An International Relations Perspective on the Reform Needs of the Human Rights Council

This article approaches the matter of institutional reform of the United Nations Human Rights Council from an international relations perspective. A well-known tension exists between State representatives acting for their governments in international organisations, but whose decisions are presented as UN policies. The latter should be guided primarily by the UN Charter and public international law. However, in reality, different worldviews and foreign policy considerations play a more significant role. In a comprehensive stock-take, the article looks at four major dimensions of the Council, starting with structure and dynamics and major trends, followed by its country and thematic activities, and the role of key actors. Council reform proposals from both States and civil society are explored. Whilst the intergovernmental body remains the most important authority responsible for the protection of human rights in the international sphere, it has also been the subject of considerable criticism. Although it has made considerable progress towards enlarging its coverage and taking on more challenging human rights crises, among some of its major weaknesses are the election of human rights-unfriendly countries into its ranks, the failure to apply stronger sanctions on large, politically influential countries in the South and North, and lack of influence on human rights crises and chronic human rights problems in certain countries. Whilst various reform proposals have emerged from States and NGOs, other more far reaching propositions are under sometimes difficult negotiations. In the mid- to long-term, the UN human rights machinery can only have a stronger and more lasting impact if support from national/local actors and coalitions in politics and society can be strengthened.

The Versailles Peace Treaty Before the Permanent Court of International Justice: Tracing the Legalism of the Paris Settlement

The concept of international law underlying the Versailles Peace Treaty is marked by a complex and ambivalent combination of references to just peace and the use of the legal form. This article analyses the concept of law and the use of legal techniques and institutions in the Paris settlement, and connects it to various contemporaneous strands of ‘legalism' and to the transformation from (classical) nineteenth-century to (modern) twentieth-century international law. In a second step, the article turns to how the ambivalent legalism in the Versailles Peace Treaty impacted on the respective case law of the Permanent Court and how this case law connects to ‘modern' approaches to international law. While, in substance, the cases involving the Versailles Peace Treaty raised issues of both post-war settlement and international organisation, in doctrinal terms, the Court tentatively developed a concept of international law that squares with modern approaches. This can be demonstrated by examination of the case law, which contributed to the law of international organisations, redefined sovereignty, and developed the humanitarian dimension of international law.

From Versailles to the Kellogg-Briand Pact: Prohibiting and Justifying Aggression in the Interbellum

The article is a historical re-description of international legal debates concerning the ius ad bellum in the Interwar period (1919–1936). Using a core/periphery heuristic, it is demonstrated that the normative changes created by the League Covenant and the Kellogg-Briand Pact were being drafted and interpreted by the great powers in a way that still allowed them to justify military interventions in their peripheries. Even military violence between Western states could only be partially outlawed by these instruments. Legal uncertainties produced during the drafting of the new instruments could readily be exploited by the Western dominated international legal discourse. And yet, with the principle of sovereign equality on the rise in the Interbellum, and the battle of semi-periphery governments against the ‘standard of civilisation', traditional justifications for military violence came under increasing pressure. At that very moment, international lawyers in the core introduced a broader understanding of self-defence, gradually replacing former justifications for military interventions both within the core and in the peripheries of Western powers. All of this taken together in practice arguably consumed a substantial part of the alleged ‘progress' made by international legal pacifism in the Interbellum.

Book Reviews

W. A. Schabas, The Trial of the Kaiser, Oxford University Press, Oxford 2018, 432 pages, ISBN 9780198833857. (Prof. J. M. Reijntjes, Prof.em. in Criminal Law, The Open University of the Netherlands and the University of Curaçao.) Harold Hongju Koh, The Trump Administration and International Law, Oxford University Press, Oxford 2018, 232 pages, ISBN 9780190912185. (David l. Sloss, John A. and Elizabeth H. Sutro Professor of Law, Santa Clara University School of Law) Gina Heathcote, Feminist Dialogues on International Law: Success, Tensions, Futures, Oxford University Press, Oxford 2019, 256 pages, ISBN 9780199685103. (Aoife O'Donoghue, Professor of International Law and Governance, Durham University Law School) Steven Wheatley, The Idea of International Human Rights Law, Oxford University Press, New York 2019, 204 pages, ISBN 978-0-19-874984-4. (Mark A. Chinen, Professor of Law at the Seattle University School of Law and a Fellow of the Fred T. Korematsu Center for Law and Equality) Marco Longobardo, The Use of Force in Occupied Territory, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2018, xxix+320 pages, ISBN 9781108473415. (Michael Bothe, Professor Emeritus of Public Law, Johann Wolfgang Goethe University, Frankfurt am Main) Shavana Musa, Victim Reparation Under the Ius Post Bellum: An Historical and Normative Perspective, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2019, 290 pages, ISBN 9781108471732. (Dr. Jens Iverson, Assistant Professor of Public International Law, Leiden Law School, Leiden University) Russell Buchan, Cyber Espionage and International Law, Hart, Oxford 2019, xxviii+219 pages, ISBN 9781782257363. (François Delerue, Research Fellow in Cyberdefense and International Law, Institut de Recherche stratégique de l'Ecole militaire (IRSEM) and Lecturer, Sciences Po Paris) Alejandro Rodiles, Coalitions of the Willing and International Law: The Interplay Between Formality and Informality, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2018, xx+287 pages, ISBN 978-1-10-849365-9. (Matteo Tondini, Legal Advisor and Researcher Member, Italian Group, International Society for Military Law and the Law of War) Cindy Wittke, Law in the Twilight: International Courts and Tribunals, the Security Council and the Internationalisation of Peace Agreements Between State and Non-State Parties, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2018, 244 pages, ISBN 9781108335676. (Kimana Zulueta-Fülscher, Head of International IDEA's MyConstitution Programme (Yangon, Myanmar)) P. Chandrasekhara Rao and Philippe Gautier, The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea: Law, Practice and Procedure, Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham 2018, xxvii+363 pages, ISBN 9781786433008. (Valentin J. Schatz, Research Associate, Chair of International Law of the Sea and International Environmental Law, Public International Law and Public Law (Alexander Proelß), Faculty of Law, University of Hamburg) Lloyd Freeburn, Regulating International Sport. Power, Authority and Legitimacy, Brill/Nijhoff, Leiden 2018, 277 pages, ISBN 978-90-04-37978-7. (Christian J. Tams, Chair of International Law, University of Glasgow; Director, Glasgow Centre of International Law & Security)