International Responsibility of State for the Acts of an Unsuccessful Insurrectional Movement: Case of ISIS in Iraq

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-24
Author(s):  
Hojjat Salimi Turkamani
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Prime Minister ◽  
Main Question ◽  
Due Diligence ◽  
Government Officials ◽  
International Responsibility

Abstract ISIS, as an insurgent movement, announced its presence in Iraq in 2013, and, after extensive military and non-military activities in the country, its suppression was officially declared by the Prime Minister in 2017. The main question is whether the actions of this failed insurgent movement can be attributed to Iraq under international law of responsibility? This study shows that, since the Iraqi Government has taken due diligence to suppress the movement and prosecute its members, and has not granted amnesty, acts of ISIS are not attributed to it. But governmental acts of ISIS including legislative, executive and judicial ones can be attributed to state if they has taken in absence or default of government officials and in response to a request for such acts. Some of ISIS’s acts in Iraq especially in Mosul have these characteristics and are accordingly attributed to Iraq.

scholarly journals Attribution of cyber operations: an international law perspective on the Park Jin Hyok case

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 51-75
Author(s):  
Tomohiro Mikanagi ◽  
Kubo Mačák
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Alternative Pathway ◽  
The United States ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Due Diligence ◽  
Standard Of Proof ◽  
Probative Value ◽  
High Profile ◽  
International Responsibility ◽  
Key Aspects

States are increasingly willing to publicly attribute hostile cyber operations to other States. Sooner or later, such claims will be tested before an international tribunal against the applicable international law. When that happens, clear guidance will be needed on the methodological, procedural and substantive aspects of attribution of cyber operations from the perspective of international law. This article examines a recent high-profile case brought by the United States authorities against Mr Park Jin Hyok, an alleged North Korean hacker, to provide such analysis. The article begins by introducing the case against Mr Park and the key aspects of the evidence adduced against him. It then considers whether the publicly available evidence, assuming its accuracy, would in principle suffice to attribute the alleged conduct to North Korea. In the next step, this evidence is analysed from the perspective of the international jurisprudence on the standard of proof and on the probative value of indirect or circumstantial evidence. This analysis reveals the need for objective impartial assessment of the available evidence and the article thus continues by considering possible international attribution mechanisms. Before concluding, the article considers whether the principle of due diligence may provide an alternative pathway to international responsibility, thus mitigating the deficiencies of the existing attribution law. The final section then highlights the overarching lessons learned from the Park case for the attribution of cyber operations under international law, focusing particularly on States' potential to make cyberspace a more stable and secure domain through the interpretation and development of the law in this area.

Diligentia quam in suis as a Technique for a Contextual Application of the Full Protection and Security Standard: Considering the Level of Development of Host States in International Investment Law

2020 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 596-611
Author(s):  
Nitish Monebhurrun
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Investment ◽  
Due Diligence ◽  
Foreign Investors ◽  
International Investment Law ◽  
Local Means ◽  
Security Standard ◽  
Maximum Protection ◽  
Investment Law ◽  
Full Protection

With international investment law as the background to this study, the present article examines how the full protection and security standard can be construed from the perspective of developing states hosting foreign investments. The research delves into classical public international law to argue that the diligentia quam in suis rule can be used as a means of interpretation to strike a balance between foreign investors’ and developing states’ interests when construing the full protection and security standard. The rule provides that any expected due diligence from the state party is necessarily of a subjective nature. This means that developing host states must deploy their best efforts to offer maximum protection to foreign investors not on an in abstracto basis but as per their local means and capacity. Accordingly, the standard is presented as an adaptable and flexible one which moulds its contours as per the level of development of the host state. Such flexibility does not imply condoning states’ abuse and negligence. The article explains how the diligentia quam in suis rule enables a conciliation between the full protection and security standard and the host state's level of development while rationalising the standard's application to developing nations.

Can Multinational Corporations be responsible for human rights violation of its outsourcee company? Response of national or international law?

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 153-179
Author(s):  
Alessandro Suppa ◽  
Pavel Bureš
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Multinational Corporations ◽  
Corporate Law ◽  
International Economy ◽  
Due Diligence ◽  
Business And Human Rights ◽  
Original Question ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Human Rights Violation

SummaryNowadays, an important role in the world is played by Multinational Corporations (MNCs). They hire, produce, and influence the international economy, but also, they exploit, pollute. Their business activities might have a worldwide effect on human lives. The question of the responsibility of MNCs has drawn the attention of many scholars, mainly from the study field labelled “Business and Human Rights”. The present paper does not examine the topic under the same approach. The authors aim at presenting the issue in a broader perspective, exploring the concept of due diligence both in international and corporate law. In this paper, authors strategically use the uniformity of national legislations as a possible and alternative solution to the issue. They are aware of three fundamental factors: 1) the definition of MNCs needs to be as clear as possible, so to avoid any degree of uncertainty; 2) the outsourcing phenomenon interacts with that definition; 3) in case of no possibility to include outsourcing in the definition of MNC, the original question arises in a significant way.

A UN Specialized Agency for the Environment

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Said Mahmoudi
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Financial Stability ◽  
Environmental Governance ◽  
Institutional Arrangement ◽  
International Organization ◽  
Main Question ◽  
Industrialized Countries ◽  
Institutional Reforms ◽  
Global Environmental ◽  
Stockholm Conference

The issue, international organization for the protection of the environment perhaps more than those in any other area of international law, is characterized by the contestation of the policies and aspirations of developing and industrialized countries. The discussions which preceded the 1972 Stockholm Conference concerned partly the type of international institutional arrangement required for addressing the environmental problems. As regards the institutional reforms with respect to international environmental governance (IEG), the main question is whether to focus on the existing global institution, i.e. UNEP, or to create a new functional international organization. After almost five decades of existence, turning UNEP into a ‘specialized agency’ within the UN system is a reasonable move. It would meet the long-felt need to elevate its status and equip it with the necessary competence and financial stability for the demanding task it should have as an efficient global environmental organization.

Space Debris Mitigation as an International Law Obligation

2015 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 297-335
Author(s):  
Lawrence Li
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Space Debris ◽  
Outer Space ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
International Responsibility ◽  
International Liability ◽  
International Instruments ◽  
Space Activities ◽  
Proper Interpretation ◽  
Debris Mitigation

Human space activities have grown rapidly in recent decades, but the international legal framework, comprising of the five space treaties, has largely remained unchanged since the 1980s. One of the consequences is that international responsibility and liability for space debris, which is a major hazard to space activities, have also remained uncertain for years. Nonetheless, States have responded to these problems by implementing national voluntary measures. More importantly, two major non-binding international instruments have been laid down by the Inter-Agency Space Debris Coordination Committee and the United Nations Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space, respectively. This article argues that, in light of recent States practice established under these international instruments, and a proper interpretation of the space treaties, it has been recognised by the international community that States are obliged to mitigate the generation of space debris, a failure of which will lead to international liability.

Due diligence as a secondary rule of general international law

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-30
Author(s):  
Richard Mackenzie-Gray Scott
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Due Diligence ◽  
Legal Practice ◽  
Formed Part ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Domestic Law ◽  
Secondary Rule ◽  
Law Making ◽  
Law Commission ◽  
Do So

Abstract The conventional understanding of due diligence in international law appears to be that it is a concept that forms part of primary rules. During the preparatory stages in creating the Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts (ARSIWA), the International Law Commission (ILC) focused on due diligence as though it could have formed part of secondary rules. Despite this process, no due diligence provision forms part of the ARSIWA. Yet a number of the final provisions are based on primary rules. This is because the ILC relied on the method of extrapolation in attempts to create secondary rules. Extrapolation is a method of international law-making by which the output of an analytical process is reproduced in a different form following an examination of its content that exists in other forms. In using this method, the ILC attempted to create secondary rules by extrapolating from primary rules. Yet it did not do so with respect to due diligence. However, due diligence can be formulated and applied differently by using this same method. This article analyses the steps of this process to construct a vision of where international legal practice should venture in the future. In learning from and amalgamating the dominant trends in different areas of international and domestic law, this article proposes that due diligence could exist as a secondary rule of general international law. By formulating and applying due diligence as a secondary rule, there is potential to develop the general international law applicable to determining state responsibility for the conduct of non-state actors.

COVID-19 și posibilele apărări în dreptul internațional: ar putea forța majoră și schimbarea fundamentetnală a circumstanțelor să justifice neexecutarea obligațiilor internaționale?

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (2020) ◽  
pp. 186-202
Author(s):  
Ion GÂLEA ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
International Law ◽  
Common Sense ◽  
Prima Facie ◽  
Fundamental Change ◽  
The Public ◽  
Force Majeure ◽  
International Obligations ◽  
International Responsibility ◽  
The Law

The study examines possible defences that States could invoke in order to justify or excuse measures designed to respond to the COVID-19 crisis, which prima facie might not be in conformity with certain international obligations. The study examines only defences available in general international law – beside certain exceptions that might be provided by the clauses of the respective treaties. Two grounds for suspending international obligations, stemming from the law of treaties – impossibility of performance and rebus sic stantibus – and three circumstances precluding wrongfulness, stemming from the law of international responsibility – force majeure, distress and state of necessity – are subject to examination. The study argues that, even if “common sense” might draw the public opinion towards the plausibility of invoking force majeure, impossibility of performance or fundamental change of circumstances, such a conclusion does not reflect general international law. In reality, the “best candidate” as a justification or excuse is distress, while the “second best candidate” might be represented by the state of necessity.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document