Pub Date : 2020-12-07DOI: 10.1163/15723747-17020002
Jan Klabbers
Regional organizations are an important part of everyday international life. Newspapers in the fall of 2019 would comment on—to name a few organizations—the Southern Common Market (MERCOSUR for its Spanish initials) and the possible trade deal with the EU; the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank created in 2015 as an alternative to the Asian Development Bank; the Amazon Cooperation Treaty Organization and its dispute with U.S. online retail company Amazon over the new internet space “amazon”; and the European Union and the intricate Brexit crisis, which has been attracting global attention since 2016. Still, regional organizations appear to have a modest role in the narrative of international law and international organization(s), and as such they are infrequently the object of legal study. The modest role of regionalism is at least partly explained by the counterforce of two discourses on which international law has traditionally relied in response to unilateralist tendencies, the discourses of universality (or the normative variant “universalism”) and of function (or the normative variant “functionalism”). These also have been undercurrents for much of the thinking about international organizations as international actors. Function is commonly taken as the key defining principle and basis for authority of international organizations, and contrasted with territorial sovereignty of states. International organizations are set up with functionally limited competences within an (in principle) unlimited territory, rather than with unlimited competences with a (in principle) limited territorial scope. For this functional foundation, organizations for a long time were pictured as inherently neutral and less susceptible to the snares of individual state interest and sovereign conflict. The discourse of universality revolves around a universal foundation or scope of the law. Indeed, the appeal of international organizations often seems linked to a picture of universal membership—which in a sense offers, within the boundaries of a particular issue area, a form of political organization alternative to the state. This image is epitomized by the United Nations with its semi“monopoly” on the use of force (even if exercised through authorization) granted by the Charter system. The universality and functionality discourses with respect to international organizations have come together in the idea of an institutional-normative sphere next to classic interstate law. Thus, in the 1970s the notion of an “international superstructure” emerged, referring to the layer of institutional arrangements “over and above” states.1 Clearly, regional organizations defy both the vision of a universally applicable normative framework and the vision of a deterritorialized world in which authority is divided by issue area or “function.” Regional organizations elude the territory-function dichotomy that some scholars have developed as a basis for explanatory models.2 And in the eve
{"title":"Interactions between Regional and Universal Organizations: A Legal Perspective","authors":"Jan Klabbers","doi":"10.1163/15723747-17020002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15723747-17020002","url":null,"abstract":"Regional organizations are an important part of everyday international life. Newspapers in the fall of 2019 would comment on—to name a few organizations—the Southern Common Market (MERCOSUR for its Spanish initials) and the possible trade deal with the EU; the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank created in 2015 as an alternative to the Asian Development Bank; the Amazon Cooperation Treaty Organization and its dispute with U.S. online retail company Amazon over the new internet space “amazon”; and the European Union and the intricate Brexit crisis, which has been attracting global attention since 2016. Still, regional organizations appear to have a modest role in the narrative of international law and international organization(s), and as such they are infrequently the object of legal study. The modest role of regionalism is at least partly explained by the counterforce of two discourses on which international law has traditionally relied in response to unilateralist tendencies, the discourses of universality (or the normative variant “universalism”) and of function (or the normative variant “functionalism”). These also have been undercurrents for much of the thinking about international organizations as international actors. Function is commonly taken as the key defining principle and basis for authority of international organizations, and contrasted with territorial sovereignty of states. International organizations are set up with functionally limited competences within an (in principle) unlimited territory, rather than with unlimited competences with a (in principle) limited territorial scope. For this functional foundation, organizations for a long time were pictured as inherently neutral and less susceptible to the snares of individual state interest and sovereign conflict. The discourse of universality revolves around a universal foundation or scope of the law. Indeed, the appeal of international organizations often seems linked to a picture of universal membership—which in a sense offers, within the boundaries of a particular issue area, a form of political organization alternative to the state. This image is epitomized by the United Nations with its semi“monopoly” on the use of force (even if exercised through authorization) granted by the Charter system. The universality and functionality discourses with respect to international organizations have come together in the idea of an institutional-normative sphere next to classic interstate law. Thus, in the 1970s the notion of an “international superstructure” emerged, referring to the layer of institutional arrangements “over and above” states.1 Clearly, regional organizations defy both the vision of a universally applicable normative framework and the vision of a deterritorialized world in which authority is divided by issue area or “function.” Regional organizations elude the territory-function dichotomy that some scholars have developed as a basis for explanatory models.2 And in the eve","PeriodicalId":42966,"journal":{"name":"International Organizations Law Review","volume":"175 1","pages":"1-5"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2020-12-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138515718","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}
Pub Date : 2020-12-02DOI: 10.1163/15723747-2020023
Roojin Habibi, S. Hoffman, G. Burci, T. C. D. Campos, Danwood Chirwa, Margherita M. Cinà, Stéphanie Dagron, Mark Eccleston-Turner, L. Forman, L. Gostin, B. Meier, S. Negri, G. Ooms, S. Sekalala, Allyn L. Taylor, A. Yamin
The International Health Regulations (ihr), of which the World Health Organization is custodian, govern how countries collectively promote global health security, including prevention, detection, and response to global health emergencies such as the ongoing covid-19 pandemic. Countries are permitted to exercise their sovereignty in taking additional health measures to respond to such emergencies if these measures adhere to Article 43 of this legally binding instrument. Overbroad measures taken during recent public health emergencies of international concern, however, reveal that the provision remains inadequately understood. A shared understanding of the measures legally permitted by Article 43 is a necessary step in ensuring the fulfillment of obligations, and fostering global solidarity and resilience in the face of future pandemics. In this consensus statement, public international law scholars specializing in global health consider the legal meaning of Article 43 using the interpretive framework of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.
{"title":"The Stellenbosch Consensus on Legal National Responses to Public Health Risks","authors":"Roojin Habibi, S. Hoffman, G. Burci, T. C. D. Campos, Danwood Chirwa, Margherita M. Cinà, Stéphanie Dagron, Mark Eccleston-Turner, L. Forman, L. Gostin, B. Meier, S. Negri, G. Ooms, S. Sekalala, Allyn L. Taylor, A. Yamin","doi":"10.1163/15723747-2020023","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15723747-2020023","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000The International Health Regulations (ihr), of which the World Health Organization is custodian, govern how countries collectively promote global health security, including prevention, detection, and response to global health emergencies such as the ongoing covid-19 pandemic. Countries are permitted to exercise their sovereignty in taking additional health measures to respond to such emergencies if these measures adhere to Article 43 of this legally binding instrument. Overbroad measures taken during recent public health emergencies of international concern, however, reveal that the provision remains inadequately understood. A shared understanding of the measures legally permitted by Article 43 is a necessary step in ensuring the fulfillment of obligations, and fostering global solidarity and resilience in the face of future pandemics. In this consensus statement, public international law scholars specializing in global health consider the legal meaning of Article 43 using the interpretive framework of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.","PeriodicalId":42966,"journal":{"name":"International Organizations Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2020-12-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/15723747-2020023","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49203851","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}
Pub Date : 2020-12-02DOI: 10.1163/15723747-2020024
Margherita M. Cinà, S. Hoffman, G. Burci, T. C. D. Campos, Danwood Chirwa, Stéphanie Dagron, Mark Eccleston-Turner, L. Forman, L. Gostin, Roojin Habibi, B. Meier, S. Negri, G. Ooms, S. Sekalala, Allyn L. Taylor, A. Yamin
The International Health Regulations (ihr), of which the World Health Organization is custodian, govern how countries collectively promote global health security, including prevention, detection, and response to potential global health emergencies such as the ongoing covid-19 pandemic. While Article 44 of this binding legal instrument requires countries to collaborate and assist each other in meeting their respective obligations, recent events demonstrate that the precise nature and scope of these legal obligations are ill-understood. A shared understanding of the level and type of collaboration legally required by the ihr is a necessary step in ensuring these obligations can be acted upon and fully realized, and in fostering global solidarity and resilience in the face of future pandemics. In this consensus statement, public international law scholars specializing in global health consider the legal meaning of Article 44 using the interpretive framework of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.
{"title":"The Stellenbosch Consensus on the International Legal Obligation to Collaborate and Assist in Addressing Pandemics","authors":"Margherita M. Cinà, S. Hoffman, G. Burci, T. C. D. Campos, Danwood Chirwa, Stéphanie Dagron, Mark Eccleston-Turner, L. Forman, L. Gostin, Roojin Habibi, B. Meier, S. Negri, G. Ooms, S. Sekalala, Allyn L. Taylor, A. Yamin","doi":"10.1163/15723747-2020024","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15723747-2020024","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000The International Health Regulations (ihr), of which the World Health Organization is custodian, govern how countries collectively promote global health security, including prevention, detection, and response to potential global health emergencies such as the ongoing covid-19 pandemic. While Article 44 of this binding legal instrument requires countries to collaborate and assist each other in meeting their respective obligations, recent events demonstrate that the precise nature and scope of these legal obligations are ill-understood. A shared understanding of the level and type of collaboration legally required by the ihr is a necessary step in ensuring these obligations can be acted upon and fully realized, and in fostering global solidarity and resilience in the face of future pandemics. In this consensus statement, public international law scholars specializing in global health consider the legal meaning of Article 44 using the interpretive framework of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.","PeriodicalId":42966,"journal":{"name":"International Organizations Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2020-12-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46791790","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}
Pub Date : 2020-08-06DOI: 10.1017/9781108888653.003
Quentin-Baxter
The major assets of the Human Rights programme are substantial, and some of them are easily counted. The Universal Declaration championed by Cassin and chronicled by Sohn has enlarged the meaning of the human rights provisions of the United Nations Charter, and is within the frame of reference of almost every United Nations debate. Lauterpacht 2 laid the foundations for sound legal development by tracing the Charter provisions to their heritage in existing law. Other writers of the first rank have helped to change the perspectives of international law to conform with the Charter goals of universality and of ultimate concern for individual human rights. It is the measure of these changes that the Secretary-General of the International Commission of Jurists, writing in celebration of Human Rights Year, is able to affirm:
{"title":"The United Nations I","authors":"Quentin-Baxter","doi":"10.1017/9781108888653.003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108888653.003","url":null,"abstract":"The major assets of the Human Rights programme are substantial, and some of them are easily counted. The Universal Declaration championed by Cassin and chronicled by Sohn has enlarged the meaning of the human rights provisions of the United Nations Charter, and is within the frame of reference of almost every United Nations debate. Lauterpacht 2 laid the foundations for sound legal development by tracing the Charter provisions to their heritage in existing law. Other writers of the first rank have helped to change the perspectives of international law to conform with the Charter goals of universality and of ultimate concern for individual human rights. It is the measure of these changes that the Secretary-General of the International Commission of Jurists, writing in celebration of Human Rights Year, is able to affirm:","PeriodicalId":42966,"journal":{"name":"International Organizations Law Review","volume":"42 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2020-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79398256","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}
Pub Date : 2020-08-06DOI: 10.1017/9781108888653.010
W. M. Beaney
{"title":"The International Criminal Court","authors":"W. M. Beaney","doi":"10.1017/9781108888653.010","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108888653.010","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":42966,"journal":{"name":"International Organizations Law Review","volume":"5 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2020-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"72491934","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}
Pub Date : 2020-08-06DOI: 10.1017/9781108888653.008
{"title":"Refugees and International Migration: UNHCR, the IOM, and the 1951 Convention","authors":"","doi":"10.1017/9781108888653.008","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108888653.008","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":42966,"journal":{"name":"International Organizations Law Review","volume":"21 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2020-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78566060","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}
Pub Date : 2020-08-06DOI: 10.1017/9781108888653.002
{"title":"Theory, Methods, and International Organizations","authors":"","doi":"10.1017/9781108888653.002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108888653.002","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":42966,"journal":{"name":"International Organizations Law Review","volume":"8 12 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2020-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90378827","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}
Pub Date : 2020-08-06DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511779824.007
Ian Hurd
{"title":"The United Nations II","authors":"Ian Hurd","doi":"10.1017/CBO9780511779824.007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511779824.007","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":42966,"journal":{"name":"International Organizations Law Review","volume":"21 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2020-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90805627","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：