 |
I have been teaching the class on "Actors, Institutions, and Legal Frameworks in International Affairs" off and on for a number of years since I helped develop the course as part of the committee that was tasked with a role in the establishment of the School of International Affairs of Penn State University. The course was meant as a hybrid of sorts. Its objective was to move beyond (and perhaps through) the traditional courses in international organizations, or law or the traditional courses in international affairs. Each, of course, is deeply embedded in its own core ideology. The law courses are constructed from out a world view that centers law as the authoritative expression of social order and principles. The international affairs courses share with law a deep commitment to the ideologies of the state, at least in the form in which they have emerged for what are now the liberal democratic orders of developed states. That is an ordering of the world that (like every other) believes in a a place for everything/everyone and everything/everyone in its place in which there are vertical orderings of authoritative connection to political and economic power (public and private orderings, and to its expression (law, contract, custom, etc.).
Indeed, it is possible to suggest that these traditional courses, as conventionally structured, serve more as an apologia for a constructed world view and as the instrument for its rationalization in ways that then naturalize the subject and treat it as inevitable and incontestable. In a sense, that framing premise well serves the core objective of education, where education is understood primarily as a means of socializing the young, the untrained, and the community. Education embeds societally important values and perspectives to ensure that the existing political, economic, religious, etc. structures are carried forward. There is nothing wrong with that. Education in that sense, as indoctrination, as a societal and political catechism, has a long pedigree. Education as indoctrination been used by communities of believers for a very long time, whether those communities are political, economic, societal or religious. They have ended to raise objection mostly when elements of a community (either within or outside of it) object to a catechism or portions of it. Ironically even rebellious education int he West is a form of (counter) indoctrination where its critical approach serves other but equally potent ideological masters.
Education can also serve as a means of lifting the gaze from out of the premises within which it is located. Education might, for some, serve a useful purpose, not as indoctrination, but rather as the space of greater enlightenment--an enlightenment that can then be taken back within the ideologically constrained worlds in which we must make our lives. One lifts the gaze in two senses. First it is possible to do so within an ideological community to try to better see the way that its orthodoxies are being challenged and with that challenge the way that ideology either drives or is driven by change or events. Second, it is possible to do so between self-referencing ideological systems, of distinct and self contained ways of seeing and ordering the world. Taken together it may be possible to reverse the study of the way the world is ordered by starting with the characteristics of that ordering and then attaching to it the systems of filtering those characteristics in ways that make it possible to squeeze "useful" meaning from them. The object would be to attach an ideology to characteristics last, and to engage in the study of the characteristics first.
This is not to suggest the criticism-self criticism exercises of systems by their own followers, which is what tends to pass for analysis in may quarters. Instead, it is to suggest thee exercise of moving beyond ideological perspectives in the study of human behaviors organized through the language of law or the structures of political, economic, or societal communities. It is an effort to engage, in as clear eyed an examination as possible, in identifying the characteristics, misalignment, and challenges of these communities as they seek to engage others while also meeting internal challenges to their own orthodoxies. This is not an easy task. One is always deeply embedded in one's own way of seeing and understanding the world. Even efforts to see the world as other "naturally" see it may be affected by one's own "home" view. Yet it is an effort worth making, if only to better understand the realities of the complexities of the world in which one operates, in order to better understand other when they seek to speak across ideological communities. One can do this and remain loyal to one's own world view "home base."
In any case, I thought it was worth the effort to be guided by these ideas in the preparation of a class ostensibly focused on three of the key critical elements of international affairs--its actors, their institutions, and legal frameworks (the language of such affairs). The object of instruction would be on meaning making, that is on the ways in which communities create and impose coherent systems of meaning on their surroundings and on their sense of themselves as themselves and in the world. Success or failure? Only time (and my students) will tell, It was worth the effort, and I invite those interested to have a look and share their thoughts.
What follows is the application of these ideas in the the form of the course on ""Actors, Institutions, and Legal Frameworks in International Affairs." The Course learning outcomes objectives and grading, plus the course concept statement and syllabus follow.
Actors, Institutions, and Legal Frameworks in International Affairs
INTAF 801
Semester: Spring Semester 2021
Larry Catá Backer
DOWNLOAD VERSION (PDF): Spring 2021 INTAF801SYLL_Spr2021
This course introduces students to the various levels of international interaction and exchange (supranational, state-to-state, state-to-private, private-to-private); the sources and limitations of law and regulation at each level; and the variety of actors and institutions characteristic of each level. The course explores the roles, authority, and limitations of the institutions and actors at each level and the implications of these for domestic and transnational governance, development, human rights, commerce, migration, and civil society.
STATEMENT OF LEARNING OUTCOMES AND ASSESSMENT
Learning Outcomes:
The “Course Concept Statement” is included below at the beginning of the Syllabus. Students are expected to acquire a working knowledge of the following.
First, students will be introduced to the current landscape within which it is possible to understand the nature and role of actors, institutions, and legal frameworks that relate to international affairs. That requires a strong focus on the principles of economic globalization and its emerging variants, as well as oppositional systems. That introduction will also serve to provide students with an initial exploration of the dynamic political-economic-societal environments within which actors and institutions are identified (and legitimated or outlawed), and within which legal (rule) frameworks are developed and implemented
Second, students will be introduced to the range of organizations that populate the landscape of international affairs. Students will be introduced first to the distinction between public and private institutions. Within public systems of institutionalized authority students will distinguish, as political and legal entities, between the state, public international organizations, and international financial institutions. Within private systems of institutionalized authority students will distinguish between economic organizations (including multinational enterprises), civil society organs (e.g., non-governmental organizations), religious organizations, hybrid institutions (e.g., the International Standards Organization (ISO), and outlaw institutions (e.g., organized crime, and organized non-state political movements).
Third, students will examine more carefully the principal actors, their institutional forms, and the forms of their engagement in international affairs. The focus of this exploration with respect to each of these actors will be similar: how are they constituted, who are their stakeholders, what is the extent of their authority (internal and external), to which other entities are they dependent, how to they operate.
(A) The state: The students will consider the state system—that is, the state as a political organization and as an actor among other states and non-state actors. They will be introduced to notions of differences between governors and governed and hierarchies of authority. Students will be introduced to law as the means through which states communicate authoritatively to order and control their territories and populations. Distinctions between the domestic law of states (that bind the state and its populations) and the international law (that are made between and bind states) will also be considered.
(B) Public International Organizations: Students will consider the way that the collective of states have built the contemporary state system That study focuses first on the development of the United Nations system and the public international organizations established around or through the U.N. system. Students will also consider te regional human rights systems (those of the African Union, European, and the Organization of American), and international financial institutions (World Bank States, International Monetary Fund, and Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank ). Students will also examine the way that law is used as the authoritative method to constitute these organizations, and as the means through which they speak authoritatively through treaty, regulation, and the development of policy. Students will also become familiar with the way that public organizations sometimes use private law (contract) to develop systems of regulation (for example through loan agreements). The differences between formal and informal communication—between hard and soft law, and between public law (the law of states) and private law (the law of non-state actors) is introduced.
(C) Civil Society: Students will be introduced to the elements of civil society—as actors and institutions, and their emergence as key players in international affairs. Key areas of examination will be national regulation, the application of international law and norms, and more specifically the emerging issue of protection for human rights defenders.
((D) Economic Actors: Students will be introduced to the key role of large institutional economic actors—mostly multinational enterprises—in the operation of globalization. The key areas of study will be on the development of data driven governance mechanisms, on the delegation of public authority to private actors (the transformation of economic enterprises into privatized administrative agencies), and the role of these enterprises within the international system.
Fourth, students will consider how each of these entities operates within the global context. They will consider the “rules of engagement” among these institutions. They will also explore the ways in which these institutions communicate with each other (and their interlinkages), how or to what extent they retain autonomy with respect to internal and external activity), and how their interactions affect policy, culture, economics, and globalization.
Fifth, students will be exported to develop some familiarity with the way that law and regulation serve as the language of internal affairs. Students will be expected to acquire a rudimentary knowledge of the international law system, and its distinction from domestic law systems. Students will also explore the quasi-legal nature of governance systems—rules that have the functional effect of “law” but are not produced through the organs of state actors.
Sixth, students will learn how to manage and present information in groups. The object is t provide students with more practical experience in translating theory into practical knowledge that can serve as the basis for policy analysis and recommendations in context.
Learning Outcomes Assessment:
Student achievement in all learning outcomes will be measured by (1) FOUR group presentations (each worth 15% of the grade), (2) Group Summary Reports Assigned throughout the semester (together worth 20% of the grade); and (3) a final 24 hour open book take home examination to be administered through the CANVAS system (worth 20% of the grade). Learning Outcomes will be monitored through student participation in class discussion and in the group presentations.
* * *
SYLLABUS
This Syllabus consists of a (1) Course Concept Statement, (2) Statement of Course Content and Structure, (3) Summary Syllabus (With Weekly Discussion Themes), and (4) Detailed Syllabus With Problems and Assigned Readings.
Course Concept Statement:
“Actors, Institutions, and Legal Frameworks in International Affairs” introduces students to the core principles and methods of international interaction and exchange. Interaction points to the forms used to engage with others—communication, collaboration, cooperation, association, and their opposites. These can range from the informal and serendipitous, to the formal and meticulously orchestrated. Exchange tends to be understood as a consequences of interaction; it is what interaction makes possible in terms of trade or exchange. But it also suggests the quality of the interaction—an argument, an altercation, an airing of difference. Interaction and exchange mark all behaviors among individuals, as well as the institutions and communities within which they may be situated (either by choice, birth, or circumstances). It is around these exchanges and interactions that complex webs of politics, society, economics, religion, and culture are woven.
These complex webs, in turn, serve as the basis for the great systems that now dominate life in virtually every part of the globe. The course starts with an examination of organizing system ideologies and then consider six key systems that constitute the driving elements of international interactions and exchanges.
Organizing Ideologies for International Affairs.
Every system, though, is made up of actors, of the institutions within which actors can engage in collective activity, and the language through which these systems are constituted and which are also used within systems as the basic mode communication. To that end, it become necessary to understand actors, the institutions in which they operate, and the structuring language through which such actions are given effect and meaning. Consideration of each of the systems identified below requires a close examination of the actors, institutions, and framing language through which these systems are constituted and operate. Each requires a slightly different approach.
A number of ideological systems are identified. Most attention will be paid to the dominant ideology of contemporary international affairs—the ideology of post 1945 globalization built around a very specific view of the state system It identifies the values and key premises of this ideological base and suggests its trajectories. This is a systemic ideology that reached the apex of its power in the first decades of the 21st century. It is grounded in principles of markets driven fere movement of goods, capital, investment, and to a lesser extent—people. It embraces the principle of formal equality among states and the supremacy of national law. It creates a community of states through international law that is transformed from mere contracts between states to constituting documents that create government for the management of the duties and responsibilities of states, and for the development of the values to be advanced by that community. It is also a system that encourages the delegation of authority and embraces new sources of governance and new governance actors who operate in transnational space—civil society, multinational enterprises, private standard setting bodies, religious organizations. It is also a system that is increasingly grounded in overarching cultures of compliance and accountability administered through standards overseen by bureaucracies of public and private actors.
That ideology of post 1945 globalization is now challenged and students will also consider a number of these challenging ideologies. Very briefly, these include neo-imperialism ideologies that are represented by variations of hub and spoke systems of inter-state relations which are then augmented and administered through international institutions and operationalized through deputized private actors. The America First and Chinese Belt and Road Projects may manifest moves toward this ideology. It also includes post-colonial ideologies. These have an older pedigree and arose even as contemporary globalization ideology gained dominance. Post-Colonial ideologies reject the core principles of post 1945-globalization and those of neo-imperialist schools, especially the exercise of hegemonic authority by states and the governance role of private actors. It seeks to deconstruct the current systems based on an objective of dismantling structures of power hierarchies among states and to seek a more equitable division of benefits and obligations that are components of the tasks of increasing human welfare. It is suspicious of the exercise of power beyond state borders and yet understands that community is necessary as a predicate to challenging unbalanced exercises of national power directly or through international organizations.
Each of these ideologies are manifested in the construction of systems of international affairs. Students will be introduced to the relationship between ideological perspective and the way that affects and constrains the possibility of building systems of international relations. The focus will be, initially, on introducing students to the conventional master narrative of international relations (and to re-interpret that master narrative through the lens of ideological analysis). It then considers emerging schools of international affairs, focusing students on transnational and plural law theories, and polycentricity in governance. Because one is engaged here in system building, students will also in the process be introduced to the (1) forms of legal discourse (2) in the translation of ideological positions to concrete manifestations (3) in institutional organization, (4) in the management of power and (5) in the creation of values systems (6) through which the politics, culture, and sociology of international affairs is organized.
Actors, Institutions, Law.
Framing ideologies have to frame some community and must occupy some sort of space (concrete or abstract) within which it can be manifested and applied. . In international affairs, the community through which ideologies ae manifested include three quite different sorts of structures that move from the more or less concrete t the infinitely abstract.
1. Actors. Not all actors are central to each of the five systems described above. It will be necessary to examine which actors tend to be important to a system, and to determine further, the extent to which actors are important across systems (and how that significance is understood). The defining characteristic of actors is that they “act”--that is that they are capable of agency. They have the capacity, however constituted, to set things in motion, to perform; they are those who drive other things (people, events, policy, decisions, etc.). Any one or thing, abstract or corporeal can be an actor. Part of what the student will undertake in this course is to begin to develop a method for identifying actors relevant to the study of international affairs. In that context, however, it is the character of the actors that themselves are essential elements in the understanding of the characteristics of systems, but also of the ways in which such systems will be constrained. Every actor carries with it a set or self-conceptions and principles of actions (including objectives and taboos) that are essential to their own constitution, but also critical to the way in which they operate within systems. That accumulation of those operational objectives and constraints, then provide the system with its character and the limits of evolution (and, as we will see, of reform). The identification and examination of actors, then, will play a large role in the study of the systems through which they act.
2. Institutions. Institutions are establishments through which collectives can become a singularity; they are a thing established as well as its arrangement and characteristics. They are also a curious hybrid—like the state. On the one hand it is a singularity. An institution is spoken of and understood in the singular. And yet that singular personality is a construct—of law, of social norms and expectations, and of the collective consent of those who choose to operate within it. At the same time, institutions might be understood as collectives—as the means through which individuals can aggregate something (capital, effort, political or religious authority) and manage collective objectives, aspirations and rules to create communities of shared interest. Institutions are both the sum of its constituents as well as an organism apart from those who come together to create it. It is a means of structuring and aggregating, of collective action, but it is at the same time a singular actor. In the first half of the 21st century, institutions have also come to be understood as platforms. It is in this sense a nexus point, a space, within which other actors may operate. In this sense they can be the collectives made up of other actors. For example, the international system includes international organizations that are themselves the representative bodies of states. In this sense, institutions might be understood as its internal constituency (in the sense that a state is its citizens, or a corporation its shareholders). But markets are also institutions--a space where actors and others can bring objects for exchange. Depending on the circumstance, these different characteristics may be emphasized. But together they play a key role in understanding the way that collective organizations work. During the course of study we will consider the way that different systems approach the construction of institutions differently, and the consequences of those differences in terms of the exchanges and interactions possible among them.
3. Law. Students are fairly well used to the language of policy, at least in terms in which discourse is constructed and meaning (including values) are given to words, concepts, and taboos. They are less used to the language of law, and of business. Both the language and discourse, the way in which meaning is made and frames of reference constructed through the language of policy and law are themselves subsets of the larger framing language and discourse of core system ideologies. The six great systems to be considered, and identified below are essentially framed by and operate using language, concepts and principles that touch both on law and on business. Familiarity with legal concepts and orientation, as well as the tropes used to express (and manage) political, economic, social, and religious issues through law will be highlighted. But the language of business has also become important. We live in a word of accountability, whose rules are implemented not through the coercive police power of the state but rather by the constant and repetitive process of assessment. Accounting and accountability, risk management, and compliance will also be considered as the means through which systems are now operated. As well the differences in the ways that framing language (of law and accountability) between these systems tell the student much about how they operate and the way they are conceived. Attention will be paid to similarities and differences between systems in the way they use the language of law and of accountability.
Six key systems in international affairs.
The combination of framing ideologies, and the three structural components necessary to give them life, now appear to operate within six systems within which ideology and clusters of actors, institutions, and law operate to give the system its internal character and define the way in which they may interest with other systems. Together this produces the ecology within which it is possible to understand international affairs. The six foundational systems that produce the environment in which international affairs occur include: (1) the state; (2) public international organizations (including regional organizations); (3) private international organizations (civil society and multinational enterprises); (4) private transnational economic systems (MNEs, SOEs);(5) public international judicial systems; and (6) private grievance and dispute resolution systems.
1. The State System. Political systems remain the basic building blocks through which international exchanges and interactions are grounded. Until the middle of the 20th century states were deemed to be the only mechanism for such exchanges that had any authority. But the development of multilateralism, and the rise of governance authority in international public and private organizations—the structural foundations for globalization—have substantially transformed the role and function of states. Still, no understanding of international interactions and exchanges is possible without first understanding the state within these emerging webs of activity—and of governance. In that context it is important to understand the concept of the state, the meaning of sovereignty, and the basic framework within which states have developed rules for governing their inter-relations. It is also important to begin to understand that states do not appear the same from the inside and from the outside. From the outside the state appears as a unitary body corporate onto which all political authority has been vested (through the operation of whatever political theory suits its people). States are formally equal in their inter-relations; functionally the authority and power of states are based on a number of factors. But effectively all states are unequal. States may work in concert, or they may seek to act alone. But all states appear solid form the outside—a single color painted onto maps. From the inside, states may appear far less solid. While states are solid, their government can vary wildly. That variation goes not just to the organization and theory of operation of government. But it also touches on the effective extent of government control of its territory and population. Just as states can cede some authority to institutions created among a group of states, states have also ceded authority down to regions and peoples. While states ae vested the highest authority over politics, economics, and society, it may have a more complex relation with religion and with ethnic nations within a territory. But since 1945, states have also operated in the private sector. States have become enterprises (SOEs or state-owned enterprises); they have become investment vehicles (sovereign wealth fund); they have become banks and insurance companies (Ex-Im Banks). This has complicated the traditional understanding of states as public bodies regulating markets, as against private bodies participating in markets or as social actors. The highest expression of state activity is through law or permitted exercises of executive (administrative) discretion. It will be as important for the student to develop an understanding of the language (its ideologies and constraints) that states use to communicate (and to bind themselves and their residents) as it is to develop a clearer understanding of the state itself. To that end a basic grounding in principles of international law and of national formation will be necessary.
2. Public International Organizations. Especially since 1945, states have sought to act in concert. That action in concert principle has led to the development of an enormous and enormously variegated universe of international organizations, many of which are vested with forms of executive, legislative or judicial authority. International organizations are the constructs of states. They are created through law; and they function through governance principles constrained by the (international) law form which they were created. International organizations can be organized into complex multi-institutional systems—the classic one is the United Nations system. Or they can be organized into functionally distinctive organs—like the world Trade Organization or the International Criminal Court (the later to be considered as an exemplar of a public prosecutor-judicial institution). Their authority is limited only by their willingness of states to concede to their authority. But since 1945, even non-consenting states may be caught up in their webs of governance. Nonconsenting states may be required to observe the rules of international practice in their relations with consenting states. But international organizations are not limited I their capacity to traditional matters of public concern. Critically important to the construction of a globally disciplined economic and financial system embedding the values of markets driven globalization and its governance values has been the role played by international financial institutions (IFIs), principally the World Bank, and the International Monetary Fund, now joined by the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank and others. Here one encounters the regulatory and policy power of lending and its legalization through contract. The great web of international organizations has produced the foundations necessary for the development of economic globalization. They have set global standards, they have provided consensus global normative principles—from principles of development, to human rights, to conflict. Their operation is as varied as their objectives. The understanding of the international system, and their relation to states, and increasingly to individuals and non-state entities, forms the key element in the operation of global systems.
3. Private International and Transnational Organizations. States are not the only “bodies corporate” that have embraced the notion of multilateralism. Globalization has also produced a trend toward the development and operation of private international organization. The most well-known of these are international governmental organizations that seek to act as the nexus point for the organization of collective popular will across states. These are usually organized along functionally differentiated lines. Amnesty International and Oxfam are two famous examples. But there are others. And they have become important actors in systems of international public organizations. But beyond NGOs, there are a growing number of private international organizations that function in a variety of areas. These include standard setting organizations, and organizations that create, certify, and monitor compliance with their own standards. They have become an essential element of the move from human rights based to sustainability-based responsibility for economic transactions by public or private bodies. In the process they have developed sometimes autonomous systems of governance that have become important drivers of international exchanges and interactions.
4. Private transnational economic systems (MNEs; SOEs). Globalization has not only made borders more porous, to has created a significant governance gap. While states have great authority within their borders, they generally cannot reach economic activity beyond their borders, though the power of the more powerful states to reach their economic actors outside their borders is greater. And that is the problem. Globalization has made it possible to move from national to global production chains. It has permitted the disaggregation of economic activity. So disaggregated, economic activity can be placed in any number of different places and all coordinated through interlinked relationships of contract or ownership. The resulting aggregation, the multinational corporation, has itself transformed the nature of governance. Since the start of this century, the multinational enterprise has become both a source and an object of international regulation. States and international organizations have increasingly delegated regulatory objectives to MNEs. Legal cultures of compliance and accountability, including anti-corruption efforts, human rights and sustainability obligations, along with efforts to suppress terrorist and international criminal activity (money laundering, modern slavery, have resulted in the creation of law and normative frameworks at the national and international levels that have effectively imposed n MNEs an obligation to monitor their supply chains and to use their control and contract relations to ensure compliance with normative and legal expectations. MNEs have also become, like NGOs an important stakeholder in the creation of international norms. As a result, much operational regulation of economic activity is overseen by or developed through the system of disaggregated coordinated economic production.
5. Public International Judicial Systems. Public judicial system are both the oldest and in some respects the least developed forms of international remedial organs. It is likely that international public judicial organs came late to the scene precisely because of the utility and success of national judicial systems and the willingness of states to tolerate the forum and rule shopping that follows a system fractured along national lines. But from the early 20th century, and increasingly in this century, public international judicial bodies have arisen in response to the needs of states to find a means of peaceful settlement of disputes among them. More importantly, as international organizations have been created to develop international law systems—judicial mechanisms had to be developed to provide a means of vindicating these newly developed systems of rights and duties. Foremost among these efforts has been the development of an international system of criminal law, and the simultaneous development of an International Criminal Court through which those rights are vindicated. But also important are the evolution of regional human rights tribunals. The European, OAS, and African Courts of Human Rights have become powerful actors in the development both of a normative system based on human rights, and as a vehicle for the vindication of such rights, mostly against states indirectly, and private individuals indirectly. .
6. Private International Grievance and Dispute Resolution Systems. Since the end of the last century a number of dispute resolution and remedial systems have acquired prominence. These tend to blend elements of public and private organizations. What makes them distinctive is their separation both from the judicial organs of states, as well as from a tight adherence to the domestic legal orders of any state or of international bodies. There is a substantial variety of forms that have emerged. Some of them are almost wholly private and deal specifically with issues related to economic activity. In that respect we will consider the great systems of private arbitration that have arisen, both as examples of autonomous systems and for their substantive and operational characteristics. We will also consider hybrid arbitration systems. These include ICSID, a World Bank sponsored system for arbitration of claims between states and private entities related to the protections of bilateral trade agreements. But increasingly, these private systems also include emerging company-based grievance mechanism. These are distinctive for three reasons. First they tend to serve as the creators of enforceable norms specific to the company. Second, these norms tend to be enforced, increasingly, along the entire chain of production over which the company has authority. Third, they give rise to grievance mechanisms that sometimes even displace those offered by states through their judiciaries. Related to these company grievance mechanisms are multilateral private mechanisms. The most well-known of these was established in the wake of the Rana Plaza Factory building collapse, in which a group of companies formed an collective and provided (and funded) a grievance mechanism that substantially displaced the courts and national remedies. Lastly, the importance of religious courts ought to be considered. They sometimes serve a hybrid role—institutions to which the state has devolved authority over certain matters. At other times they serve as autonomous vehicles for applying religious norms enforced through religious courts over economic and social matters in interactions among members of a faith community.
Taken together, this matrix of ideologies, of systems and their actors, institutions and framing language, produce the rich environment in which international activity is now managed. That matrix suggest that this environment is dynamic and constantly changing. It also suggests that the systems created are volatile, even if internally stable.
* * *
This course will examine each of these elements of the matrix of the environment within international exchanges and interactions are possible. Though it is a large class, the intention is to teach it in a modified seminar style. Each week’s discussion will be built around a group of materials that suggest the central themes to be discussed. That discussion, in turn, is built around presentations derived from student group work. Each of the presentations will be centered on the five systems described above, each of which will serve as a separate section of the course. The object is to teach “law and policy in action” at the operational level, and to avoid, to the extent possible, too great an emphasis on abstract concepts detached form the real world in which they are being applied, and through this application, changed.
The course is thus divided in six parts. Part I serves as introduction. That will set the tone for the course, one in which the student will be asked to apply abstract knowledge to the concrete problems. Part 2 then considered the ideological foundations. Parts 3-8 then examines in more detail the different systems of international affairs identified in the Course Concept note: the state, public international organizations, private international organizations, private transnational economic organizations, public judicial systems, and private prosecutorial and judicial mechanisms. Each is built around readings and student presentations. Students will be responsible for their presentations as well as expected to participate meaningfully in discussion of other presentations and the readings. Team assignments will be distributed during the first week of class.
SYLLABUS
Part I Introduction
Class 1: Introduction
-- Course Information, course concept note and syllabus review
Part 2 From Ideology to Master Narrative in International Affairs:
Actors, Institutions, Legal Frameworks
Class 2: The ideological core of the globalization baseline:
Different lenses through which one “sees” and relates to the world and its ordering: Varieties of ideologically contingent ways of approaching globalization.
READINGS:
--Larry Catá Backer, “Economic Globalization Ascendant: Four Perspectives on the Emerging Ideology of the State in the New Global Order.” University of California, Berkeley La Raza Law Journal, Vol. 17, No. 1, 2006. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=917417.
Class 3-4: The Conventional Master Narrative of International Institutional Law or Ordering:
Conceptual Background
READINGS:
--Alvarez Chapter 1 pp. 1-57;
Class 3 Sections 1.1-1.3 (pp. 1-45)
Each Group is to prepare a 1-2 page summary of each of the analytical frameworks as follows:
Groups 1-4: Functionalism (pp. 17-29)
Groups 5-8; Realism (pp. 29-32)
Groups 9-13: Disaggregationists (pp. 32-39)
Group 14-15 Critical Theory (pp. 39-43)
Groups 16-17: Constructivism (pp. 43-45)
Class 4 Section 1.4 (pp. 45-57).
Class 5: An Alternative--International Institutional Law as Transnational Law
READINGS (Each Group is to prepare 3-5 page summary of the reading assigned)
-- Larry Catá Backer, The Emerging Normative Structures of Transnational Law: Non-State Enterprises in Polycentric Asymmetric Global Orders, 31 BYU J. Pub.L. 1 (2016)). Also available HERE: https://digitalcommons.law.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1527&context=jpl , pp. 1-29(Parts I-III). GROUPS 1-3
--Peer Zumbasen, Transnational Law, CLPE Research Paper 09/2008 Vol. 04(2). Available http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1105576. GROUPS 4-6.
-- Craig Scott, “Transnational Law” as Proto-Concept: Three Conceptions, 10(7) German Law Journal 859 (2009). GROUS 7-9
-- Reza Dibadj, Panglossian Transnationalism, 44 Stanford Journal of International Law 253 (2008). GROUPS 10-12
--Terrance Halliday and Gregory Schaffer, “Transnational Legal Orders,” in (Halliday & Schaffer (eds) Transnational Legal Orders (Cambridge University Press, 2015), pp. 1-22; 45-51. GROUPS 13-15
--Teubner, Gunther, Global Bukowina: Legal Pluralism in the World-Society (1996). GLOBAL LAW WITHOUT A STATE, Gunther Teubner, ed., Dartsmouth, pp. 3-28, 1996, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=896478 GROUPS 16-17
OPTIONAL (EXTRA CREDIT FOR PREPARATION OF A 3-5 PAGE SUMMARY of either or both)
--Backer, Larry Catá, The 'Cri de Jessup' Sixty Years Later: Transnational Law’s Intangible Objects and Abstracted Frameworks Beyond Nation, Enterprise, and Law (March 12, 2019). In Peer Zumbansen (ed.), Jessup’s Bold Proposal. Critical Engagements with Transnational Law (Cambridge UP, 2019) , Coalition for Peace & Ethics Working Paper 3/1 (March 2019) , Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3350824,
--Mark Drumbl and Katerina Uhlirova, “Actors and Law Making in International Environmental Law,” Research Handbook of International Environmental Law (Cambridge2019).
Part 3: The State System Within the International Ecologies:
Sovereignty Looking Inward and Outward
Class 6: The Foundation: The Idealized State, Sovereignty, and its Constitution
READINGS (Each Group is to prepare 3-5 page summary of the reading assigned)
--Convention on Rights and Duties of States (inter-American); December 26, 1933 (http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/intam03.asp). GROUPS 1-2
----Alexander Passerin D’Entrèves, The Notion of the State: An Introduction to Political Theory (Oxford, 1967, pp. 1-11). GROUPS 5-6
--Stephen Krasner, Sovereignty: Organized Hypocrisy (Princeton University Press, 1999), pp. 1-41. GROUPS 7-9
--Restatement (Third) of Foreign Relations Law of the United States, § 201.GROUPS 10-12
--Larry Catá Backer, God(s) Over Constitutions: International and Religious Transnational Constitutionalism in the 21st Century. Mississippi Law Review, Vol. 27, 2008. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1070381. GROUPS 13-15
--J.P. Nettl, “The State as a Conceptual Vehicle,” in The State: Critical Concepts. Volume: 1 (John A. Hall, ed., London: Routledge, 1994) 9-24. GROUPS 16-17
--Westel W. Willoughby, The Fundamental Concepts of Public Law (New York: MacMillan, 1924). Excerpts. GROUP 3-4
Class 7: Weak States, Strong States in the State System
READINGS (Each Group is to prepare 3-5 page summary of the reading assigned)
--Backer, Larry Catá, Are Supply Chains Transnational Legal Orders? What We Can Learn from the Rana Plaza Factory Building Collapse, UC Irvine Journal of International, Transnational, and Comparative Law: Vol. 1(1), 11 et seq. .Available at: https://scholarship.law.uci.edu/ucijil/vol1/iss1/3. GROUPS 1-2
-- Peter T. Leeson and Claudia R. Williamson, Anarchy and Development: An Application of the Theory of Second Best, Law & Development Review 2009. GROUPS 3-4
-- Ken Menkhaus, Governance Without Government in Somalia: Spoilers, State Building and the Politics of Coping, International Security 31(3): 74-106 (2007). GROUPS 5-6
-- David Sogge, Weak States and the Savage Wars of Peace, available https://www.cidac.pt/files/4013/8316/2850/weak_states_and_the_savage_wars_of_peace.pdf. GROUPS 7-8
--OECD (2011), International Engagement in Fragile States: Can’t we do better? OECD Publishing, available https://www.oecd.org/countries/somalia/48697077.pdf. GROUPS 9-10
--Westel W. Willoughby, The Fundamental Concepts of Public Law (New York: MacMillan, 1924). Excerpts. GROUPS 11-12
--Stewart Patrick, Weak States and Global Threats: Assessing Evidence of Spillovers (January 2006). Center for Global Development Working Paper No. 73, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=984057 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.984057 GROUPS 13-14
--Coyne, Christopher J., Reconstructing Weak and Failed States: Foreign Intervention and the Nirvana Fallacy. Foreign Policy Analysis, 2006, 2: 343-361., Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=887414 GROUPS 15-16
--Larry Catá Backer, “The Clash of Empires? Playing With Fire in the Shadow of the Umbrella Movement,” Hong Kong Between “One Country” and “Two Systems” Essays from the Year that Transformed the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (June 2019 – June 2020) (Little Sir Press, forthcoming 2021). GROUP 17.
Class 8: Country Reviews Team Presentation 1. Each Group will be assigned the state indicated below. They are to prepare a 3 slide PowerPoint ((1) Weak State Characteristics; (2) Strong State characteristics; (3) Analysis and Conclusion: Is the state strong or weak) along with a supporting memo of no more than 5 pages.
Team 1—Iraq
Team 2—Cambodia
Team 3—Senegal
Team 4—Paraguay
Team 5—Cuba
Team 6—Jamaica
Team 7—Canada
Team 8--Belorussia
Team 9—South Korea
Team10--Afghanistan
Team 11--Moldova
Team 12--Eritrea
Team 13--Honduras
Team 14--Italy
Team 15--Russia
Team 16--Azerbaijan
Team 17--Belorussia
Part 4—Public International Systems; Regional Trade Organizations
Class 9: International Institutional Law: Autonomy of Actors
READINGS
--Alvarez, Chapter 2
Indicated Group is to prepare 3-5 page summary of the reading assigned)
Sections 2.1-2.2: GROUPS 1-8
Section 2.3-2.4 GROUPS 9-17
Class 10: International Institutional Law: IO Law Making
--Alvarez, chapter 3.
Indicated Group is to prepare 3-5 page summary of the reading assigned)
Sections 3.1-3.2: GROUPS 1-8
Section 3.3 GROUPS 9-17
OPTIONAL (EXTRA CREDIT FOR PREPARATION OF A 3-5 PAGE SUMMARY)
-- Lindseth, Peter L., Supranational Organizations (September 14, 2014). In Ian Hurd, Ian Johnstone, and Jacob Katz Cogan, eds., Oxford Handbook of International Organizations (OUP, 2016) , Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2517896
Class 11: Soft Law and IOs as the producers of Private Governance
READINGS (Each Group is to prepare 3-5 page summary of the reading assigned)
-- Anna di Robilant, Genealogies of Soft Law, 54 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF COMPARATIVE LAW 499 2006). GROUPS 1-3
-- Shelton, Dinah L., Soft Law. HANDBOOK OF INTERNATIONAL LAW, Routledge Press, 2008, GWU Legal Studies Research Paper No. 322, GWU Law School Public Law Research Paper No. 322, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1003387 GROUPS 4-6
-- Abbott, Kenneth Wayne and Genschel, Philipp and Snidal, Duncan and Zangl, Bernhard, Orchestration: Global Governance through Intermediaries (August 6, 2012). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2125452 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2125452 ; GROUPS 7-9
--OECD Guidelines for SOEs (Preface, Concepts) . Available http://www.oecd.org/document/33/0,3343,en_2649_34847_34046561_1_1_1_1,00.html. GROUPS 10-11
--OECD Guidelines for Multinational Corporations 2011 (Preface, Concepts and Principles) http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/43/29/48004323.pdf GROUPS 12-14
--UN Conferece of the Parties, Adoption of the Paris Agreementn FCCC/CP/2015/L.9/Rev.1 (12 Dec. 2015). Available https://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2015/cop21/eng/l09r01.pdf. GROUPS 15-17
Class 12: Unpacking traditional IOs; Team Presentations No. 2.
Each Group will be assigned the public international organization (IO) indicated below. They are to prepare a 3 slide PowerPoint ((1) Organization and operation of the IO; (2) rulemaking capacity; (3) history, controversies, and conclusion: how autonomous is the IO) along with a supporting memo of no more than 5 pages.
Team 1—World Health Organization
Team 2—Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)
Team 3—International Organization for Standards (ISSO
Team 4—International Labor Organization (ILO)
Team 5—International Civil Aviation Organization
Team 6—World Trade Organization
Team 7—UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)
Team 8--World Intellectual Property Organization
Team 9—Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO)
Team10--UN Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO)
Team 11--World Meteorological Organization (WMO)
Team 12--International Maritime Organization (IMO)
Team 13--International Organization for Migration (IOM)
Team 14--International Telecommunications Union(ITU)
Team 15--Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights
Team 16--UN Women
Team 17--UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD)
Class 13: IFIs: The World Bank, IMF and AIIB models
READINGS (Each Group is to prepare 3-5 page summary of the reading assigned)
--World Bank Organization GROUPS 1-2
--World Bank Annual Report 2020
--IMF Organization GROUPS 3-4
--“The IMF at a Glance”
--IMF 2020 Annual Report
--AIIB Organization GROUPS 5-6
--AIIB at a lance
--AIIB, Corporate Strategy: Financing Infrastructure for Tomorrow (September 2020)
--Anthony Anghie, “Time Present and Time Past: Globalization, International Financial Institutions, and the Third World,” N.Y.U. J. Int’l Law and Policy 32:243 (2000) READ 243-275 GROUPS 7-8
-- Sarah Babb, “The Washington Consensus as transnational policy paradigm: Its origins, trajectory and likely successor,” Review of International Political Economy 20(2):268-297 (2013) GROUPS 9-10
--Diego Hernandez, “Are ‘New Donors’ Challenging World Bank Conditionality?, World Development 96:529-549 (2017) GROUPS 11-2
--Jacqueline Best, “Ambiguity and Uncertainty in International Organizations: A History of Debating IMF Conditionality,” International Stdies Quarterly 56(4):674-688 (2012) GROUPS 13-14
--Martin A. Weiss, “Asian Infrastructure and Investment Bank (AIIB),” Current Politics and Economics of South, Southeastern, and Central Asia, 27(1/2):1-29 (2018). GROUPS 15-16
--Xiaohui Wu, “Friendly Competition for Co-Progressive Development: The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank vs. the Bretton Woods Institutions,” Chinese Journal of International Law 16:41-76 (2017). GROUP 17
Class 14: World Trade Organization
READINGS (Each Group is to prepare 3-5 page summary of the reading assigned):
--WTO 2020 Annual Report GROUPS 1-3
-- Meyer, Timothy, From Contract to Legislation: The Logic of Modern International Lawmaking (January 13, 2014). Chicago Journal of International Law, Vol. 14(2), pp. 559-623 (2014), UGA Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2014-02, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2378870 GROUPS 4-6
--Lamp, Nicolas, How Some Countries Became 'Special': Developing Countries and the Construction of Difference in Multilateral Trade Lawmaking (June 17, 2014). Journal of International Economic Law 18(4), 2015, 743-771, Queen's University Legal Research Paper No. 2015-017, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2455952 GROUPS 7-9
--Ghias, Shoaib A., International Judicial Lawmaking: A Theoretical and Political Analysis of the WTO Appellate Body (July, 22 2008). Berkley Journal of International Law (BJIL), Vol. 24, No. 2, 2006, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1168562 GROUPS 10-13
--Mazumder, Rabin, Trade Liberalization & WTO: Impact on Developing Countries (January 16, 2008). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1084394 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1084394
GROUPS 14-17
Class 15 Regional Trade Organizations
READINGS (Each Group is to prepare 3-5 page summary of the reading assigned):
--Belt & Road Initiative:
--Wang, Heng, China’s Approach to the Belt and Road Initiative (May 20, 2018). Journal of International Economic Law, Volume 22, 2019 (Forthcoming), UNSW Law Research Paper No. 18-82, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3283660
--Wang, Heng, Divergence, Convergence or Crossvergence of Chinese and US Approaches to Regional Integration: Evolving Trajectories and Their Implications (June 30, 2018). Tsinghua China Law Review, Volume 10, Number 2, 149-185 , UNSW Law Research Paper No. 18-77, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3145058
--Broude, Tomer, Belt, Road and (Legal) Suspenders: Entangled Legalities on the 'New Silk Road' (November 17, 2019). Forthcoming, Nico Krisch (ed.), Entangled Legalities, Hebrew University of Jerusalem Legal Research Paper 20-01, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3489749
--ALBA
-- Backer, Larry Catá and Molina, Augusto, Cuba and the Construction of Alternative Global Trade Systems: ALBA and Free Trade in the Americas (May 20, 2009). University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Economic Law, Vol. 31, No. 3, 2010, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1407705
--Trans Pacific Partnership
--Backer, Larry Catá, The Trans-Pacific Partnership: Japan, China, the U.S. and the Emerging Shape of a New World Trade Regulatory Order (March 18, 2014). Washington University Global Studies Law Review, 13(1), 2013, Penn State Law Research Paper No. 20-2013, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2237523
Part 5 Private International Organizations
Class 16 Non-Governmental Organizations
READINGS (Each Group is to prepare 3-5 page summary of the reading assigned):
--Peter Willetts, “NGOs, Social Movements, and Civil Society,” in pp. 6-31; 114-134 GROUPS 15-17
--Math Noortmann, Non-State Actors in International Law, in Non-State Actors in International Relations (Bas Arts, Math Noortmann and Bob Reinalda, eds., Aldershot: Ashgate, 2001. READ PAGES 63-73. GROUPS 1-3
--Bob Reinalda and Bertjan Verbeek, Theorizing Power Relations Between NGOs, Intergovernmental Organizations, and States, , in Non-State Actors in International Relations (Bas Arts, Math Noortmann and Bob Reinalda, eds. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2001. READ PAGES 145-158. GROUPS 4-6
--Bob Reinalda, Private in Form, Public in Purpose: NGOs in International Relations Theory, in Non-State Actors in International Relations (Bas Arts, Math Noortmann and Bob Reinalda, eds., Aldershot: Ashgate, 2001. READ PAGES 11-40. GROUPS 7-9
--Mary Kaldor, “Civil Society and Accountability,” Journal of Human Development 4(1):4-27 (2003). GROUPS 10-12
-- We the peoples: civil society, the United Nations and global governance Report of the Panel of Eminent Persons on United Nations–Civil Society Relations (2004) (Cardozo Report) READ 7-31. GROPS 13-14
OPTIONAL:
--Peter R. Baehr, Non-Governmental Human Rights Organizations in International Relations (Palgrave 2009) ISBN 978-0-230-20134-7 (hrdbk) pp. 1-48.
Class 17: States as Private Actors—Sovereign Wealth Funds and SOEs
READINGS (Each Group is to prepare 3-5 page summary of the reading assigned):
--Abdullah Al-Hassan, Michael Papaioannou, Martin Skancke, and Cheng Chih Sung, Sovereign Wealth Funds: Aspects of Governance Structures and Investment Management, IMF Working Paper WP/13/ 231 (2013). https://www.imf.org/~/media/Websites/IMF/imported-full-text-pdf/external/pubs/ft/wp/2013/_wp13231.ashx . GROUPS 1-4
--International Working Group of Sovereign Wealth Funds, Generally Accepted Principles and Practices (GAPP)—Santiago Principles. Available for download at https://www.ifswf.org/sites/default/files/santiagoprinciples_0_0.pdf AND Kuwait Declaration 2009, available https://www.ifswf.org/sites/default/files/2010%20Kuwait%20Meeting%20-%20Kuwait%20Declaration.pdf GROUPS 5-8
-- Larry Catá Backer. "Sovereign Investing and Markets-Based Transnational Rule of Law Building: The Norwegian Sovereign Wealth Fund in Global Markets." American University International Law Review 29 no. 1 (2013): 1-122. READ pp. 2-55; https://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi? GROUPS 9-12
--Larry Catá Backer, Sovereign Wealth Funds, Capacity Building, Development, and Governance , 52 Wake Forest Law Review (2017) (HERE) GROUPS 13-17
OPTIONAL (EXTRA CREDIT FOR PREPARATION OF A 3-5 PAGE SUMMARY of either or both)
--Larry Catá Backer, SWFs in Five Continents and Three Narratives: Similarities and Differences, in Research Handbook on Sovereign Wealth Funds and International Investment Law 57-98 (Fabio Bassan, ed., Cheltenham, Eng.: Edward Elgar, 2015).
Part 6 Private transnational economic systems
Class 18: Multinational Corporations as IOs
-- Larry Catá Backer, Multinational Corporations as Objects and Sources of Transnational Law, 14 ILSA Journal of International and Comparative Law499 (2008). http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1092167.
--Larry Catá Backer, Private Actors and Public Governance Beyond the State: The Multinational Corporation, the Financial Stability Board and the Global Governance Order,17 Indiana Journal Global Legal Studies (2011). Available http://ssrn.com/abstract=1658730.
Class 19: Third Party standard setting and monitoring organizations
Class 20: Team Presentation 3, the regulatory functions of private enterprises.
Each Group will be assigned the state indicated below. They are to prepare a 3 slide PowerPoint ((1) brief description of the organizations; (2) Monitoring and governance functions (corruption, sustainability, human rights); (3) Connection between enterprise and other international actors/institutions and Conclusion: to what extent are these enterprises more like private administrative agencies) along with a supporting memo of no more than 5 pages.
Team 1—
Team 2—
Team 3—
Team 4—
Team 5—
Team 6—
Team 7—
Team 8--
Team 9—
Team10--
Team 11--
Team 12--
Team 13--
Team 14--
Team 15--
Team 16--
Team 17--
Part 7 Public International Prosecutor-Judicial Systems
Class 21: The International Court of Justice
--The ICJ at a Glance
--ICJ General FAQs
--ICJ Advisory Opinion FAQs
--Medellin v. Texas, 552 U.S. 491 (2008).
--Accordance with International Law of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence in Respect of Kosovo, ICJ, July 22, 2010, Gen, List No. 141 (Advisory Opinion). Available http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/141/15987.pdf.
--Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory Advisory Opinion 2004 July 9 General List No. 131 (July 9, 2004) (available http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/131/1671.pdf). The opinion is very long. Please read Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (Request for advisory opinion) Summary of the Advisory Opinion of 9 July 2004 (https://unispal.un.org/DPA/DPR/unispal.nsf/0/3740E39487A5428A85256ECC005E157A) and then focus on
1. Jurisdiction: Paragraphs 14-15, 24-25, 36, 38, 40.
2. Consent: Paragraphs 46-47, 49.
3. Legal Basis: Paragraphs 86-89, 102-111 (especially 89 on jus cogens)
4. Application of Law: Paragraph 115 (de facto annexation) versus Paragraph116 (proportionate anti-terrorism measures).
5. Legal Consequences: Paragraphs 148-158.
6. Remedies: Paragraph 159-160.
Class 22: The International Criminal Court System
http://www.icc-cpi.int/ (English)
https://www.icc-cpi.int/?ln=fr (Français)
Use the MENU to read the following:
-- ICC Overview.
-- ICC About.
-- ICC About: How the Court Works.
-- ICC About: IN the Courtroom
-- ICC About: Interacting with Communities.
-- ICC Basic facts about the ICC
-- Core ICC texts (for reference)
a. Rome Statute
b. Elements of Crimes
c. Rules of Procedure and Evidence
d. Regulations of the Court
e. Agreement on Privileges and Immunities
f. Regulations of Prosecutor
g. Staff Regulations of the Court
h. Code of Judicial Ethics
Class 23-24: The Regional Human Rights System: Europe, Africa, Latin America.
Everyone will read the materials on the European Human Rights system. Analysis and Evaluation of African and OAS Systems in comparison to European System will be based on teams assigned for class 16.
READINGS:
International Human Rights Institutions: European System
-- Thomas Buergenthal, The Evolving International Human Rights System, 100 Am. J. Int'l L. 783 (2006). READ INTRODUCTION AND PARTS I & IV.
-- The ECHR System:
A. ECHR Court in Brief
B. ECHR In 50 Questions
C. ECHR Questions & Answers
D. ECHR Overview 1959-2015
E. ECHR Facts & Figures
F. ECHR Case Processing and Working Methods
G. ECHR Convention and Protocols
H. ECHR Convention Reservations
I. ECHR Rules of Court (Generally here)
J. ECHR Practice Directions
K. ECHR Resolution on Judicial Ethics
-- Frank Hoffmeister, Germany: The Status of European Convention on Human Rights in Domestic Law, 4(4) International Journal of Constitutional Law 722 (2006).
Class 25 Group Presentation 4: Court Practice.
Each Group will be assigned the state indicated below. They are to prepare a 3 slide PowerPoint ((1) ; (2); (3) Analysis and Conclusion:) along with a supporting memo of no more than 5 pages.
Team 1—
Team 2—
Team 3—
Team 4—
Team 5—
Team 6—
Team 7—
Team 8--
Team 9—
Team10--
Team 11--
Team 12--
Team 13--
Team 14--
Team 15--
Team 16--
Team 17--
Part8 Hybrid, Private and Non State Based International Grievance Mechanisms
Class 26-27: International Center for the Settlement of Disputes (ICSID) With a nod to the International Court of Arbitration
READINGS
--The U.S. Model Bi-Lateral Investment Treaty (BIT)
--Andreas F. Lowenfeld, “The ICSID Convention: Origins and Transformation,” Georgia Journal of International and Comparative Law 38:47 (2010).
--Ole Kristian Fauchald, “The Legal Reasoning of ICSID Tribunals—An Empirical Analysis,” European Journal of International Law 19(2):301-364 (2008).
--Ling Ling He and Razeen Sappideen, “Investor-State Arbitration under Bilateral Trade and Investment Agreements: Finding Rhythm in Inconsistent Drumbeats,” Journal of World Trade 47:215 (2013).
--Meg Kinnear, “An Introduction to ICSID Process,” Conference PPTs (November 2015); available [https://cil.nus.edu.sg/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Day2-ICSID-ICSID101.pdf].
--David Gantz, “Resolution of Investor-State Controversies in Developing States,” The Law Development Review 5(2):82-127
--ICSID, 2020 Annual Report
ICSID Primary Source Documents:
ICSID Rules
ICSID Additional Facility Rules:
Permanent Court of Arbitration Overview
ICSID Annual Report 2006
11 ICSID CASE NOTES
Class 28 REVIEW and CONCLUSIONS
No comments:
Post a Comment