2013
This paper will discuss the costs and benefits of sharing responsibility between states and international organizations for their own internationally wrongful acts. Rules on shared responsibility are sparse in the existing law of international responsibility as codified by the International … Read more
4 November 2013
Negotiations held in Hobart, Tasmania by the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources failed to reach an agreement to protect the ocean ecosystem in the Antarctic. The United States and New Zealand proposed a 500,000 square mile reserve in the Southern Ocean around Antarctica. Australia, France, and the European Union proposed a network of protected areas in the eastern Antarctic region. Both proposals were blocked due to the resistance of Russia, China, and Ukraine. Agreement between twenty-four members of the Commission and the European Union is required for the adoption of a proposal.
The resisting states argue that such reserves would cut off their access to fish stocks and undermine the fishing industries. However, fisheries scientists state that the reserves would help protect and restore the ecosystem from depletion caused by overfishing, pollution, and climate change. Yuri Onodera, climate adviser for Friends of the Earth Japan and attendee at the conference, stated, ‘once again, national interests and politics are a hurdle to the international interest of protecting the environment.’
Source: New York Times | Talks on Antarctic Marine Reserve Fail to Reach Agreement
3 November 2013
In this blogpost I reflect, from a shared responsibility perspective, on two issues arising under the draft EU-ECHR Accession Agreement: (1) the question of to whom EU member states’ acts implementing EU law are attributed, and why; (2) the intervening role reserved for the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) in proceedings brought before the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). The relevant provisions in the draft Accession Agreement are Art. 1(3), respectively Art. 3(6).
1. Issues of attribution
The draft Accession Agreement makes it clear that the attribution of responsibility may be a function of the relevant primary norms of international law, and their scope (the ECHR norms in the case) rather than of secondary rules that are applicable across-the-board. Questions of shared/exclusive responsibility are then conceived of differently with respect to the ECHR than, say, the World Trade Organization (WTO). In the former case, acts of EU member states implementing EU law are attributed to the member state rather than to the EU, whereas in the latter, such acts are attributed to the EU, the member states being mere agents or organs. (more…)
15 October 2013
After one of deadliest migrant-ship disasters in recent history, whereby a vessel originating from Libya capsized, already resulting in the death of 311 individuals, UN High Commissioner for Refugees spokesperson Adrian Edwards urged wider responsibility-sharing among European Union states to process asylum claims, and to find lasting solutions for people that are in need of international protection.
A better gathering and sharing of information about the routes and means that people are taking in flight is also needed, as well as improved rescue at sea detection and response, and better care arrangements on arrival after their disembarkation, such as improved facilities, according to Edwards.
Source: UNHCR | UNHCR warns of further boat tragedy risk on Mediterranean
Source: UN News Centre | After Lampedusa tragedy, UN refugee agency urges European Union to revisit migration polices
30 September 2013
In an op-ed in the Jerusalem Post, Eugene Kontorovich explains that the European Union knowingly and purposefully provides substantial direct financial assistance to settlements in Turkish-occupied Northern Cyprus. Kontorovich, professor at Northwestern University School of Law, argues that there is a contradiction between the EU position in regard to the occupied Palestinian territories and occupied territories in Cyprus. Whereas with regard to the former, the EU has stated that international law mandates its guidelines that prevent EU money from benefiting occupied Palestinian territories, with regard to the latter, the EU funds an occupied EU member state, without mentioning any international legal question about such funding.
Source: The Jerusalem Post | How the EU directly funds settlements in occupied territory