The Experts below are selected from a list of 54363 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Laurence R Helfer - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
opposing International justice kenya s integrated backlash strategy against the icc
International Criminal Law Review, 2017Co-Authors: Laurence R Helfer, Anne E ShowalterAbstract:The government of Kenya has employed a wide range of strategies to undermine the recently-dismissed prosecutions of President Uhuru Kenyatta and Deputy President William Ruto before the International Criminal Court (ICC). This Article argues that these strategies are part of an integrated backlash campaign against the ICC, one that encompasses seemingly unrelated actions in multiple global, regional and national venues. We identify three overarching themes that connect these diverse measures—politicizing complementarity, regionalizing political opposition, and pairing instances of cooperation and condemnation to diffuse accusations of impunity. By linking its discrete acts of opposition to these three themes, the government ultimately increased the effectiveness of its campaign against the Court. Our findings provide insights for analysing other instances of backlash against International Courts and institutions.
-
opposing International justice kenya s integrated backlash strategy against the icc
Social Science Research Network, 2017Co-Authors: Laurence R Helfer, Anne E ShowalterAbstract:The government of Kenya has employed a wide range of strategies to undermine the recently-dismissed prosecutions of President Uhuru Kenyatta and Deputy President William Ruto before the International Criminal Court (ICC). This Article argues that these strategies are part of an integrated backlash campaign against the ICC, one that encompasses seemingly unrelated actions in multiple global, regional and national venues. We identify three overarching themes that connect these diverse measures—politicizing complementarity, regionalizing political opposition, and pairing instances of cooperation and condemnation to diffuse accusations of impunity. By linking its discrete acts of opposition to these three themes, the government ultimately increased the effectiveness of its campaign against the Court. Our findings provide new evidence to analyze others instances of backlash against International Courts and institutions.
-
backlash against International Courts in west east and southern africa causes and consequences
European Journal of International Law, 2016Co-Authors: Karen J Alter, Laurence R Helfer, James Thuo GathiiAbstract:This article discusses three credible attempts by African governments to restrict the jurisdiction of three similarly situated sub-regional Courts in response to politically controversial rulings. In West Africa, when the Court of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) upheld allegations of torture by opposition journalists in Gambia, that country’s political leaders sought to restrict the Court’s power to review human rights complaints. The other member states ultimately defeated Gambia’s proposal. In East Africa, Kenya failed in its efforts to eliminate the East African Court of Justice (EACJ) and to remove some of its judges after a decision challenging an election to a sub-regional legislature. However, the member states agreed to restructure the EACJ in ways that have significantly affected the Court’s subsequent trajectory. In Southern Africa, after the Southern African Development Community (SADC) Tribunal ruled in favor of white farmers in disputes over land seizures, Zimbabwe prevailed upon SADC member states to suspend the Tribunal and strip its power to review complaints from private litigants. Variations in the mobilization efforts of community secretariats, civil society groups and sub-regional parliaments explain why efforts to eliminate the three Courts or narrow their jurisdiction were defeated in ECOWAS, scaled back in the EACJ and largely succeeded in the SADC.
-
International Courts as agents of legal change evidence from lgbt rights in europe
International Organization, 2014Co-Authors: Laurence R Helfer, Erik VoetenAbstract:Do International court judgments influence the behavior of actors other than the parties to a dispute? Are International Courts agents of policy change or do their judgments merely reflect evolving social and political trends? We develop a theory that specifies the conditions under which International Courts can use their interpretive discretion to have system-wide effects. We examine the theory in the context of European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) rulings on lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) issues by creating a new data set that matches these rulings with laws in all Council of Europe (CoE) member states. We also collect data on LGBT policies unaffected by ECtHR judgments to control for the confounding effect of evolving trends in national policies. We find that ECtHR judgments against one country substantially increase the probability of national-level policy change across Europe. The marginal effects of the judgments are especially high where public acceptance of sexual minorities is low, but where national Courts can rely on ECtHR precedents to invalidate domestic laws or where the government in power is not ideologically opposed to LGBT equality. We conclude by exploring the implications of our findings for other International Courts.
-
nature or nurture judicial lawmaking in the european court of justice and the andean tribunal of justice
Social Science Research Network, 2010Co-Authors: Karen J Alter, Laurence R HelferAbstract:Are International Courts power-seeking by nature, expanding the reach and scope of International rules and their own authority where permissive conditions allow? Or, does expansionist lawmaking require special nurturing? We investigate the relative influences of nature versus nurture by comparing expansionist lawmaking in the European Court of Justice (ECJ) and the Andean Tribunal of Justice (ATJ), the ECJ’s jurisdictional clone and the third most active IC. We argue that International judges are more likely to become expansive lawmakers where they are supported by sub-state interlocutors and compliance constituencies, including government officials, advocacy networks, national judges, and administrative agencies. This comparison of two structurally identical International Courts calls into question prevailing explanations of ECJ lawmaking, and it suggests that prevailing scholarship puts too much emphasis on self-interested power seeking of judges, the importance of regime design features, and the preferences of governments in explaining IC lawmaking. Published online by Cambridge University Press 12 October 2010
Karen J Alter - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
backlash against International Courts in west east and southern africa causes and consequences
European Journal of International Law, 2016Co-Authors: Karen J Alter, Laurence R Helfer, James Thuo GathiiAbstract:This article discusses three credible attempts by African governments to restrict the jurisdiction of three similarly situated sub-regional Courts in response to politically controversial rulings. In West Africa, when the Court of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) upheld allegations of torture by opposition journalists in Gambia, that country’s political leaders sought to restrict the Court’s power to review human rights complaints. The other member states ultimately defeated Gambia’s proposal. In East Africa, Kenya failed in its efforts to eliminate the East African Court of Justice (EACJ) and to remove some of its judges after a decision challenging an election to a sub-regional legislature. However, the member states agreed to restructure the EACJ in ways that have significantly affected the Court’s subsequent trajectory. In Southern Africa, after the Southern African Development Community (SADC) Tribunal ruled in favor of white farmers in disputes over land seizures, Zimbabwe prevailed upon SADC member states to suspend the Tribunal and strip its power to review complaints from private litigants. Variations in the mobilization efforts of community secretariats, civil society groups and sub-regional parliaments explain why efforts to eliminate the three Courts or narrow their jurisdiction were defeated in ECOWAS, scaled back in the EACJ and largely succeeded in the SADC.
-
the new terrain of International law Courts politics rights
2014Co-Authors: Karen J AlterAbstract:List of Illustrations ix Case Study Index xi Preface xv List of Abbreviations xxv PART I: Delegating Authority to International Courts, a Global View 1 Chapter 1: The New Terrain of International Law: Courts, Politics, Rights 3 Chapter 2: International Courts Altering Politics 32 Chapter 3: The New International Courts 68 Chapter 4: World History and the Evolving International Judiciary 112 PART II: International Courts in Action 161 Chapter 5: International Dispute Settlement 163 Chapter 6: International Administrative Review 199 Chapter 7: International Law Enforcement 244 Chapter 8: International Constitutional Review 282 PART III: Courts, Politics, Rights 333 Chapter 9: International Courts and Democratic Politics 335 Chapter Appendixes 367 Legal Cases Index and Citations 401 Court Treaty Bibliography and Litigation Data Sources 407 Bibliography of Cited Works 415 Index 441
-
the new terrain of International law Courts politics rights
2014Co-Authors: Karen J AlterAbstract:This is the introductory chapter of my forthcoming book with the same title. International relations have long been considered outside of the domain of law. Most people presume that law is only meaningful when backed by a central enforcer. By this logic, absent a world state International law cannot meaningfully exist. International law is rising in political relevance because since the end of the Cold War, International politics has become increasingly judicialized. Domestic actors increasingly see the rule of law as requiring respect for International law; domestic and International actors are increasingly invoking International law as they advocate for and justify policy prescriptions; and International Courts, ad hoc International legal mechanisms, and domestic judges are increasingly adjudicating state respect for International law. The New Terrain of International Law charts the changes and trends in judicializing International relations by focusing on the creation and use of International Courts (ICs). Today there are more than two-dozen International Courts that have collectively issued over 37,000 binding legal rulings in individual contentious cases. The contribution of the Courts, International or otherwise, is to say what the law requires, and to perhaps specify remedies for law violations. The New Terrain of International Law explains how this very limited power — the power to speak the law — translates into political influence, and it explains when and how delegating authority to International Courts influences International and domestic politics. This working paper includes an extended table of contents and a case study index.
-
nature or nurture judicial lawmaking in the european court of justice and the andean tribunal of justice
Social Science Research Network, 2010Co-Authors: Karen J Alter, Laurence R HelferAbstract:Are International Courts power-seeking by nature, expanding the reach and scope of International rules and their own authority where permissive conditions allow? Or, does expansionist lawmaking require special nurturing? We investigate the relative influences of nature versus nurture by comparing expansionist lawmaking in the European Court of Justice (ECJ) and the Andean Tribunal of Justice (ATJ), the ECJ’s jurisdictional clone and the third most active IC. We argue that International judges are more likely to become expansive lawmakers where they are supported by sub-state interlocutors and compliance constituencies, including government officials, advocacy networks, national judges, and administrative agencies. This comparison of two structurally identical International Courts calls into question prevailing explanations of ECJ lawmaking, and it suggests that prevailing scholarship puts too much emphasis on self-interested power seeking of judges, the importance of regime design features, and the preferences of governments in explaining IC lawmaking. Published online by Cambridge University Press 12 October 2010
-
nature or nurture judicial lawmaking in the european court of justice and the andean tribunal of justice
International Organization, 2010Co-Authors: Karen J Alter, Laurence R HelferAbstract:Are International Courts power-seeking by nature, expanding the reach and scope of International rules and the Courts' authority where permissive condi- tions allow? Or, does expansionist lawmaking require special nurturing? We investi- gate the relative influences of nature versus nurture by comparing expansionist lawmaking in the European Court of Justice ~ECJ! and the Andean Tribunal of Jus- tice ~ATJ !, the ECJ's jurisdictional cousin and the third most active International court+ We argue that International judges are more likely to become expansionist law- makers where they are supported by substate interlocutors and compliance constitu- encies, including government officials, advocacy networks, national judges, and admin- istrative agencies+ This comparison of two structurally identical International Courts calls into question prevailing explanations of ECJ lawmaking, and it suggests that prevailing scholarship puts too much emphasis on the self-interested power-seeking of judges, the importance of institutional design features, and the preferences of gov- ernments to explain lawmaking by International Courts+
Salvatore Caserta - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
western centrism contemporary International law and International Courts
Leiden Journal of International Law, 2021Co-Authors: Salvatore CasertaAbstract:The article unpacks the notion of western centrism in contemporary International law by developing a framework to capture its varied patterns. It argues that western centrism can have three different manifestations – systemic, evaluative, and professional – depending on whether it refers to the rationality, the narratives, or the actors at play in the International legal field. The article then discusses three theoretical approaches that can help scholars dealing with western centrism in International (legal) scholarship. These are: (i) the critical readings of those scholars that explain International law through the lens of power and domination; (ii) the Stanford school of sociological institutionalism, which explains International institutions and norms through the role of culture and global scripts; and (iii) post-Bourdieusian reflexive sociology, which analyses the roles of transnational legal elites in colonial and post-colonial settings. Finally, the article reconstructs the experience of the Caribbean Court of Justice in the light of western centrism, demonstrating that, different from what is often argued in the literature, the Court is not a failed replica of the Court of Justice of the EU, but an institution in its own right, with its own approach to International law, its own successes and failures.
-
western centrism contemporary International law and International Courts
Social Science Research Network, 2020Co-Authors: Salvatore CasertaAbstract:The paper unpacks the notion of western centrism in contemporary International law by developing a framework to capture the its varied patterns. It argues that western centrism can have three different manifestations – Systemic, Evaluative, and Professional – depending on whether it refers to the rationality, the narratives, or the actors at play in the International legal field. The paper then discusses three theoretical approaches that can help scholars dealing with western centrism in International (legal) scholarship. These are: the critical readings of those scholars that explain International law through the lens of power and domination; II) the Stanford school of sociological institutionalism, which explains International institutions and norms through the role of culture and global scripts; and III) the post-Bourdieusian reflexive sociology, which analyses the roles of transnational legal elites in colonial and post-colonial settings. Finally, the paper reconstructs the experience of the Caribbean Court of Justice in the light of Western Centrism, demonstrating that, different from what often argued in the literature, the court is not a failed replica of the Court of Justice of the EU, but an institution in its own right, with its own approach to International law, its own successes and failures.
Paul Lindenretek - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the subjects of spatial statism reclaiming politics and law in International entanglement afterword to the foreword by ran hirschl and ayelet shachar
International Journal of Constitutional Law, 2020Co-Authors: Paul LindenretekAbstract:In their Foreword, Hirschl and Shachar challenge the supposed contemporary decline of state sovereignty and describe the enduring and expansive spatial reach of state power to counter threats to sovereign territorial control. This Afterword looks into the normative foundations of this account and its consequences for public International law and for International Courts, in particular. “Spatial statism” exposes, I argue, a disjunction between the concepts of state sovereignty and popular sovereignty—and thus disrupts the normative expectation that those subject to the law are also its authors. It is this expectation that International judicial review must seek to restore. The attempt to do so is burdened by analytical and practical difficulties. But the project, I argue, is essential. In confronting the new “spaces” of International entanglement, judges must redeem the idea that citizens might yet reclaim those entanglements as a “common world,” not just a space in which they are brought together, unfreely, under the mantle of state coordination and coercion.
-
the subjects of spatial statism reclaiming politics and law in International entanglement
Social Science Research Network, 2019Co-Authors: Paul LindenretekAbstract:In their Foreword, Hirschl and Shachar challenge the supposed contemporary decline of state sovereignty and describe the enduring and expansive spatial reach of state power to counter threats to sovereign territorial control. This Afterword looks into the normative foundations of this account and its consequences for public International law and for International Courts, in particular. “Spatial statism” exposes, I argue, a disjunction between the concepts of state sovereignty and popular sovereignty—and thus disrupts the normative expectation that those subject to the law are also its authors. It is this expectation that International judicial review must seek to restore. The attempt to do so is burdened by analytical and practical difficulties. But the project, I argue, is essential. In confronting the new “spaces” of International entanglement, judges must redeem the idea that citizens might yet reclaim those entanglements as a “common world,” not just a space in which they are brought together, unfreely, under the mantle of state coordination and coercion.
Anne E Showalter - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
opposing International justice kenya s integrated backlash strategy against the icc
International Criminal Law Review, 2017Co-Authors: Laurence R Helfer, Anne E ShowalterAbstract:The government of Kenya has employed a wide range of strategies to undermine the recently-dismissed prosecutions of President Uhuru Kenyatta and Deputy President William Ruto before the International Criminal Court (ICC). This Article argues that these strategies are part of an integrated backlash campaign against the ICC, one that encompasses seemingly unrelated actions in multiple global, regional and national venues. We identify three overarching themes that connect these diverse measures—politicizing complementarity, regionalizing political opposition, and pairing instances of cooperation and condemnation to diffuse accusations of impunity. By linking its discrete acts of opposition to these three themes, the government ultimately increased the effectiveness of its campaign against the Court. Our findings provide insights for analysing other instances of backlash against International Courts and institutions.
-
opposing International justice kenya s integrated backlash strategy against the icc
Social Science Research Network, 2017Co-Authors: Laurence R Helfer, Anne E ShowalterAbstract:The government of Kenya has employed a wide range of strategies to undermine the recently-dismissed prosecutions of President Uhuru Kenyatta and Deputy President William Ruto before the International Criminal Court (ICC). This Article argues that these strategies are part of an integrated backlash campaign against the ICC, one that encompasses seemingly unrelated actions in multiple global, regional and national venues. We identify three overarching themes that connect these diverse measures—politicizing complementarity, regionalizing political opposition, and pairing instances of cooperation and condemnation to diffuse accusations of impunity. By linking its discrete acts of opposition to these three themes, the government ultimately increased the effectiveness of its campaign against the Court. Our findings provide new evidence to analyze others instances of backlash against International Courts and institutions.