19 März 2021

No More Need for Doublespeak

How will Southeast Asian governments react to the violent developments in Myanmar? ASEAN’s non-interference principle is often described as an effective shield against foreign meddling in domestic affairs. In the face of reputational damage and possible economic setbacks, though, ASEAN members had started to refer to human rights, democracy and the rule of law to justify occasional peer pressure – not out of normative conviction but due to strategic considerations. After years of democratic backsliding and declining global expectations, however, these semantic gymnastics are much less required today. Continue reading >>
0
14 April 2020

Abstract panic: On fake news, fear and freedom in Southeast Asia

In Southeast Asia, which is the world’s most dynamic laboratory of fake news legislation, the corona crisis has put previously created laws to practice and sparked additional legislative activity. The professed goal is to prevent public panic. Recent enforcement actions, however, demonstrate the complete irrelevance of any panic indicators. A falsehood’s panic potential is simply assumed. In short, an abstract panic threat is fought with very concrete measures: Arrests and criminal prosecutions. Cases from across Southeast Asia prove the trend, whereas two decisions in Singapore deserve particular attention. Continue reading >>
0
16 Mai 2017

A Principle of Direct Effect: The Eurasian Economic Union’s Court pushes for more Integration

In a reply to a Belarusian request, the Court of the Eurasian Economic Union decided in one of the most important cases of its history. It formulated the ‘direct effect’ principle in order to coordinate between EAEU law and the domestic legal orders of the EAEU Member States. Continue reading >>
0
27 Januar 2014

Quergelesen: Gibt es einen „Konstitutionalismus des globalen Südens“?

Die vornehmste Aufgabe einer Verfassung sei es, die Wunden der […] Continue reading >>
0
05 September 2013

Eine militärische Intervention in Syrien wäre nicht legal

Weder der US-amerikanische Präsident noch der Kongress der Vereinigten Staaten von Amerika sind zu einer „Strafaktion“ berechtigt. Die Charta der Vereinten Nationen lässt vom absoluten Gewaltverbot nur zwei Ausnahmen zu, die in Syrien beide nicht vorliegen. Gleichwohl trifft die internationale Gemeinschaft eine Schutzverantwortung gegenüber der Syrischen Bevölkerung. Eine völkerrechtliche Einordnung von Sven Simon. Continue reading >>
25 April 2013

Ethnische Konfliktlösung durch Verfassungsdesign: Donald Horowitz in der American Academy

Wenn der Bürgerkrieg vorbei ist, die Guerrillas ihre Waffen niedergelegt […] Continue reading >>
19 März 2013

Rechtsschutz gegen UN-Sanktionen: Rudert der EuGH zurück?

Vor viereinhalb Jahren hat der EuGH sein epochales Urteil Kadi […] Continue reading >>
15 März 2013

Rechtswissenschaft in Japan: Interessiert an uns, interessant für uns

Wer an einem Montagabend nach 18 Uhr in einem Geschäftshaus […] Continue reading >>
09 Februar 2013

„Not universal, but all over the place“: Zur Globalität der Geschichte des Völkerrechts

Eine Weltgeschichte des Völkerrechts: Da steckt gleich eine Handvoll höchst […] Continue reading >>
28 November 2012

Does China Enjoy Greater Legitimacy Than Any Western State?

I was listening to the radio a little while ago, […] Continue reading >>
24 Juni 2012

Strategic Decoration in the Persianate and Latinate Worlds c. 1500-1700

As the academic year draws slowly to a close, we […] Continue reading >>
13 März 2012

EuGH stoppt Sippenhaft durch Sanktionen

Der Sohn kann nicht unbedingt etwas dafür, wenn der Vater […] Continue reading >>
18 Februar 2012

Race, Caste and Law: Dalit and African American Responses to Legal Conservatism

As we continue to discuss the fundamental rights situation in […] Continue reading >>
0
30 Januar 2012

Case-Law adopted by China?

By RUIYI LI This post was originally posted on UK […] Continue reading >>
0
Go to Top