The previous section provided only a snapshot of the ways that the international legal practice of the EU might be viewed as contributing to the development of customary internationallaw. In addition to the three modes of contribution that have been discussed already by the ILC, IOs can also contribute to the development of customary internationallaw as autonomous and independent legal actors on the international plane. This practice does not consist solely of EU action, but is developed over time through the EU’s constant interaction with States and other international organizations. It is accepted that IOs can play a role as independent international actors, and as such can participate in the development of internationallaw alongside States. 101 However, the way in which IO practice contributes to the development of customary internationallaw had not been articulated clearly. The work of the Special Rapporteur has helped shine a light on this important question, outlining three main ways that IO practice may contribute to customary internationallaw. These methods mainly view IOs as forums in which member States act. There is less discussion, however, about how IOs may contribute to customary internationallaw in their own right. This article pointed to some of the ways in which the practice of the EU may be considered as developing customary internationallaw. Through its external practice, particularly as party to international treaties, the EU contributes to the development of rules about how public internationallaw concepts apply to supranational organizations. The CJEU, which does not fall neatly into the category of a national or an international court, may also contribute to
The InternationalLaw Commission (ILC), for example, was established by the UN General Assembly, which was itself established by states. 19 It has a mandate to codify and progressively develop internationallaw, 20 and, on this basis, has produced draft Articles and other works. Another example is the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), which was created by the UN General Assembly and is empowered to promote ‘the conclusion and ratification of international conventions for the protection of refugees, supervising their application and proposing amendments thereto’. 21 At the suggestion of a state, UNHCR’s Executive Committee, itself composed of states, requested UNHCR ‘to consider the possibility of issuing—for the guidance of governments—a handbook relating to procedures and criteria for determining refugee status. 22 UNHCR thus published its Handbook on Procedures and Criteria for Determining Refugee Status under the 1951 Convention and the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees. 23 The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) is of a somewhat different order, but still falls within the notion of a state- empowered entity. Although the ICRC was created by a group of private individuals and not by states, it was later empowered by states to carry out various functions, thus satisfying the ‘empowerment’ aspect of a state-empowered entity. The Statutes of the International Red Cross Movement, which were adopted by the International Conference of the Red Cross, 24 provide that the role of the ICRC is ‘to work for the understanding and dissemination of knowledge of international humanitarian law applicable in armed conflicts and to prepare any development thereof’ and ‘to carry out mandates entrusted to it by the International Conference’. 25 With this mandate in mind, the ICRC has published Commentaries on the Geneva Conventions and Additional Protocols and, at the request of the International Conference of the Red Cross and Red Crescent, a Study on Customary International Humanitarian Law.
Internationallaw on the ABS regime, particularly from the perspective of developing biodiversity-rich countries, would play a significant role as the foundation upon which a legal framework on marine bioprospecting should be developed. It is therefore important to first analyse the number of principles that should be embedded in such a framework. In this context, I rely on the previous work by De Jonge and Louwaars regarding a number of principles underlying the concept of benefit-sharing. 54 Their study concludes that there are six strains of argumentation in which the concept of benefit-sharing is embedded, based on the following principles or motivations: the South-North imbalance in resource allocation and exploitation; the need to conserve biodiversity; biopiracy and the imbalance in intellectual property rights; a shared interest in food security; an imbalance between intellectual property protection and the public interest; and protecting the cultural identity of traditional communities. 55 The authors noted that these different motivations in the development of the ABS regime of genetic resources utilisation have been difficult to reconcile and stakeholders appear to pursue a mix of different aims and objectives instead. 56
DOI: 10.4236/chnstd.2018.71010 115 Chinese Studies western missionaries. Until late 1930s, the discipline of internationallaw has been mature, which is embodied in the fact that the basic fields and topics in- volved in the teaching and research of modern internationallaw have basically been determined (He, 2004). Li Shengyu believed that neither traditional Chi- nese culture nor China’s world order can produce the concepts of modern in- ternational law from our own tradition. Modern internationallaw was imported from the West in the middle of the 19th century. The first comprehensive and systematic introduction of Western internationallaw to China was the American missionary William A. P Martin, whose Chinese name was Ding Bangliang (Li, 2001). Gao Liping thought that the first person to translate modern internationallaw is Ding Haoliang (Gao, 2005). Chen Yue believed that late Qing Dynasty of China was a troublesome period in Chinese history. During this period, the guns and cannons of western powers collapsed the Chinese nation. In order to solve the national crisis, in the late Qing Dynasty, everybody tried some means to in- tegrate with the West, and the modern internationallaw played a role as a communication bridge (Chen, 2004). Yang Zewei signaled that the seventeenth century was the heyday of the Qing Dynasty and maintained the traditional hie- rarchical ideas in foreign relations that are incompatible with the emerging equal international relations in Europe.
claiming wider expanses of ocean.1,5® That hope was in vain, however, for throughout the 1960s and onwards a steadily swelling group of coastal States grew increasingly adamant that it was in their own individual interest to establish a 200-mile maritime zone in which they alone would exercise sovereign rights over the resources. Often newly-indepen- dent and economically weak, many of those States lacked the capacity to exploit the resources of distant waters. For them, therefore, a mere 12-mile zone was unsatisfactorily, particularly when abundant fishery resources in the waters just beyond that limit and within easy reach of their rela tively modest, coastal fishing vessels, were being heavily exploited by foreign fleets. With little practical choice, States increasingly moved to expand their fishery jurisdic tion in the national interest as being essential to the State’s economic development and the betterment of national living conditions. Many more States, while not themselves making such a claim, indicated that they would be pushing for recognition of the 200-mile zone at the forthcoming law of the sea conference.
In May 2006, HH Sheikh Khalifa bin Zayed Al Nayhan issued Law no. 14 of 2006 establishing the Paris-Sorbonne University Abu Dhabi. Wholly owned by the Abu Dhabi Education Council (ADEC), the Paris-Sorbonne University Abu Dhabi’s new state- of-art campus with a capacity of up to 2,000 students enhances educational opportunities in Abu Dhabi in partnership with some of the world’s leading academic institutions and offers undergraduate and postgraduate degrees in Social Science and Art, Law and Economics and Business Management disciplines. Aligned to the Emirates vision 2030 and in response to the escalating market demands, Paris-Sorbonne University Abu Dhabi is committed to deliver the future Emirati and international workforce and contribute to UAE’s economic diversification by offering degrees that support this development. We will work towards advancing and nurturing the local talent pool and
not actually be so far away from home. It may, in fact, already be there. Going back to the contents page of the internationallaw textbook, one begins to imagine the possibilities for home we might find there: in wartime claims to homeland; in refugees’ flight from home; in indigenous peoples’ struggle for home and identity; and in the loss of home to environmental degradation and development projects. These are just some of the ways we might begin to think about home in internationallaw. Moreover, that home and internationallaw share certain characteristics encourages looking into the connections between them: both comprise a set of practices and discourses that aim to create a particular order in the world; both have a private and sentimental side; and both have at their heart a particular type of universality. 50 One just needs to begin to see things through the lens of home to be able to imagine these possibilities. To assist with this, in the next part of this chapter I turn to the wider literature and examine how home is conceptualised in fields outside of internationallaw. In particular, I highlight the key themes that inform the definition of home I work with in this thesis.
This article will discuss how economic relations between peoples and coun- tries have developed over time, giving rise to new challenges for the law. Much of international economic law has developed relatively recently in response to the growth in international economic activity. As the expansion of international economic activity increased contacts among people of different nations, this in- teraction had to be regulated by internationallaw. In the early years of the de- velopment of international economic law, the law dealt mainly with the nature of the legal relationship between a state and a foreign company engaged in the exploitation of its natural resources. It is in this context that this article will ex- amine the evolution of select key principles of international economic law. This article will also examine the definition of international economic law, the fun- damental principles of this body of law and developments in other areas of in- ternational law that have influenced the development of international economic law.
apprehending and giving normative response to a more complex reality of problems and social expectations than those that used to be addressed by the old international water law, centered on the pure regulation of the uses of water. The changes involved are diverse and numerous. It seems however possible to identify some common threads underlying all the changes and trends identified. A first one is the move towards establishing a creative interface between the traditional core of this body of principles and rules dedicated to water and those other dis- ciplines of internationallaw which more directly address the concerns with the protection of the environment, social equity, and a sensible weighing of the economic values. Internormativity is thus one of the keys for un- derstanding the evolution of international water law and the vigor thereof; the normative dialogue generates cross-fertilisation and renovation of international water law. Another one is the implicit sense of urgency that these proposed changes and trends carry, corresponding only to the magnitude of the global water crisis. These changes are definitely momentous, as the newer law became much more complex in the normative responses pursued. They are not however deprived of an underlying vision: on the contrary, the newer international water law announces decisive cardinal options, pursues shared goals, honours certain values, follows principles which lend heuristic and interpretative sense to the reconstruction of this legal field. In the whole, the changes thus amount to true paradigm-shifts (Kuhn, 1962). But this realisation also alerts us to the uncertainties that are still involved in the progress of international water law. It is of the very nature of paradigm-shifts themselves that they comprehend ambiguities and even elicit resistance. The uncertain harmonisation of the trends for environ- mentalisation and humanisation of water, on the one hand, and its economicisation, on the other, is in this regard telling. To this, one should add the realisation that these developments are an ongoing process: new problems seem already perceptible in the horizon—“climatising” international water law, adapting it to the challenges of climate change seems to be one of them. Another one is the struggle to render the whole movement of “legalisa- tion” or more and newer law-making, a living reality: ensuring that the newer normative messages are complied with, should also become one of the major tenets of the evolution of international water law. Assessing the past but also looking ahead, one can not but be reminded of the works of Sisyphus.
The implications of the case law can be best evaluated in terms of the juris- prudence which had been created (Martin, Robert, & Sarah, 2011). It can be stated that while exploring environmental legal principles, it becomes necessary to investigate human rights encompassed within legal disputes (Ruchi, 2017). EIA is that tool which helps in respecting human rights’ elements strongly linked with environmental standards (Ole, David, & Wang, 2011). There are still loop- holes prevalent within the international environmental law and inclusion of EIA has helped in addressing some of the loopholes (Oran, 2011). The ICJ judgment had shifted focus of individuals towards a new jurisprudence where EIA does not form an important component of the customary internationallaw; however, it shall address obligations related to due diligence (Michael et al., 2013). An area has been left unanswered in the pulp mill case, i.e. whether relevance of EIA would exist or will emerge only when there is any human rights’ obligation (Barry & Barry, 2012)? The jurisprudence of including EIA within the interna- tional environmental law shall gain further significance with future develop- ments in this particular area (Alexander & Robert, 2012). It is evident from this case that the ICJ’s judgement revolved around proving that the Uruguay’s wrongful conduct was a mere reflection of Argentina’s satisfaction. In trans- boundary operations, disputes often emerge due to environmental standards (Bruno, 2013). Therefore, in scenario where cross-boundary operations are in- volved, the need for impact assessments arises (Philippe, 2017). In the future scenario, the international tribunals and the national courts would surely take into account the ICJ’s jurisprudence in the pulp mill case. The ICJ’s final judge- ment was given while critically examining Article 41(a) included within the 1975 Statute (Philippe, 2017). When a state guarantees operations being conducted with due diligence, then it becomes essential to conduct a thorough environ- mental assessment (Alan, 2012). On the contrary, when trans-boundary opera- tions constitute the risk of industrial activities having an adverse impact on the environment then the inclusion of EIA becomes mandatory (Dirk, Andreas, & Sandra, 2011). Customary law obligations should not only be confined to inves- tigating the basic environmental standards (Manfred, et al., 2012). From a broader perspective, states must even conduct EIA so as to address their due diligence obligation (Jessica & Enrique, 2012).
Reasonable use is also a legal principle for the use of international watercourses. This section traces the inclusion of the principle in four international instruments: the Helsinki Rules, the 1997 United Nations Convention, the Berlin Rules, and the InternationalLaw Commission (³ILC´) Draft Articles on Transboundary Aquifers. In contrast to the principles of equitable sharing and equitable utilization, reasonable utilization received little discussion in the reports and commentary for these instruments. As demonstrated in the previous section, reasonable use is a well-established principle of water law, which this author posits is the same principle in domestic riparian law as it is in the law of international watercourses. Both circumstances use the same factors to determine what a reasonable use is. Reasonable use can be a foundation principle when determining shared benefits from a watercourse and, more importantly, when adjusting or reallocating shared waters in response to new uses, changing circumstances, and during conditions of water stress.