From the bottom-up : redesigning the international legal response to anthropogenic climate change

The design of the Kyoto Protocol renders it incapable of effectively responding to the problem of anthropogenic climate change. Therefore, this article explores the opportunity to construct a new, principled legal approach to respond to climate change that is premised on nationally derived legal responses. To do so, this article considers the theoretical foundation of the international legal response to climate change – Hardin's "The Tragedy of the Commons‟ – and the systemic design faults of the Kyoto Protocol. This article also suggests four principles – a judicious mix of legal instruments, flexibility, intrinsic legal coherence, and quantifiable and achievable targets for the reduction of greenhouse gas intensity – that are necessary to guide the creation of a nationally derived legal response to climate change. This approach is intended to provide the catalyst for new bilateral and multilateral arrangements that can, with the passing of time, generate sufficient momentum to drive the creation of a new and effective cooperative international legal framework to mitigate anthropogenic climate change.

Bringing protection home : healing the schism between international obligations and national safeguards created by extraterritorial processing

Extraterritorial processing schemes are designed to prevent and deter access to statutory and judicial safeguards in the country responsible for the interception and transfer of asylum seekers to a third country. In line with this objective, they incorporate interdiction, transfer and processing practices and standards that are deliberately isolated from the national legal and institutional protections within either the intercepting state or the third country where processing occurs. Australia's recent disbandment of its extraterritorial processing centres in third countries highlights the fact that extraterritorial processing schemes have proven unworkable as a matter of international law, as they negate the national safeguards fundamental to the satisfaction of a state's protection obligations.