CJIL Online is the official digital-only imprint of the Chicago Journal of International Law. Established in 2021, CJIL Online furthers the Journal’s mission by highlighting particularly timely, dynamic, and cutting-edge developments in international and comparative law. CJIL Online also strives to be as accessible as possible—both for readers and academics seeking to publish. We review submissions on a year-round, rolling basis and consider a wide range of manuscripts, from shorter Essays to traditional Articles. CJIL Online upholds the Journal’s long-standing values of intellectual curiosity, rigor, and professionalism.

 

Online
Article
CJIL Online 5.1
International Football Transfer Agreements and Liability for Negligent Payment of ‘Hacked’ Invoices
Ilias Bantekas
Professor of Law at Hamad bin Khalifa University (Qatar Foundation) and Adjunct Professor of International Law at Georgetown University, Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service.

There exists a number of seemingly inconsistent decisions and judgments issued by courts and sports tribunals on the topic of erroneous bank transfers as a result of hacked invoices for football transfer fees delivered through hacked email addresses. The buyer is presumed to have the burden of making correct payment and consequently is found to be in breach of its obligation to the selling club for failure to pay to the seller’s bank account. The argument presented here, which is consistent with the spirit of relevant statutes, institutional rules, and the limited case law, is that there is a clear due diligence standard demanded from seller and buyer in player transfer agreements. Both must ensure, on the basis of a best-efforts approach, that their IT systems are not susceptible to external interference, and if they have any suspicion that they have indeed been interfered with, they must alert the other party immediately. The buyer, in particular, must use alternative (personal) channels of communication with the seller where the latter alters its banking details as those are registered in FIFA’s Transfer Matching System (TMS). Where the buyer takes all appropriate due diligence measures and the seller fails to respond on time or is otherwise negligent in its IT controls, the buyer’s liability for erroneous payments is partial, if at all, since the seller is deemed to have contributed to the buyer’s breach of contract.

Online
Comment
CJIL Online 5.1
Miners on the Moon: Taking the Framework from the Law of the Sea to Space
George Ericsson
Thank you to the Chicago Journal of International Law and its members for their hard work preparing this Comment for publication. A special thank you to the following individuals for their direct contributions to the project: Professor David Weisbach, Professor Tom Ginsburg, Matthew Lively, Anna Schmidt, and Hana Nasser.

Terrestrial Mining historically answered global demand for minerals and metals. But, as Earth’s once-plentiful mines diminish, companies and states seek new avenues to meet the world’s ever-increasing resource demand. Instead of down, scientists are now looking up at the stars, to Space Mining, which entails resource extraction from celestial bodies. It is not yet economically feasible, but strides are slowly being made in turning this futuristic industry into a reality. Currently, Space Mining has limited regulation, creating the potential for conflict over space’s valuable resources. Therefore, the international community should begin preparing for the industry’s eventual rise by creating a regulatory and dispute resolution framework. This comment will advocate for incorporating the regulatory and dispute resolution regimes of Deep-Sea Mining in the space context. The two main modes are (1) an industrial regulator akin to the “International Seabed Authority” and (2) an International Arbitration Panel dedicated to handling Space Mining disputes like the “Seabed Disputes Chamber.” These frameworks can properly monitor potential externalities while still providing incentives to encourage discovery.

Online
Article
CJIL Online 4.2
New Zealand Constitutionalism
Matthew S. R. Palmer
Judge of the Court of Appeal of New Zealand

Nothing in this Essay represents the views of the New Zealand judiciary. I thank Sarah Burton for comments and research assistance and Helena Palmer and Ruth Wilkie for comments. 

Having published in the first issue of the first volume of this journal twenty-five years ago, I am delighted to accept the invitation to comment on Professor Richard Albert’s thought-provoking new conceptualization of constitutionalism as it might relate to New Zealand. The issues are not free from controversy in New Zealand, so I tread carefully and from an orthodox constitutional perspective.  I also sound a note of warning about assumptions, grounded in realism.

Albert favors lawful and peaceful attempts by peoples to use the levers of politics and law to achieve constitutional recognition within a state. He sees this as preferable to the sort of revolutionary self‑determination pursued through violence, such as by the Dutch against the Habsburgs in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries or the Americans against the British in the eighteenth century. Few would disagree. But I caution against assuming away the underlying influence of coercive power in modern nation states. A worldwide resurgence of power politics is currently underway. Legal and political mechanisms in even well-established democratic states can be susceptible to power.

Underlying patterns and distribution of historical coercive power influence the path-dependent nature of constitutional evolution in any state. Historical coercive roots have a habit of running through the grain of a nation’s constitutional culture. They can determine the success of constitutional initiatives. For example, Indigenous peoples are a numerical minority in most states now and their political power tends to reflect that. In many cases, peaceful and lawful initiatives are the only means of constitutional recognition available to indigenous peoples. But such initiatives do not always succeed.

In this Essay, I briefly outline how Albert’s framework can characterize aspects of the constitutional evolution of New Zealand.

Online
Comment
CJIL Online 4.2
Identity Checks in France in Violation of Article 14 Post-Wa Baile v. Switzerland
Julia-Jeane Lighten
B.A. 2020, Middlebury College; J.D. Candidate 2026, The University of Chicago Law School

I would like to thank the board and staff of the Chicago Journal of International Law for their guidance, as well as Professor Anjli Parrin for advising me.

On February 20, 2024, the European Court of Human Rights ruled in Mohamed Wa Baile’s favor on his claim that Switzerland violated his rights under Article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights, in conjunction with Article 8. Mr. Wa Baile alleged that Swiss law enforcement violated his rights when they subjected him to an identity check without offering an objective reason for doing so. The Court’s finding of a substantive violation of Article 14 with respect to racial profiling was unprecedented. The Court relied on factors such as the Administrative Court’s ruling that law enforcement had no objective reason for requesting identification from Mr. Wa Baile, statistics showing the extent of racial profiling practices in Switzerland, as well as Switzerland’s failure to implement adequate measures to remedy the issue. Similar to Switzerland, statistics show the prevalence of racial profiling in France. France also hesitates to enact laws and implement measures to prevent racial profiling. This is noted in a pending class action lawsuit in the European Court of Human Rights: Seydi and others v. France. This Comment argues that the theory behind Switzerland’s liability in Wa Baile v. Switzerland gives rise to allegations of Article 14 violations in France, as law enforcement exhibits a pattern of conducting identity checks absent reasonable suspicion and objective justifications.

Online
Article
CJIL Online 4.2
Chile’s Constituent Processes: A Fault Line of Decolonial Constitutionalism?
Jorge Contesse & Domingo Lovera
Contesse is a Professor of Law & Director of the Center for Transnational Law, Rutgers Law School; Lovera is an Associate Professor of Law and Co-Director, Public Law Program, Diego Portales Law School.

This Essay examines the concept of “decolonial constitutionalism,” as articulated by Professor Richard Albert, focusing on its application to Chile’s recent constitution-making processes. Albert defines decolonial constitutionalism as “the use of legal, legitimate, and non-violent means to assert sovereignty, to secure rights, or to achieve recognition for a people, nation, or state.” The Essay explores how Chile’s attempts to draft a new constitution between 2019 and 2023 reflect both the potential and challenges of decolonial constitutionalism, particularly in relation to the rights and recognition of Indigenous Peoples. The first process (2019–2022) prominently featured Indigenous demands, including the proposal to reconfigure Chile as a plurinational state, but was ultimately rejected by the public. The second process (2023), in contrast, marginalized Indigenous claims and emphasized national unity, leading to another rejection. Despite these failures, the Essay argues that the constitutional recognition of Indigenous Peoples, even in a limited form, represents a significant—albeit incomplete—step toward decolonization. The Essay concludes by suggesting that future efforts to address Indigenous rights may need to shift from constitution-making to judicial enforcement and international legal mechanisms. Through this analysis, the Essay contributes to the broader discourse on how constitutional processes can serve as tools for decolonial emancipation.

Online
Comment
CJIL Online 4.2
A Womb of One’s Own: Supporting International Surrogacy Regulation with a Historical Wet Nursing Perspective
Christina Hartman

I would like to thank the staff of the Chicago Journal of International Law for their suggestions and support and Professor Emily Buss for her insightful feedback.

Surrogacy is a growing area of assisted reproductive technology that is used transnationally. Opinions on the practice vary widely, influencing legislation around the world. Some areas ban the practice altogether, while other areas have little regulation at all. International rights to health, including autonomy and reproductive rights, are evoked throughout the surrogacy process. Surrogacy, like wet nursing, involves women using reproductive abilities to support other families in exchange for compensation. This Comment supports regulation on surrogacy that does not ban the practice, arguing instead that international rights support the continued use of surrogacy, and that wet nursing supports the idea that surrogates should be compensated for their work.

Online
Comment
CJIL Online 4.1
Minority Rights Protections in the Post-Arab Spring Egyptian and Tunisian Constitutions
Sahar M. Omer
J.D. Candidate 2025, The University of Chicago Law School

I would like to extend my gratitude to the editorial board and staff of the Chicago Journal of International Law and to Professor Tom Ginsburg for advising me. I would also like to thank my friends and family for their constant support.

The 2011 Arab Spring was an inflection point for the Middle East and North Africa region, representing an opportunity for democracies in countries that have only experienced authoritarianism as sovereign nations. Both Tunisia and Egypt drafted and ratified new constitutions in the wake of their revolutions. Among the chief worries that citizens and onlookers had in their drafting processes was the role that Islamists would have, particularly in human rights and minority protections. As more citizens wanted fundamental rights protected in their constitutions, the drafters had the task of incorporating them with the Islamic identity of the state. Compromises by the Tunisian Islamists and secular groups led to a more well-received constitution by minority groups, while the opposite happened in Egypt. This Comment argues, based on the comparative success of the 2014 Tunisian Constitution, that religious-based democratic states will need to include more protections for minority and historically marginalized groups to increase their acceptance and longevity.

Online
Comment
CJIL Online 4.1
Administering an International Climate Migration Lottery
Hana Nasser
B.A., University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Ph.D., University of Virginia, J.D. Candidate at the University of Chicago

I would like to thank my comment editors, Amara Shaikh and Tyler Lawson for their feedback and guidance. Professor Nicole Hallett provided detailed comments on drafts and helped me sharpen the argument. Professor Tom Ginsburg provided valuable feedback on the comment’s proposed design for a climate migration lottery.

Experts predict that millions of people will need to migrate internally and across borders due to global warming. Currently, international legal frameworks do not extend the same legal protections to climate migrants as are afforded refugees and asylum seekers. While international law recognizes the right to asylum based on political persecution, there is no international right to migrate based on climate-based harms that states are legally bound to observe. This Comment proposes a climate migration lottery (CML) that would be administered internationally to address current and future climate-based migration. Under this proposal, receiving states would agree via a treaty to admit their fair share of the total pool of climate migrants selected through the lottery. Migrants from countries with a high susceptibility to having large portions of territory rendered uninhabitable by climate change would be eligible to enter the CML. This comment argues that a CML can alleviate the strain on regions in developing states that must accommodate internally displaced persons as well as the burden on countries that are near low-lying Pacific island states that will experience significant rates of displacement due to sea level rises.

Online
Comment
CJIL Online 3.2
The Cathedral of Looted Goods: Enforcing Cultural Property Repatriation with Calabresi and Melamed’s Entitlement Protection Rules
Jennifer Kuo

I am endlessly grateful for the staff of the Chicago Journal of International Law, my faculty advisor Professor Lee Fennell, and my family and friends for their continued support, assistance, and guidance throughout the process of writing this Comment.

Normatively, most nations agree that holding onto artifacts belonging to other peoples is both morally and legally unconscionable, but practically, there has been no enforcement scheme under international law for artifacts to finally return home. Calabresi and Melamed’s property, liability, and inalienability rules could be justified and applied to repatriation disputes through consideration of a mixture of economic efficiency, distributive, and justice motivations. Using this framework to create a model of variable protection of international law would create a comprehensive enforcement scheme that resolves the fundamental enforcement problem that international law faces in facilitating repatriation.

Online
Comment
CJIL Online 3.2
A Comparative Approach to Addressing Language Discrepancies in Multilingual Treaties
Jake Atlas
B.A. 2020, the University of Texas at Austin; J.D. Candidate 2025, The University of Chicago Law School.

I would like to thank Professor Tom Ginsburg and the staff of the Chicago Journal of International Law for their invaluable assistance and guidance.

Multilingual treaties have a long history of interpretation at the International Court of Justice. Yet the ICJ has often ignored their unique features and interpreted them as they would any other treaty. This has led to judgments and advisory opinions that fail to reconcile discrepancies between language versions of multilingual treaties and therefore do not follow the interpretive guidelines set under Article 33 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. Yet these issues facing the ICJ are not unique to that Court. Many jurisdictions face the problems of multilingualism and use novel solutions that the ICJ could incorporate. This Comment begins by analyzing two challenges facing multilingual legislation in Canada and the European Union, namely: de facto unilingualism and discrepancies in language versions. Next, it will argue that both jurisdictions have relied on unique solutions to address those two challenges. Finally, this Comment will turn its attention back to multilingual treaties and the ICJ. It will argue that the same challenges that face multilingual legislation exist for multilingual treaties. Given this, it will argue that the solutions used by Canada and the EU can be applied in the context of treaties and the ICJ should adopt those solutions to better reflect the purposes of Article 33 of the Vienna Convention and the unique principles of multilingual treaties.

Online
Comment
CJIL Online 3.1
Ending the Race to the Bottom: Analyzing A Recent Global Agreement on Corporate Taxation
Rupan Bharanidaran
B.A. 2018, University of California, Los Angeles; J.D. Candidate 2024, The University of Chicago Law School.

I would like to thank Professor Adam Chilton and the Chicago Journal of International Law staff for their assistance and guidance with this comment.

In October 2021, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development announced a global tax agreement that creates a territorial tax system and imposes a 15% global minimum tax. This Comment analyzes the OECD agreement by using case studies of previous multilateral tax proposals to provide historical context and by delving into various criticisms of the agreement.

Online
Article
CJIL Online 3.1
Justice from the General Assembly: An International Tribunal for the Crime of Aggression in Ukraine
Graham M. Glusman
Graham M. Glusman graduated from Columbia Law School and Amsterdam Law School in 2023 with a J.D. and an LL.M. in International Criminal Law. He earned his B.A. from Columbia University in 2019. He is currently employed at a major law firm in New York where he focuses on international arbitration and white collar litigation.

The author would like to extend his gratitude to Professor Lori Damrosch at Columbia Law School and Professor Tomas Hamilton at Amsterdam Law School for their frequent encouragement and invaluable guidance throughout the writing process. The author would also like to thank the incredibly talented editors at CJIL. All opinions expressed in this Article are the author’s own and do not reflect the views of the author’s employer.

In February 2022, the Russian Federation invaded the territory of Ukraine, igniting the largest military conflict in Europe since the end of the Second World War. This Article argues that under the powers articulated in the 1950 Uniting for Peace resolution, the General Assembly has the authority to convene an international tribunal capable of prosecuting the crime of aggression in Ukraine.