Refine
Has Fulltext
- no (23) (remove)
Document Type
- Part of a Book (23) (remove)
Language
- English (23) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (23) (remove)
Keywords
- Computer Science (1)
- Humanities (1)
- Law (1)
- Politics & International Relations (1)
- Social Sciences (1)
- building law COVID-19 pandemic (1)
- de-urbanisation (1)
- guarantee of legal protection (1)
- idependent courts (1)
- municipal law (1)
Institute
- Öffentliches Recht (23) (remove)
Article 15bis. Exercise of jurisdiction over the crime of aggression (State referral, proprio motu)
(2022)
Article 15bis: Exercise of jurisdiction over the crime of aggression (State referal, proprio motu)
(2016)
Article 15ter Exercise of jurisdiction over the crime of aggression (Security Council referral)
(2022)
This chapter aims to analyse whether and how democracy is actually threatened by big-data-based operations and what role international law can play to respond to this possible threat. It shows how big-data-based operations challenge democracy and how international law can help in defending it. The chapter focuses on both state and non-state actors may undermine democracy through big data operations; although democracy as such is a rather underdeveloped concept in international law, which is often more concerned with effectivity than legitimacy – international law protects against these challenges via a democracy-based approach rooted in international human rights law on the one hand, and the principle of non-intervention on the other hand. Thus, although democracy does not play a major role in international law, international law nevertheless is able to protect democracy against challenges from the inside as well as outside.
Back in 1949, and thus only one year after the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the four Geneva Conventions were adopted, providing a strong signal for a new world order created after 1945 with the United Nations at their centre and combining as their goals both the maintenance of peace and security and the protection of human rights, but also recognising, realistically, that succeeding generations had so far not yet been saved from the scourge of war. Hence, the continued need for rules governing, and limiting, the means and methods of warfare once an armed conflict has erupted. At the same time, the international community has unfortunately not been able so far to fully safeguard individual human rights, its efforts to that effect and the continuous development of international human rights law over the years notwithstanding.
Smend, Rudolf
(2021)
This introductory essay is structured as follows: First of all, several forms of urbanisation (I.) are introduced and the processes of urbanisation and dis-urbanisation (II.) are defined. Then four fields of law which are deeply affected by urbanisation are put into the focus. These are, local government law (III.), but also public building law (IV.), civil service law (V.) and public finance law (VI.). Afterwards the effects of the corona pandemic on these fields of law are contemplated, taking account of the process of urbanisation (VII.). Finally, the main results are summarised (VIII.).
Would the world be a better place if one were to adopt a European approach to state immunity?
(2021)
This chapter argues not only that there is no European Sonderweg (or ‘special way’) when it comes to the law of state immunity but that there ought not to be one. Debates within The Hague Conference on Private International Law in the late 1990s and those leading to the adoption of the 2002 UN Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States, as well as the development of the EU Brussels Regulation on Jurisdiction and Enforcement, as amended in 2015, all demonstrate that state immunity was not meant to be limited by such treaties but ‘safeguarded’. Likewise, there is no proof that regional European customary law limits state immunity when it comes to ius cogens violations, as Italy and (partly) Greece are the only European states denying state immunity in such cases while the European Court of Human Rights has, time and again, upheld a broad concept of state immunity. It therefore seems unlikely that in the foreseeable future a specific European customary law norm on state immunity will develop, especially given the lack of participation in such practice by those states most concerned by the matter, including Germany. This chapter considers the possible legal implications of the jurisprudence of the Italian Constitutional Court for European military operations (if such operations went beyond peacekeeping). These implications would mainly depend on the question of attribution: if one where to assume that acts undertaken within the framework of military operations led by the EU were to be, at least also, attributable to the troop-contributing member states, the respective troop-contributing state would be entitled to enjoy state immunity exactly to the same degree as in any kind of unilateral military operations. Additionally, some possible perspectives beyond Sentenza 238/2014 are examined, in particular concerning the redress awarded by domestic courts ‘as long as’ neither the German nor the international system grant equivalent protection to the victims of serious violations of international humanitarian law committed during World War II. In the author’s opinion, strengthening the jurisdiction of international courts and tribunals, bringing interstate cases for damages before the International Court of Justice, as well as providing for claims commissions where individual compensation might be sought for violations of international humanitarian law would be more useful and appropriate mechanisms than denying state immunity.