The commons as a paradigm shift for a regenerative

As the Earth System's trajectory approaches an irreversible path towards a "Hothouse Earth", societies remain unable to collectively ensure the maintenance of a stable climate. Nearly 30 years have passed after climate change was considered a Common Concern of Humankind, a status that remains the legal framework adopted by the Paris Agreement. A stable climate is a manifestation of the stable and well-defined functioning of the Earth System. Although intangible, a stable climate exists in the real world and is necessarily a common good for being limited, exhaustible, and non-excludable. Thus, a congruent system between the rules of appropriation (negative impacts) and provision of the global public good (positive impacts) is necessary for the effective management of the common good – stable climate. However, in the current legal framework that considers a stable climate a Common Concern of Humankind, a stable climate is invisible to our international legal system and economy, which makes it impossible for it to become an object of international governance. Here, the authors argue that the recognition of a stable climate as the Common Heritage of Humankind is the first and fundamental step for being able to act towards restoring and maintaining a stable climate.

Art. 11 of the Italian Constitution between text and context

Luigi Bonanate’s book “Costituzione italiana: articolo 11” analyses Article 11 of the Italian Constitution through the prism of its application. Bonanate provides the reader, in a clear and compelling style, with a complete interpretation of Article 11, combining the analysis of the preparatory work in the Constituent Assembly with its doctrinal interpretation and political application. The book does not only analyse the drafting of this article, but also focuses on the “political history of Article 11”, on the contemporary debate by the scientific community and, finally, on its relations with the international legal system.

Jus Cogens: Problem of the Role in Treaty Interpretation

Due to their specific legal nature, the jus cogens rules occupy a special place and have conceptual significance in international law system in the vein that their non-compliance may, in fact, sabotage foundations of the international legal system based on states consent. Since the entry into force of the VCLT, jus cogens concept in international law has moved closer to international legal practice. A paradoxical situation exists - jus cogens concept in international law is generally accepted, there is also a normatively established definition of such a rule, but its specific framework and content remain unclear. The ICJ has repeatedly addressed the issue of jus cogens norms, but a detailed concept on jus cogens has not been formed. It is analyzed that the problem of establishing jus cogens is difficult to solve in abstractio. The reason lies not only in the absence of a single official list of norms jus cogens – the criteria for including norms in such a list are not defined. Opinions of representatives of the doctrine and the international judiciary on this issue differ significantly. Addressing the problem of the role and significance of jus cogens, general international law imperative rules, for the observance and interpretation of treaties, it should be noted that treaties are to be interpreted in a format compatible with the imperative norms. The considerations presented in the research indicate a special, if not decisive, role in the observance of jus cogens in treaties interpretation.Keywords: International Law; VCLT; Treaties; Imperative Rules Jus Cogens: Masalah Peran dalam Interpretasi Perjanjian AbstrakAturan Jus Cogens menempati tempat khusus dan memiliki makna konseptual dalam sistem hukum internasional dikarenakan sifat hukumnya yang spesifik, selain karena ketidakpatuhannya dapat menyabot fondasi sistem hukum internasional berdasarkan persetujuan negara. Sejak berlakunya VCLT, konsep Jus Cogens dalam hukum internasional semakin mendekati praktik hukum internasional. Situasi paradoks terjadi - konsep Jus Cogens dalam hukum internasional diterima secara umum. Ada juga definisi yang ditetapkan secara normatif dari aturan semacam itu, tetapi kerangka kerja dan isinya yang spesifik masih belum jelas. ICJ telah berulang kali membahas masalah norma Jus Cogens, tetapi konsep rinci tentang Jus Cogens belum terbentuk. Dianalisis bahwa masalah pembentukan Jus Cogens sulit dipecahkan secara abstrak. Alasannya tidak hanya terletak pada tidak adanya satu daftar resmi norma Jus Cogens – kriteria untuk memasukkan norma dalam daftar tersebut tidak didefinisikan. Pendapat perwakilan doktrin dan peradilan internasional tentang masalah ini berbeda secara signifikan. Mengatasi masalah peran dan pentingnya Jus Cogens, aturan umum hukum internasional imperatif, untuk ketaatan dan interpretasi perjanjian. Perlu dicatat bahwa perjanjian harus ditafsirkan dalam format yang kompatibel dengan norma-norma imperatif. Pertimbangan yang disajikan dalam penelitian ini menunjukkan peran khusus, jika tidak menentukan, dalam ketaatan Jus Cogens dalam interpretasi perjanjian.Kata kunci: Hukum Internasional; VCLT; Perjanjian; Aturan Imperatif Jus Cogens: Проблема Роли В Толковании Договора Aннотация Нормы jus cogens вследствие своей специфической правовой природы занимают особое место, имеют концептуальное значение в системе международного права в том смысле, что их несоблюдение может фактически подорвать основы международной правовой системы, которая опирается на согласие государств. Со времени своего включения в Венскую конвенцию о праве международных договоров 1969 г., концепция международного права jus cogens подошла к международной юридической практике. Доказано, что имеет место парадокс – концепция jus cogens в международном праве общепринятая, также существует нормативно-закрепленное понятие такой нормы, при этом ее рамки и содержание остаются неточными. МС ООН неоднократно касался проблематики норм jus cogens, однако не дал системного видения данного вопроса. Проблему определения jus cogens решить in abstracto сложно. Причина не только в отсутствии единого официального перечня норм jus cogens – не определены критерии включения норм в такой перечень. Мнения представителей доктрины и международного судейского корпуса по этому поводу существенно различаются. Приведенные в исследовании соображения свидетельствуют об особой, если не решающей, роли jus cogens в процессе интерпретации международных договоров.Ключевые слова: Jus cogens, международное право, интерпретация международных договоров, ВКПМД

An International Rule of Law

The “international rule of law” is an elusive concept. Under this heading, mainly two variations are being discussed: The international rule of law “proper” and an “internationalized” or even “globalized” rule of law. The first usage relates to the rule of law as applied to the international legal system, that is the application of the rule of law to those legal relations and contexts that are governed by international law. In this context, the term international rule of law is often mentioned as a catchphrase which merely embellishes a discussion of international law tout court. The international rule of law is here mainly or exclusively used as shorthand for compliance with international law, a synonym for a “rule based international order,” or a signifier for the question whether international law is “real” law. This extremely loose usage of the term testifies its normative and symbolic appeal although it does not convey any additional analytic value. The second usage of the rule of law in international contexts covers all other aspects of the rule of law in a globalizing world, notably rule of law promotion in its widest sense. The increasing interaction between national and international law and between the diverse domestic legal orders (through law diffusion and reception, often again mediated by international law) is a manifestation of the second form of the rule of law. The structure of this bibliography roughly follows this bifurcation of the Rule of Law Applied to the International Legal System and the Rule of Law in a Globalizing World. Next to these two main parts, three further, separate sections discuss questions that arise at the intersection of the two variants or are of crosscutting importance to the rule of law as a whole. This includes sections on the Rule of Law as a UN Project: A Selection of UN Documents on the Rule of Law, the Interaction between the International and Domestic Rule(s) of Law, and the (International) Rule of Law: A Tool of Hegemony?.

A Lauterpachtian Affair: Security Exceptions as ‘Self-Judging Obligations’ in the Case Law of the International Court of Justice and Beyond

Although Sir Hersch Lauterpacht never dealt with security exceptions during his time at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), his entire body of work formed the intellectual premise for the approach of the Court towards security exceptions and the way in which the ICJ manoeuvers in the larger debate on the relationship between law, politics and the proper discharge of the judicial function. The Lauterpachtian approach is understood as a particular attitude towards the judicial function in which the Court serves as an instrument for the protection of peace, as a guardian of the coherence and unity of the international legal system and as a driving force for the development of international law. However, in some other important elements of its reasoning, the Court seems to remain more Lauterpachtian in spirit than in letter. Despite these inconsistencies, the Court arguably exerted significant (albeit somehow uneven) influence over World Trade Organization panels and investment tribunals.

Part VI Actors, Ch.35 The State

This chapter assesses the role of the state in international environmental law. The starting point is the Westphalian notion of states' unimpaired freedom of action, increasingly revealed as a ‘myth’. The chapter then considers ideas of contemporary statehood—an element of a global system of environmental governance. Contemporary statehood and its relevance for international environmental law can best be illuminated by focusing on the roles assumed by states as authors, addressees, and guardians of international law. Finally, the chapter discusses the changing role of states in light of ongoing transformations in the international legal system, including the growing plurality of actors, norms, and institutions, as well as the growth of inter-linked networks of states and other actors.

1. The nature of international law and the international legal system

This chapter briefly discusses the nature of the international legal system. The premise is that the structure of the international legal system is fundamentally different from that of national legal order: contrary to the vertical structure encountered in domestic settings, in international law the structure is horizontal. States enjoy sovereign equality, while both international law-making and international adjudication are based on the consent of the States. There are various theories that have attempted to describe the nature of the international law, including naturalism, positivism, formalism, and realism. Also significant is the the existence of a certain hierarchy in the international legal system, in the sense that there are some peremptory norms of international law, such as the prohibition of torture and genocide, to which there is no derogation.

International Fundamental Values and Obligations Erga Omnes

This chapter argues that international law is a value-oriented legal order, and that the way in which its fundamental values are safeguarded reflects the unique structural features of the international legal system. In lack of an international constitution in a formal sense, the international fundamental values materialize through the brute practice of states, international organizations, and a number of open-ended legal concepts allowing the legal relevance of the underlying ethical convictions of the international community. In the field of international responsibility, such is the function fulfilled by the concept of obligations erga omnes. This chapter maintains that lawful responses to breaches of obligations erga omnes should always bear some elements of collectiveness. This condition realizes not only through institutionalized processes but also by means of a wide range of collective, scarcely formalized procedures of concertation of state action which may take place in institutional, political, or diplomatic settings.

China’s Fairness Discourses and Allocation of Climate Responsibility

The idea of ‘fairness’ may be viewed as fundamental to a nation’s participation in the development of the international legal system governing climate change. As the second-largest economy and the largest Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emitter in the world, China’s actions on climate change are critical to the global response. Indeed, international cooperation on climate change is unlikely to succeed without China’s active engagement. Therefore, China’s perception of the fairness of responsibility allocation will significantly influence its attitudes toward its international climate responsibilities. However, limited work has been done to date to concretely examine China’s perspective of the fairness of responsibility allocation and to understand its fairness discourses and practices of climate responsibility in a dynamically evolved process. This article aims to fill that gap in the literature by elucidating how China perceives the fair allocation of climate responsibility and how its fairness discourses and practices have evolved over the course of the three phases of international climate change negotiations. It will be shown that China has perceived the factors of historically accumulated emissions, per capita emissions and capability to lie at the very core of its understanding of fairness.