@techreport{Krieger2016,
  type      = {Working Paper},
  author    = {Krieger, Heike},
  title     = {Rights and Obligations of Third Parties in Armed Conflict},
  series = {KFG Working Paper Series},
  journal   = {KFG Working Paper Series},
  number    = {5},
  issn      = {2509-3770},
  doi       = {10.25932/publishup-42073},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-420732},
  pages     = {23},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {This paper will turn into a contribution to a book on community obligations. It focusses on third parties' rights and obligations in armed conflict. It is often said that international law has developed from a legal order which is designed to protect sovereignty to a system which also promotes community interests. This shift is said to be reflected in structural changes of the legal system. The creation of rights and obligations for third parties is generally seen as a part of this perceived paradigmatic shift. Community interests can be furthered either by negative duties of abstention, by an entitlement for third states, or even by duties to take positive measures. Since the shift towards protecting community interests apparently requires some form of cooperation, positive rights and duties to protect and to promote appear to be indispensable. Authors relying on a community perspective often dismiss duties of abstention as an expression of indifference in the face of a violation of a fundamental norm. Solidarity seems to require that third states take a more proactive role in actively enforcing community interests. The paper aims to test this understanding on the basis of an analysis of rights and obligations of third states in armed conflict. In order to argue that duties of abstention of third states are a central instrument for promoting community interests in relation to armed conflicts, the paper will first trace pertinent structural changes in international law. In particular, it will question the extent to which positive rights and obligations of third states have been firmly established in international law. In a second step, this contribution will evaluate the overall tendencies in the ongoing lawmaking process for promoting community interests in relation to armed conflict.},
  language  = {en}
}
@techreport{Buser2016,
  type      = {Working Paper},
  author    = {Buser, Andreas},
  title     = {Colonial Injustices and the Law of State Responsibility},
  series = {KFG Working Paper Series},
  journal   = {KFG Working Paper Series},
  number    = {4},
  issn      = {2509-3770},
  doi       = {10.25932/publishup-42054},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-420541},
  pages     = {30},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {Caribbean States organised in CARICOM recently brought forward reparation claims against several European States to compensate slavery and (native) genocides in the Caribbean and even threatened to approach the International Court of Justice. The paper provides for an analysis of the facts behind the CARICOM claim and asks whether the law of state responsibility is able to provide for the demanded compensation. As the intertemporal principle generally prohibits retroactive application of today's international rules, the paper argues that the complete claim must be based on the law of state responsibility governing in the time of the respective conduct. An inquiry into the history of primary (prohibition of slavery and genocide) as well as secondary rules of State responsibility reveals that both sets of rules were underdeveloped or non-existent at the times of slavery and alleged (native) genocides. Therefore, the author concludes that the CARICOM claim is legally flawed but nevertheless worth the attention as it once again exposes imperial and colonial injustices of the past and their legitimization by historical international law and international/natural lawyers.},
  language  = {en}
}
@techreport{Kane2016,
  type      = {Working Paper},
  author    = {Kane, Angela},
  title     = {Abr{\"u}stungsvertr{\"a}ge in der UNO},
  series = {KFG Working Paper Series},
  journal   = {KFG Working Paper Series},
  number    = {3},
  issn      = {2509-3770},
  doi       = {10.25932/publishup-42050},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-420505},
  pages     = {12},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {Das dritte Working Paper in der KFG Working Paper Series analysiert Zustand und Perspektiven v{\"o}lkerrechtlicher Abr{\"u}stungsvertr{\"a}ge unter der {\"A}gide der Vereinten Nationen. W{\"a}hrend die dreißig Jahre zwischen der Kuba-Krise und dem Fall des Eisernen Vorhangs f{\"u}r die Abr{\"u}stung eine erfolgreiche Periode gewesen seien, seien in den Vereinten Nationen seither außer dem Waffenhandelsvertrag keine weiteren Abr{\"u}stungsvertr{\"a}ge abgeschlossen worden. Die gegenw{\"a}rtige Stimmung sei abwartend bis negativ, obwohl es ein Nachholbed{\"u}rfnis gebe, Abr{\"u}stungsvertr{\"a}ge an die heutigen politischen Gegebenheiten sowie an den Stand der Technik anzupassen. Die Verfasserin schl{\"a}gt als L{\"o}sung vor, durch eine Politik der kleinen Schritte ein besseres Abr{\"u}stungsklima zu schaffen, indem dem Diskurs auf Grundlage zus{\"a}tzlicher Protokolle zu bestehenden Vertr{\"a}gen und notfalls auch durch ein Ausweichen auf andere Gremien eine neue Richtung verliehen werde.},
  language  = {de}
}
@techreport{Kahombo2016,
  type      = {Working Paper},
  author    = {Kahombo, Balingene},
  title     = {Africa Within the Justice System of the International Criminal Court},
  series = {KFG Working Paper Series},
  journal   = {KFG Working Paper Series},
  number    = {2},
  issn      = {2509-3770},
  doi       = {10.25932/publishup-41953},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-419537},
  pages     = {42},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {This article re-examines the relationship between Africa and the International Criminal Court (ICC). It traces the successive changes of the African attitude towards this Court, from states' euphoria, to hostility against its work, to regional counter-initiatives through the umbrella of the African Union (AU). The main argument goes beyond the idea of "the Court that Africa wants" in order to identify concrete reasons behind such a formal argument which may have fostered, if not enticed, the majority of African states to become ICC members and actively cooperate with it, when paradoxically some great powers have decided to stay outside its jurisdiction. It also seeks to understand, from a political and legal viewpoint, which parameters have changed since then to provoke that hostile attitude against the Court's work and the entrance of the AU into the debate through the African Common Position on the ICC. Lastly, this article explores African alternatives to the contested ICC justice system. It examines the need to reform the Rome Statute in order to give more independence, credibility and legitimacy to the ICC and its duplication to some extent by the new "Criminal Court of the African Union". Particular attention is paid to the resistance against this idea to reform the ICC justice system.},
  language  = {en}
}
@techreport{KriegerNolte2016,
  type      = {Working Paper},
  author    = {Krieger, Heike and Nolte, Georg},
  title     = {The International Rule of Law - Rise or Decline?},
  series = {KFG Working Paper Series},
  journal   = {KFG Working Paper Series},
  number    = {1},
  issn      = {2509-3770},
  doi       = {10.25932/publishup-41952},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-419528},
  pages     = {25},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {The paper undertakes a preliminary assessment of current developments of international law for the purpose of mapping the ground for a larger research project. The research project pursues the goal of determining whether public international law, as it has developed since the end of the Cold War, is continuing its progressive move towards a more human-rights- and multi-actor-oriented order, or whether we are seeing a renewed emphasis of more classical elements of international law. In this context the term "international rule of law" is chosen to designate the more recent and "thicker" understanding of international law. The paper discusses how it can be determined whether this form of international law continues to unfold, and whether we are witnessing challenges to this order which could give rise to more fundamental reassessments.},
  language  = {en}
}