As diversity can affect the perceived legitimacy of a state’s dispute resolution system and the quality of judicial decisions, diversity levels in the national bench and bar have been an area of transnational concern. By contrast, little is known about diversity of adjudicators and counsel in international arbitration. With a lack of accurate, complete, and publicly available data about international arbitrators and practitioners, speculation about membership in the “invisible college” of international arbitration abounds. Although defining the international arbitration community is challenging, rather than leave the “invisible college” unexamined, this Article offers one systematic glimpse into the global elites of international arbitration.
This Article considers how secrecy and covert conduct shape the development of international law. Focusing on the area of the use of force, it examines how international law-making processes are affected when a state acts covertly—that is, when a state does not publicly acknowledge its conduct—and that covert conduct comes—partially or fully, accurately or inaccurately—to public light.
This Article conducts a comprehensive survey of the relevant current state practice and judicial precedent regarding occupied territories, aside from the well-examined case of Israel. State practice and decisions of important national courts support a fully permissive approach to economic dealings by third-party states or nationals in territories under prolonged occupation or illegal annexation. There is no obligation on third-party states to block such activity, or to insist on particular language on product labels, or to ensure that their foreign aid funds do not cross into occupied territory.
In this paper, we consider one particularly interesting feature of the Lieber Code, which is the fact that it was a drawn up by the U.S. Government to regulate the conduct of its armed forces in a civil war. In so doing, we explore the links between the Lieber Code and the contemporary regulation of non-international armed conflicts. In particular, we explore some similarities and contrasts between the views on the regulation of civil war that existed at the time of the drafting of the Lieber Code and the position that exists today.
The European Court of Justice’s final decision in Kadi II—Yassin Abdullah Kadi’s challenge in Europe to his designation as an international terrorist financier—has stimulated significant discussion on the relationship between European and international law. Less attention has been paid to the Kadi II’s correlate in U.S. courts, Kadi v. Geithner, decided in the D.C. Circuit. This Note considers the impact of Kadi’s legal challenges in the United States and Europe from the perspective of U.S. counterterrorism policy.
A norm prohibiting the complicity of one state in the internationally wrongful conduct of another state is a recognized part of customary international law, and the norm is also contained in many international treaties. This Note will explore the circumstances in which courts have upheld or declined jurisdiction over complicity claims, relying on recent international and domestic cases that arose in the context of the U.S. extraordinary rendition program.