Conceptualization of Restrictive Measures Policy in the Context of European Security Issues: New Approaches

The changing international situation and growing external challenges have given a new impetus to the further development of the Foreign and Security Policy of the EU. Promoting European interests and values on the world stage and enhancing the EU's ability to act autonomously are among the significant directions of the new strategic agenda of the European Union for 2019‒2024. One of the important foreign policy instruments in the EU's arsenal are restrictive measures against states, individuals and organizations (in the broadest sense). The aim of the study is the processes of conceptualization of the European policy of the application of restrictive measures: the formation of the regulatory framework and the implementation mechanism, taking into account the modern realities of the international and European legal order, in combination with the accumulated doctrinal resources and elements of the progressive development of the law of international responsibility. It is noted that it is in the EU space that the doctrinal potential is being formed, catalyzing the process of diversifying the formats of normative regulation in the sphere of implementing international responsibility. As a result of the study, the authors test the hypothesis that the following substantive components of the noted conceptualization processes correspond to the tasks of “autonomization” of the EU foreign and security policy and “a stronger Europe in the world”: countermeasures of third states; jurisdictional countermeasures; shared responsibility.

Functional Responsibility of International Organisations

This book provides a novel approach to the allocation of international responsibility in a multilayered structure like the European Union. Introducing a new concept of functional international responsibility, this study finds that in international economic law the focus of international dispute settlement bodies is not on the responsible party, but on a party best placed to bear responsibility. The book offers a comprehensive analysis of international rules of responsibility and international dispute settlement practice, primarily that of the World Trade Organization and investment arbitration. The study offers a practically applicable approach to questions of international responsibility which will assist international adjudicators, EU and Member States' officials and third country government agents who negotiate economic agreements and are involved in international economic disputes. The book is also relevant to those interested in the governance and accountability questions under the new EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement.

State Responsibility for COVID-19: Does International Contagion Constitute Transboundary Harm?

As the damage caused by COVID-19 has increased exponentially, so too has the insistence that China bears some international responsibility for the unquantifiable damage sustained as a direct result of the state having failed to contain the virus, and to notify the international community of its existence. Some have suggested that the international contagion of the virus may be classified as transboundary harm. The current article analyses the law of transboundary harm, and proposes a set of criteria based on treaty and precedent that may be relied on to properly classify an event as such. It concludes that it is not only incorrect to classify international contagion as transboundary harm, but that to do so would pose a significant risk to the position and treatment of the individual in international law.

The International Responsibility to Protect in a Post-Liberal Order

This article considers the implications of a post-liberal order for the international responsibility to protect. It focuses on two questions. First, what challenges will the international responsibility to protect face in a post-liberal order? Second, in light of these challenges, how would the requirements of the international responsibility to protect differ in the post-liberal order? In response to the first question, the article argues that in a post-liberal order the international responsibility to protect is likely to be subject to the “Influence Challenge,” whereby its ability to constrain and influence states decreases. In response to the second question, it argues that the requirements of the international responsibility to protect would be affected in several ways, including necessitating greater consideration of questions of prioritization and requiring a re-evaluation, and potential abandonment, of the currently predominant approach to the responsibility to protect.

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

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.

9. State responsibility

The law of international responsibility sets out the legal consequences arising from a breach by a State of its international obligations. It should be distinguished from ‘primary rules’ of international law, which lay down international obligations. International responsibility arises when a certain act or omission is wrongful, ie it is attributed to a State and it amounts to a violation of its ‘primary’ obligations. The international responsibility may be excused under certain strict circumstances, such as consent or necessity. Otherwise, the responsible State should cease the wrongful conduct and, in case of damage, it should provide reparation to the injured State, in the form of restitution, compensation, and satisfaction.

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.