The persistent objector doctrine (POD) in international law provides that a rule of customary international law (CIL) will not oblige a state that has persistently objected to the development of the rule. The doctrine requires that the objection be “persistent” and “consistent” and that it not be contradictory. This Article offers a novel understanding of “contradiction.”
This Article fills a gap in existing scholarship by offering a comprehensive explanatory and functional theory of the role of the past as a constraint in domestic and global politics, or, in short, a theory of political stare decisis.
This Comment argues that a claim brought on behalf of Australia's "Stolen Generations" at the International Court of Justice could correct the Court’s jurisprudential errors in its application of the Genocide Convention and enable the Stolen Generations to achieve justice.
This Article offers a unique typological framework to study the evolution of International Commercial Courts (ICCs). It argues that the most apt characterization of the relevant power dynamics is “co-opetition,” a combination of “cooperation/collaboration/complementarity” and “competition.”
Drawing on the moral philosophy of torture, this Article argues that siege starvation is a war crime of societal torture. Recognizing this redefines the meaning and place of the crime in the framework of international criminal law.
Using U.N. Human Rights Council Resolution 26/9 and its proposed legally binding instrument as a new avenue for transnational corporate accountability, this Comment examines FIFA’s liability for human rights violations in Qatar connected to the World Cup.