Use of Force
Mary Ellen O’Connell examines the erosion of international legal norms, particularly the prohibition on the use of force, in the context of U.S. President Donald Trump’s disregard for legal constraints and the evolving concept of a “Rule-Based International Order.” O’Connell argues that a permissive approach to legal interpretation by Western states, especially the U.S., has weakened the prohibition on the use of force and calls for a return to natural law principles as a foundation for international law. O’Connell urges the international legal community to promote compliance by modeling adherence to authentic international law and supporting states that champion its principles. Read the full post here.
European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR)
Tal Mimran examines the ECtHR ruling in Sassi and Benchellali v. France, which upheld the immunity of U.S. officials accused of torture at Guantanamo Bay, rejecting the notion of exceptions to state immunity for jus cogens violations like torture. The author critiques the ECtHR’s decision, arguing that it reinforces the broad scope of state officials’ immunity and dismisses the International Law Commission’s Draft Article 7, which suggested exceptions for serious international crimes. Mimran emphasizes the need for a balanced approach that reconciles the prosecution of international crimes with state sovereignty, potentially through a treaty-based solution to clarify immunity norms. Read the full post here.
Eric Fripp discusses the ECtHR’s decision in Ukraine v Russia (Re Crimea), which addressed the Russian practice of “passportisation:” the forced extension of Russian citizenship to residents of Crimea following its annexation in 2014. The Grand Chamber found that the imposition of Russian citizenship violated the right to private life under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, primarily due to the coercive nature of the process. Fripp notes that the decision emphasized that the opt-out process was hindered by significant procedural barriers, and individuals were left in a precarious situation, forced to either accept Russian citizenship or become foreigners in their land. The author critiques the limitations of international law in regulating “passportisation,” highlighting the need for a clear framework to address non-consensual nationality imposition. Read the full post here.
Warfare
Aurel Sari explores the legal and strategic challenges posed by hybrid threats and grey zone conflicts, which blur the traditional lines between war and peace through a mix of conventional and non-conventional tactics, such as military force, disinformation, and economic pressure. While these concepts have gained traction in discussions of modern warfare, the article cautions against using them to overshadow the legal frameworks of armed conflict, which are grounded in established criteria such as the use of force and self-defense. The rise of non-kinetic harms, like cyberattacks and misinformation, further complicates legal analysis, raising questions about international law’s capacity to address these evolving threats. Ultimately, the article calls for a reflection on how international law can adapt to the changing character of warfare without losing sight of its core principles. Read the full post here.
Racheal Wanyana examines the emerging domain of cognitive warfare, highlighting its potential as a formidable non-kinetic tool in international politics. Cognitive warfare involves manipulating human cognition to influence attitudes, behaviors, and public sentiment, with the ultimate aim of destabilizing adversaries. The author explores the legal challenges of classifying cognitive warfare under the United Nations Charter’s prohibition of the use of force, traditionally applied to physical acts of aggression. It argues that while cognitive operations are non-kinetic, their destructive potential—manifested through social unrest, destabilization, and even physical harm—can meet the thresholds for prohibited force. Wanyana suggests a consequence-based approach to define prohibited force, emphasizing the severity, proximity, and intention of cognitive operations. However, it acknowledges the need for clearer legal frameworks to address the subtleties of cognitive warfare, which could otherwise escape regulation and destabilize international peace. Read the full post here.
Environmental Law
Eklavya Vasudev provides a comparative analysis of environmental governance in India and the European Union, highlighting their contrasting approaches to addressing pollution and environmental crises. The author explores how India’s judiciary plays an interventionist role, issuing directives to enforce compliance and coordinate fragmented governance efforts, while the EU relies on a decentralized framework guided by subsidiarity and proportionality, which allows Member States flexibility but often results in inconsistent compliance. By examining the strengths and weaknesses of both systems, Vasudev suggests how each can learn from the other to improve environmental governance, balancing judicial oversight with institutional capacity and stakeholder engagement. Read the full post here.
Alice Murgier’s analysis of the 2024 KlimaSeniorinnen case highlights Switzerland’s struggle to balance climate action and economic growth. The author notes that while the Swiss government acknowledged the ECtHR’s ruling, that current climate measures violated the right to private and family life, political resistance and concerns over judicial overreach have hindered meaningful implementation. Further, the author finds that the upcoming February 2025 referendum on the “Initiative for Environmental Responsibility” will test public support for stricter environmental policies amid fears of economic burdens. Read the full post here.
International Humanitarian Law (IHL)
Thibaud Jourdan analyzes the impact of a ceasefire agreement between Hamas and Israel on the applicability of IHL. The author explores how IHL continues to apply during ceasefires and temporary pauses in hostilities until a stable and permanent peace is achieved. Jourdan discusses the temporal scope of IHL, distinguishing between concepts such as the “close of hostilities” and the “general close of military operations.” The author highlights that while the current ceasefire holds potential for peace, neither Gaza nor Lebanon has met conditions that would terminate the applicability of IHL. The continued relevance of IHL is emphasized for ensuring humanitarian protections and accountability until a lasting resolution is reached. Read the full post here.
International Criminal Court (ICC)
Luca Poltronieri Rossetti discusses the controversial release and repatriation of Osama Elmasry Njeem by Italian authorities despite an arrest warrant from the International Criminal Court (ICC) for crimes against humanity and war crimes. The author critiques the procedural missteps and the Italian Court of Appeals’ decision to free Njeem due to alleged irregularities in his arrest by the Turin Police, which bypassed formal cooperation channels mandated by Italy’s cooperation law with the ICC. The author argues that the Italian government’s passive handling of the case, coupled with its expedited expulsion of Njeem, suggests a deliberate political decision to avoid cooperation with the ICC, likely influenced by diplomatic and realpolitik considerations. The author notes that the incident raises concerns about Italy’s future cooperation with the ICC and sets a troubling precedent for international justice. Read the full post here.
Cultural Heritage
Ludovico Carofano critically examines the Falepili Union Treaty, highlighting its failure to adequately address the protection of Tuvalu’s cultural heritage amidst the rising threat of climate change. The author notes that while the Treaty acknowledges Tuvalu’s deep ancestral ties to its land and sea, it lacks explicit references to cultural preservation, leaving a gap in safeguarding the nation’s intangible heritage. Tuvalu’s efforts, such as submitting its cultural landscape to UNESCO and pioneering a digital “twin” to preserve traditions and language, are seen as innovative responses to climate-induced displacement. However, the Treaty’s focus on climate resilience through infrastructure investments overlooks the profound loss of cultural heritage tied to Tuvalu’s land and sea, raising questions about the adequacy of adaptation measures and the need for more explicit protections within international climate frameworks. Read the full post here.
Greenland
Jure Vidmar examines international legal principles relating to recent U.S.-Denmark tensions over Greenland. The author notes that traditional territorial acquisition methods, like conquest and annexation, are outdated under modern law, which emphasizes self-determination and prohibits aggression. As such, Greenland, governed by Denmark with internal self-determination, can pursue independence through a legal process defined by the 2009 Self-Government Act. While post-independence association with another state isn’t legally prohibited, negotiations with Denmark could potentially impose restrictions on it. Vidmar highlights that Greenland’s future status will be influenced by broader geopolitical dynamics, including U.S. ambitions. Read the full post here.
Recent events and announcements can be found here.
