Showing papers in "Berkeley Journal of International Law in 2018"

Protecting the Maritime Rights of States Threatened by Rising Sea Levels: Preserve Legacy Exclusive Economic Zones

Abstract: This paper addresses how international criminal tribunals can obtain content and non-content data held in electronic storage by private companies incorporated in the United States for use as evidence. We primarily focus on the International Criminal Court (ICC) for two reasons: first, the ICC faces hurdles above and beyond those of other international criminal tribunals—including barriers created by the 2002 passage of the American Servicemembers’ Protection Act (ASPA)— and thus represents the most restrictive case; second, as the world’s first permanent international criminal court, it is crucial to analyze how the court is functioning and establish a legal infrastructure to facilitate the ICC’s long-term operation. We conclude that, with regard to the ICC, and contrary to conventional understanding and practice, ASPA is not a barrier to the ICC’s investigations in the United States so long as the ICC limits any requests for assistance to investigations of crimes against humanity, war crimes, and genocide allegedly perpetrated by foreign nationals. Second, we conclude that tribunals such as the ICC have five options for securing privately-held electronic information: (1) DOI: https://doi.org/10.15779/Z38JW86N2M * JD, PhD, Lecturer-in-Residence, UC Berkeley School of Law; Executive Director, Human Rights Center. ** JD, Vice President, Human Rights Program, Benetech. *** JD, MA, Attorney, the National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild; Researcher, Human Rights Center, UC Berkeley School of Law. The authors thank their colleagues—Roxanna Altholz, Laurel Fletcher, Mark Gergen, Jonathan Simon, Eric Stover, Beth Van Schaack, Chuck Weisselberg, Kate Westmoreland, and Frank Zimring—for their feedback at critical stages of this Article’s development. The authors also thank Suzanne Chenault, Rebecca Chraim, Natalia Krapiva, Nikita Mehandru, Eleanor Naiman and Peggy O’Donnell for their research assistance. Any errors are, of course, the authors’ own. 2 BERKELEY JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW [Vol. 36:1 submitting requests directly to tech companies; (2) filing requests for assistance in U.S. district courts; (3) requesting assistance from the executive branch; (4) asking foreign governments to submit Mutual Legal Assistance (MLA) requests on the ICC’s behalf; and (5) partnering with joint law enforcement bodies, like INTERPOL, to make foreign-to-domestic law enforcement requests. INTRODUCTION............................................................................... 2 I. PART I ........................................................................................................ 7 A. Brief History of Documentary Evidence in International Criminal Tribunals .................................................................. 7 B. Brief History of the ICC ........................................................... 9 C. Evidentiary Challenges at the ICC ........................................ 11 II. PART II ................................................................................................... 13 A. Plain Meaning ........................................................................ 17 B. Legislative History ................................................................. 18 C. Congressional Action ............................................................. 19 D. Executive Branch Views ......................................................... 20 E. ASPA As Applied to ICC Investigations: Section 7422(h) ..... 22 F. Summary ................................................................................ 23 III. PART III ................................................................................................ 23 A. Requests to U.S. Service Providers ........................................ 24 B. Requests to U.S. District Courts ............................................ 27 C. Requests Through U.S. Diplomatic Channels ........................ 29 D. Requests for Mutual Legal Assistance ................................... 32 E. Joint Investigations ................................................................ 33 CONCLUSION .............................................................................................. 34

The South China Sea as a Challenge to International Law and to International Legal Scholarship

Abstract: The 2016 Arbitration Award of the PCA has set out the maritime legal questions in the South China Sea in great detail. This paper takes the Award as a starting point, but rather than focussing on maritime legal issues, it uses the South China Sea as a paradigm for the challenges that face not only international law as a normative order, but also international legal scholarship. First, the conflict in the South China Sea has weighty implications for the law of the sea, which, historically, has primarily served the interests of (Western) sea-faring nations. More importantly, the conflict in the South China Sea threatens the safeguarding of peace as one of the main tasks of international law, setting the United States against China in a reiteration of previous historical conflicts. These developments should serve as a cautionary contrast to the prevailing narrative of international law as a progressively successful normative order. The paper will analyse two aspects of that narrative: the gradual deterritorialisation and the advancing constitutionalisation of international law. It will be argued that while such concepts have their merits, the South China Sea exposes the (considerable) limitations that they are still subject to.

How Power Dynamics Influence the "North-South" Gap in Transitional Justice

Abstract: INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................... 191 I. WORKSHOP FORMAT ............................................................................. 194 II. WHAT DID WE LEARN? ....................................................................... 194 A. Dynamics of Colonialism in Transitional Justice Interventions ........................................................................ 195 1. Collective Memory and Legacies of Colonialism .......... 197 2. Collective Amnesia and International Transitional Justice Interventions .................................................................. 198 B. Dynamics of the Legalization of Transitional Justice .......... 199 1. The Legal Framework of Transitional Justice and the Politics It Promotes ....................................................... 200 2. The Politics of Social Justice as Transitional Justice ... 203 C. Dynamics of Research Extraction ........................................ 205 1. North-Based Researchers, South-Based Sites ............... 206 2. Extractive Pressures on North-Based Research ............ 208 3. South-Based Researcher-Practitioner Dynamics .......... 210 D. Funding Dynamics ............................................................... 211 1. Funding Top-Down Priorities ....................................... 211

Resolution of Territorial Disputes in East Asia: The Case of Dokdo

Abstract: This Article seeks to contribute to solving the Korea-Japan territorial dispute over Dokdo island (Korea)/Takeshima (Japanese). The Republic of Korea argues that Dokdo has formed a part of Korea since as early as 512 C.E.; as Korea currently exercises control over the island, its claim to discovery would appear to fulfill the legal test for possession of territory. Conversely, the Japanese government claims that Korea never exercised sufficient sovereignty over Dokdo. Japan claims that the island remained terra nullius — in other words, territory not possessed by any nation and so could be claimed — until it annexed Dokdo in 1905. Japan also claims that in the 1951 peace treaty ending World War II, the Allies did not include Dokdo in the list of islands taken from Japan, which implies that Japan retained the island in the postwar settlement. This article makes three contributions. First, it brings forward evidence from the maps held at various archives in the United States and Western Europe to determine the historical opinions of experts and governments about the possession of Dokdo. Second, it clarifies the factors that have guided international tribunals in their resolution of earlier disputes involving islands and maritime territory. Third, it shows how the claim of terra nullius has little legitimate authority when applied to East Asia, an area where empires, kingdoms, and nation-states had long exercised control over territory.

Is ISIS a State? The Status of Statehood in the Age of Terror

Abstract: This Essay considers the definitional challenge posed by the Islamic State’s State-like attributes and suggests a new approach to recognizing sovereignty within the meaning of international law. The dual factors I set forth—respect and observance of fundamental human rights in territory controlled by the candidate State and acceptance of the sovereign co-existence of other States— are intended to reframe traditional analyses of the Montevideo Convention. This piece draws upon recent scholarship, judicial decisions, and diplomatic practices surrounding recognition of would-be States to identify a form of human rights minimalism and acknowledgment of the international order that may usefully inform debates concerning potential future sovereigns. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................... 37 I. MONTEVIDEO’S LIMITATIONS .......................................................................... 40 A. A Minimal Standard ........................................................................ 40 B. The Challenge Posed by ISIS .......................................................... 45 II. HUMAN RIGHTS MINIMALISM WITHIN THE INTERNATIONAL ORDER: A TWO-PART PROPOSAL ............................................................................. 50 A. Respecting Human Security Domestically ...................................... 50 B. Respect for Sovereign Co-existence ................................................ 55 CONCLUSION ....................................................................................................... 59 DOI: https://doi.org/10.15779/Z38VD6P497 * Carl M. Williams Professor of Law & Ethics, University of Wyoming College of Law and Human Rights Fellow, UC Berkeley School of Law, Human Rights Center. The author thanks Karen Knop, Eric Naiman, Chris Kutz, Jamie O’Connell, Katerina Linos, Francisco Rivera, David Sloss, Kathleen Morris, Chimene Keitner, David Levine, Matthew Stannard, Anupam Chander, Anne Nesbit, and Alexa Koenig for their insights. The author also thanks research assistants Al Walsh and Keeley Cronin. 2018] THE STATUS OF STATEHOOD IN THE AGE OF TERROR 37

Access Denied? The International Criminal Court, Transnational Discovery, and The American Servicemembers Protection Act

Abstract: This paper addresses how international criminal tribunals can obtain content and non-content data held in electronic storage by private companies incorporated in the United States for use as evidence. We primarily focus on the International Criminal Court (ICC) for two reasons: first, the ICC faces hurdles above and beyond those of other international criminal tribunals—including barriers created by the 2002 passage of the American Servicemembers’ Protection Act (ASPA)— and thus represents the most restrictive case; second, as the world’s first permanent international criminal court, it is crucial to analyze how the court is functioning and establish a legal infrastructure to facilitate the ICC’s long-term operation. We conclude that, with regard to the ICC, and contrary to conventional understanding and practice, ASPA is not a barrier to the ICC’s investigations in the United States so long as the ICC limits any requests for assistance to investigations of crimes against humanity, war crimes, and genocide allegedly perpetrated by foreign nationals. Second, we conclude that tribunals such as the ICC have five options for securing privately-held electronic information: (1) DOI: https://doi.org/10.15779/Z38JW86N2M * JD, PhD, Lecturer-in-Residence, UC Berkeley School of Law; Executive Director, Human Rights Center. ** JD, Vice President, Human Rights Program, Benetech. *** JD, MA, Attorney, the National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild; Researcher, Human Rights Center, UC Berkeley School of Law. The authors thank their colleagues—Roxanna Altholz, Laurel Fletcher, Mark Gergen, Jonathan Simon, Eric Stover, Beth Van Schaack, Chuck Weisselberg, Kate Westmoreland, and Frank Zimring—for their feedback at critical stages of this Article’s development. The authors also thank Suzanne Chenault, Rebecca Chraim, Natalia Krapiva, Nikita Mehandru, Eleanor Naiman and Peggy O’Donnell for their research assistance. Any errors are, of course, the authors’ own. Published by Berkeley Law Scholarship Repository, 2018 2 BERKELEY JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW [Vol. 36:1 submitting requests directly to tech companies; (2) filing requests for assistance in U.S. district courts; (3) requesting assistance from the executive branch; (4) asking foreign governments to submit Mutual Legal Assistance (MLA) requests on the ICC’s behalf; and (5) partnering with joint law enforcement bodies, like INTERPOL, to make foreign-to-domestic law enforcement requests. INTRODUCTION............................................................................... 2 I. PART I ........................................................................................................ 7 A. Brief History of Documentary Evidence in International Criminal Tribunals .................................................................. 7 B. Brief History of the ICC ........................................................... 9 C. Evidentiary Challenges at the ICC ........................................ 11 II. PART II ................................................................................................... 13 A. Plain Meaning ........................................................................ 17 B. Legislative History ................................................................. 18 C. Congressional Action ............................................................. 19 D. Executive Branch Views ......................................................... 20 E. ASPA As Applied to ICC Investigations: Section 7422(h) ..... 22 F. Summary ................................................................................ 23 III. PART III ................................................................................................ 23 A. Requests to U.S. Service Providers ........................................ 24 B. Requests to U.S. District Courts ............................................ 27 C. Requests Through U.S. Diplomatic Channels ........................ 29 D. Requests for Mutual Legal Assistance ................................... 32 E. Joint Investigations ................................................................ 33 CONCLUSION .............................................................................................. 34

Tethering the Law of Armed Conflict to Operational Practice: “Organized Armed Group” Membership in the Age of ISIS

Abstract: The article begins with a background section discussing organized armed groups (OAG), such as ISIS, and the consequences of membership in such a group. A survey of the various methods of determining OAG membership, and the practical applicability of each approach to ISIS, follows. Based upon this comparison, the article concludes that more restrictive membership criteria create an unworkable paradigm that does not match the realities of the modern battlefield. Instead, an expansive understanding of who qualifies as a member of an OAG is not only practical, but necessary for providing underlying support for the principle of distinction in non-international armed conflicts.