@article{ZimmermannThienel2012, author = {Zimmermann, Andreas and Thienel, Tobias}, title = {Yugoslavia, cases and proceedings before the ICJ}, isbn = {978-0-19-929168-7}, year = {2012}, language = {en} } @article{ZimmermannWeiss2020, author = {Zimmermann, Andreas and Weiß, Norman}, title = {V{\"o}lker- und verfassungsrechtliche Parameter eines deutschen Lieferkettengesetzes}, series = {Archiv des V{\"o}lkerrechts}, volume = {58}, journal = {Archiv des V{\"o}lkerrechts}, number = {4}, publisher = {Mohr Siebeck}, address = {T{\"u}bingen}, issn = {0003-892X}, doi = {10.1628/avr-2020-0028}, pages = {424 -- 463}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Currently a political debate is ongoing in Germany as to whether Germany should, following the example of several other European countries such as France and the Netherlands, adopt a Supply Chain Act (Lieferkettengesetz). If adopted, the act in question would impose due diligence obligations on German corporations to prevent human rights violations taking place in their respective global supply chains. It is against this background that the article examines the preconditions that must be met in order for such act to be eventually compatible with both, German constitutional and international law. The authors further deal with the question whether Germany might even be obliged under international, as well as under German constitutional law, to enact such a supply chain law in order to protect the human rights of workers employed by companies forming part of the global supply chains of German companies. As far as German constitutional law is concerned the article notably deals with the question whether it is the Federal parliament that may adopt such a law also taking into account the competencies of the European Union in the field, and what are the requirements of legal specificity and proportionality in order for the draft law to stand constitutional scrutiny. The authors further offer detailed suggestions how corporate due diligence standards might be best provided for in the envisaged law and propose a risk analysis approach that varies not only according to specific countries and sector-specific characteristics, but that by the same token also takes into account the ability of the respective German company to exercise an appropriate due diligence standard when it comes to human rigths issues arising within the framewok of their supply chain. As far as the substantive human rights standards are concerned that should serve as benchmarks for the envisaged Supply Chain Act the authors propose to rely on, and refer to, those instruments such as the ICCPR and the CESCR, as well as the ILO treaties containing core labour standards, that enjoy almost universal acceptance and reflect customary international law.}, language = {de} } @article{Zimmermann2013, author = {Zimmermann, Andreas}, title = {The security council and the obligation to prevent genocide and war crimes}, year = {2013}, language = {en} } @article{Zimmermann2015, author = {Zimmermann, Andreas}, title = {The Palestinian-Israeli Conflict: Developing International Law Without Solving the Conflict}, series = {Archiv des V{\"o}lkerrechts}, volume = {53}, journal = {Archiv des V{\"o}lkerrechts}, number = {2}, publisher = {Mohr Siebeck}, address = {T{\"u}bingen}, doi = {10.1628/000389215X14412717564749}, pages = {149 -- 166}, year = {2015}, abstract = {The article analyses whether the Palestinian-Israeli conflict has served as a catalyst for the development of international law, as well as whether international law has been instrumental in attempting to find solutions for the said conflict. In several ways, this conflict has made a significant contribution to understanding and interpreting the UN Charter. It also brought along important developments about the role of third parties, both under the Geneva Conventions and under the law of state responsibility, which provides for an obligation of not recognizing as legal, or not rendering aid or assistance to situations caused by serious violations of jus cogens. International judicial institutions (and also domestic ones) play a rather limited role in this respect, due both to a lack of courage to address fundamental questions, and/or a disregard of the outcome of the proceedings by at least one of the parties to the conflict. Other reasons are Israel's reluctance of accepting the jurisdiction of either the ICJ or the ICC, and its view on the non-applicability of human rights treaties outside of its territory, as well as Palestine's uncertain status in the international community limiting its access to international courts. However, the ICJ's 2004 (formally non-binding) advisory opinion on the Israeli Wall provided answers to some of the most fundamental questions related to the conflict, unfortunately without having any immediate impact on the situation on the ground. Given Palestine's accession to the Rome Statute in early 2015, time has yet to show which role in the process will be played by the ICC. Other issues arising from the conflict, and examined by this article, are that of (Palestinian) statehood, going beyond the traditional concept of statehood and including the consequences of the jus cogens-character of the right of self-determination, as well as questions of treaty succession and succession in matters of State responsibility with regard to acts committed by the PLO.}, language = {en} } @article{Zimmermann2011, author = {Zimmermann, Andreas}, title = {The obligation to prevent genocide: towards a general responsibility to protect?}, isbn = {978-0-19-958881-7}, year = {2011}, language = {en} } @article{Zimmermann2013, author = {Zimmermann, Andreas}, title = {The international court of justice and state succession to treaties: avoiding principled answers to questions of principle}, isbn = {978-0-19-965321-8}, year = {2013}, language = {en} } @article{ZimmermannBerdefy2023, author = {Zimmermann, Andreas and Berdefy, Alina-Camille}, title = {Strafverfolgung und Beendigung von Straflosigkeit angesichts des russischen Angriffskriegs gegen die Ukraine}, series = {Ukraine-Krieg und Recht}, volume = {2}, journal = {Ukraine-Krieg und Recht}, number = {4}, publisher = {C.H. Beck}, address = {M{\"u}nchen}, pages = {164 -- 167}, year = {2023}, language = {de} } @article{Zimmermann2012, author = {Zimmermann, Andreas}, title = {State sucession in treaties}, isbn = {978-0-19-929168-7}, year = {2012}, language = {en} } @article{Zimmermann2012, author = {Zimmermann, Andreas}, title = {State sucession in other matters than treaties}, isbn = {978-0-19-929168-7}, year = {2012}, language = {en} } @article{ZimmermannJauer2021, author = {Zimmermann, Andreas and Jauer, Nora}, title = {Possible indirect legal effects under international law of non-legally binding instruments}, series = {KFG working paper series}, volume = {48}, journal = {KFG working paper series}, publisher = {Berlin Potsdam Research Group International Law - Rise or Decline?}, address = {Berlin}, issn = {2509-3770}, pages = {24}, year = {2021}, abstract = {As part of the current overall process of de-formalization in international law States increasingly chose informal, non-legally binding agreements or 'Memoranda of Understanding' ('MOUs') to organize their international affairs. The increasing conclusion of such legally non-binding instruments in addition to their flexibility, however, also leads to uncertainties in international relations. Against this background, this article deals with possible indirect legal consequences produced by MOUs. It discusses the different legal mechanisms and avenues that may give rise to secondary legal effects of MOUs through a process of interaction with and interpretation in line with other (formal) sources of international law. The article further considers various strategies how to avoid such eventual possible unintended or unexpected indirect legal effects of MOUs when drafting such instruments and when dealing with them subsequent to their respective 'adoption'.}, language = {en} }