468-2478
AbstractThis article introduces a Thematic Section and theorizes the multiple ways that judicializing international relations shifts power away from national executives and legislatures toward litigants, judges, arbitrators, and other nonstate decision-makers. We identify two preconditions for judicialization to occur—(1) delegation to an adjudicatory body charged with applying designated legal rules, and (2) legal rights-claiming by actors who bring—or threaten to bring—a complaint to one or more of these bodies. We classify the adjudicatory bodies that do and do not contribute to judicializing international relations, including but not limited to international courts. We then explain how rights-claiming initiates a process for authoritatively determining past violations of the law, identifying remedies for those violations, and preventing future violations. Because judicializing international relations occurs in multiple phases, in multiple locations, and involves multiple actors as decision-makers, governments often do not control the timing, nature, or extent to which political and policy decisions are adjudicated. Delegation—and the associated choice of institutional design features—is thus only the first step in a chain of processes that determine how a diverse array of nonstate actors influence politically consequential decisions.
In: International studies quarterly: the journal of the International Studies Association, Band 63, Heft 3, S. 449-530
ISSN: 1468-2478
World Affairs Online