Let’s (Not) (Dis)Agree to Disagree!? – What Is a “Dispute” in International Adjudication?
noviembre 12, 2019
That’s the title of the talk that Dr. Andreas Kulick (Tübingen) will give at FIDE on 25 November 2019. This is, of course, a classic problem of international litigation. Francisco Garcimartín, Ignacio Díez-Picazo and I are proud to host this discussion at our seminar on arbitration and international litigation, that is already 12 years old and counting.
Here is the abstract of the talk:
«International courts and tribunals only enjoy jurisdiction to settle a dispute if what is submitted before them is precisely thus – a “dispute”. From Article 36(2) of the ICJ Statute over Articles 286 and 287 UNCLOS to the dispute settlement clauses in international investment agreements – both, with respect to investor-state and state-state arbitration – international adjudication usually requires demonstration that the parties are in fact engaged in a “dispute”. According to the World Court, a “dispute” is a “disagreement on a point of fact or law”. However, what if the parties disagree over whether there actually exists such disagreement? What if, say, in a state-state investment arbitration under a BIT, the opposing party refused to respond to the applicant’s submissions prior to the introduction of proceedings? Or, before the ICJ, the respondent argues that there is no “dispute” because it declined to react to the applicant’s contentions? In other words, can a disputing party avoid a dispute by playing dead? On the other hand, where to draw the line in order to prevent the applicant from seizing an international court or tribunal where there is in fact no real disagreement among the parties? The session will address these matters analysing recent ICJ jurisprudence and arbitrations between States, including in the framework of international investment agreements, and discussing the implications of various approaches to addressing the issues raised.»
If you are an academic or a doctoral student with an interest in this matter and wish to attend the seminar, please send me an email.
Lawfare, the Use of Law in Strategic Competition and Hybrid Warfare
noviembre 11, 2019
El próximo 27 de noviembre tendremos el gusto de recibir en el seminario de Derecho internacional al Sr. Andrés Muñoz Mosquera y otros funcionarios del Departamento Jurídico de la OTAN (SHAPE – Supreme Headquarters Allied Power Europe), para una presentación y discusión sobre Lawfare, the Use of Law in Strategic Competition and Hybrid Warfare.
La sesión será en inglés de 14:30 horas a 16:00 horas en la Facultad de Derecho de la UAM. Si tienen especial interés en el tema o están investigando sobre temas afines, escríbanme para asistir al seminario.
Seminario con el profesor Jorge Viñuales
abril 12, 2016
Seguimos aprovechando la visita del Profesor Jorge Viñuales (U. de Cambridge) a la Facultad de Derecho de la UAM. Hoy tuvimos un interesante seminario en el Máster de Gobernanza y Derechos Humanos sobre protección del medio ambiente y derechos humanos, con una animada discusión a partir de las excelentes preguntas de los alumnos del Máster. Mañana hablará sobre desafíos de la soberanía de los Estados en la Facultad de Filosofía y el jueves 14 de abril tendremos el último seminario de su estadía en Madrid en el Seminario de Profesores de la Facultad. El tema elegido para el seminario del jueves es «la interpretación auténtica en el derecho internacional moderno». Será a las 12 hs en el seminario VIII del Edificio de Derecho.
El próximo martes 26 de mayo de 12 a 13:30 horas, en el seminario 8 de la cuarta planta de la Facultad de Derecho de la UAM, tendremos la oportunidad de debatir con Lorella de la Cruz sobre la agenda comercial de la UE en Latinoamérica, con una especial atención a la negociación con países del Mercosur. Lorella estudió Derecho en la UAM y trabaja desde hace tiempo en la Dirección General de Comercio de la Comisión Europea, donde ahora se ocupa de las relaciones con los países latinoamericanos. Si les interesa el tema, como siempre, serán bienvenidos al seminario.
Seminario con Jessica Almqvist sobre los límites de la independencia judicial de la Corte Penal Internacional
abril 6, 2015
El próximo jueves 9 de abril, en la Facultad de Derecho de la UAM (cuarto piso, seminario 4), nuestra colega Jessica Almqvist discutirá con nosotros su artículo «Human Rights Appraisal of the Limits to Judicial Independence for International Criminal Justice», publicado en enero de 2015 en el Leiden Journal of International Law (DOI: 10.1017/S0922156514000557). Este es el abstract:
The UN Security Council’s involvement in the area of international criminal justice raises concerns about judicial independence. Of primary concern in this study is the degree to which this political organ has come to determine and restrict jurisdiction of international criminal tribunals, with the effect of excluding cases involving alleged grave crimes by actors whose presence in situations of which the Council is seized is supported by its permanent members. This control, it will be argued, undermines the basic conditions for a sound administration of justice, as it impedes these tribunals from selecting the cases that may come before them in accordance with respect for human rights and the rule of law. More specifically, restrictions imposed by political organs, leading to unjustified unequal treatment before the law and the courts of perpetrators and victims of grave crime in a given situation, are contrary to principles of equality and non-discrimination. A theory of international judicial independence should therefore extend to a consideration of the legality of such restrictions and acknowledge it as an essential requirement of independence.
Están tod@s invitados a participar, como de costumbre. Escriban a jessica.almqvist (@) uam.es si desean una copia completa del artículo o, si tienen suscripción, pueden descargarlo aquí.
Seminario DI-UAM sobre la Ley de tratados
diciembre 2, 2014
Para el último seminario de Derecho internacional del año 2014 en la UAM hemos programado una mesa redonda sobre la Ley 25/2014, de 27 de noviembre de 2014, de Tratados y otros Acuerdos Internacionales, en la que los catedráticos Antonio Remiro Brotóns, Javier Díez-Hochleitner y yo intercambiaremos primeras impresiones y análisis de esta nueva ley. Habrá espacio para la discusión con los participantes, que pueden mandar preguntas y comentarios adjuntos a este post o por twitter. El acto tendrá lugar el lunes 15 de diciembre de 2014, de 12:00 a 14:00 horas, en el Salón de Grados de la Facultad de Derecho de la UAM.
El próximo miércoles 11 de diciembre a las 17 horas nos visita en el seminario el Profesor Alexander Orakhelashvili. La cita es, como de costumbre, en la Facultad de Derecho de la UAM. ¡Todos son bienvenidos! El seminario será en inglés.
Professor Alexander Orakhelashvili will visit our seminar next Wednesday 11 December at 5pm. As usual, the seminar will take place at the Faculty of Law of the UAM. Everybody is welcome!
Responsibility and Immunities: Similarities and Differences between States and International Organisations
International litigation and codification efforts over the past decade show that the law of responsibility and of immunity gets increasingly intertwined, and parallel developments take place in the law applicable to States and to international organisations. The European Court’s judgment on Srebrenica Mothers was one of the recent illustrations of the intertwining nature of these developments. However, it should also be borne in mind that States and international organisations are structurally different entities and different legal persons. This issue cannot be without importance from whether and to what extent the principles applicable to their liability and immunity can be similar. In this spirit, this presentation will try to explore the similarities and differences in these areas, notably in terms of such notions as attribution in the law of responsibility, and functionality in the law of immunities.
For more information on Professor Orakhelashvili and his publications please visit http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/schools/law/staff/profile.aspx?ReferenceId=3817
El próximo lunes 10 de junio de 2013, a partir de las 10:30 horas, tendrá lugar un seminario organizado en el contexto del proyecto de investigación sobre la protección de los bienes jurídicos globales, en el que el Profesor Ernst-Ulrich Petersmann, Catedrático Emérito de Derecho Internacional y Europeo del Instituto Universitario de Florencia, Italia, presentará una ponencia sobre su trabajo “Constituting, Limiting, Regulating and Justifying Multilevel Governance of Interdependent Public Goods: From Constitutional Nationalism to Multilevel Constitutionalism and Cosmopolitan Constitutionalism?”
El profesor Markus Wagner, Universidad de Miami, abrirá la discusión con un comentario sobre la contribución del Profesor Petersmann.
El seminario será moderado por el Profesor Carlos Espósito, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid.
El programa empieza a las 10:30 horas y termina a las 13:00 horas, incluida una pausa café de 15 minutos. El lugar de celebración es el Seminario VIII de la cuarta planta del edificio de la Facultad de Derecho de la UAM y la lengua de trabajo será el inglés.
Rogamos confirmar la intención de asistir a nicolas.carrillo@uam.es antes del miércoles 5 de junio con el fin de prever la capacidad de la sala.
A continuación reproducimos el abstract del trabajo y aquí se puede descargar el texto completo del artículo y un resumen para el seminario.
Constituting, Limiting, Regulating and Justifying Multilevel Governance of Interdependent Public Goods: Methodological Problems of International Economic Law Research
by Ernst-Ulrich Petersmann
Abstract
This contribution discusses legal and methodological problems of multilevel governance of the international trading, development, environmental and legal systems from the perspective of “public goods theories” and related legal theories. The state-centred, power-oriented governance practices in worldwide organizations fail to protect effectively human rights, transnational rule of law and other international public goods for the benefit of citizens. Their criticism by civil society, democratic parliaments and courts of justice prompts increasing opposition to non-inclusive, intergovernmental rule-making, as in the case of the 2011 Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement rejected by the European Parliament. The “democracy deficits” and morally often unjustified power politics underlying “Westphalian intergovernmentalism” weaken the overall coherence of multilevel regulation of interdependent public goods that interact “horizontally” (e.g., the monetary, trading, development, environmental and related legal systems) as well as “vertically” (e.g., in case of “aggregate public goods” composed of local, national, regional and worldwide public goods). The “laboratory” of European multilevel governance offers lessons for reforming worldwide governance institutions dominated by executives. The integration of nation states into an interdependent, globalized world requires a multilevel integration law in order to protect transnational public goods more effectively. Legal and constitutional theories need to be integrated into public goods research and must promote stronger legal, judicial and democratic accountability of intergovernmental rule-making vis-à-vis citizens on the basis of “cosmopolitan constitutionalism” evaluating the legitimacy of national legal systems also in terms of their contribution to protecting cosmopolitan rights and transnational public goods.
Forthcoming Global Community Yearbook of International Law and Jurisprudence (GCYILJ) 2012 (2013).
El viernes 10 de mayo a las 12:00 horas tendremos el gusto de recibir al profesor Nico Krisch en el seminario de profesores de la Facultad de Derecho de la UAM. El profesor Krisch va a presentar (en inglés) su paper «From Consent to Consultation: The Shifting Architecture of International Law». Aquí pueden leer el paper y este es el abstract:
Because of its emphasis on state consent, classical international law is often seen as inadequate for solving problems of a global scale, especially when they involve global public goods. As these problems grow in importance, many commentators call for, and expect pressure towards, the inclusion of non-consensual elements in the international legal order. This article analyzes to what extent, and in what forms, we can empirically observe such a turn to non-consensualism. It develops expectations about the salience of different forms (collective, multilateral, unilateral; formal/informal; egalitarian/hierarchical) in responses to significant challenges of global public goods, and it uses three issue areas – antitrust, climate change regulation, and the control of terrorism financing – to investigate actual processes of change and their shape. It finds a certain, but limited, pressure on traditional international legal categories, such as multilateral treaty-making, the boundaries of institutional powers, and jurisdictional limits for unilateral action. More prominent is a turn to informal institutions and rules, often coupled with more exclusive, minilateral decision- making processes that allow for greater speed, flexibility and hierarchy in problem-solving. The limited role of consent in this order is compensated, in part, by the emergence of structures of representation and processes of consultation. In the resulting picture, international law retains much of its consensual character, but it is increasingly sidelined in favour of other sites of governance in which consent plays a much more limited role. These findings allow us to gain a better understanding of processes of change of international law and of its place in the broader normative order in global politics.
Si quieren mandar preguntas para el seminario, escríbanlas en los comentarios y, si cabe y nos da tiempo, las plantearemos en la discusión con el profesor Krisch.
El viernes, en realidad, la afición del derecho internacional tiene programa doble en la Faculta de Derecho de la UAM, porque a las 10:30 horas, en el marco de la Maestría en Gobernanza y Derechos Humanos, imparte una conferencia Luis López Guerra, magistrado del Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos, sobre “Derechos Humanos e identidad nacional en la jurisprudencia del TEDH”.
Foto: es una toma que hice de la famosa Plaza de España en Santo Domingo, con el Alcázar de Don Diego de Colón al fondo, el punto de partida de una de las principales arquitecturas del derecho internacional.
aquiescencia 