GlobaLex March/April 2024 Issue is Live

By Lucie Olejnikova

GlobaLex March/April 2024 issue is live featuring seven article updates: Vatican, Trinidad & Tobago, Researching Customary International Law, Researching Third-Party Funding in Investor-State Dispute Settlement, Researching the Systems of the United Nations Criminal Tribunals, MERCOSUR, and Researching the League of Nations Documents. Webmasters and content managers, please update your pages. We thank all our wonderful authors, new and established, for their excellent contributions and commitment to open access authorship!

Photo by Polina Zimmerman

UPDATE: Researching the Law of the Vatican City State by Angelo Coccìa at https://www.nyulawglobal.org/globalex/Vatican1.html.

Angelo Coccìa is an Italian lawyer, cassationist, and rotal. He graduated in Law from the University of Rome “La Sapienza” with a Thesis in Ecclesiastical Law. Graduated in Canon Law from the Pontifical Lateran University. He also holds a diploma as a Rotale Lawyer at the Rotale Studies of the Chancellery Palace in Rome. He is a member of the Archsodalizio of the Roman Curia and adviser of the Coetus Advocatorum Association. He is registered in the Register of the Apostolic Tribunal of the Roman Rota, at the Register of Lawyers and Prosecutors of the Tribunals of the Vicarage of Rome, at the tribunals of the Vatican City, all courts in which he permanently works.

UPDATE: Trinidad & Tobago Law and Legal Research by C. Deane at https://www.nyulawglobal.org/globalex/Trinidad_Tobago1.html.

C. Deane is the Foreign. Comparative and International Law Librarian for University of California Law, San Francisco. They received their primary and secondary education in Trinidad. They have a B.A. in Cultural Anthropology with a Certificate in Latin American Studies from Princeton University, an M.A. in Cultural Anthropology and a J.D. with a Certificate in International and Comparative Law from the University of Tulsa in Oklahoma, and an M.L.I.S. degree from San Jose State University, School of Library and Information Science.

UPDATE: Researching Customary International Law, State Practice, and the Pronouncements of States Regarding International Law by Renu Urvashi Sagreiya at https://www.nyulawglobal.org/globalex/Customary_International_Law1.html.

Renu Urvashi Sagreiya is the Reference & Digital Collections Librarian at the Jerene Appleby Harnish Law Library at Pepperdine University Caruso School of Law. She has a B.A. in Sociology & Anthropology with a Minor in Spanish from Agnes Scott College, a J.D. from Drexel University Thomas R. Kline School of Law, and is an M.S.L.S. Candidate at Pennsylvania Western University, Clarion.

UPDATE: Researching Third-Party Funding in Investor-State Dispute Settlement by Xin (Sherry) Chen at https://www.nyulawglobal.org/globalex/Third-Party_Funding_Investor-State_Dispute_Settlement1.html.

Xin (Sherry) Chen is the Associate Director of Collection Strategy at the Biddle Law Library, University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School. She teaches both U.S. and international legal research courses and is active in AALL’s Foreign, Comparative & International Law section, currently chairing the Asian Law Interest Group. She holds a B.A. from Shanghai International Studies University, China, and both a J.D. and a M.S. in Library Information Science from the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. She is admitted to practice law in the State of New York. The author would like to thank Alex Bado, Graduate Fellow, Law & Justice Program, Boston College Law School, for his editorial support and contributions.

UPDATE: Searching through Systems of the UN Criminal Tribunals by Devan Orr at https://www.nyulawglobal.org/globalex/UN_Criminal_Tribunals_Research_Guide1.html.

Devan Orr is the Foreign, Comparative, and International Law Librarian at William & Mary Law School. She teaches several legal research classes including Foreign and International Research, and L.L.M. Legal Writing and Research. She has a J.D. from Arizona State University Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law and an M.L.I.S. degree from the University of Arizona. She is the co-chair of the Publicity Committee of FCIL-SIS for AALL and an actively licensed attorney with the Arizona State Bar.

UPDATE: MERCOSUR Legal Research – Sources and Documents by Gloria Orrego Hoyos and Mariel Romani at https://www.nyulawglobal.org/globalex/Mercosur1.html.

Gloria Orrego Hoyos has a law degree from the Pontificia Universidad Javeriana in Bogotá, Colombia. She has a Masters in Constitutional Law and Human Rights from the Universidad de Palermo in Buenos Aires and a postgraduate degree in Library and Information Management from the Universidad de Ciencias Empresariales y Sociales (UCES) in Buenos Aires, Argentina. She is currently a professor in the Legal Research Methods course in the Law Department of the University of San Andrés and, in the same course at the Universidad Torcuato DiTella (UTDT). For 10 years she worked at the Max von Buch Library of the University of San Andrés in Buenos Aires as head of the reference services. She currently serves as a legal reference at the General Secretariat of Training and Jurisprudence of the Public Defender’s Office.

Mariel Romani is an Argentine librarian in charge of the Serials library at the Max von Buch Library at the Universidad de San Andrés, Buenos Aires, Argentina. She assists faculty in their research and oversees legal reference and information literacy at the institution.

UPDATE: Researching League of Nations Documents by Gabriela Femenia at https://www.nyulawglobal.org/globalex/League_Nations_Guide1.html.

Gabriela Femenia is the Director of the Law Library and Associate Professor of Law at Temple University Beasley School of Law. She received her J.D. from the University of Pennsylvania and her M.L.I.S. from the University of Washington. In addition, she holds degrees in History from the University of California, Berkeley, and Harvard University. For more articles, visit https://www.nyulawglobal.org/globalex/index.html.

ASIL 2024 Recap: Resource Extraction in Outer Space—Current State of Play and Pathways for the Future

By Julie Woolridge

At the ASIL Annual Meeting, a panel of experts discussed the topic of mineral extraction in outer space. The panel included diverse viewpoints from the U.S. Department of State, Navajo Nation, academia, and international judiciary.

Speakers:

• Justin Ahasteen, Executive Director of the Navajo Nation Washington Office
• Monika Ehrman, SMU Dedman School of Law
• Greg O’Brien, Office of the Ocean and Polar Affairs, U.S. Department of State
• Emily Pierce, Office of the Legal Advisor, U.S. Department of State
• LCDR Tracy Reynolds, U.S. Navy JAG (Moderator)
• Charlotte Verdon, Judicial Fellow, International Court of Justice

Building on the IALL theme, “International Law in an Interdependent World,” the panel highlighted the interdependency by talking about outer space within the context of other areas outside the jurisdiction of any one nation, specifically the maritime environment.  Greg O’Brien of the U.S. Department of State set the stage by discussing the experiences/lessons from the development of the Law of the Sea to provide some examples and models that could be informative or provide a basis for debate, departure or comparison.  His discussion highlighted the royalty processes for minerals extracted, jurisdiction identification, and the concept of the common heritage of humankind, and possible applications in outer space. 

Prof. Monika Ehrmar from SMU Dedman School of Law discussed the legal implications of a potential modern-day gold rush in outer space, emphasizing the current barriers to such resource extraction. As Prof. Ehrmar discussed, even if fully formed gold bars existed in space, and all we had to do was get the gold and bring it back, it would still not be profitable to do so.  Despite the technological hurdles that make space mining currently unprofitable, she pointed out the opportunity for legal frameworks to evolve in anticipation of future advancements.

Charlotte Verdon of the International Court of Justice continued the discussion by elaborating on the nascent, not yet enforce, BBNJ Agreement, which pertains to the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction, drawing parallels to potential regulations in outer space resource usage.

Emily Pierce of the U.S. Department of State continued the conversation by discussing the current treaties and soft-law applicable in outer space, such as the Outer Space Treaty and the Artemis Accords. While not binding, the Artemis Accords, currently with 38 signatories, allows for the benefit of extracted materials in outer space, but specifies that current outer-space treaties much be followed, and that extraction of those minerals does not necessarily equate to appropriation.  

Justin Ahasteen from the Navajo Nation brought a critical perspective to the panel, noting the lack of consultation with Indigenous Peoples in the treaty negotiations about outer space, highlighting the broader issues of engagement and respect for the rights of Indigenous Peoples in global policy development.  One of the most memorable parts of the panel was after Justin concluded his comments, and Emily Pierce took a moment to speak directly to Justin and extended an offer to conduct a listening session to the Navajo Nation. 

The panel concluded with a forward-looking statement from the moderator LCDR Tracy Reynolds, who encouraged embracing the spirit of innovation with her remark, “Let’s make new mistakes.” This statement captures the essence of the pioneering journey into outer space mineral extraction—acknowledging that while the path may be fraught with errors, each mistake is a step towards learning and improvement in this uncharted territory. This sentiment should guide our approach as we navigate the complexities of international law and intercultural respect in the pursuit of outer space resources.

The session was recorded and is available online here: https://i1.sndcdn.com/artworks-ybRhROHnwmoYU68A-8AwnYQ-tiny.jpg

Webinar Recap: “What in the World is Happening… in the Russian War against Ukraine and Global Accountability”

By Francesco Fasano

On March 12^th, the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Committee of the FCIL-SIS hosted a webinar titled “What in the World is Happening… in the Russian War against Ukraine and Global Accountability,” as part of its What in the World webinar series highlighting current global events.  Paul Moorman from USC Gould School of Law hosted the webinar. The featured speaker was Iryna Zaverukha, a legal scholar from L’viv, Ukraine, currently at USC Gould School of Law.  This was an update to last year’s webinar on the crisis in Ukraine, coming at an important and harrowing milestone in the ongoing aggression. February 24, 2022, marked the two-year anniversary of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, and March 18th, 2024, marked a decade passed since the illegal annexation of Crimea by Russia.

Iryna began the webinar by contextualizing the Russian invasion against global political shifts, framing it as a fundamental clash between authoritarianism and democracy. She introduced jus ad bellum and discussed Russia’s hybrid war strategy, which includes information warfare, economic coercion, and military aggression. For example, the 2014 annexation of Crimea, which was internationally criticized, was portrayed by Russia as reunification, indicative of their strategic information manipulation and the lack of global response which later influenced the conflict in Eastern Ukraine’s Donbass region.

The discussion then shifted into the legal sparring following Crimea’s annexation. The UN Security Council was stalled by Russia’s veto, but the General Assembly passed a resolution affirming Ukraine’s territorial integrity. Iryna detailed Ukraine’s legal challenges against Russia’s actions, including lawsuits at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), despite Russia’s denial of involvement. On January 31, 2024, the ICJ issued a judgment addressing the International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism and the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, finding Russia violated international law by banning the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People and recognizing the independence of Donetsk and Luhansk. Iryna mentioned that the ICJ also found Russia had not breached its obligation to freeze funds meant for terrorism financing but had violated the convention by failing to investigate such financing. On racial discrimination, the ICJ recognized violations against Crimean Tatars but ultimately did not provide remedies. In response to Russia’s 2022 invasion, the ICJ ordered Russia to halt its military operations in Ukraine.

Iryna Zaverukha 2024

Responding to the 2022 invasion, the UN Security Council under Russia’s presidency could not progress due to the veto, and on February 27, 2022, the Security Council adopted resolutions that called for an emergency special session of the General Assembly to address the Ukraine crisis under the Uniting for Peace Resolution. The General Assembly during this time adopted six resolutions condemning Russia’s actions. Iryna highlighted the legal complexities in prosecuting the crime of aggression, making note of the the limitations of the International Criminal Court (ICC), as neither Russia nor Ukraine are Rome Statute parties. This led to proposals for a special tribunal and the creation of the International Center for the Prosecution of the Crime of Aggression in The Hague.

Iryna Zaverukha 2024

Iryna also discussed global efforts to address war crimes and potential ecocide in Ukraine, emphasizing the use of AI in documentation. The ICC has issued arrest warrants for high-ranking Russians for crimes like the unlawful deportation of children, indicating the ongoing pursuit of justice. Last, Iryna noted U.S. support, including legislative actions extending jurisdiction over war crimes and fostering international cooperation to hold perpetrators accountable.

Iryna Zaverukha 2024

A View from the Periphery: “Analyzing the Updated Policy on Major Disruptive Events of a Popular Platform. Adapting to the Impacts of Climate Change”

By Juan-Andrés Fuentes

A few days ago, a well-known and user-friendly online platform that enables people to book accommodations, including houses and rooms, around the world, updated its policy on major disruptive events.[1]

Photo by Markus Spiske

You might be asking, “What is a major disruptive events policy?” This type of policy regulates how this platform handles cancellations when unforeseen circumstances prevent guests from using the service/space in the manner and time outlined by the booked reservation. This policy update will only apply to events or situations in the place where the reservation is located (and within the duration of time covered by that reservation). In short, “events that impact a guest’s ability to travel to the reservation are no longer covered,” informed the company.

When I read it, I paid special attention to the part related to natural disasters that would be covered by the company. After speculating on some very extraordinary events, I asked myself:

• Is it not contradictory to severely restrict this policy’s coverage when this policy, in its early form, made this company’s service attractive to users, in the first place?
• Do future guests not deserve protection when an unforeseen event prevents them from even reaching their booked space/service?  
• Given that climate change is widely accepted as fact and no longer believed to be merely a myth, is it not contradictory to offer fewer resources and alternatives for events that we acknowledge are only increasing in severity and occurrence rate?

What is the reason for updating the major disruptive events policy regarding natural disasters? This is my hypothesis: Taking into account that the business model has proven to be successful (the brand is worth millions now), and drastic signs of climate change are on the rise, which would be reflected in the number of last-minute cancellations/refund requests made by guests due to weather problems at their home locations, the popular platform is adapting to a new reality, one where people must deal with climate change in their daily lives. As part of dealing with this new reality, guests must acknowledge the potential risk of losing part/all of the money they have paid to make a reservation through the platform due to increasingly common, yet unpredictable natural events. [2]

---

[1] To form your own opinion on the subject, take a look at this link https://www.airbnb.com/help/article/1320?c=.pi80.pkb21uaS8xLzMwODA3NTk4MjI2MTkz&euid=0d0991f7-be49-9c20-1f3d-7e3c17e90446.

[2] Thanks to Sean Bustard Berthold for his ideas to improve the content of this post.

From the Reference Desk: International Legal Documents in the News

By Jonathan Pratter

When scanning the news I like to keep an eye out for stories that refer to international legal documents of note, and then see if I can find the full text of the document. I have three examples of international legal documents in the news.

Photo by brotiN biswaS on Pexels.com

Readers of this blog will be tuned into the fact that plastic pollution is a serious issue of international concern. According to the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) 400 million tons of plastic waste are produced per year, much of it single-use plastic. Also according to UNEP it is estimated that 75 to 199 million tons of plastic is currently found in our oceans. Unless we change how we produce, use and dispose of plastic, the amount of plastic waste entering aquatic ecosystems could nearly triple from 9-14 million tons per year in 2016 to a projected 23-37 million tons per year by 2040.

In March 2022 the UN Environment Assembly adopted a resolution to develop an international legally binding instrument on plastic pollution, including in the marine environment, and to convene an Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC) to draft the instrument. The INC has met several times. Its fourth session will be in April 2024 in Ottawa, Canada. The INC will have before it a revised draft text of the international legally binding instrument on plastic pollution, including in the marine environment. The revised draft text is dated 28 December 2023, but it counts as an international legal document in the news because it will be considered by the INC at the April 2024 session. The revised draft text carries the document symbol UNEP/PP/INC.4/3.

The European Union enacted the Digital Markets Act (DMA) in September 2022 and the DMA went into effect in May 2023. The full title is Regulation 2022/1925 on contestable and fair markets in the digital sector. The DMA enacts rules of conduct for so-called gatekeepers in the digital economy. Examples of what gatekeeper platforms may not do include:

• Treat services and products offered by the gatekeeper itself more favorably than similar services or products offered by third parties on the gatekeeper’s platform;
• Prevent consumers from linking up to businesses outside the gatekeeper’s platform;
• Prevent users from un-installing any pre-installed software or app if they wish;
• Track end users for the purpose of targeted advertising without effective consent having been granted.

The DMA qualifies as an international legal document in the news because in March 2024 the European Commission opened investigations against Alphabet, Apple and Meta (all gatekeepers) for non-compliance with the DMA. Regarding Apple and Alphabet, the Commission is assessing whether measures they implemented in connection with app stores are in breach of the DMA, which requires gatekeepers to allow app developers to steer consumers to offers outside the gatekeepers’ app stores, free of charge. Regarding Meta, the Commission is investigating whether the “pay or consent” model for users in the EU complies with the DMA, which requires gatekeepers to obtain consent from users when they intend to combine or cross-use their personal data.

Twenty five years ago states participating in the Washington Conference on Holocaust-Era Assets adopted the Washington Conference Principles on Nazi-Confiscated Art. To give an idea of the flavor of the Washington Conference Principles, I quote Principle 8: “If the pre-War owners of art that is found to have been confiscated by the Nazis and not subsequently restituted, or their heirs, can be identified, steps should be taken expeditiously to achieve a just and fair solution, recognizing this may vary according to the facts and circumstances surrounding a specific case.” The Washington Conference Principles have been cited in various U.S. cases about Nazi-looted art.

Now, as of March 2024, we have a new document, Best Practices for the Washington Conference Principles on Nazi-Confiscated Art, which are intended to “clarify and improve the practical implementation of the Principles. Point D. of the Best Practices says that “’just and fair solutions’ means just and fair solutions first and foremost for the victims of the Holocaust (Shoah) and other victims of Nazi persecution and for their heirs. In principle, as set out in the Terezin Declaration, the primary just and fair solution is restitution ….” I should point out that the 2009 Terezin Declaration on Holocaust Era Assets dealt with a variety of issues in addition to Nazi-looted art. Readers of this blog can no doubt point to other international legal documents in the news.

A View from the Periphery: Exploring the Intersection of Migration and Citizenship: Research Topics and Resources to Dive Into

By Juan-Andrés Fuentes

Migration and citizenship have become increasingly relevant topics of discussion both nationally and internationally. For instance, last February, the Albanian Congress approved a treaty with Italy allowing for the temporary accommodation of migrants in Albanian territory while their asylum requests are being processed by Italian authorities.[1] In addition, just a few days ago, the Maltese government initiated the process of revoking the citizenship of the CEO of a cyber spyware company.[2] The reason behind it  would be the development of a powerful surveillance tool by his company, which has the potential to threaten global security.

Sometimes migration and citizenship could create complex situations. This post explores some possible topics where migration and citizenship intersect and offers research resources for further exploration. For instance, climate change is causing sea levels to rise, putting countries bathed by the Pacific Ocean, such as Tuvalu, at risk of disappearing. This has caused politicians, academics, and regular citizens of such countries to question what will happen to them if their territories are no longer viable. Where will they migrate? Will they become stateless?

Photo by Tima Miroshnichenko: https://www.pexels.com/photo/cold-snow-road-person-7009468/

Furthermore, during the pandemic, many businesses in Latin America had to close down because of the sudden, strict, and long lockdowns. Because most entrepreneurs in Latin American countries operate informally, the pandemic has had a devastating impact on them and their workers, forcing many to seek better opportunities elsewhere. As a result, a large number of Latin Americans have been arriving in the United States daily. While migration has had a positive impact on the North American economy, certain crimes committed by undocumented individuals have led U.S. politicians to consider ways to make it more difficult for migrants in specific categories to legalize their status. This would ultimately impede their path to citizenship, should they choose to pursue it.

In some parts of the world, demographic shifts are causing concern as the population ages and birth rates decline. For example, Japan is grappling with this issue and has started to consider migration as a possible solution. However, due to current laws, acquiring Japanese nationality through birth is only possible if one of the parents is a Japanese citizen at the time of birth. This not only discourages potential migrants from considering Japan as a destination but also poses a challenge to their full integration into the country’s culture and society.

Here are some useful resources that will assist you in your related research project:

ECOLEX: This is a reliable resource on international environmental law as it has been developed by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP).[3]

Migration Data Portal (International Migration Organization): This database provides extensive information on global migration. It even has a section dedicated to how climate change is affecting human mobility.

Global Citizenship Observatory (GLOBALCIT): This database, developed by prestigious European institutions, provides free access to information on citizenship (and electoral) laws worldwide.

Lexology: This database offers a practitioner’s perspective on different areas of law. In the case of immigration, it is relevant to consider this type of information because rules must be enforced by administrative authorities and might be contested before courts.

---

[1] https://ecre.org/mediterranean-italy-albania-deal-takes-another-step-forward-%E2%80%95-syrian-refugees-go-back-and-forth-between-cyprus-and-lebanon-despite-apparent-return-agreement-%E2%80%95-more-crossings-and-death/

[2] https://www.imidaily.com/europe/malta-moves-to-strip-citizenship-from-sanctioned-israeli-spyware-ceo/

[3] For a detailed review of this database, visit https://www.aallnet.org/fcilsis/wp-content/uploads/sites/7/2022/10/FCIL_vol37no1_October2022.pdf  

GlobaLex November/December 2023 Issue is Live

By Lucie Olejnikova

GlobaLex November/December 2023 issue is live featuring seven updates: Algeria, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Liberia, North Macedonia (formerly Macedonia), Sierra Leone, and Human Right to Water. Webmasters and content managers, please update your pages and please note that North Macedonia has a new URL to reflect the name change. We thank all our wonderful authors, new and established, for their excellent contributions and commitment to open access authorship!

UPDATE: Algerian Legal Research by Vincent Ramette at https://www.nyulawglobal.org/globalex/Algeria1.html.

Vincent Ramette is a specialist in real estate collective investment (REIT) and financial law. He oversees financial regulatory compliance, risk management, and personal data protection in an investment management company in France. He was the director of the internet customer department for a major international publisher and worked as the director of knowledge management at a global law firm. He is a former independent expert in business and corporate law and worked as a senior expert in business performance and legal databases for the European Commission (Algiers, Eastern European countries, and Moscow). He wrote numerous articles on legal information and was involved in continuous education for lawyers. Vincent holds an MA in Business Law and a bachelor’s degree in education sciences. He is an expert in lean management.

UPDATE: The Legal System of the Peoples’ Republic of Bangladesh by Mohammad Ershadul Karim at https://www.nyulawglobal.org/globalex/Bangladesh1.html.

Dr. Mohammad Ershadul Karim is a Senior Lecture at the Faculaty of Law, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia and a non-practicing lawyer enrolled with Bangladesh Supreme Court.

UPDATE: Researching the Legal System of the Kingdom of Bhutan by Pema Needup and Dr Mohammad Ershadul Karim at https://www.nyulawglobal.org/globalex/Bhutan1.html.

Pema Needup is currently the Director General of the Bhutan National Legal Institute in Thimphu, Bhutan.

Dr Mohammad Ershadul Karim is a Senior Lecturer at the Faculty of Law, University of Malaya, Malaysia and a non-practicing lawyer enrolled with the Bangladesh Supreme Court.

UPDATE: Introducing the Legal System of North Macedonia by Servaas Feiertag, LL.M. at https://www.nyulawglobal.org/globalex/North_Macedonia1.html.

Mr. Servaas Feiertag is an independent consultant and senior international expert at Servaas Feiertag Consultancy in the areas of the rule of law, justice reform, good governance, integrity & anti-corruption mechanisms, and organizational development in South Eastern Europe (since 2020, notably in the Republic of North Macedonia with public institutions and civil society), Sub Sahara Africa, and the MENA region. Over the last 25 years he has held various senior expert and management positions at the international level such as program manager, principal legal counsel, senior legal consultant/team leader, and project leader.

UPDATE: Liberian Legal System and Legal Research by Hanatu Kabbah at https://www.nyulawglobal.org/globalex/Liberia1.html.

UPDATE: Sierra Leone Legal System and Legal Research by Hanatu Kabbah at https://www.nyulawglobal.org/globalex/Sierra_Leone1.html.

Hanatu Kabbah holds an LL.B. (Hons.) and an LL.M. (Public Service Law) degree from NYU. She is a senior legal consultant and researcher, public interest practitioner with extensive experience working on access to justice in the formal and informal justice sector. She has considerable expertise in human rights, rule of law and governance with broad work experience in conflict, fragile and post conflict & transitional societies. She has researched widely on rule of law issues and developed tools for legal and non-legal advocates. She taught at the Faculty of Law, University of the Gambia and was the Director of the Law Clinic of the UTG. She received her Bachelor of Laws Degree with Honours (LL.B. HONS.) from Fourah Bay College, University of Sierra Leone and a Degree of Utter Barrister at the Sierra Leone Law School. She was admitted to the Sierra Leone Bar in 1999. She holds a Diploma in the Equal Status and Human Rights of Women in 2002 from the Raoul Wallenberg Institute of Human Rights and Humanitarian Law at Lund University in Sweden. She has also studied at the Rene Cassin International Institute for Human Rights in Strasbourg, France and at the OMCT (World Organization against Torture), Special Procedures Seminar, “Addressing the Economic, Social and Cultural Root Causes of Violence through the UN Special Procedures System” held in Geneva, Switzerland. She is also a Transitional Justice Fellow after studying at the Transitional Justice Fellowship Programme organized by the International Centre for Transitional Justice and the Institute for Justice and Reconciliation in Cape Town, South Africa in 2007. She is the author of ‘A Training Manual on Women’s Rights in Sierra Leone’.

UPDATE: Researching the Human Right to Water with an Annotated Bibliography by Jootaek Lee at https://www.nyulawglobal.org/globalex/Human_Right_to_Water1.html.

Jootaek Lee is an associate professor and FCIL librarian at Rutgers Law School (Newark). Professor Lee is also an adjunct professor and an affiliated faculty for the Program on Human Rights and the Global Economy (PHRGE) at the Northeastern University School of Law.  He is also a Massachusetts attorney. Professor Lee, a prolific scholar and author, has been published in prestigious journals, including Northwestern Journal of Human Rights, Georgetown Environmental Law Review, Law Library Journal, International Journal of Legal Information, Legal Reference Services Quarterly, Korea University Law Review, and GlobaLex by New York University Law School. His research focuses on artificial intelligence and human rights, human rights to land, water and education, Asian practice of international law, especially human rights and international criminal law, legal informatics, Korean law and legal education, and pedagogy in law. He made numerous presentations at national and international conferences. He is active with the American Association of Law Libraries (AALL) and the American Society of International Law (ASIL), having served on AALL’s Annual Meeting Program Committee, Diversity Committee, CONELL Committee, and Awards Committee. He is the former Co-Chair of International Legal Research Interest Group of the ASIL (2012-2015) and the former president of Asian American Law Librarians Caucus of AALL (2013-2014).

For more articles, visit https://www.nyulawglobal.org/globalex/index.html.

IALL 2023 Recap: Spotlight on Current Doctoral Research at the Geneva Graduate Institute

By Caitlin Hunter

The main venue for this year’s IALL Annual Course was the Geneva Graduate Institute and, as a result, attendees had the opportunity to hear from three Ph.D. students about their exciting and important forthcoming research.

Jana Šikorská discussed her research on the increasing role of mayors in international lawmaking. Šikorská described how mayors have taken on new roles, no longer simply implementing international agreements signed by national governments, but actively engaging with international organizations as partners. Initiatives such as the Global Cities Hub and the UN’s Forum of Mayors provide mayors with both formal and informal social opportunities to collaborate with each other and with international organizations. Šikorská characterized mayors as speaking a different language than national-level leaders, emphasizing practical concepts such as know-how and lessons learned, rather than abstract concepts of rights and duties. Ultimately, she argues that the increasing role of mayors represents a pluralistic, socially-rooted, and expertise-based form of norm-making that does not fit neatly into traditional lawmaking frameworks.

Fekade Abebe drew attention to the plight of the almost 60,000 missing migrants who have disappeared while searching for a better life. Abebe noted that the 60,000 number is almost certainly an undercount. There is no coordinated legal response to the missing migrant crisis and law enforcement typically blames missing migrants for their fates. The families of missing migrants generally lack the financial means, language skills, and legal knowledge to search for their loved ones and assert their legal rights. As a result, families are left in limbo and tragic mass deaths of migrant men, women, and children re-occur over and over, from the Lampedusa tragedy over a decade ago to the tragedies off Greece and Italy this June and August. Abebe’s forthcoming research searches for appropriate legal frameworks to protect the rights of the missing migrants and their families.

Finally, Stefania Di Stefano discussed efforts to integrate international human rights law into online content moderation. Di Stefano noted that social media is an increasingly important public fora for debate but one that is governed by private corporations that are not subject to traditional human rights norms protecting freedom of expression. UN human rights bodies have made a few tentative efforts to apply human rights norms to corporations, such as the Human Rights Council’s 2011 Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and various reports by the Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression and Opinion.

However, one of the major players in this area is a body created by the social media industry itself: the Oversight Board, created by Meta to hear appeals of content removal decisions made by Facebook and Instagram. Di Stefano described this as a novel attempt by a corporation to join in the “game of interpretation”, a phrase used to describe states’ efforts to persuade the international legal community that their interpretation of the law is correct. Most international legal scholars, including Di Stefano, were skeptical of the Oversight Board, suspecting that Meta planned to coopt international law to justify and “human rights wash” its existing practices. However, Di Stefano and other scholars have been positively surprised by the Oversight Board’s efforts to demonstrate its legitimacy by producing judicial-sounding decisions that cite to and apply appropriate legal authorities. Today, the Oversight Board has effectively become the largest producer of jurisprudence on freedom of expression online.

Shev123, CC0, via Wikimedia Commons

As an audience member observed during the Q&A, Di Stefano’s research highlights a theme also suggested by Šikorská’s and Abebe’s research: the breakdown of traditional formal international lawmaking mechanisms and the increasing role in international lawmaking for nontraditional actors.

Overall, hearing about the Geneva Graduate Institute students’ research was a highlight of the conference and I encourage readers to keep an eye out for their eventual publications.

From the Reference Desk: Researching International Arbitrations

By Jonathan Pratter

When looking for international arbitrations, the default call (as it should be) is Reports of International Arbitral Awards (R.I.A.A.), published by the Codification Division of the United Nations Office of Legal Affairs, and available in full text for free online. R.I.A.A. is not in chronological order. For example, volume I publishes awards from the 1920s, while volume VI has awards from the 19 teens and volume IX has awards from the 19 aughts.

R.I.A.A. is not the end of the matter. There is an interesting bibliography of collections and repertories of international arbitrations.

A student was looking for an international arbitral award from 1928 of the Upper Silesian Arbitral Tribunal. The tribunal was established in the wake of World War I to decide questions arising out of the partition of Upper Silesia between Germany and Poland. More information will be found in the entry for the tribunal in the Max Planck Encyclopedia of International Procedural Law.

The citation the student had was “A.D. 4:418.” A consultation of Raistrick’s Index to Legal Citations and Abbreviations revealed that “A.D.” is the abbreviation for the Annual Digest of Public International Law Cases, the predecessor of the International Law Reports. In volume 4 of the Annual Digest at page 418 is an extract of the award the student was looking for, but only an extract. The citation given there was to Decisions of the Upper Silesian Arbitral Tribunal, followed by the indication “in German and Polish.” On the chance that it would have more information, I consulted the Repertory of International Arbitral Jurisprudence (1991) by Coussirat-Coustère and Eisemann. There I found the name of the German edition of the decisions, Amtliche Sammlung von Entscheidungen des Schiedsgericht für Oberschlesien (1930-37). So it turned out that the full text of the award in English does not exist.

Photo by Karolina Grabowska

The Permanent Court of Arbitration (P.C.A.) is not a court. It is rather an institution established to administer international arbitrations. The P.C.A. handles both inter-state arbitrations and mixed arbitrations, such as investment arbitration, between states and private parties. The P.C.A. provides information, including the text of awards, on the arbitrations it administers under the Cases tab of its website.

Historically, the United States has been an active participant in international arbitration. A bibliographic product of this tradition is Moore’s monumental work, History and Digest of the International Arbitrations to which the United States Has Been a Party (1898) in six big volumes. In volume 1, for example, the reader will find a detailed account of the proceedings in the arbitrations carried out under the Jay Treaty of 1794 that formally ended the Revolutionary War. In addition, Moore’s History and Digest is full of detailed maps that accompany the boundary arbitrations it documents. Moore also began a related project that was left unfinished, although six volumes were produced. It is titled International Adjudications, Ancient and Modern: History and Documents (1929-1936).

A valuable reference guide is Stuyt’s Survey of International Arbitrations, 1794-1989 (3^rd ed. 1990). This covers approximately 600 international disputes that resulted in agreements to arbitrate. The one-page entries for each case give all the critical information, including the names of the parties, a brief description of the dispute, a note on the agreement to arbitrate, and notes on the disposition of the arbitration, with citations to the text of the award, if it is published.

The French have been leaders in producing works on international arbitration. Two titles of note are De Lapradelle and Politis Recueil des Arbitrages Internationaux (1905-1954) and La Fontaine Pasicrisie Internationale 1794-1900: Histoire Documentaire des Arbitrages Internationaux (reprinted 1997).

In the realm of international dispute settlement the legally binding means are arbitration and judicial settlement. Arbitration was first; it precedes judicial settlement by over a century. The ability to find and work with international arbitrations is one of the central skills of the FCIL librarian.

IALL 2023 Recap: The Swiss Legal Order and International Law: Does Direct Democracy Make a Difference?

By David Isom

On October 10, 2023, at the 41^st IALL Annual Course in Geneva, Switzerland, Andreas R. Ziegler, Professor of International Law at the University of Lausanne, discussed how Switzerland’s constitution intersects with international law, with a focus on two forms of direct democracy that it creates. He began by discussing what is sometimes described as Switzerland’s “friendliness” towards international law. With a more-or-less monist legal system, international law becomes part of the Swiss legal order as soon as an international agreement of some kind is consummated (no implementing law necessary), and international law can be applied by any judge or civil servant. That being said, there may still be questions regarding how a particular element of international law should be interpreted or applied—for example, economic and social rights like the right to schooling or healthcare can be very abstract, and the particular legal obligations that they might create under Swiss domestic law are not obvious. Additionally, although Swiss law generally recognizes the primacy of international law, conflicts between international legal obligations and domestic laws still require some kind of resolution.

Ziegler then discussed Switzerland’s traditional openness to international law and how the Swiss people and cantons are involved. He explained that Switzerland’s Constitution of 1848 was fairly modern in that it espoused human rights, setting it apart from the constitutions of its neighbors. The current constitution (the Federal Constitution of 18 April 1999 of the Swiss Confederation) is much more recent, but still shows many rules rooted in the 1848 constitution and its 1874 revision. However, the principle of direct democracy—sometimes viewed as a foundational component of the Swiss system—actually developed later through political processes.

Article 5 of the current constitution states that “[a]ll activities of the state are based on and limited by law” (§ 1), and that “[t]he Confederation and the Cantons shall respect international law” (§ 4). The constitution also establishes two forms of direct democracy. First, Article 139 creates a popular initiative process that allows for essentially any kind of change to the constitution provided that 100,000 registered voters demand it—for example, to modify technical rules for cars; change school dress codes; introduce rules that might conflict with existing international obligations, terminate an existing treaty, or influence negotiations of a new treaty; or ban the construction of minarets. § 3 establishes some limits on the changes that can be wrought through this process: the initiative must “comply with the requirements of consistency of form, and of subject matter,” and cannot “infringe mandatory provisions of international law” (jus cogens).

The second form of direct democracy is the referendum, of which there are both mandatory and optional varieties. Article 140 creates a mandatory referendum process for (among other things) “amendments to the federal constitution” and “accession to organisations for collective security or to supranational communities,” and must be approved by majorities of both the cantons and the population as a whole. Ziegler cited Switzerland’s 1920 entry into the League of Nations, joining the United Nations (rejected in 1986, approved in 2002), its 1972 free trade agreement with the European Economic Community, the 1992 rejection of joining the European Economic Area, and a future possible framework agreement with the EU as examples that were or will be subjects of the mandatory referendum process.

Article 141 creates an optional process that allows for either 50,000 eligible voters or eight cantons to request a referendum on (among other things) “international treaties that: 1. Are of unlimited duration and may not be terminated, 2. Provide for accession to an international organization, [or] 3. Contain important legislative provisions or whose implementation requires the enactment of federal legislation.” Such a demand must be made within 100 days, and if successful, requires a simple majority of the population to be approved. Ziegler cited Switzerland’s delayed entry into the WTO in July 1995, the 2019 approval of the language of the EU Weapons Directive, the 2020 Frontex agreement, and the 2021 approval of a free trade agreement with Indonesia as examples that were subject to the optional referendum process.

Ziegler concluded by offering some brief thoughts on the implications of the Swiss forms of direct democracy on international law. Since they essentially create a consultative process through which more information is shared with the citizens in order to gain their assent, they may have the effect of giving international law more legitimacy in Switzerland. Moreover, Swiss direct democracy may lend more reliability and effectiveness to the country’s foreign policy since it is created by the executive knowing that it could be rejected by the cantons or citizens. He directed the audience to “Bundesverfassung und Völkerrecht” (“The Swiss Constitution and International Law”; German only), a chapter he contributed to the St. Galler Commentary on the Swiss Federal Constitution, for a more detailed discussion of the topic.