The Wretched of the Earth

The New Sovereignty: Compliance with International Regulatory Agreements, by Abram Chayes and Antonia Handler Chayes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1995. Pp. 285. $49.95 (hardcover) . I. INTRODUCTION Just after the end of the second World War, and at the dawn of the modern age of technological innovation, the future prime minister of the United Kingdom, Sir Anthony Eden, told the House of Commons that "[e]very succeeding scientific discovery makes greater nonsense of old-time conceptions of sovereignty."1 Five decades later, despite the sustained assault mounted not only by science but by the dissolution, association, and recombination of what used to be thought of as indisputably sovereign states, and by the expanding importance of intergovernmental and nongovernmental organizations, international lawyers have been slow to discard those conceptions. Sovereignty is still seen as a defining criterion of international legal personality, rendering more difficult questions regarding the juridical status of such entities as the European Union, the former Yugoslav republic of Macedonia, the Commonwealth of Independent States, the Palestine Liberation Organization, and insurgent forces exercising government authority in such places as Liberia, Bosnia, Burma, and Sri Lanka.2 Despite both its title and the need for a scholarly yet provocative book on the evolution of the concept of sovereignty at the end of the twentieth century, this is not the set of issues to which Abram and Antonia Chayes turn their attention in The New Sovereignty: Compliance with International Regulatory Agreements.3 Rather than a theory of sovereignty, new or otherwise, they present a theory of international behavior modification. More accurately, it is a theory of getting states to do what they should do, either because they accepted obligations voluntarily, as in the case of treaties and other agreements, or because obligations were imposed on them by other international legal processes, such as the maturation of custom into binding law. The book's principal thesis is that noncompliance with norms is usually the result, not of deliberate contumacy, but of a lack of capacity, sluggishness brought on by domestic political paralysis, or, occasionally, ambiguity in the rule itself.4 Compliance, therefore, is most efficiently secured not by coercive measures, or even by threatened or actual withdrawal of membership rights in international organizations, but by interactive, cooperative efforts and transparency.5 Such efforts result not only in improved behavior by recalcitrant states but in improvement of the international regimes themselves. The most valuable and persuasive parts of the book are those in which the Chayeses draw upon their first-hand experience to discuss specific regulatory treaty regimes of which they have been participants or close students.6 The least effective are those in which generalizations are hazarded with insufficient empirical support and theoretical underpinnings that are not developed with adequate rigor. The volume also suffers from inconsistent and even incorrect readings of U.S. law and policy (U.S. law is regularly deployed as illustrating key aspects of the authors' thesis), which undermine some of the credibility that the authors work so hard to earn elsewhere in the book. In particular, the critical argument that coercive sanctions do not work fails to take into account other objectives, beyond bringing about compliance with treaties, that states have in view when they decide that other states' behavior is intolerable and requires a response. II. THE NEW SOVEREIGNTY The agenda in The New Sovereignty is the development of a theory under which the international community can attain a level of compliance with what the authors call "international regulatory agreements" superior to that commonly observed.7 To that end, they set out to prove, first, that sanctions-whether collective or unilateral, economic or military-do not work. …

The New Sovereignty: Compliance with International Regulatory Agreements

Rogues: Two Essays on Reason

This is really going to save you time and your money in something should think about. If you're seeking then search around for online. Without a doubt there are several these available and a lot of them have the freedom. However no doubt you receive what you spend on. An alternate way to get ideas would be to check another punishment and responsibility essays in the philosophy of law. Our goal is always to offer you an assortment of cost-free ebooks too as aid resolve your troubles. We have got a considerable collection of totally free of expense Book for people from every single stroll of life. We have got tried our finest to gather a sizable library of preferred cost-free as well as paid files. Searching for many sold book or reading resource worldwide? We supply them all in layout kind as word, txt, kindle, pdf, zip, rar and also ppt. one of them is this qualified punishment and responsibility essays in the philosophy of law that has actually been written by Still confused ways to get it? Well, simply check out online or download by registering in our website below. Click them. GO TO THE TECHNICAL WRITING FOR AN EXPANDED TYPE OF THIS PUNISHMENT AND RESPONSIBILITY ESSAYS IN THE PHILOSOPHY OF LAW, ALONG WITH A CORRECTLY FORMATTED VERSION OF THE INSTANCE MANUAL PAGE ABOVE.

Punishment and responsibility: essays in the philosophy of law

Book review of  An Introduction to the International Criminal Court  by  William A. Schabas and published by Cambridge University Press (Cambridge), 2001. (406 pp.)

An Introduction to the International Criminal Court

Sovereignty as Responsibility at the International Criminal Court : The “Frontiers” of International Judicial Intervention

This article explores the policy background of AI in ethical public services by applying the perspective of mutuality and trust to give a better understanding of the ethical evaluation of AI-enabled public services. The findings from Finnish government services emphasize that establishing governance rules arising from mutuality is not often viewed as a precursor to ethical evaluation, which was done post-facto with limited user engagement. We conclude that structured by a social mutuality framework, mutuality requires a systemic approach to ethics and active user engagement, which in turn requires an investment of time and cognitive attention by all agents involved. 

Emanuela Koskimies

Papers

Sovereignty as Responsibility at the International Criminal Court : The “Frontiers” of International Judicial Intervention

Mutuality in AI-enabled new public service solutions