| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
157288
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article concerns the ILC’s Draft Articles on the Protection of Persons in the Event of Disasters and, in particular, the establishment of a rights-duties relationship between States concerning the right to accept or refuse assistance from third States (horizontal rights-duties relationship). The article assesses the merits of the horizontal rights-duties relationship by assessing the two primary justifications for the proposition. The first justification is that the proposition reflects the law as it currently stands. The second justification is that, independent of whether the proposition reflects current law, it is morally required in order to save lives and protect the dignity of persons affected by disasters. The assessment is undertaken, principally, on the basis of the materials relied upon in the commentary to the Draft Articles as well as deliberations within the ILC itself.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
109200
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2011.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The Al Qaida/Taliban sanctions regime established under Resolution 1267 of the UN Security Council has been under severe strain due to lack of adherence to due process standards. Over the years, the Security Council has incrementally adopted measures to try to alleviate some of the concerns, including through the creation of an ombudsperson to receive petitions from listed individuals requesting to be de-listed. In June 2011, the Security Council adopted two resolutions further strengthening the due process standards. This paper considers whether the new measures adopted are sufficient to respond to some of the concerns raised. While the new initiatives are a significant improvement, as a matter of law, the due process objections remain.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
178011
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
While international lawyers have not traditionally paid much attention to the phenomenon of populism, a recent upswing in the populist movements in governments around the world has led to an increase in the fascination of international lawyers with populism. On the whole, there seems to be a view that populism has negatively affected the communitarianism and multilateralism of international law. This article interrogates this proposition. It comes to the conclusion that the proposition is based on an erroneous assumption about the state of international law. It concludes that populism is not a threat to international law, but that populist strategies against certain institutions and rules of international law are merely a reflection of international law’s own limitations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|