As the rules against modern slavery and trafficking have grown over the past three decades and become more effectively enforced, awareness has grown that domestic servants of diplomats form a class that is particularly vulnerable to exploitation, which means they are unusually badly protected and often unable to secure justice. First, the immunity of diplomats and other members of diplomatic missions forms an obstacle to civil and criminal proceedings against them; second, if a judgment is obtained through waiver of immunity, it cannot be enforced; and third, even if the diplomat is expelled, this still leaves the servant without an effective remedy.
{"title":"Basfar v. Wong (U.K. Sup. Ct.)","authors":"E. Denza","doi":"10.1017/ilm.2022.65","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ilm.2022.65","url":null,"abstract":"As the rules against modern slavery and trafficking have grown over the past three decades and become more effectively enforced, awareness has grown that domestic servants of diplomats form a class that is particularly vulnerable to exploitation, which means they are unusually badly protected and often unable to secure justice. First, the immunity of diplomats and other members of diplomatic missions forms an obstacle to civil and criminal proceedings against them; second, if a judgment is obtained through waiver of immunity, it cannot be enforced; and third, even if the diplomat is expelled, this still leaves the servant without an effective remedy.","PeriodicalId":212220,"journal":{"name":"International Legal Materials","volume":"15 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122196088","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
On April 26, 2022, the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA), without a vote, adopted resolution 76/262 entitled “Standing mandate for a General Assembly debate when a veto is cast in the Security Council.” Less than two months later, on June 8, 2022, for the first time in history, the UNGA held a debate specifically to address a veto cast by China and Russia in the Security Council (UNSC). This meeting, convened in accordance with resolution 76/262, represents a great step forward for accountability within the UN system and opens a new chapter regarding the balance of power among the principal organs of the organization. The power dynamics within the UNSC, the demands for a more efficient United Nations, the fact that a meaningful UNSC reform is not in sight, and the current polarization resulting from Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine set the context in which the resolution was adopted.
{"title":"G.A. Res. 76/262 on a Standing Mandate for a General Assembly debate when aveto is cast in the Security Council (U.N.)","authors":"Pablo A. Arrocha Olabuenaga","doi":"10.1017/ilm.2022.46","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ilm.2022.46","url":null,"abstract":"On April 26, 2022, the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA), without a vote, adopted resolution 76/262 entitled “Standing mandate for a General Assembly debate when a veto is cast in the Security Council.” Less than two months later, on June 8, 2022, for the first time in history, the UNGA held a debate specifically to address a veto cast by China and Russia in the Security Council (UNSC). This meeting, convened in accordance with resolution 76/262, represents a great step forward for accountability within the UN system and opens a new chapter regarding the balance of power among the principal organs of the organization. The power dynamics within the UNSC, the demands for a more efficient United Nations, the fact that a meaningful UNSC reform is not in sight, and the current polarization resulting from Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine set the context in which the resolution was adopted.","PeriodicalId":212220,"journal":{"name":"International Legal Materials","volume":"13 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125656868","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The provisional measures orders by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in Armenia v. Azerbaijan, Azerbaijan v. Armenia (2021), and Ukraine v. Russian Federation (2022) are reproduced here to mark the start of the proceedings in these important cases. The Court issued these provisional measures orders in a setting of ongoing tensions and a pending ongoing war, respectively.
{"title":"Arm. v. Azer., Azer. v. Arm., & Ukr. v. Russ. (Orders on Provisional Measures) (I.C.J.)","authors":"E. Rieter","doi":"10.1017/ilm.2022.66","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ilm.2022.66","url":null,"abstract":"The provisional measures orders by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in Armenia v. Azerbaijan, Azerbaijan v. Armenia (2021), and Ukraine v. Russian Federation (2022) are reproduced here to mark the start of the proceedings in these important cases. The Court issued these provisional measures orders in a setting of ongoing tensions and a pending ongoing war, respectively.","PeriodicalId":212220,"journal":{"name":"International Legal Materials","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132965526","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
On December 20, 2021, the U.K. Supreme Court (the Supreme Court) delivered a unanimous decision in the highly publicized Maduro Board v. Guaidó Board litigation. The decision partially overturned that of the England and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division) and is an important decision on both issues raised in the case: the recognition of governments and the “Act of State” doctrine. The first of those is examined in more detail in this note.
{"title":"“Maduro Board” of the Central Bank of Venez. v. “Guaidó Board” of the Central Bank of Venez. (UKSC)","authors":"M. Waseem","doi":"10.1017/ilm.2022.51","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ilm.2022.51","url":null,"abstract":"On December 20, 2021, the U.K. Supreme Court (the Supreme Court) delivered a unanimous decision in the highly publicized Maduro Board v. Guaidó Board litigation. The decision partially overturned that of the England and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division) and is an important decision on both issues raised in the case: the recognition of governments and the “Act of State” doctrine. The first of those is examined in more detail in this note.","PeriodicalId":212220,"journal":{"name":"International Legal Materials","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114322574","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In the wake of Russia's invasion of Ukraine, states have deployed an array of tools aimed at isolating and weakening Russia, and supporting Ukraine, while avoiding direct involvement in the hostilities. These measures have included sanctions, export and import restrictions, visa bans, exclusion of Russian aircraft from states' airspace, seizure of oligarchs' property, and the provision of weapons and aid to Ukraine. Many states have also worked to terminate or suspend Russia's membership or participation in international organizations. In light of Russia's aggression and widely publicized reports of human rights atrocities, its early exclusions from two key human rights institutions—the Council of Europe (CoE) and the UN Human Rights Council (HRC)—were seen as important symbolic reaffirmations of the rules-based international order.
{"title":"Documents on Russia's Exclusion from Council Eur. & U.N.H.R.C.","authors":"J. Bischoff","doi":"10.1017/ilm.2022.57","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ilm.2022.57","url":null,"abstract":"In the wake of Russia's invasion of Ukraine, states have deployed an array of tools aimed at isolating and weakening Russia, and supporting Ukraine, while avoiding direct involvement in the hostilities. These measures have included sanctions, export and import restrictions, visa bans, exclusion of Russian aircraft from states' airspace, seizure of oligarchs' property, and the provision of weapons and aid to Ukraine. Many states have also worked to terminate or suspend Russia's membership or participation in international organizations. In light of Russia's aggression and widely publicized reports of human rights atrocities, its early exclusions from two key human rights institutions—the Council of Europe (CoE) and the UN Human Rights Council (HRC)—were seen as important symbolic reaffirmations of the rules-based international order.","PeriodicalId":212220,"journal":{"name":"International Legal Materials","volume":"2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123675803","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
On April 7, 2022, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) issued a preliminary ruling in United Airlines, clarifying the territorial scope and upholding the applicability of the Air Passenger Regulation in relation to connecting flights departing from an EU airport, even when the second leg of the flight takes place outside of the European Union. A decade after one of the most high-profile cases on the extraterritorial reach of EU law concerning the inclusion of global aviation emissions in the EU emissions trading system (ETS) (Air Transport Association of Americas), United Airlines brought to light its lasting significance and its extension to a different aspect of air transport concerning passenger rights.
{"title":"Case C-561/20 Q v. United Airlines, Inc. (C.J.E.U.)","authors":"Ioanna Hadjiyianni","doi":"10.1017/ilm.2022.50","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ilm.2022.50","url":null,"abstract":"On April 7, 2022, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) issued a preliminary ruling in United Airlines, clarifying the territorial scope and upholding the applicability of the Air Passenger Regulation in relation to connecting flights departing from an EU airport, even when the second leg of the flight takes place outside of the European Union. A decade after one of the most high-profile cases on the extraterritorial reach of EU law concerning the inclusion of global aviation emissions in the EU emissions trading system (ETS) (Air Transport Association of Americas), United Airlines brought to light its lasting significance and its extension to a different aspect of air transport concerning passenger rights.","PeriodicalId":212220,"journal":{"name":"International Legal Materials","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130468600","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
On April 21, 2022, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) issued a judgment finding the illegality of Colombia's measures and actions in the Nicaraguan exclusive economic zone (EEZ) in the case Alleged Violations of Sovereign Rights and Maritime Spaces in the Caribbean Sea. The dispute primarily concerned the Court's jurisdiction based on the American Treaty on Pacific Settlement (Pact of Bogotá) Article XXXI and a coastal state's rights over its maritime zones under customary international law.
{"title":"Alleged Violations of Sovereign Rights and Maritime Spaces in the Caribbean Sea (Nicar. v. Colom.), Judgment (I.C.J.)","authors":"Yuri Ishii","doi":"10.1017/ilm.2022.48","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ilm.2022.48","url":null,"abstract":"On April 21, 2022, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) issued a judgment finding the illegality of Colombia's measures and actions in the Nicaraguan exclusive economic zone (EEZ) in the case Alleged Violations of Sovereign Rights and Maritime Spaces in the Caribbean Sea. The dispute primarily concerned the Court's jurisdiction based on the American Treaty on Pacific Settlement (Pact of Bogotá) Article XXXI and a coastal state's rights over its maritime zones under customary international law.","PeriodicalId":212220,"journal":{"name":"International Legal Materials","volume":"46 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116898701","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
On July 13, 2021, the United Nations Human Rights Council (HRC) adopted a resolution designed to facilitate the enjoyment of the human rights and other basic freedoms of Africans and people of African descent in every region of the world, specifically against excessive use of force by law enforcement officers. The Resolution deplored all forms of racial discrimination against Africans and people of African descent, condemned “the continuing racially discriminatory and violent practices” perpetrated against this group by many law enforcement officials, and urged states “to seize every opportunity” to implement an “anti-racism agenda” that prioritizes “racial equality and justice” for the group, including better use of independent national human rights institutions and preferential programs, among other far-reaching, substantive techniques. Although not yet constituted, the Resolution established an independent committee, comprising individuals with law enforcement and human rights expertise, charged with the responsibility for “advanc[ing] racial justice and equality [with]in the context of law enforcement in all parts of the world” through various means that include visits to countries where violations are taking place.
{"title":"Resolution 42/21 (U.N.H.R. Council)","authors":"P. Aka","doi":"10.1017/ilm.2022.64","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ilm.2022.64","url":null,"abstract":"On July 13, 2021, the United Nations Human Rights Council (HRC) adopted a resolution designed to facilitate the enjoyment of the human rights and other basic freedoms of Africans and people of African descent in every region of the world, specifically against excessive use of force by law enforcement officers. The Resolution deplored all forms of racial discrimination against Africans and people of African descent, condemned “the continuing racially discriminatory and violent practices” perpetrated against this group by many law enforcement officials, and urged states “to seize every opportunity” to implement an “anti-racism agenda” that prioritizes “racial equality and justice” for the group, including better use of independent national human rights institutions and preferential programs, among other far-reaching, substantive techniques. Although not yet constituted, the Resolution established an independent committee, comprising individuals with law enforcement and human rights expertise, charged with the responsibility for “advanc[ing] racial justice and equality [with]in the context of law enforcement in all parts of the world” through various means that include visits to countries where violations are taking place.","PeriodicalId":212220,"journal":{"name":"International Legal Materials","volume":"62 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130777251","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：