WTO government procurement rules and the local dynamics of procurement policies: A malaysian case study

This article examines efforts to create binding international rules regulating public procurement and considers, in particular, the failure to reach a WTO agreement oil transparency in government procurement. The particular focus of the discussion is the approach taken by Malaysia to these international procurement rules and to the negotiation of an agreement on transparency. Rules governing public procurement directly implicate fundamental arrangements of authority amongst and between different parts of government, its citizens and non-citizens. At the same time, the rules touch upon areas that are particularly sensitive for some developing countries. Many governments use preferences in public procurement to accomplish important redistributive and developmental goals. Malaysia has long used significant preferences in public procurement to further sensitive developmental policies targeted at improving the economic strength of native Malays. Malaysia also has political and legal arrangements substantially at odds with fundamental elements of proposed global public procurement rules. Malaysia has, therefore, been forceful in resisting being bound by international public procurement rules, and has played all important role in defeating the proposed agreement oil transparency. We suggest that our case study has implications beyond procurement. The development of international public procurement rules appears to be guided by many of the same values that guide the broader effort to create a global administrative law. This case study, therefore, has implications for the broader exploration of these efforts to develop a global administrative law, in particular the relationship between such efforts and the interests of developing countries.

Human Dignity and judicial Interpretation of Human Rights

The Universal Declaration on Human Rights was pivotal in popularizing the use of 'dignity' or 'human dignity' in human rights discourse. This article argues that the use of 'dignity', beyond a basic minimum core, does not provide a universalistic, principled basis for judicial decision-making in the human rights context, in the sense that there is little common understanding of what dignity requires substantively within or across jurisdictions. The meaning of dignity is therefore context-specific, varying significantly from jurisdiction to jurisdiction and (often) over time within particular jurisdictions. Indeed, instead of providing a basis for principled decision-making, dignity seems open to significant judicial manipulation. increasing rather than decreasing judicial discretion. That is one of its significant attractions to both judges and litigators alike. Dignity provides a convenient language for the adoption of substantive interpretations of human rights guarantees which appear to be intentionally, not just coincidentally. highly contingent on local circumstances. Despite that, however, I argue that the concept of 'human dignity' plays an important role in the development of human rights adjudication, not in providing an agreed content to human rights but in contributing to particular methods of human rights interpretation and adjudication.

Amnesties in Transition: Punishment, Restoration, and the Governance of Mercy

Despite the much vaunted triumph of human rights, amnesties continue to be a frequently used technique of post-conflict transitional justice. For many critics, they are synonymous with unaccountability and injustice. This article argues that despite the rhetoric, there is no universal duty to prosecute under international law and that issues of selectivity and proportionality present serious challenges to the retributive rationale for punishment in international justice. It contends that many of the assumptions concerning the deterrent effect in the field are also oversold and poorly theorized. It also suggests that appropriately designed restorative amnesties can be both lawful and effective as routes to truth recovery, reconciliation, and a range of other peacemaking goals. Rather than mere instruments of impunity, amnesties should instead be seen as important institutions in the governance of mercy, the reassertion of state sovereignty and, if properly constituted, the return of law to a previously lawless domain.

Courts and Consociations:How human rights courts may destabilize power-sharing settlements

We consider the use of consociational arrangements to manage ethno-nationalist, ethno-linguistic, and ethno-religious conflicts, and their compatibility with non-discrimination and equality norms. Key questions include to what extent, if any, consociations conflict with the dictates of global justice and the liberal individualist preferences of international human rights institutions, and to what extent consociational power-sharing may be justified to preserve peace and the integrity of political settlements. In three critical cases, the European Court of Human Rights has considered equality challenges to important consociational practices, twice in Belgium and, most recently, in Sejdic and Finci, concerning the constitutional arrangements established for Bosnia Herzegovina under the Dayton Agreement. The Court’s recent decision in Sejdic and Finci has significantly altered the approach it previously took to judicial review of consociational arrangements in the Belgian cases. We seek to account for this change and assess its implications. We identify problematic aspects of the judgment and conclude that, although the Court’s decision indicates one possible trajectory of human rights courts’ reactions to consociations, this would be an unfortunate development because it leaves future negotiators in places riven by potential or manifest bloody ethnic conflicts with considerably less flexibility in reaching a settlement. That in turn may unintentionally contribute to sustaining such conflicts and make it more likely that advisors to negotiators will advise them to exclude regional and international courts from having standing in the management of political settlements.

ARTICLE: Property and the Definition of Slavery

Currently there is no clear understanding of the meaning of ‘slavery’ in modern international law. While generally it is accepted that the
authoritative definition of slavery is provided by Article 1 of the Slavery Convention 1926, in recent times slavery has been understood in such a wide variety of ways that effectively it is a meaningless term. This paper reflects on this interpretation problem and aims to redress this balance by reclaiming the core meaning of the legal definition. It applies property law perspectives to explain the conception of ownership invoked by Article 1, to argue that it remains relevant and to explore how it might be applied in identifying modern cases of slavery.

Human Rights in Northern Ireland in 2011

This chapter surveys and comments on the developments in the legal protection of human rights in Northern Ireland during the year 2011.

Legislation Blocking Antitrust Investigations and the September 2012 Russian Executive Order

This article offers a typology of so-called blocking legislation and analyses its development, functions and legality under international law. It also presents and discusses the new Russian blocking Order, issued in September 2012, focusing on its possible effects on the European Commission's investigation of Gazprom's business practices (in light of EU competition law) as well as, more broadly, on foreign operations of Russian strategic enterprises.

An Enchanted Tool? Humanitarian Assistance and the ILC Draft Articles on the Protection of Persons in the Event of Disasters

Despite previous attempts at codification of international law regarding international responses to natural and human-made disasters, there is currently no binding international legal framework to regulate the provision of humanitarian assistance outside armed conflicts. Nevertheless, since the International Law Commission (ILC) included the protection of persons in the event of disasters on its programme of work in 2006, it has provisionally adopted eleven draft articles that have the potential to create binding obligations on states and humanitarian actors in disaster settings. Draft articles adopted include the definition of ‘a disaster’, the relationship of the draft articles to the international humanitarian law of armed conflict, recognition of the inherent dignity of the human person, and the duty of international cooperation. However, the final form of the draft articles has not been agreed. The Codification Division of the UN Office of Legal Affairs has proposed a framework convention format, which has seen support in the ILC and the UN General Assembly Sixth Committee. The overall aim of this article is to provide an analysis of the potential forms of international regulation open to the ILC and states in the context of humanitarian responses to disasters. However to avoid enchanting the ILC draft articles with unwarranted power, any examination of form requires an understanding of the substantive subject matter of the planned international regulation. The article therefore provides an overview of the international legal regulation of humanitarian assistance following natural and human-made disasters, and the ILC’s work to date on the topic. It then examines two key issues that remain to be addressed by the ILC and representatives of states in the UN General Assembly Sixth Committee. Drawing on the UN Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement, the development and implications of binding and non-binding international texts are examined, followed by an analysis of the suggested framework convention approach identified by the Special Rapporteur as a potential outcome of the ILC work.

Clarifying the acquis humanitaire: a transnational legal perspective on the internalization of humanitarian norms

Although the international obligations and institutional frameworks for disaster response are not yet settled, as evidenced by the International Law Commission’s work on the protection of persons in the event of disasters and the on-going promotion of disaster laws by the Red Cross Movement; the diverse source and nature of such initiatives suggests that the international community is engaged in a process of norm creation, elaboration and interpretation reflecting a desire for legal clarity in humanitarian operations. Situated within the framework of transnational law, this paper argues that an acquis humanitaire, based on the principle of humanity, encapsulates the evolving body of law and practice specifically relating to the protection of persons in times of humanitarian crisis in both armed conflicts and natural or human-made disasters. Reflecting the non-traditional, non-statist, dynamic and normative basis of transnational legal process, as elaborated by Harold Koh, the constant flow of ideas and principles between the national, regional and international spheres provides an analytical framework for the on-going transnational dialogues on the social, political and legal internalization of humanitarian norms. Drawing on the internalization of humanitarian norms within the United Kingdom, this paper concludes that as the international community examines the codification of a universal legal framework for the protection of persons in the event of disasters it is necessary to understand the transnational process of interpretation and internalization of humanitarian norms, and how this may vary across different regions and countries.