American Bankruptcy Institute Law Review 17 Am. Bankr. Inst. L. Rev., No. 1, Spring, 2009. Boston College Law Review 50 B.C. L. Rev., No. 3, May, 2009. Boston University Public Interest Law Journal 18 B.U. Pub. Int. L.J., No. 2, Spring, 2009. Cardozo Journal of Conflict Resolution 10 Cardozo J. Conflict Resol., No. 2, Spring, 2009. Cardozo Public Law, Policy, & Ethics Journal 7 Cardozo Pub. L. Pol’y & Ethics J., No. 3, Summer, 2009. Chicago Journal of International Law 10 Chi. J. Int’l L., No. 1, Summer, 2009. Colorado Journal of International Environmental Law and Policy 20 Colo. J. Int’l Envtl. L. & Pol’y, No. 2, Winter, 2009. Columbia Journal of Law & the Arts 32 Colum. J.L. & Arts, No. 3, Spring, 2009. Connecticut Public Interest Law Journal 8 Conn. Pub. Int. L.J., No. 2, Spring-Summer, 2009. Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy 18 Cornell J.L. & Pub. Pol’y, No. 1, Fall, 2008. Cornell Law Review 94 Cornell L. Rev., No. 5, July, 2009. Creighton Law Review 42 Creighton L. Rev., No. 3, April, 2009. Criminal Law Forum 20 Crim. L. Forum, Nos. 2-3, Pp. 173-394, 2009. Delaware Journal of Corporate Law 34 Del. J. Corp. L., No. 2, Pp. 433-754, 2009. Environmental Law Reporter News & Analysis 39 Envtl. L. Rep. News & Analysis, No. 7, July, 2009. European Journal of International Law 20 Eur. J. Int’l L., No. 2, April, 2009. Family Law Quarterly 43 Fam. L.Q., No. 1, Spring, 2009. Georgetown Journal of International Law 40 Geo. J. Int’l L., No. 3, Spring, 2009. Georgetown Journal of Legal Ethics 22 Geo. J. Legal Ethics, No. 2, Spring, 2009. Golden Gate University Law Review 39 Golden Gate U. L. Rev., No. 2, Winter, 2009. Harvard Environmental Law Review 33 Harv. Envtl. L. Rev., No. 2, Pp. 297-608, 2009. International Review of Law and Economics 29 Int’l Rev. L. & Econ., No. 1, March, 2009. Journal of Environmental Law and Litigation 24 J. Envtl. L. & Litig., No. 1, Pp. 1-201, 2009. Journal of Legislation 34 J. Legis., No. 1, Pp. 1-98, 2008. Journal of Technology Law & Policy 14 J. Tech. L. & Pol’y, No. 1, June, 2009. Labor Lawyer 24 Lab. Law., No. 3, Winter/Spring, 2009. Michigan Journal of International Law 30 Mich. J. Int’l L., No. 3, Spring, 2009. New Criminal Law Review 12 New Crim. L. Rev., No. 2, Spring, 2009. Northern Kentucky Law Review 36 N. Ky. L. Rev., No. 4, Pp. 445-654, 2009. Ohio Northern University Law Review 35 Ohio N.U. L. Rev., No. 2, Pp. 445-886, 2009. Pace Law Review 29 Pace L. Rev., No. 3, Spring, 2009. Quinnipiac Health Law Journal 12 Quinnipiac Health L.J., No. 2, Pp. 209-332, 2008-2009. Real Property, Trust and Estate Law Journal 44 Real Prop. Tr. & Est. L.J., No. 1, Spring, 2009. Rutgers Race and the Law Review 10 Rutgers Race & L. Rev., No. 2, Pp. 441-629, 2009. San Diego Law Review 46 San Diego L. Rev., No. 2, Spring, 2009. Seton Hall Law Review 39 Seton Hall L. Rev., No. 3, Pp. 725-1102, 2009. Southern California Interdisciplinary Law Journal 18 S. Cal. Interdisc. L.J., No. 3, Spring, 2009. Stanford Environmental Law Journal 28 Stan. Envtl. L.J., No. 3, July, 2009. Tulsa Law Review 44 Tulsa L. Rev., No. 2, Winter, 2008. UMKC Law Review 77 UMKC L. Rev., No. 4, Summer, 2009. Washburn Law Journal 48 Washburn L.J., No. 3, Spring, 2009. Washington University Global Studies Law Review 8 Wash. U. Global Stud. L. Rev., No. 3, Pp.451-617, 2009. Washington University Journal of Law & Policy 29 Wash. U. J.L. & Pol’y, Pp. 1-401, 2009. Washington University Law Review 86 Wash. U. L. Rev., No. 6, Pp. 1273-1521, 2009. William Mitchell Law Review 35 Wm. Mitchell L. Rev., No. 4, Pp. 1235-1609, 2009. Yale Journal of International Law 34 Yale J. Int’l L., No. 2, Summer, 2009. Yale Journal on Regulation 26 Yale J. on Reg., No. 2, Summer, 2009.

/pdf/current-index-to-legal-periodicals-8re353ze53.pdf

Current index to legal periodicals

Is there still a right to seek asylum in a globalised world? Migration control has increasingly moved to the high seas or the territory of transit and origin countries, and is now commonly outsourced to private actors. Under threat of financial penalties airlines today reject any passenger not in possession of a valid visa, and private contractors are used to run detention centres and operate border crossings. In this volume Thomas Gammeltoft-Hansen examines the impact of these new practices on refugees' access to asylum. A systematic analysis is provided of the reach and limits of international refugee law when migration control is carried out extraterritorially or by non-state actors. State practice from around the globe and case law from all the major human rights institutions are discussed. The arguments are further linked to wider debates in the fields of human rights, general international law and political science. (Less)

/pdf/access-to-asylum-international-refugee-law-and-the-2g2oq29oh0.pdf

Access to Asylum: International Refugee Law and the Globalisation of Migration Control

A paradigm change is occurring, in the course of which human beings are becoming the primary international legal persons. In numerous areas of public international law, substantive rights and obligations of individuals arguably flow directly from international law. The novel legal status of humans in international law is now captured with a concept borrowed from constitutional doctrine: international rights of the person, as opposed to international law protecting persons. Combining doctrinal analysis with current practice, this book is the most comprehensive contemporary analysis of the legal status of the individual. Beyond Human Rights, previously published in German and now revised by the author in this English edition, not only deals with the individual in international humanitarian law, international criminal law and international investment law, but it also covers fields such as consular law, environmental law, protection of individuals against acts of violence and natural disasters, refugee law and labour law.

Beyond Human Rights: The Legal Status of the Individual in International Law

Book review of Toward a Just World: The Critical Years in the Search for International Justice by Dorothy V. Jones (The University of Chicago Press, 2002).

Toward a Just World: The Critical Years in the Search for International Justice

Since the decision of the International Court of Justice in LaGrand (Germany v United States of America), the law of provisional measures has expanded dramatically both in terms of the volume of relevant decisions and the complexity of their reasoning. Provisional Measures before International Courts and Tribunals seeks to describe and evaluate this expansion, and to undertake a comparative analysis of provisional measures jurisprudence in a range of significant international courts and tribunals so as to situate interim relief in the wider procedure of those adjudicative bodies. The result is the first comprehensive examination of the law of provisional measures in over a decade, and the first to compare investor-state arbitration jurisprudence with more traditional inter-state courts and tribunals.

Provisional Measures before International Courts and Tribunals

The Permanent Court as composed after the first general election The judges As the Court Protocol had entered into force at the time of the opening of the Second Assembly in September 1921, the first general election of judges took place on 14 September 1921. The judges were to be elected under Article 2 of the Statute ‘amongst persons of high moral character, who possess the qualifications required in their respective countries for appointment to the highest judicial offices, or are jurisconsults of recognized competence in international law’. According to Article 9, ‘the whole body … should represent the main forms of civilization and the principal legal systems of the world’. In the Assembly, just before the election, Mineitciro Adatci had said that this ‘extremely important article … emphasises the universal character of the institution, for as the various States accept the clause enjoining mutual obligation, the Court of International Justice will become a complete world organisation’. The successful candidates were rather diverse in terms of their experience and had a range of ages. A number of judges had made significant contributions to international legal theory. Max Huber (forty-seven years old in 1921) was a Swiss professor in international law from Zurich, who had spent the war as legal adviser to the Swiss Federal Council. Huber's doctoral thesis from 1898 on state succession had been much referred to, and in 1910 he had published a mature piece on the foundation, past and possible future of international law: Beitrage zur Kenntnis der soziologischen Grundlagen des Volkerrechts und der Staatengesellschaft .

The foundational period, 1922–1924

The legacy of the Permanent Court

From arbitration to adjudication As the predecessor of the present International Court of Justice, the Permanent Court of International Justice was a historic ‘melting-pot’ of ideals about international justice and, according to some, international community as well as notions of international law. It was the culmination so far of a persistent movement towards, in prosaic terms, more effective settlement of international disputes. The twentieth century had opened with a call for international justice, a growing hope of sustaining peace through international adjudication and law. Although cold water was inevitably poured on the belief in international adjudication being a real, trustworthy alternative to warfare, the century witnessed several successful projects of international justice, with more now underway. This was partly due to the legacy of the Permanent Court where international law was brought down to earth, as it were, and given a practical edge. In this context, the world, at last, experienced the rise of the international judiciary. The Permanent Court of International Justice was preceded by the Permanent Court of Arbitration established under the 1899 and 1907 Conventions for the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes, which have been described as ‘in a sense a codification of the law of pacific settlement up to that time’. In Articles 15 (1899) and 37 (1907), ‘international arbitration’ was defined as having ‘for its object the settlement of disputes between States by judges of their own choice on the basis of respect for law’.

Ole Spiermann

Papers

The foundational period, 1922–1924

The legacy of the Permanent Court

A project of international justice

Revisiting the Permanent Court