Past cases are the European Court of Justice's most prominent tool in making and justifying the rulings and decisions which affect the everyday lives of more than half a billion people. Marc Jacob's detailed analysis of the use of precedents and case-based reasoning in the Court uses methods such as doctrinal scholarship, empirical research, institutional analysis, comparative law and legal theory in order to unravel and critique the how and why of the Court's precedent technique. In doing so, he moves the wider debate beyond received 'common law' versus 'civil law' figments and 'Eurosceptic' versus 'Euromantic' battle lines, and also provides a useful blueprint for assessing and comparing the case law practices of other dispute resolution bodies.

The European Union's (EU) powerful legal framework drives the process of European integration. The Court of Justice (ECJ) has established a uniquely effective supranational legal order, beyond the original wording of the Treaty of Rome and transforming our traditional understanding of international law. This work investigates how these fundamental transformations in the European legal system were received in one of the most important member states, Germany. On the one hand, Germany has been highly supportive of political and economic integration; yet on the other, a fundamental pillar of the post-war German identity was the integrity of its constitutional order. How did a state whose constitution was so essential to its self-understanding subscribe to the constitutional practice of EU law? How did a country who could not say 'no' to Europe become the member state most reluctant to accept the new power of the ECJ?

The Special Court for Sierra Leone (SCSL) is the third modern international criminal tribunal supported by the United Nations and the first to be situated where the crimes were committed. This timely, important, and comprehensive book is the first to critically assess the impact and legacy of the SCSL for Africa and international criminal law. The collection, containing 37 original chapters from leading scholars and respected practitioners with inside knowledge of the tribunal, analyzes cutting-edge and controversial issues with significant implications for international criminal law and transitional justice. These include joint criminal enterprise; the novel crime against humanity of forced marriage; the war crime prohibiting enlisting and using child soldiers in the first court to prosecute that offense; the prosecution of the war crime of attacks against United Nations peacekeepers in the first tribunal where this offense was prosecuted; the tension between truth commissions and criminal trials in the first country to simultaneously have the two; and the questions of whether it is permissible under international law for states to unilaterally confer blanket amnesties to local perpetrators of universally condemned international crimes, whether the immunities enjoyed by an incumbent head of a third state bars his prosecution before an ad hoc treaty-based international criminal court, and whether such courts may be funded by donations from states without compromising judicial independence.

The vast majority of all international judicial decisions have been issued since 1990. This increasing activity of international courts over the past two decades is one of the most significant developments within the international law. It has repercussions on all levels of governance and has challenged received understandings of the nature and legitimacy of international courts. It was previously held that international courts are simply instruments of dispute settlement, whose activities are justified by the consent of the states that created them, and in whose name they decide. However, this understanding ignores other important judicial functions, underrates problems of legitimacy, and prevents a full assessment of how international adjudication functions, and the impact that it has demonstrably had. This book proposes a public law theory of international adjudication, which argues that international courts are multifunctional actors who exercise public authority and therefore require democratic legitimacy. It establishes this theory on the basis of three main building blocks: multifunctionality, the notion of an international public authority, and democracy. The book aims to answer the core question of the legitimacy of international adjudication: in whose name do international courts decide? It lays out the specific problem of the legitimacy of international adjudication, and reconstructs the common critiques of international courts. It develops a concept of democracy for international courts that makes it possible to constructively show how their legitimacy is derived. It argues that ultimately international courts make their decisions, even if they do not know it, in the name of the peoples and the citizens of the international community.

Of the many expectations attending the creation of the first permanent International Criminal Court, the greatest has been that the principle of complementarity would catalyse national investigations and prosecutions of conflict-related crimes and lead to the reform of domestic justice systems. Sarah Nouwen explores whether complementarity has had such an effect in two states subject to ICC intervention: Uganda and Sudan. Drawing on extensive empirical research and combining law, legal anthropology and political economy, she unveils several effects and outlines the catalysts for them. However, she also reveals that one widely anticipated effect - an increase in domestic proceedings for conflict-related crimes - has barely occurred. This finding leads to the unravelling of paradoxes that go right to the heart of the functioning of an idealistic Court in a world of real constraints.

Few institutions in the world are credited with initiating and confounding political change on the scale of the United States Supreme Court. The Court is uniquely positioned to enhance or inhibit political reform, enshrine or dismantle social inequalities, and expand or suppress individual rights. Yet despite claims of victory from judicial activists and complaints of undemocratic lawmaking from the Court's critics, numerous studies of the Court assert that it wields little real power. This book examines the nature of Supreme Court power by identifying conditions under which the Court is successful at altering the behavior of state and private actors. Employing a series of longitudinal studies that use quantitative measures of behavior outcomes across a wide range of issue areas, it develops and supports a new theory of Supreme Court power.

The European system of human rights protection faces institutional and political pressures which threaten its very survival. These institional pressures stem from the backlog of applications before the European Court of Human Rights, the large number of its judgments that remain unimplemented, and the political pressures that arise from sustained attacks on the Court's legitimacy and authority, notably from politicians and jurists in the United Kingdom. This book addresses the theme which lies at the heart of these pressures: the role of national parliaments in the implementation of judgments of the Court. It combines theoretical and empirical insights into the role of parliaments in securing domestic compliance with the Court's decisions, and provides detailed investigation of five European states with differing records of human rights compliance and parliamentary mobilisation: Ukraine, Romania, the United Kingdom, Germany, and the Netherlands. How far are parliaments engaged in implementation, and how far should they be? Do parliaments advance or hinder human rights compliance? Is it ever justifiable for parliaments to defy judgments of the Court? And how significant is the role played by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe? Drawing on the fields of international law, international relations, political science, and political philosophy, the book argues that adverse human rights judgments not only confer obligations on parliamentarians but also create opportunities for them to develop influential interpretations of human rights and enhance their own democratic legitimacy. It makes an authoritative contribution to debate about the future of the European and other supranational human rights mechanisms and the broader relationship between democracy, human rights, and legitimate authority.

The International Criminal Court (ICC) is the first permanent international criminal tribunal, which has jurisdiction over the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole: genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and crime of aggression. This book critically analyses the law and practice of the ICC and its contribution to the development of international criminal law and policy. The book focuses on the key procedural and substantive challenges faced by the ICC since its establishment. The critical analysis of the normative framework aims to elaborate ways in which the Court may resolve difficulties, which prevent it from reaching its declared objectives in particularly complex situations. Contributors to the book include leading experts in international criminal justice, and cover a range of topics including, inter alia, terrorism, modes of liability, ne bis in idem, victims reparations, the evidentiary threshold for the confirmation of charges, and sentencing. The book also considers the relationship between the ICC and States, and explores the impact that the new regime of international criminal justice has had on countries where the most serious crimes have been committed. In drawing together these discussions, the book provides a significant contribution in assessing how the ICC's practice could be refined or improved in future cases. The book will be of great use and interest to international criminal law and public international law.

In a thoroughly revised second edition that incorporates the major changes made in the procedures and practice of the Inter-American Court since the original publication of this book, Jo M. Pasqualucci provides a comprehensive critique that is at once scholarly yet practical. She analyzes all aspects of the Court's advisory jurisdiction, contentious jurisdiction, and provisional measures orders through 2011. She also compares the practice and procedure of the Inter-American Court with that of the European Court of Human Rights, the Permanent Court of Justice, and the United Nations Human Rights Committee. She evaluates changes in the Rules of Procedure of the Inter-American Court that entered into force on January 1, 2010, and which substantially change the role of the Inter-American Commission in contentious cases before the Court. She also evaluates the challenges and means of State compliance with the Court's innovative reparations orders. Featuring revisions to every chapter to address the numerous new judgments, provisional measures, and orders adopted by the Court, this book will provide an important and updated resource for scholars, practitioners, and students of international human rights law.

The Court of Justice of the European Union has exclusive jurisdiction over European Union law and holds a broad interpretation of these powers. This, however, may come into conflict with the jurisdiction of other international courts and tribunals, especially in the context of so-called mixed agreements. While the CJEU considers these 'integral parts' of EU law, other international courts will also have jurisdiction in such cases. This book explores the conundrum of shared jurisdiction, analysing the international legal framework for the resolution of such conflicts, and provides a critical and comprehensive analysis of the CJEU's far-reaching jurisdiction, suggesting solutions to this dilemma. The book also addresses the special relationship between the CJEU and the European Court of Human Rights. The unique interaction between these two bodies raises fundamental substantive concerns about overlaps of jurisdiction and interpretation in the courts. Conflicts of interpretation manage largely to be avoided by frequent cross-referencing, which also allows for much cross-fertilization in the development of European human rights law. The link between these two courts is the subject of the final section of the book.

Counterclaims, the right of a State sued by another State to bring its own counter-suit in the course of the same trial, may offer an opportunity to mitigate the effects of the original suit and help to resolve disputes between States that have more than one aspect. In recent years, counterclaims have been frequently presented at the International Court of Justice (ICJ). This book examines the counterclaims presented at the ICJ and at its predecessor, the Permanent Court of International Justice (PCIJ), during its 65 years of existence. It is the first study that focuses exclusively on the subject of counterclaims. It analyses the evolution of the germane provisions in the PCIJ and ICJ Rules of Procedure and the practice of the Court, especially in light of the relevant case-law of the ICJ. A useful source for academics and practitioners in International law.

Alongside existing regimes for victim redress at the national and international levels, in the coming years international criminal law and, in particular, the International Criminal Court, will potentially provide a significant legal framework through which the harm caused by egregious conduct can be addressed. Drawing on a wealth of comparative experience, Conor McCarthy's study of the Rome Statute's regime of victim redress provides a comprehensive exploration of this framework, examining both its reparations regime and its scheme for the provision of victim support through the ICC Trust Fund. The study explores, in particular, whether the creation of a regime of victim redress has a role to play as part of a system for the administration of international criminal justice and, more generally, whether it has such a role alongside other regimes, at the national and international levels, by which the harm suffered by victims of egregious conduct may be redressed.

Investment protection treaties generally provide for the obligation to treat investments fairly and equitably, even if the wording of the rule and its relationship with the customary international standard may differ. The open-textured nature of the rule, the ambiguous relationship between the vague treaty and equally vague customary rules, and States' interpretations of the content and relationship of both rules (not to mention the frequency of successful invocation by investors) make this issue one of the most controversial aspect of investment protection law. This monograph engages in a comprehensive analysis of the relationship between the international minimum standard and fair and equitable treatment. It provides an original argument about the historical development of the international standard, a normative rationale for reading it into the treaty rules of fair and equitable treatment, and a coherent methodology for establishing the content of this standard. The first part of this book untangles the history of both the international minimum standard and fair and equitable treatment. The second part addresses the normative framework within which the contemporary debate takes place. After an exhaustive review of all relevant sources, it is argued that the most persuasive reading of fair and equitable treatment is that it always makes a reference to customary law. The third part of the book builds on the historical analysis and the normative framework, explaining the content of the contemporary standard by careful comparative human rights analysis.

Most literature on international arbitration is practice-oriented, technical, and promotional. It is by arbitrators and largely for arbitrators and their clients. Outside analyses by non-participants are still very rare. This book boldly steps away from this tradition of scholarship to reflect analytically on international arbitration as a form of global governance. It thus contributes to a rapidly growing literature that describes the profound economic, legal, and political transformation in which key governance functions are increasingly exercised by a new constellation that include actors other than national public authorities. The book brings together leading scholars from law and the social sciences to assess and critically reflect on the significance and implications of international arbitration as a new locus of global private authority. The views predictably diverge. Some see the evolution of these private courts positively as a significant element of an emerging transnational private legal system that gradually evolves according to the needs of market actors without much state interference. Others fear that private courts allow transnational actors to circumvent state regulation and create an illegitimate judicial system that is driven by powerful transnational companies at the expense of collective public interests. Still others accept that these contrasting views serve as useful starting points of an analysis but are too simplistic to adequately understand the complex governance structures that international arbitration courts have been developing over the last two decades. In sum, this book offers a wide-ranging and up-to-date analytical overview of arguments in a vigorous nascent interdisciplinary debate about arbitration courts and their exercise of private governance power in the transnational realm. This debate is generating fascinating new insights into such central topics as legitimacy, constitutional order and justice beyond classical nation state institutions.

As international criminal courts and tribunals have proliferated and international criminal law is increasingly seen as a key tool for bringing the world's worst perpetrators to account, the controversies surrounding the international trials of war criminals have grown. War crimes tribunals have to deal with accusations of victors' justice, bad prosecutorial policy and case management, and of jeopardizing fragile peace in post-conflict situations. In this exceptional book, one of the leading writers in the field of international criminal law explores these controversial issues in a manner that is accessible both to lawyers and to general readers. Professor William Schabas begins by considering the discipline of international criminal law, outlining the differing approaches to the description of international crimes and examining the frequent claims relating to the retroactive application of these crimes. The book then discusses the relationship between genocide and crimes against humanity, studying the fascination with what Schabas calls the 'genocide mystique'. International criminal tribunals have often been stigmatized as an exercise in victors' justice. This book traces how this critique developed and the difficulty it poses to the identification of situations for prosecution by the International Criminal Court. The claim that amnesty for international crimes is prohibited by international law is challenged, with a more nuanced approach to the relationship between justice and peace being proposed. Throughout the book there is a strong historical perspective, with constant reference to the early experiments in international justice at Nuremberg and Tokyo. The work also analyses the growing pains of the International Criminal Court as it enters its second decade.

The International Court of Justice at The Hague is the principal judicial organ of the UN, and the successor of the Permanent Court of International Justice (1923-1946), which was the first real permanent court of justice at the international level. This 2005 book analyses the groundbreaking contribution of the Permanent Court to international law, both in terms of judicial technique and the development of legal principle. The book draws on archival material left by judges and other persons involved in the work of the Permanent Court, giving fascinating insights into many of its most important decisions and the individuals who made them (Huber, Anzilotti, Moore, Hammerskjoeld and others). At the same time it examines international legal argument in the Permanent Court, basing its approach on a developed model of international legal argument that stresses the intimate relationships between international and national lawyers and between international and national law.

The idea of due process of law is recognised as the cornerstone of domestic legal systems, and in this book Larry May makes a powerful case for its extension to international law. Focussing on the procedural rights deriving from Magna Carta, such as the rights of habeas corpus (not to be arbitrarily incarcerated) and nonrefoulement (not to be sent to a state where harm is likely), he examines the legal rights of detainees, whether at Guantanamo or in refugee camps. He offers a conceptual and normative account of due process within a general system of global justice, and argues that due process should be recognised as jus cogens, as universally binding in international law. His vivid and compelling study will be of interest to a wide range of readers in political philosophy, political theory, and the theory and practice of international law.

Interest in social science and empirical analyses of law, courts and specifically the politics of judges has never been higher or more salient. Consequently, there is a strong need for theoretical work on the research that focuses on courts, judges and the judicial process. The Routledge Handbook of Judicial Behavior provides the most up to date examination of scholarship across the entire spectrum of judicial politics and behavior, written by a combination of currently prominent scholars and the emergent next generation of researchers. Unlike almost all other volumes, this Handbook examines judicial behavior from both an American and Comparative perspective. Part 1 provides a broad overview of the dominant Theoretical and Methodological perspectives used to examine and understand judicial behavior, Part 2 offers an in-depth analysis of the various current scholarly areas examining the U.S. Supreme Court, Part 3 moves from the Supreme Court to examining other U.S. federal and state courts, and Part 4 presents a comprehensive overview of Comparative Judicial Politics and Transnational Courts. Each author in this volume provides perspectives on the most current methodological and substantive approaches in their respective areas, along with suggestions for future research. The chapters contained within will generate additional scholarly and public interest by focusing on topics most salient to the academic, legal and policy communities.

This book examines the birth of the European individual as a juridical problem, focusing on legal case dossiers from the European Court of Justice as an electrifying laboratory for the study of law and society. Foucault's story of the modern subject constitutes the book's main theoretical inspiration, as it considers the encounter between legal and other practices within a more general field of juridical power: a network of active relations, between different social spheres. Through the analysis of delinquent individuals - each expelled from one of the Member States - the raw material for constructing the idea of the European individual is uncovered. The European individual, it is argued, emerged out of the intersection of regimes of law, security and economy, and its practices of knowledge-power. Birth of the European Individual: Law, Security, Economy will be of interest to those studying the individual in law, as well as anyone considering the relationships between power and the individual.

This is an open access title available under the terms of a CC BY-NC-ND 3.0 International licence. It is free to read at Oxford Scholarship Online and offered as a free PDF download from OUP and selected open access locations. Several instances of war crimes trials are familiar to all scholars, but in order to advance understanding of the development of international criminal law, it is important to provide a full range of evidence from less-familiar trials. This book therefore provides an essential resource for a more comprehensive overview, uncovering and exploring some of the lesser-known war crimes trials that have taken place in a variety of contexts: international and domestic, northern and southern, historic and contemporary. It analyses these trials with a view to recognising institutional innovations, clarifying doctrinal debates, and identifying their general relevance to contemporary international criminal law. At the same time, the book recognises international criminal law's history of suppression or sublimation: What stories has the discipline refused to tell? What stories have been displaced by the ones it has told? Has international criminal law's framing or telling of these stories excluded other possibilities? And - perhaps most important of all - how can recovering the lost stories and imagining new narrative forms reconfigure the discipline? Many of the trials examined in this book have hardly ever before been discussed; others have been examined only in the most cursory manner. Indeed, until now, no volume has been dedicated to telling the story of these trials, that have yet to find a place in the international criminal law canon. Providing a detailed analysis of these trials, which took place in Europe, Africa, South America, and Australasia, in both historical and contemporary contexts, this book is essential reading for anyone concerned with the development of international criminal law.

The Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements was concluded on June 30, 2005, and promises to become an important instrument in judicial relations throughout the world, making choice of forum clauses both more likely to be honored and more likely to lead to judgments that will be recognized and enforced around the globe. The convention, and the proposed treatise, will serve as an indispensable source for both transactions lawyers drafting the transnational commercial contracts of the future and for litigators involved in the resolution of disputes between parties to important transnational commercial transactions.

To mark the fiftieth anniversary of the International Court of Justice, a distinguished group of international judges, practitioners and academics has undertaken a major review of its work. The chapters discuss the main areas of substantive law with which the Court has been concerned, and the more significant aspects of its practice and procedure in dealing with cases before it. It discusses the role of the Court in the international legal order, and its relationship with the UN's political organs. The thirty-three chapters are presented under five headings: the Court; the sources and evidences of international law; substance of international law; procedural aspects of the Court's work; the Court and the UN. It has been prepared in honour of Sir Robert Jennings, judge and sometime President of the Court.

Decisions of the International Court of Justice are almost as replete with references to precedent as are decisions of a common law court. Even though previous decisions are not binding, the Court relies upon them as authoritative expressions of its views on decided points of law. In his book, the distinguished international lawyer Judge Shahabuddeen examines various aspects of this phenomenon. He shows the extent to which the Court is guided by its previous decisions, and discusses the way in which parties to cases are themselves guided by decisions of the Court in framing and presenting their cases. He also traces the possibilities for future development of the system. Judge Shahabuddeen's analysis of the Court is a major contribution to this important subject.

When Slobodan Milosevic died in the United Nations Detention Unit in The Hague over four years after his trial had begun, many feared - and some hoped - that international criminal justice was experiencing some sort of death itself. Yet the Milosevic case, the first trial of a former head of state by a truly international criminal tribunal and one of the most complex and lengthy war crimes trials in history, stands for much in the development and the future of international criminal justice, both politically and legally. This book, written by the senior legal advisor working for the Trial Chamber, analyses the trial to determine what lessons can be learnt that will improve the fair and expeditious conduct of complex international criminal proceedings brought against former heads of state and senior political and military officials, and develops reforms for the future achievement of best practice in international criminal law.

The ALI (American Law Institute) and UNIDROIT (the International Institute for the Unification of Private Law) are preeminent organizations working together toward the clarification and advancement of the procedural rules of law. Recognizing the need for a universal set of procedures that would transcend national jurisdictional rules and facilitate the resolution of disputes arising from transnational commercial transactions, Principles of Transnational Civil Procedure was launched to create a set of procedural rules and principles that would be adopted globally. This work strives to reduce uncertainty for parties that must litigate in unfamiliar surroundings and to promote fairness in judicial proceedings. As recognized standards of civil justice, Principles of Transnational Civil Procedure can be used in judicial proceedings as well as in arbitration. The result is a work that significantly contributes to the promotion of a universal rule of procedural law.
The American Law Institute was organized in 1923 following a study conducted by a group of prominent American judges, lawyers, and law professors. Their recommendation that a lawyers' organization be formed to improve the law and its administration led to the creation of The American Law Institute.
UNIDROIT was founded in 1926 as a specialized agency of the League of Nations. It exists as an independent intergovernmental organization on the basis of a multilateral agreement, the UNIDROIT Statute. Its purpose is to study needs and methods for modernizing, harmonizing, and coordinating private laws between states and groups of states and to prepare legislative texts for consideration by governments.