Write On! Call for Papers: U.S. Naval War College

December 12, 2016December 12, 2016 / Osazenoriuwa Ebose / Leave a comment

U.S. Naval War College (NWC) is issuing a ‘call for papers’ in preparation of its fifth annual Women, Peace and Security (WPS) Conference to be held, August 2017, at the college.

In an effort to gather theoretical and practical ideas from a wider audience not normally represented in a limited conference format, the conference series chair is soliciting papers from academics, researchers, military personnel, non-governmental organizations and individuals who have an interest or experience in issues pertaining to WPS.

“Conferences have limited room for participants,” said Mary Raum, NWC professor and chair of the WPS Conference series. “To have available, online and in the networked world, some quality thoughts on components of WPS from thinkers and practitioners who have a direct tie to the subjects being discussed is an invaluable resource.

“This call for papers will allow for a broader reach in exchanging ideas and enable us to network on a global scale – a first step for formalizing the sharing of ideas allied with conference precepts.”

Since the inception of the U.S. National Action Plan on WPS in 2011, NWC has been at the forefront of exploration into national and international issues involving WPS, working toward the goal of empowering women in conflict prevention and peace.

According to Raum, the conference continues to grow in perspective and scope to ensure the participation and inclusion of ideas from sister services and international partners across the globe.

“Any person tasked with protecting the national interest must be aware of the linkages between the security of women and the security of states,” said Raum. “They should also be aware of the broad-level interconnections of the role of WPS with military, economic and social freedoms around the globe.”

Continue reading →

Write On! PluriCourts conference ‘Adjudicating international trade and investment disputes’ (deadline March 1)

February 22, 2016 / Karen Hoffmann / Leave a comment

The PluriCourts Centre of Excellence at the University of Oslo is organizing a conference titled ‘Adjudicating international trade and investment disputes: between interaction and isolation.’ The conference will be hosted at the Faculty of Law of the University of Oslo 25-26 August 2016. Abstracts are due March 1, 2016.

The conference aims to focus on the relationship, interactions and comparisons between the international trade and investment regimes in the context of adjudication of disputes. The conference will welcome research across the disciplines of law, political science, and philosophy relating to three themes: the new mega-regionals, comparisons and practices, and cross-fertilization and learning. Historically, the global regulation of international trade and investment relations have been closely interrelated; but in the post-war period, international trade law and international investment law developed on largely divergent paths. While international trade regulation has culminated in a multilateral regime with a permanent dispute settlement mechanism, the international regulation of foreign direct investment is primarily governed by 3500 essentially bilateral treaty relationships calling for ad hoc investor – state arbitration potentially to be hosted by a variety of international institutions. Despite these seemingly distinct structures, there is a recent trend that some say signal a move towards regime convergence: most clearly seen in the rise of mega-regional free trade agreements (FTAs) with investment chapters.

This potential convergence may be deceiving, however. The investment chapters of FTAs remain separate from the rest of the agreements and provide for distinct rules and procedures on dispute settlement. Moreover, issues of overlap between trade chapters and investment chapters have not been resolved, which means that the same case could possibly be raised simultaneously in two separate disputes under the same FTA. Legal disputes based on investment chapters in FTAs to date (ie under the NAFTA and DR-CAFTA) appear to interpret the investment protection chapters as standalone agreements with little or no reference to other sections of the FTAs. Despite the limitations to integration that this new generation of trade and investment agreements may represent, there are other areas of interaction between the trade and investment regimes that could provide better evidence of a gradual move towards cohesion. This conference aims to look at the development of the new mega-regionals, but also the ways (or lack thereof) that the trade and investment regimes share practices and cross-fertilize.

For more information and submission procedures, see: Call for Papers – Trade Investment Conference [pdf]

Report on the ‘Pluralist Approaches to International Criminal Justice Conference’ Amsterdam, 7-8 January

January 11, 2016 / Joanna Nicholson / 1 Comment

Last week I was privileged to attend a conference arranged by the Center for International Criminal Justice at the University of Amsterdam entitled ‘Pluralist Approaches to International Criminal Justice’. The conference proved to be a fascinating and inspiring experience. As its title indicates, the concern of the conference was legal pluralism, a notion that lies at the centre of many of the key debates taking place within international criminal justice (ICJ) today.

There were six panels in all, spread over one and a half days. The first panel explored the interfaces between international criminal law (ICL) and different theories of pluralism. James Stewart presented a new paper, co-authored with Asad Kiyani, entitled ‘The Ahistoricism of Legal Pluralism in International Criminal Law’. He discussed the implications that can arise in ICL when the historical reality of the international or national criminal laws that inform ICL – which have often been created by colonial imposition or by way of an ‘unsuccessful’ legal transplant- is neglected. Cassandra Steer asked what we mean by legal pluralism. She distinguished between strong pluralism, which challenges the notion of the state being the sole lawmaker, and weak pluralism, that accepts that law can have multiple sources. ICL is formed by a patchwork of different traditions and there is a tendency to pluck notions that fit within one’s own legal tradition, when a better approach would be to seek the most appropriate solution for a particular context. Sergey Vasiliev concluded the panel by discussing different types of legal pluralism and explaining why this is a worthwhile project and the value of this discussion in ICL.

The second panel considered the institutional aspects of pluralism in ICL. Alex Whiting asked whether the ICC is threatened by a proliferation of criminal courts, focusing particularly on the pros and cons of an ad hoc court for Syria. Robert Cryer discussed whether complementarity is working; reaching the very lawyerly conclusion that the answer depends upon what one is looking for in the first place. Phil Clark then sought to debunk some assumptions made of complementarity by focusing on the reality of complementarity in Central Africa.

The third panel discussed ICL as a legal-cultural hybrid. Megan Fairlie discussed how the ICC Prosecutor’s obligation under the ICC Statute to ‘establish the truth’ and ‘investigate incriminating and exonerating circumstances equally’ has been fulfilled in practice. Her research shows that the tendency of the OTP has been towards adversality rather than impartiality, rendering imperative the accused’s ability to wage a vigorous defence at trial. Elinor Fry then explored indictments in ICL. She explained that while international criminal courts and tribunals have developed relatively sound pleading principles, they have ignored evidentiary precision in the sense of distinguishing between different types of evidence and facts.

Panel four examined the multiple identities ICJ claims and how ‘normative pluralism’ translates into ideological tensions at the heart of ICL. Darryl Robinson began by asking the audience for help in addressing two troublesome questions: where should he look to find the parameters of the fundamental principles of legality and culpability; and what can be done to counter the objection that these principles are ‘Western’? Carsten Stahn addressed the normative identities of the ICC, discussing different paradigms of post-colonial discourse, such as elitism, whereby ICJ becomes the preserve of a few; social engineering, whereby ICJ is viewed as patronising; and orientalisation, for example in the way in which ICJ creates social categories, such as child soldiers. Emily Haslam then discussed victim representation at the ICC and how victims are portrayed by different legal ‘tribes’- different institutional or non-institutional actors who claim, whether explicitly or implicitly, to act in their name. This pluralism can lead to tensions and challenges for the implementation of victim representation at the ICC.

The penultimate panel explored the role of courts in furthering the convergence (or fragmentation) of ICL. Marjolein Cupido suggested that the use of the casuistic method- which provides that the law is not controlled by abstract rules alone, and that attention should be paid to how judges apply these rules to the facts of individual cases- should be used by scholars in ICL to develop a more complete understanding of international crimes and liability theories. Lachezar Yanev discussed judicial dialogue in ICL, focusing on the ‘common plan or agreement’ element in competing theories of co-perpetration. Finally, Harmen van der Wilt addressed legal reactions to terrorism- whether rules of criminal law enforcement or the law of war should apply, and whether international courts and tribunals can assist states in formulating a coherent approach.

The final panel focused on the challenges to ICL’s hegemonic claims and the resistance faced by ICJ when seeking to order and impact equally on incommensurable socio-cultural environments. Nicola Palmer discussed Rwanda and the intermix between international, national and local responses to justice. She suggested that the conflicts between these three different regimes are more subtle than we imagine, and that pluralism could provide a useful method to show when ICJ is justified and when it should be limited. Sarah Nouwen explored pluralism as both a justification and limit for ICJ, arguing that ICL has become so successful that it has marginalised other alternative conceptions of justice and risks becoming a threat to justice itself. Finally, Asad Kiyani outlined four challenges for pluralists in ICL- firstly, the hegemony of colonial criminal law; secondly, the hegemony of sources- that turning to national laws enforces the predominance of European law; thirdly, the hegemony of state law, that excludes recourse to non-state legal ordering; and finally, the hegemony of ICL- that the ICC model of ICJ prevents alternative modes of response being used.

Each of the panels culminated in fascinating Q and A sessions, with the panellists responding to insightful questions from an engaged and well-informed audience. The conference’s principal organisers, Elies van Sliedregt and Sergey Vasiliev, are to be congratulated on having arranged such a successful, informative and timely event.

Casas de la Memoria to Conviction?

November 11, 2015 / Rachel E. Lopez

From “casas de la memoria” in Guatemala, Peru, and El Salvador to an upcoming international colloquium in Spain entitled “From Past to Future: Memory and the Process of Transition,” the development of collective memory – an enduring and shared memory of events – is taking center stage as one path toward healing the wounds of a tattered national conscience and preventing the recurrence of mass atrocities. But to what extent is collective memory compatible with judicial systems, which tend to be very individual-centered?

An annual online symposium co-hosted by Opinio Juris and NYU Journal of International Law and Politics (JILP) that went live this morning is exploring this very question. The focus of the symposium is The (Re)collection of Memory After Mass Atrocity and the Dilemma for Transnational Justice, my article that was recently published in Volume 47, Number 4, of NYU JILP.

The impetus for this article arises from the challenges I encountered in working with survivors of mass atrocity. The indivisibility of their memory struck me, as did the healing and bonds it generated. As I began to examine the literature on collective memory, I realized that I was not alone in this observation. Scholars from disciplines ranging from sociology to clinical psychology have written about and documented collective memory and its cathartic effects.

My article explores the tension between the preservation of collective memory and another impulse that follows mass atrocity: the desire for justice. Because many judicial systems are heavily influenced by notions of individualism, they are by design ill equipped to accommodate collective memory. Traditional rules of evidence and professional conduct often exhibit a single-minded focus on individual representation by replicating models that assume one client who autonomously makes legal decisions without consulting his or her community. Bound by these rules, attorneys must disrupt or even dismantle collective memory, thereby retraumatizing their clients.

In this article, I offer an alternative. I believe that human rights attorneys should instead endeavor to preserve and promote collective memory. For that reason, I urge a fundamental rethinking of the law’s preference for individual memory in the context of transitional justice. I believe that the inclusion of collective memory would better serve the goals of transitional justice by facilitating a more complete understanding of the collective harms of mass atrocity and possibly advancing reconciliation.

Today and tomorrow, Opinio Juris will feature comments on my article from four distinguished scholars:

• Mark A. Drumbl is the Class of 1975 Alumni Professor of Law and Director of the Transnational Law Institute at Washington & Lee University.
• Naomi Roht-Arriaza is Distinguished Professor of Law, University of California, Hastings College of Law (and a fellow IntLawGrrl! –Ed.).
• Ruti Teitel is Ernst C. Stiefel Professor of Comparative Law at New York Law School.
• Johan D. van der Vyver is the I.T. Cohen Professor of International Law and Human Rights, Emory University School of Law.

Tomorrow, I will respond to their comments. I welcome you to join the conversation by posting your thoughts here.

Write On! Call for Papers: ‘A Nordic Approach to International Law?’ Abstracts due 15 March

October 21, 2014 / Karen Hoffmann / Leave a comment

From 27-29 August 2015, the Centre for International Law and Justice (CILJ) at the University of Copenhagen’s Faculty of Law will convene a conference in Oslo, Norway, on “A Nordic Approach to International Law?” (One of our own editors, IntLawGrrl Cecilia M. Bailliet, will be a keynote speaker!) From the conference call for papers (pdf):

The Nordic countries have a long-standing tradition of collaboration on a wide range of legal issues. The Nordic Council of Ministers endeavours ‘to promote basic common principles in Nordic legislation’, and extensive inter-Nordic harmonization is now in place in areas as diverse as education, energy, taxation, culture, and gender equality.

But do these ‘shared Nordic values’ extend to embrace a common perspective on international law and policy beyond the Nordic region? And do international legal scholars in the Nordic countries share a professional outlook enabling us to speak of a distinct ‘Nordic approach to international law’?

YOU ARE INVITED

You are invited to a two-day conference in Oslo, Norway, where international legal scholars will join expert practitioners to discuss contemporary issues of international law from a Nordic perspective. Renowned scholars and practitioners will present their views in keynote lectures and roundtable discussions and will comment on papers submitted. Junior scholars are particularly encouraged to submit and present papers.

In addition to research papers addressing the question of a distinct Nordic tradition within international legal scholarship, we welcome papers that treat topics in international law from a Nordic viewpoint. Examples include:

• the relationship between international and domestic law

• the relationship between international law and other disciplines

• responsibility for violations of international law

• international norm conflicts

• sovereignty and statehood

• the Arctic

• the proliferation of international courts

We also welcome papers lending a Nordic perspective to specific fields of regulation, including but not limited to:

• international human rights law

• international environmental law

• international humanitarian law

• international migration law

• international investment law

• international trade law

• international criminal law

KEYNOTE SPEAKERS AND INVITED EXPERTS INCLUDE

• Cecilia M. Bailliet, University of Oslo

• David Thór Björgvinsson, University of Copenhagen

• Terje Einarsen, University of Bergen

• Martti Koskenniemi, Helsinki University

• Gregor Noll, Lund University

• Gro Nystuen, International Law & Policy Institute, Oslo

• Ole Spiermann, Bruun & Hjejle, Copenhagen

• Geir Ulfstein, University of Oslo

• Jens Vedsted-Hansen, Aarhus University

• Pål Wrange, Stockholm University

• Inger Österdahl, Uppsala University

PAPER PROPOSALS

Senior and junior scholars (including PhD students) are invited to submit paper proposals. Papers will be selected on the basis of abstracts submitted. Selection criteria are: Originality of the work, links to the conference theme, and geographical representation of the speakers. Abstracts (not exceeding 800 words) should be submitted to astrid.kjeldgaard-pedersen@jur.ku.dk. Accepted papers should not exceed 8,500 words (incl. footnotes).

After the conference, a number of papers will be selected for publication in an edited volume to be published by an international publisher. Please indicate, when submitting abstracts, if your paper will be available for publication.

TIMELINE

• The deadline for the submission of abstracts is 15 March 2015

• Successful applicants will be informed by 15 April 2015

• The deadline for the submission of full papers is 15 July 2015

For more information, see the conference website at http://www.jura.ku.dk/cilj/calender/nordic-approach-int-law.

Write On! Call for Papers: ‘Human Rights and Justice,’ Hague Institute for Global Justice (deadline 14 Nov.)

October 6, 2014 / Karen Hoffmann / Leave a comment

The human rights sections of the International Studies Association, the American Political Science Association, the European Consortium for Political Research, and the International Political Science Association are pleased to announce the fourth joint international conference on human rights, on the theme “Human Rights and Justice,” to take place 8 – 10 June 2015 at The Hague Institute for Global Justice. The conference will take place immediately before the annual meeting of the Academic Council on the United Nations System (11 – 13 June), also in The Hague.

This joint conference will ask researchers and policymakers from academia, think tanks, IOs and NGOs to deal with various aspects of justice and human rights. Papers should highlight how and to what extent human rights in all aspects and levels of governance, law and decision making allow or deny access to justice. This may include questions regarding whether and to what extent the international human rights regime can address adequately the challenges of human rights implementation and justice, as well as how regional, national, and local mechanisms may address human rights challenges. Paper and panel proposals that also address the issues such as climate justice, transitional justice or cyber justice as well as access to justice and global distributive justice are welcome. Some of the questions to be addressed at the conference include:

Are human rights and justice always compatible?
How do we conceptualize the relationship between human rights and justice?
What role does global distributive justice play in advancing human rights?
How do we ensure that domestic justice systems address a wide range of human rights issues?
Are international justice institutions (e.g. International Criminal Court, European Court of Human Rights, Inter-American Court, African Court on Human and People’s Rights) adequate for addressing human rights issues?
How have norms regarding justice and human rights evolved?

Submissions will open shortly. Please note that proposals must relate to the theme of the conference in some manner to be considered. Each full panel proposal should include exactly four papers plus a chair and discussant.

The deadline for submissions is 14 November 2014. Notification of acceptances will be sent by e-mail by 20 December 2014.

For more information, visit: http://global-human-rights.org/HRJ.html

Women @ ASIL (8th ed.)

April 7, 2014April 7, 2014 / Elizabeth Ludwin King / Leave a comment

IntLawGrrls is pleased to highlight this year’s roster of incredible women who will speak at the annual meeting of the American Society of International Law this week in D.C. (prior editions here and here). This 108th gathering, entitled The Effectiveness of International Law, marks the first time that ASIL and the International Law Association will jointly convene a conference. Details on registration here.

Highlights include the Grotius Lecture on Wednesday, April 9. Radhika Coomaraswamy (left, photo credit), former U.N. Under Secretary-General and Special Representative of the Secretary General for Children and Armed Conflict and Special Rapporteur on Violence Against Women will deliver this year’s lecture: Women and Children: The Cutting Edge of International Law. We are particularly pleased to note that IntLawGrrls co-founder and contributor Diane Marie Amann (University of Georgia School of Law; Special Adviser on Children in Armed Conflict, International Criminal Court, Office of the Prosecutor) (below right) will serve as discussant.

In addition to the Grotius Lecture, the annual WILIG luncheon on Thursday will honor three International Court of Justice Judges: Julia Sebuntinde, Joan Donoghue, and Xue Hanqin. Justice Sandra Day O’Connor will provide the opening remarks at what promises to be another fascinating WILIG event.

Justices Donoghue, Sebutinde, and Hanqin will appear again on Friday, April 11, at the plenary session, and International Criminal Court Prosecutor and IntLawGrrl Fatou Bensouda (right) will be one of the honorees at the Gala Dinner later that evening.

Once again, the panelists at ASIL are as diverse as the topics, with at least one woman on nearly every panel. The Women @ ASIL honor roll is below:

Monday, April 7, 5:00-6:30 p.m.

Opening plenary: IntLawGrrl Ruth Wedgwood (President of the American Branch of the ILA and Chair of the ILA Biennial Conference 2014), and Mary McLeod (U.S. Department of State)

Tuesday, April 8, 2:15-3:45 p.m.

Teaching International Law – IntLawGrrl Charlotte Ku (University of Illinois) (left, photo credit)

Wednesday, April 9, 1:45-3:15 p.m.:

Corporate Responsibility and Human Rights – Sara Seck (University of Western Ontario), Rachel Davis (Shift)

Wednesday, April 9, 1:45-2:45 p.m.:

Connecting the Dots: Visualizing International Law – Marylin Raisch (Georgetown University Law Center)

Wednesday, April 9, 3:30-5:00 p.m.:

Is International Law Effective? The Case of Russia and Ukraine – Lori Fisler Damrosch (Columbia Law School) (right, photo credit), Nina Khruscheva (The New School)

The Fourth Restatement of Foreign Relations Law of the United States – Sarah Cleveland (Columbia Law School)

The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform Act’s Turn to International Law – Galit Sarfaty (University of British Columbia Faculty of Law) (left, photo credit)

Thursday, April 10, 9:00-10:30 a.m.:

The Approach of Courts to Foreign Affairs and National Security – Ruth Wedgwood (Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies)

Countermeasures in Cyberspace – Alexandra Perina (Council on Foreign Relations)

Interpretive Complexity and the International Humanitarian Law Principle of Proportionality – Janina Dill (Oxford University) (right, photo credit)

Thursday, April 10, 10:45 a.m. – 12:30 p.m.:

Autonomous Weaponry and Armed Conflict – Naz Modirzadeh (Harvard Law School – Brookings Project on Law and Security)

Thursday, April 10, 10:45 a.m. – 12:15 p.m.:

The Emergence of New Funding Sources of International Development – Cecilia Akintomide (African Development Bank), Betsy Apple (Open Society Justice Initiative), Uche Ewelukwa (University of Arkansas School of Law)

The Future of International Criminal Law – IntLawGrrl co-editor Milena Sterio (Cleveland State University) (right), Jane Stromseth (Office of Global Criminal Justice, U.S. State Department; Georgetown University Law Center) (left, photo credit)

Effectiveness of International Adjudication: Assessing Functions and Performance – Sivan Shlomo Agon (New York University Law School), Joan Donoghue (International Court of Justice)

Thursday, April 10, 12:45 – 2:15 p.m.:

Domestic Human Rights Enforcement After Kiobel – Agnieszka Fryszman (Cohen MIlstein, LLP), Kristin Linsley Myles (Munger Tolles & Olsen, LLP), Katie Redford (EarthRights International)

The Idea of Effective International Law – Rachael Kent (WilmerHale)

Thursday, April 10, 2:30-4:00 p.m.:

Can International Norms Protect Us from Natural Disasters? – Kristen Bookmiller (Millersville University), Elizabeth Ferris (Brookings Institution), Ingrid Nifosi-Sutton (American University Washington College of Law)

Possible Paradigmatic Changes in the Settlement of International Investment – IntLawGrrl Anne van Aaken (University of St. Gallen) (right, photo credit)

Is Forced Feeding in Response to Hunger Strikes a Violation of the Prohibition of Torture and Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment? Rachel VanLandingham (Stetson University College of Law), Pnina Sharvit Baruch (Institute for National Security Studies)

Thursday, April 10, 4:15-5:45 p.m.:

Law Enforcement Across Fields: Comparing Human Rights and Trade – IntLawGrrl Jenny Martinez (Stanford Law School), Chantal Thomas (Cornell Law School) (left, photo credit)

The Making of International Environmental Law: A Conversation with Two Pioneers – Edith Brown Weiss (Georgetown University Law Center), Olivia Radics (Environmental Law Institute), Kiran Sahdev (Georgetown University Law Center), Carina Roselli (Environmental Law Institute)

Designing Technology for Human Rights – Laura K. Donohue (Georgetown University Law Center), IntLawGrrl Molly Land (University of Connecticut School of Law) (right, photo credit)

Friday, April 11, 9:00-10:30 a.m.:

Everybody Come Together Over Me: Systemic Integration and Vienna Convention Art 31(3)(c) – Helene Ruiz-Fabri (Sorbonne Law School)

International Trade Law and International Investment Law: Complexity and Coherence – Mélida Hodgson (Foley Hoag LLP), Debra Steger (University of Ottawa)

Women’s Economic Rights, International Law and the Financial Crisis – Justice Sujata Manohar (former member of the Supreme Court of India), IntLawGrrl Patricia O’Brien (Permanent Representation of Ireland to the United Nations Office and other International Organizations) (left, photo credit)

Judges, Diplomats, and Peacebuilders: Evaluating International Dispute Resolution as a System – Jolynn Shoemaker (Center for Strategic and International Studies), IntLawGrrl Anna Spain (University of Colorado Law School) (right, photo credit)

On Socializing States: A Conversation with Ryan Goodman and Derek Jinks on Their Certificate of Merit Winning Book – IntLawGrrl Monica Hakimi (University of Michigan Law School), Siobhan McInerney-Lankford (The World Bank)

Emerging Trends and Challenges in International Legal Education and Scholarship – Kaitlin M. Ball (International Law Students Association)

Friday, April 11, 10:45 a.m. – 12:15 p.m.:

“Law of Warcraft”: New Approaches to Generating Respect for the Law – IntLawGrrl Laurie Blank (Emory University Law School) (left, photo credit), Elizabeth Stubbins Bates (SOAS, University of London)

The Effectiveness of the United Nations Human Rights Protection Machinery – Felice Gaer (Jacob Blaustein Institute), IntLawGrrl Beth Simmons (Harvard University), Kathryn Sikkink (Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University)

Friday, April 11, 12:45-2:15:

The Effectiveness of Trade to Govern “Clean Energy” Strategies – Gabrielle Marceau (WTO), Susan Esserman (Steptoe & Johnson LLP), Antonia Eliason (University of Mississippi)

New Voices in International Law: Making International Criminal Law More Effective – IntLawGrrl Saira Mohamed (University of California-Berkeley School of Law), Maria Varaki (Hebrew University/University of Copenhagen), Adejoké Babington-Ashaye (World Bank Administrative Tribunal), Gabrielle Kirk McDonald (International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia and Iran-US Claims Tribunal (retired)) (right, photo credit)

Continuities of Violence: What Role for Transitional Justice and the Rule of Law? – Colette Rausch (U.S. Institute of Peace), Katya Salazar (Due Process of Law Foundation) (left, photo credit), Nahla Valji (UN Women), Julie Werbel (USAID), Lorna McGregor (University of Essex)

Investment Chapters in Trade Agreements: IP Rights as Protected Investments – Susan K. Sell (Elliott School of International Affairs, George Washington University)

Friday, April 11, 2:30-4:00 p.m.:

Aggression and the Use of Force in International Law – IntLawGrrl Christine Chinkin (London School of Economics)

Intelligence Materials and the Courts – Kim Prost (United Nations)

The Dispute Settlement System of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea: An Assessment after 20 Years – Joanna Mossop (Victoria University at Wellington), Natalie Klein (Macquarie University) (right, photo credit)

New Voices in International Law: Empirical Perspectives on International Law – Anna Schrimpf (Princeton University), Mila Versteeg (University of Virginia) (right, photo credit)

Dworkin’s Philosophy of International Law – Jean Cohen (Columbia University)

Saturday, April 12, 9:00-10:30 a.m.:

Combating Tax Avoidance and Evasion – Ruth Mason (University of Virginia)

The Effectiveness of International Law in “Greening” the Economy – IntLawGrrl Rebecca Bratspies (City University of New York School of Law), Elizabeth Dowdeswell (Council of Canadian Academies) (right, photo credit)

Challenges of Arbitrators in International Investment Disputes: Standards and Outcomes – Judith Levine (Permanent Court of Arbitration), IntLawGrrl Meg Kinnear (ICSID), IntLawGrrl Chiara Giorgetti (University of Richmond) (left)

Sexual Violence in Armed Conflict – Kimberly Theidon (Harvard University), IntLawGrrl Olga Jurasz (Open University) (right), Dawn Sedman (Oxford Brookes University)

State Law Litigation of International Norms – Beth Stephens (Rutgers University Law School), Cassandra Burke Robertson (Case Western University Law School), Simona Grossi (Loyola Law School, Los Angeles) (left, photo credit)

Saturday, April 12, 10:45 a.m. – 12:00 p.m.:

Closing Plenary – Syria: Testing the Effectiveness of International Law – Vera Gowlland-Debbas (Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies) (right, photo credit)

Reminder: Early-bird registration for ASIL-ILA meeting closes this Friday, Feb. 7

February 5, 2014 / Karen Hoffmann / Leave a comment

Just a quick reminder that early registration for this year’s ASIL annual meeting closes this Friday. The meeting will also be the global biennial conference of the ILA and involves many IntLawGrrls! (See our earlier post with full info here.) Register early and save!

Call for Papers: European Society of International Law 10th Anniversary Conference

November 26, 2013 / Karen Hoffmann / 1 Comment

From the European Society of International Law comes this invitation and call for papers:

In the 1990s an intense debate on feminism and international law started to permeate journals and learned societies. Core concepts of international law were critiqued and de-constructed from a feminist perspective. Most recently, the ILA re-established a committee on ‘Feminism and International Law’ in 2010 focusing on the economic empowerment of women and the possible contribution of international law. Other initiatives, like the journal ‘Feminist Legal Studies’, continue; others were recently revived, such as the ‘IntLawGrrls’ blog. [Editor’s note: Hey, that’s us!]

Feminist methodological approaches to international law include the detection of silences in the law and the question of how to respond to the many (cultural, linguistic, religious, ethnic, economic) differences among women. Feminist international lawyers have added to the understanding of international law in various ways, e.g. through a feminist perspective on international criminal law and on women in armed conflicts.

These issues will be discussed in this agora, including questions such as: What is the current status of the debate? Is there still momentum in international law and feminism? What are the fields where international law and feminism might best contribute to the development of international law?

2014 marks the tenth anniversary of the European Society of International Law and, as an ESIL member, you are cordially invited to participate in the ESIL 10^th Anniversary Conference hosted by the University of Vienna and organised by its Law School’s Section for International Law and International Relations. Please consider participating by submitting an abstract for one of the agorae. Younger scholars are also welcome to submit a poster presentation.

The conference will take place at the start of the next academic year, on 4- 6 September 2014, and it will be a special occasion to look back at the development of the Society since its inaugural conference in Florence back in 2004 as well as to look forward to the decades ahead and the ways members would like international law to evolve and the ways they would like the Society to reflect those changes. As at previous ESIL events, the programme will include plenary sessions and fora featuring invited speakers as well as agorae designed to share cutting-edge research in specific areas of international law and to stimulate debate. All agora speakers will be selected on the basis of abstracts submitted in response to the Call for Papers. For the first time at an ESIL conference, we also welcome submissions for poster presentations.

The conference will explore the interplay between international law and other fields of law and between international law and other disciplines and we would therefore ask you to extend the invitation not only to other international lawyers but also to colleagues in other disciplines who might be interested in exploring the boundaries of international law and the bridges to other fields of law and indeed to other disciplines. Our professional and intellectual development requires us to explore interdisciplinary approaches.

It is our pleasure to invite you and your colleagues to respond to the Call for Papers ( in English /in French) and the Call for Posters (in English /in French).

Whether or not you decide to respond to these Calls, please make a note of the date of the 2014 conference. Information about the final programme and details of how to register for the event will be regularly updated on the ESIL website and on the Vienna conference website in the months ahead.