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.

Differenzierte Gerechtigkeit: Diskriminierungsschutz und Vertragsrecht

The theme of this book is the perceived tensions between contract law's principle of private autonomy and non-discrimination law. I first analyse the notion of discrimination, and specify that I restrict the investigation to ascribed difference,more specifically to perceived race/ethnicty, sex/gender and disability. Based on an analysis of the aims of non-discrimination law which extends onto markets, I then presented potential structures of non-discrimination clauses addressing market inequalities. Turning to a doctrinal investigation of German contract law and its position towards discrimination on grounds, I first investigated whether international law, EU law or the German constitution form a stable base for contractual non-discrimination law. Having concluded that these bodies of law require some protection against discrimination based on ascribed difference, but that contract law needs to provide its own specification, I then offer a very short comparative chapter on British and Dutch non-discrimination law (I guess I have developed quite a bit in this field since then!). Finally, I analyse in how far German courts have offered protection against discrimination on markets in the past, and which position the doctrine has taken. From page 290, I finally offer a conceptual, paradigmatic and principled proposal of how to integrate a principle of non-discrimination into German contract law. To my own surprise, this was later endorsed by one of the "doyens" of German contract law, Professor Canaris. In any case, you can see from my edited collection of 2011, that I am still fascinated by discrimination on grounds of race/ethnicity, sex/gender and disability.