The communication by States of International Law to their direct stakeholders

El derecho internacional fue concebido como un derecho interestatal. Sin embargo, como consecuencia del desarrollo progresivo del derecho, nuevos actores y nuevos sujetos han ido surgiendo. El individuo es uno de ellos bajo diferentes perspectivas, bajo la perspectiva penal al asumir la responsabilidad de sus actos frente a los diferentes tribunales ad hoc y, ahora ante la Corte Penal Internacional. También se ha desarrollado la figura bajo la perspectiva de los derechos humanos. Este artículo analiza las formas como las políticas estatales relativas al derecho internacional se presentan a los individuos, a las personas jurídicas y a los demás actores.

International Law as a Source of Constitutional Law

This article has the purpose to prove that the Customary International Law and the Conventional International Law are sources of Constitutional Law. First, it analyses the matter of the relations between International Law and National or Domestic law according with the theories dualism and monist and international decisions. Then, it studies the reception and the hierarchy of International Customary and Conventional Law to Domestic Law including Constitution. This matter has been studied according with several Constitutions and the international doctrine. Then, it considers the constitutional regulations about international law in the Constitution of the Republic of Colombia. The general conclusion is that International Law is incorporated in domestic law according with the Constitution of each country. But every state has the duty to carry out in good faith its obligations arising from treaties and other sources of International Law, and it may not invoke provisions in its Constitutions or its Laws as an excuse for failure to perform this duty. Accordingly, state practice and decided cases have established this provision, and the same rule is established in articles 27 and 46 of the Vienna Convention on Law of Treaties of 1969.

Just another case of treaty interpretation? Reconciling humanitarian law and human rights law in the ICJ

This chapter offers a fresh critique of the approach taken by the International Court of Justice to the relationship between humanitarian law and human rights law. In so doing, it seeks to move beyond the intractable debates that have dominated this area, offering an original account of the relationship that is firmly grounded in general international law concepts of treaty interpretation.

Typology of instruments of public environmental international law

At the second meeting of the focal points appointed by the Governments of the signatory countries of the Declaration on the application of Principle 10 of the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development in Latin America and the Caribbean, which was held in Guadalajara, Mexico, on 16 and 17 April 2013, a decision was made to form working groups to advance towards the creation of a regional instrument. Thus, a working group on access rights and the regional instrument was formed for the purpose of gaining more in-depth knowledge on access rights in order to make a proposal on the nature and scope of the application of a regional instrument. At its first meeting, the working group determined that a study describing the different types of international instruments would be useful in helping it achieve its objective. This report explores the different types of instruments that are used in public international law, with an emphasis on the instruments that are relevant to Principle 10. The report has three chapters, which are as follows. The first chapter analyses the term “international instrument” and discusses the distinction between binding and non-binding legal instruments, illustrated with examples. The second chapter describes the function of implementation and compliance mechanisms in an international instrument, providing examples of these mechanisms. The third chapter presents the multilateral and regional instruments relevant to access rights regarding information, participation and justice in environmental matters in Latin America and the Caribbean.

Does Israel Follow the Law? A Critical Analysis of Israel's Application of the International Law of Belligerent Occupation in the Occupied Territories

Israel's occupation of territories it captured in 1967 has become one of the longest and most controversial occupations of the last fifty years. Eschewing the traditional political analysis of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, this paper aims to explore whether Israel has adequately applied international law in the occupied territories, in particular, the law of belligerent occupation. The two actors under assessment are the Israeli government, particularly its military which enforces and maintains the law in the territories, and the Supreme Court of Israel, which has the power of review over military actions in the territories. The particular issues of the occupation that are critically analyzed are the general legal framework that Israel established in the territories, Israel's civilian settlement policy in territories, and Israel's construction of a barrier in the West Bank. This paper concludes that Israel has incorrectly applied the legal framework of belligerent occupation by refusing to apply the Fourth Geneva Convention; it has wrongly concluded that the establishment of civilian settlements in the territories conform with international law; yet it has rightly concluded that the construction of the barrier in the West Bank is permissible under international law, in contrast to the conclusion of the much publicized International Court of Justice's Advisory Opinion on the 'Wall.' Along with these general assessments, the author will also provide some historical and political insight into why the Israeli government and the Supreme Court may have applied the law in the way that they did.

Internet Intermediaries and the Law Applicable to Intellectual Property Infringements

The coordination between territoriality restricted intellectual property rights and the potential global reach of Internet activities has been the focus of significant attention in recent years. The liability of Internet intermediaries offering potentially global services that may facilitate infringements of intellectual property rights by others in multiple countries poses a particular challenge in that regard. At a substantive law level, significant differences remain between jurisdictions regarding secondary liability for intellectual property rights infringements and safe harbor provisions for Internet intermediaries. The present article discusses the conflict of laws aspects of the liability of Internet intermediaries in light of the recent international efforts to adopt soft law provisions on intellectual property and private international law.

Enforcing Copyright Infringements Online: In Search of Balanced Private International Law Rules

Enforcement of copyright online and fighting online “piracy” is a high priority on the EU agenda. Private international law questions have recently become some of the most challenging issues in this area. Internet service providers are still uncertain how the Brussels I Regulation (Recast) provisions would apply in EU-wide copyright infringement cases and in which country they can be sued for copyright violations. Meanwhile, because of the territorial approach that still underlies EU copyright law, right holders are unable to acquire EU-wide relief for copyright infringements online. This article first discusses the recent CJEU rulings in the Pinckney and Hejduk cases and argues that the “access approach” that the Court adopted for solving jurisdiction questions could be quite reasonable if it is applied with additional legal measures at the level of substantive law, such as the targeting doctrine. Secondly, the article explores the alternatives to the currently established lex loci protectionis rule that would enable right holders to get EU-wide remedies under a single applicable law. In particular, the analysis focuses on the special applicable law rule for ubiquitous copyright infringements, as suggested by the CLIP Group, and other international proposals.