Grabbing land legally: A Marxist analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 215-233 ◽  
Author(s):  
Umut Özsu
Keyword(s):  
Economic Analysis ◽  
International Law ◽  
Analytical Framework ◽  
Marxist Theory ◽  
Land Grabbing ◽  
Primitive Accumulation ◽  
Marxist Analysis ◽  
Marxist Approach ◽  
Transition To Capitalism ◽  
The Right

AbstractThis article lays the groundwork for a Marxist theory of the international law of land-grabbing. It argues that any comprehensive politico-economic analysis of land-grabbing must also be a politico-economic analysis of the law of land-grabbing. It argues further that Marx’s account of ‘primitive accumulation’ in Capital – an account it presents as an historical explanation of the transition to capitalism as well as a general theory of ‘extra-economic’ force deployed through state power, including, crucially, the power of law – is helpful for developing an analytical framework for understanding the legal facets of land-grabbing. Political economists, rural sociologists, and social and political theorists have argued for and against the applicability of Marx’s theory of ‘primitive accumulation’ to the contemporary wave of global land grabbing. Intriguingly, though, no international lawyers have grappled with the question of whether a specifically Marxist approach to the phenomenon can or should be developed. This article does so, contending that contemporary land-grabbing is unintelligible absent a theory of capitalism, and that the processes whereby capitalism transforms land and labour are unintelligible absent a theory of the periodic waves of legally mediated ‘primitive accumulation’ that propel it forward. The article pays particular attention to the work produced by Olivier De Schutter during his tenure as United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food.

scholarly journals Necessity and Proportionality and the Right of Self-Defence in International Law

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chris O'Meara
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Analytical Framework ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Military Force ◽  
Total Force ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Defensive Action ◽  
The Right ◽  
Conceptual Meaning ◽  
Self Defence

States invariably justify using force extraterritorially by reference to their inherent right of self-defence. In so doing, they accept that the exercise of such right is conditioned by the customary international law requirements of necessity and proportionality. To date, these requirements have received little attention. They are notorious for being normatively indeterminate and operationally complex. As a breach of either requirement renders ostensibly defensive action unlawful, increased determinacy regarding their scope and content is crucial to how international law constrains military force. This book examines the conceptual meaning, substance and practical application of necessity and proportionality as they relate to the right of self-defence following the adoption of the UN Charter in 1945. It provides a coherent and up-to-date description of the applicable contemporary international law and proposes an analytical framework to guide its operation and appraisal. This book contends that necessity and proportionality are conceptually distinct and must be applied in the foregoing order to avoid an insufficient ‘catch-all’ description of (il)legality. Necessity determines whether defensive force may be used to respond to an armed attack and where it must be directed. Proportionality governs how much total force is permissible and prohibits excessive responses. Both requirements are shown to apply on an ongoing basis throughout the duration of an armed conflict prompted by self-defence. Compliance with necessity and proportionality ensures that the purposes of self-defence are met (and nothing more) and that defensive force is not unduly disruptive to third-party interests and to international peace and security.

Land Grabbing as a Threat to the Right to Self-Determination: How Permanent Sovereignty over Natural Resources Limits States’ Involvement in Large-Scale Transfers of Land

2014 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 507-531
Author(s):  
Elisa Freiburg
Keyword(s):  
Natural Resources ◽  
International Law ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Land Grabbing ◽  
Human Right ◽  
Basic Premise ◽  
Planning Stage ◽  
The People ◽  
The Right

This article examines the legal connections between the modern phenomenon of ‘land grabbing’ – large-scale acquisitions of land rights by foreign investors – and the human right to self-determination. It is argued that the right to self-determination and in particular the principle of permanent sovereignty over natural resources cannot only be invoked by one State against another, but also by the people against its own government, thus legally binding all States involved in the process. The basic premise shall not be that land grabbing is per se illegal; it depends on how it is performed. The right to self-determination and the principle of permanent sovereignty over natural resources bring along important restrictions that States have to honour. Governments should develop their foreign investment relations in a way that ensures the human rights of their populations, especially given the fact that in this respect business corporations are not bound by any hard international law. The regulation of the investment is an important factor: transparency and involvement of local authorities at the planning stage, as well as the participation in the investment’s benefits help to ensure that a people is not deprived of its own means of subsistence.

The Right to Political Participation of Indigenous Peoples: A Holistic Approach

2017 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 390-427 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexandra Tomaselli
Keyword(s):  
Political Participation ◽  
International Law ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Holistic Approach ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Land Grabbing ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Indigenous Law ◽  
Indigenous Participation ◽  
The Right

In the current era of land grabbing and extractivism, political participation of indigenous peoples in their national and local affairs appears to be the crucial right to guarantee the exercise of their other rights. In the last decades, un bodies have increasingly stressed the need to improve indigenous participation in their domestic political arenas. How indigenous political participation may be recognised, operationalised, and exercised as a right, and be effective, however, remains to be discussed. Against this background, this article elaborates a proposal for a holistic approach to the right to political participation of indigenous peoples and demonstrates how it is rooted in international law, international human rights law, and international indigenous law.

World Economic Crisis and Scenarios of Post-crisis Development: Marxist Analysis

2009 ◽  
pp. 119-132
Author(s):  
A. Buzgalin ◽  
A. Kolganov
Keyword(s):  
State Regulation ◽  
Marxist Theory ◽  
Financial Capital ◽  
Late Capitalism ◽  
World Crisis ◽  
Social Interests ◽  
Marxist Analysis ◽  
World Economic ◽  
First World ◽  
World Economic Crisis

Implications of the modern Marxist theory create the opportunity to show the inevitability, the reasons and the main features of the first world crisis of the XXI century. It has been generated by deregulation of economy, which caused the ‘classical’ crisis of overproduction, and by the new contradictions of late capitalism, in particular, by persistent over-accumulation of capital and by the excessive development of the transactional sector, of the fictitious financial capital and its isolation from the real sector. Marxist analysis of social interests and contradictions shows that anti-crisis measures require not only increasing of state regulation, but also determining on behalf of whom and in the interests of what social groups this regulation will be realized. The authors propose to do this on behalf of the financial capital and in the interests of citizens, but also formulate the neoconservative scenario of post-crisis development.

PENERAPAN PRINSIP PERSONA NON GRATA TERHADAP DUTA BESAR DITINJAU DARI PERSPEKTIF HUKUM INTERNASIONAL (STUDI KASUS PENGANIAYAAN TKI OLEH DUTA BESAR ARAB SAUDI DI JERMAN)

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 60-71
Author(s):  
Devi Yusvitasari
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Recipient Country ◽  
Secondary Data ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Diplomatic Relations ◽  
National Interests ◽  
The World ◽  
Diplomatic Immunity ◽  
The Right

A country needs to make contact with each other based on the national interests of each country related to each other, including among others economic, social, cultural, legal, political, and so on. With constant and continuous association between the nations of the world, it is one of the conditions for the existence of the international community. One form of cooperation between countries in the world is in the form of international relations by placing diplomatic representation in various countries. These representatives have diplomatic immunity and diplomatic immunity privileges that are in accordance with the jurisdiction of the recipient country and civil and criminal immunity for witnesses. The writing of the article entitled "The Application of the Principle of Non-Grata Persona to the Ambassador Judging from the Perspective of International Law" describes how the law on the abuse of diplomatic immunity, how a country's actions against abuse of diplomatic immunity and how to analyze a case of abuse of diplomatic immunity. To answer the problem used normative juridical methods through the use of secondary data, such as books, laws, and research results related to this research topic. Based on the results of the study explained that cases of violations of diplomatic relations related to the personal immunity of diplomatic officials such as cases such as cases of persecution by the Ambassador of Saudi Arabia to Indonesian Workers in Germany are of serious concern. The existence of diplomatic immunity is considered as protection so that perpetrators are not punished. Actions against the abuse of recipient countries of diplomatic immunity may expel or non-grata persona to diplomatic officials, which is stipulated in the Vienna Convention in 1961, because of the right of immunity attached to each diplomatic representative.

Proposing a Way to Develop the Substantive Content of the Right of Access to Adequate Housing: An Alternative to the Reasonableness Review Model

2017 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 71-93
Author(s):  
Gustav Muller
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Municipal Services ◽  
International Convention ◽  
Cultural Rights ◽  
Substantive Content ◽  
Convincing Case ◽  
Close Proximity ◽  
Review Model ◽  
The Right ◽  
Right Of Access

In this article an attempt is made to put forward a convincing case for giving substantive content to the right of access to adequate housing and looks towards relevant international law elaborations on the meaning of this right as contained in the International Convention on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR). It does so while being aware of the Constitutional Court’s prior rejection of an international law-based minimum core interpretation of the right and opting, instead, for the so-called model of reasonableness breview. Given that the court has so expressly taken and stuck to this stance, it is argued in the article that an international law-based substantive interpretation of the right is possible – given that South Africa has recently ratified the ICESCR – and that it is preferable given the shortfalls of the model of reasonableness review. The article further highlights what difference the preferred reading of section 26(1) would make as to how courts ‘interpret’ reasonableness, that is, how courts review compliance with section 26 at present if ‘adequate’ housing is understood as having security of tenure and access to basic municipal services; is affordable, habitable and accessible; is located in close proximity to social facilities; and is culturally adequate.

The Scope and Content of Section 75(1)(a) of the Zimbabwean Constitution: An International Law Approach

2020 ◽  
Vol 53 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Chiedza Simbo
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Education System ◽  
Basic Education ◽  
The State ◽  
Education Act ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Right ◽  
Basic Education System

Despite the recent enactment of the Zimbabwean Constitution which provides for the right to basic education, complaints, reminiscent of a failed basic education system, have marred the education system in Zimbabwe. Notwithstanding glaring violations of the right to basic education by the government, no person has taken the government to court for failure to comply with its section 75(1)(a) constitutional obligations, and neither has the government conceded any failures or wrongdoings. Two ultimate questions arise: Does the state know what compliance with section 75(1)(a) entails? And do the citizens know the scope and content of their rights as provided for by section 75(1)(a) of the Constitution of Zimbabwe? Whilst it is progressive that the Education Act of Zimbabwe as amended in 2020 has addressed some aspects relating to section 75(1)(a) of the Constitution, it has still not provided an international law compliant scope and content of the right to basic education neither have any clarifications been provided by the courts. Using an international law approach, this article suggests what the scope and content of section 75(1)(a) might be.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document