ASIL Women in International Law Mentoring Program: Call for Mentors and Mentees
The American Society of International Law’s Women in International Law Interest Group is excited to announce the launch of the second year of the Women in International Law Mentoring Program.
Last year’s launch was extremely successful with over 47 groups across the United States and 5 countries worldwide. We look forward to expanding the program even further this year.
The Women in International Law Mentoring Program (WMP) links experienced female international law professionals with female law students and new attorneys interested in professional development in the field of international law. Mentoring takes place in a group setting, with a maximum of four mentees for every mentor. Mentors and mentees meet in person every other month during the course of an academic year to discuss topics and engage in activities designed to help junior women enter and be successful in the beginning years of practicing international law. Upon finishing the requirements of the one-year program, all participants receive a certificate of completion.
We are currently accepting applications for mentees and mentors. We particularly encourage potential mentors to join the Program. If you are considering it, please do sign up. It is the mentors who make this program possible, and we do all that we can to make it fulfilling and hassle-free.
To sign up, please fill out the attached mentor or mentee application form and send to email@example.com.
The deadline for mentee applications is June 15, 2014 and for mentor applications is July 1, 2014.
Transnational Standards in the Domestic Legal Order: Papers sought for October Amsterdam Workshop
As noted previously, the Faculty of Law of the University of Amsterdam, where I am a researcher, is seeking paper proposals for a workshop on “Transnational Standards in the Domestic Legal Order: Authority and Legitimacy”, to be held on 24 October 2014 in Amsterdam. The workshop explores the evolving interactions between transnational standards and the domestic legal order from the perspectives of authority and legitimacy. Full details are here (pdf). The keynote speaker will be Professor Nico Krisch (right), Institut Barcelona d’Estudis Internacionals. The sponsoring organizations will cover the speakers’ travelling and accommodation expenses. Paper proposals (max. 500 words) and a CV should be sent to Ms. Angela Moisl at <firstname.lastname@example.org>. The deadline is 18 May 2014.
Radu, Chenou, & Weber: The Evolution of Global Internet Governance: Principles and Policies in the Making
Roxana Radu, Jean-Marie Chenou, & Rolf H. Weber have published The Evolution of Global Internet Governance: Principles and Policies in the Making (Springer 2014). Here’s the abstract:
The volume explores the consequences of recent events in global Internet policy and possible ways forward following the 2012 World Conference on International Telecommunications (WCIT-12). It offers expert views on transformations in governance, the future of multistakeholderism and the salience of cybersecurity. Based on the varied backgrounds of the contributors, the book provides an interdisciplinary perspective drawing on international relations, international law and communication studies. It addresses not only researchers interested in the evolution of new forms of transnational networked governance, but also practitioners who wish to get a scholarly reflection on current regulatory developments. It notably provides firsthand accounts on the role of the WCIT-12 in the future of Internet governance.
New Issue: Global Society
The latest issue of Global Society (Vol. 28, no. 3, 2014) is out. Contents include:
• Special Issue: Affective Economies, Neoliberalism, and Governmentality
o Anne-Marie D’Aoust, Ties that Bind? Engaging Emotions, Governmentality and Neoliberalism: Introduction to the Special Issue
o William Walters, Parrhēsia Today: Drone Strikes, Fearless Speech and the Contentious Politics of Security
o Luis Lobo-Guerrero, The Capitalisation of ‘Excess Life’ through Life Insurance
o Anne-Marie D’Aoust, Love as Project of (Im)Mobility: Love, Sovereignty and Governmentality in Marriage Migration Management Practices
o Wanda Vrasti & Jean Michel Montsion, No Good Deed Goes Unrewarded: The Values/Virtues of Transnational Volunteerism in Neoliberal Capital
o Nicholas J. Kiersey, “Retail Therapy in the Dragon’s Den”: Neoliberalism and Affective Labour in the Popular Culture of Ireland’s Financial Crisis
o Nadine Voelkner, Affective Economies in the Governance of Trafficking and Sex Work in Vietnam
Call for Papers: ASIL Dispute Resolution Interest Group Workshop
The Dispute Resolution Interest Group of the American Society of International Law has issued a call for papers for its inaugural works-in-progress workshop, to take place at the University of Colorado, August 15, 2014. Here’s the call:
The Dispute Resolution Interest Group (DRIG) of the American Society of International Law (ASIL) is co-sponsoring its first scholarly works-in-progress conference with the University of Colorado Law School on Friday, August 15, 2014. The event will take place at the law school, located in Boulder, CO. The workshop seeks to highlight currents works-in-progress by a diverse group of scholars writing about international dispute resolution in the areas of international courts and tribunals, international arbitration, international mediation, international negotiation, peacekeeping, peace building, and related topics. The workshop will be a daylong event with an informal conference dinner the evening before.
To have a work-in-progress considered for presentation, please send a short abstract to DRIG Co-Chairs Christina Hioureas (CHioureas@chadbourne.com) and Anna Spain (email@example.com) by Monday, June 16, 2014. Please also include a sentence about the stage the paper is expected to be in by August (e.g., reasonably complete draft, incomplete draft, etc.). Paper presenters will be asked to circulate their drafts to workshop attendees no later than August 1, 2014.
Those interested in serving as a commentator for a paper should also send an email to the DRIG co-chairs by June 16. Commentators will be asked to prepare five to eight minutes of comments on one of the papers.
Hillebrecht: Domestic Politics and International Human Rights Tribunals: The Problem of Compliance
Courtney Hillebrecht (Univ. of Nebraska – Political Science) has published Domestic Politics and International Human Rights Tribunals: The Problem of Compliance (Cambridge Univ. Press 2014). Here’s the abstract:
International politics has become increasingly legalized over the past fifty years, restructuring the way states interact with each other, international institutions, and their own constituents. The international legalization of human rights now makes it possible for individuals to take human rights claims against their governments at international courts such as the European and Inter-American Courts of Human Rights. This book brings together theories from international law, human rights and international relations to explain the increasingly important phenomenon of states’ compliance with human rights tribunals’ rulings. It argues that this is an inherently domestic affair. It posits three overarching questions: why do states comply with human rights tribunals’ rulings? How does the compliance process unfold and what are the domestic political considerations around compliance? What effect does compliance have on the protection of human rights? The book answers these through a combination of quantitative analyses and in-depth case studies from Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Italy, Portugal, Russia and the United Kingdom.
deGuzman: The International Criminal Court’s Gravity Jurisprudence at Ten
Margaret M. deGuzman (Temple Univ. – Law) has posted The International Criminal Court’s Gravity Jurisprudence at Ten (Global Studies Law Review, Vol. 12, No. 475, 2013). Here’s the abstract:
This Essay, prepared for a symposium on “The International Criminal Court at Ten,” analyzes the ICC’s early jurisprudence on the gravity threshold for admissibility in Article 17 of the Rome Statute. It argues that the threshold, while useful in garnering support for ratification of the Rome Statute, now seems destined to play a minor role in determining the ICC’s reach. While there are multiple possible explanations for this development, an important doctrinal cause identified in the jurisprudence is that the gravity threshold for admissibility is in tension with the Rome Statute’s provisions regarding jurisdiction. At least with regard to the admissibility of cases (as opposed to “situations”), the judges have concluded that interpreting the gravity threshold to exclude certain types of defendants or crimes from the Court’s reach would amount to an impermissible revision of the Court’s jurisdiction. To avoid this outcome, the judges have developed a flexible multi-factor approach to the gravity threshold that enables them to justify admitting virtually any case within the Court’s jurisdiction. The Essay concludes by arguing that, in light of the tension between admissibility and jurisdiction, the judges are right to relegate the gravity threshold to a minor role in determining the cases the Court adjudicates. To the extent the judges seek to limit the ICC’s reach, they should do so by interpreting the Court’s jurisdictional provisions directly rather than through the back door of admissibility.
ECHR Guide for Lawyers
The Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europe (CCBE) has published a special guide entitled ‘The European Court of Human Rights – Questions and Answers for Lawyers’ online. The small booklet can be seen as a very practical, albeit also quite basic (it includes only “key information”, as the editors state) introduction to the aspects of the Strasbourg system relevant to practicing lawyers. Questions answered range from “How should ECHR case law be invoked in the national proceedings?” to “Can applicants obtain legal aid in respect of proceedings before the Court?” Many answers include links to further relevant information. This is the abstract of the guide:
“This guide is directed at lawyers intending to bring a case before the ECHR. The guide, which is a list of questions and answers, contains information and practical advice for proceedings before national courts prior to application to the ECHR, before the Court itself, and during the enforcement of the Court’s judgments.
A number of questions are covered in the handbook, including: at what stage of proceedings before national courts should human rights violations be pleaded under the European Convention of Human Rights; how to submit an application to the Court; the technical aspects of proceedings; and the role of a lawyer once a judgment has been rendered. Also included are reference to tools and resources available for parties and their lawyers.”