„Das IGH-Gutachten könnte die globale Klimagovernance grundlegend ändern.“
Fünf Fragen an Tejas Rao, Marie-Claire Cordonier Segger and Markus Gehring
Continue reading >>
„Es gibt nur eine moralisch, rechtlich und strategisch vertretbare Antwort: ein Waffenembargo“
Fünf Fragen an Janina Dill
Continue reading >>“There is only one morally, legally and strategically defensible choice: an arms embargo”
Five Questions to Janina Dill
Continue reading >>The Transformation of European Climate Change Litigation
In a transformative moment for European and global climate litigation, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) ruled today that the state has a positive duty to adopt, and effectively implement in practice, regulations and measures capable of mitigating the existing and potentially irreversible future effects of climate change. In Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz and Others v. Switzerland (“KlimaSeniorinnen”), the Court held that by failing to put in place a domestic regulatory framework for climate change mitigation, the Swiss government violated Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), the right to respect for private and family life. The judgment is a milestone for human rights protection.
Continue reading >>Ecuador’s Embassy Raid
The Mexican government broke diplomatic ties with Ecuador after the Mexican Embassy in Quito was raided on April 6, 2024, to detain Ecuador’s ex-vice-president Jorge Glas, convicted of bribery and organized crime. Both governments are facing significant stakes: Ecuador must ensure that a high-profile crime does not go unpunished, while Mexico is obligated to uphold international law and offer international protection for Jorge Glas.
Continue reading >>Voting To Annex?
On December 3, Venezuelans will vote in a referendum on the annexation of Esequibo to the territory of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela. This blog post argues that the referendum has implications for both domestic constitutional law and international law. Since the referendum cannot have any practical effect under international law, it also violates the voters’ constitutional right to participate freely in public affairs. By prioritizing solely the interests of Venezuela over the sovereignty of Guyana, the referendum might be contrary to the principles of peaceful dispute settlement and the prohibition of force, as stipulated in the United Nations Charter. It could also challenge the established legal doctrine of state consent and infringe upon the principle of prioritizing international obligations over national law.
Continue reading >>
Trapped in Gaza
Thousands of Palestinians are amassed at the Rafah border crossing into Egypt – the only land border point from Gaza that is not controlled by Israel. Periodically opened by Egypt to allow at least some aid convoys to enter Gaza, it has been firmly closed to Palestinians seeking to leave Gaza since October 10. Both international refugee and human rights law that bind Egypt make clear that its closure of the Rafah border crossing to all Palestinians – including to those at grave and imminent risk – is an illegal act of refoulement. In this case, it has proved to be an illegal act with truly deadly consequences and must be condemned as such.
Continue reading >>Slicing Away at Regulatory Statutes
In its June 2023 decision in Sackett v. EPA, the U.S. Supreme Court interpreted the Clean Water Act of 1972 to significantly cut back its water pollution protections and to hand an important victory to private property owners. Sackett is not simply important for its impact on environmental protection. Although it may be among the Court’s less visible recent rulings, it follows the Court’s trend of anti-administrativist rulings and may add importantly to the Court’s kit of anti-regulatory interpretive tools.
Continue reading >>
Constitutional Pluralism and Article 370
Recently, the Indian Supreme Court finished hearing oral arguments on a batch of petitions challenging the constitutional validity of The Constitution (Application to Jammu and Kashmir) Order, 2019 which extended all provisions of the Indian Constitution to Jammu and Kashmir. In the midst of the arguments, the Court pondered upon the nature of the relationship between the Constitution of India and the Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir. While the Court is unlikely to hand down an authoritative ruling on this relationship, the exchanges between the judges and lawyers offer us a valuable avenue to explore. By analysing the Jammu and Kashmir Constituent Assembly Debates, this piece examines the nature of the relationship envisaged by the two constitutions. I argue that the constitutional principle that undergirded the previously existing constitutional relationship between India and Jammu and Kashmir is heterarchy.
Continue reading >>
In Defense of Its Identity
The introduction of rule of law budgetary conditionality, as approved by the Court, is a first step in the right direction. But the Union must go further. Taking a page from fundamental rights and anti-discrimination law, we suggest the systematic, deliberate, and transparent incorporation of rule of law considerations into all Union policies and practices at all stages, from planning and legislation to execution and enforcement, with the aim of actively promoting, realizing, and sustaining the rule of law throughout the Union.
Continue reading >>