Topic 1

Here to Stay? Extended Liability for Joint Criminal Enterprise as a Tool for Prosecuting Mass SGBV Crimes

On September 29, 2014 it may have become considerably harder for civilian and military superiors to avoid criminal liability for mass sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV) after a landmark conviction by the United Nations International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) was affirmed on appeal.[1]  In the trial judgement for The Prosecutor v.

Topic: 
Volume: 
19
Issue: 
13
Author: 
Andrés Pérez
Image: 

Operation "Sovereign Borders": the High Court of Australia Considers Implications of International Law

Introduction

On January 28, 2015, the High Court of Australia (Australia’s highest court) issued a decision examining the question of where to take a person who flees a country for fear of persecution and is intercepted in international waters by national authorities. The judgment arose from operation “Sovereign Borders,” Australia’s latest effort to stem the flow and resultant loss of life of people travelling without authorisation to Australia by sea.

Topic: 
Volume: 
19
Issue: 
12
Author: 
Stephen Tully and Michael Smith
Image: 

Presence and Politics at the International Criminal Court

Since 2002, the International Criminal Court (ICC or the Court) in The Hague has aspired to “end impunity for the perpetrators of the most serious crimes of concern to the international community.”[1]  This pursuit has given rise to a contentious issue in two high-profile cases: whether high-ranking accused must be present at trial.

Topic: 
Volume: 
19
Issue: 
11
Author: 
Steven Arrigg Koh
Image: 

The Cases against the Nuclear Weapons States

On April 24, 2014, the Marshall Islands filed individual applications before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) against the five nuclear weapon states (NWS) parties to the 1968 Treaty on the Non-proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) (United States, United Kingdom, France, Russian Federation, China) and the NWS not parties to the NPT (Israel, India, Pakistan, North Korea)[1] claiming a violation of Article VI of the treaty, of its customary international la

Topic: 
Volume: 
19
Issue: 
10
Author: 
Marco Roscini
Image: 

Hassan v. United Kingdom: A New Approach to Security Detention in Armed Conflict?

On September 16, 2014, in Hassan v. United Kingdom,[1] the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) interpreted how international human rights law (IHRL) should coexist with international humanitarian law (IHL) in a way that appears to give primacy to certain elements of human rights law.

Topic: 
Volume: 
19
Issue: 
7
Author: 
Diane Webber
Image: 

Striking ISIL: Aspects of the Law on the Use of Force

On September 20, 2014, the government of Iraq informed the UN Security Council (SC) that it had requested the United States to lead international efforts to strike Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) sites. The strikes would end the constant threat posed by ISIL to Iraq, protect Iraq’s citizens, and ultimately enable Iraq to regain control of its borders.[1] The U.S. asserted that this request extended to ISIL sites in Syria.[2]

Topic: 
Volume: 
19
Issue: 
5
Author: 
Marc Weller
Image: