|
formerly
United Nations Decade of International Law ISSUE #28: May 2003
Note: We no longer use page numbers for this Newsletter- now that we have shifted to an electronic format. Next Newsletter: Fall 2003
MESSAGE FROM THE CHAIR: ELECTION PROCESS: This year, our group instituted a new model for our election process. It is now being studied by the ASIL, for possible use in other sections. As previously reported, our Vice Chair solicited and accepted nominations via e-mail, during the two-month period of January and February. She then posted the nomination results, as the basis for the one-month voting period. Many thanks to Martha Trofimenko for her assistance to our ASIL section for providing this valuable service. Only one person was nominated–resulting in the election itself not being particularly significant. However, the institution of our new elections process was very significant! That was because our entire group had, for the first time, the opportunity to participate in the election process via newsletter announcement and our electronic listserv. I presented the details to the ASIL CEO at the annual breakfast meeting of the various section chairs. ELECTION RESULTS: William Slomanson was elected Chair of UN21 for (the standard) three-year term. His term of office began as of the April 2003 ASIL Annual Meeting. It ends at the same meeting in 2006. Under our current process, the Chair appoints the Vice Chair, similar to the process used in American law schools–where the Dean normally appoints the Associate Dean. The Chair also appoints the other UN21 "officer" (for lack of a better term): the Newsletter Editor. In this instance the current Chair and Editor have had a smooth working relationship for many years :-) Slightly less facetiously, this arrangement is subject to the will of the majority of UN21 members. Although I have been serving in both roles for some time, I believe that has benefitted the section and the Society. It remains, however, subject to the will of the majority of our group, should anyone prefer that these two offices be occupied by two people rather than one. ADMINISTRATIVE THANKS: I would like to specially thank Cindy Marciel, Faculty Secretary, Thomas Jefferson School of Law, for her unwavering help over the years with facilitating the publication of our newsletter. Cindy prepares the mailing envelopes for copies of the newsletter to: (1) non-member friends of UN21 who read and rely on our newsletter; (2) those UN21 members who remain electronically challenged; and (3) publishers. On behalf of UN21, many thanks are due to Sasha Skenderija at Cornell Law School. He is the webmaster who is responsible for uploading our various Newsletters–and has done an outstanding job of tweaking our web presence via his many formatting ideas. LISTSERV ELECTIONS COMMUNICATIONS To: un21@yahoogroups.com
Dear members of UN21 group: With the end of February approaching, the nomination period is drawing to a close. We have one nomination already: Lilian LaBorde (Argentina) has nominated Bill Slomanson for the position of Chair. If there are any further nominations, please send them via e-mail to me at: trofimenko@dol.net or trofimenko@mail.dol.net. March is our voting month. Therefore, on March 1st, I plan to submit the name (or names, if more) of the nominee(s) for your vote. In March, please send to me your vote by e-mail. It is important that your e-mail have a subject, preferably: UN21 election. Best wishes to all, --------------------------------------------------- Dear Members of UN21, The nomination period has come to a close. We have received one nomination and that was nomination of Bill Slomanson for the Chair of our Group. Now begins the voting period, or – perhaps we should all express our acclamation. As there were no other nominations, it is obvious that we all wanted Bill to be our Chair for the next three years. Please express your vote by sending an e-mail to me, preferably by March 28th, 2003. With best wishes, UN DECADE OBJECTIVES * Each Newsletter issue carries a
restatement of the essential goals of the United Nations Decade of
International Law (1990-1999). New members, and seasoned ones as well, can
readily articulate the reason for our existence. The four essential
objectives of the Decade are:
ANNUAL REPORT TO EXECUTIVE COUNCIL [Ed. Note: Each year, the Chair of each ASIL section must report to the ASIL Executive Council. This report was submitted by the Chair on Feb. 14, 2003. It informs the Council about the section’s activities during the past/current year. The following report is probably the most important one submitted to date, because of the new election process implemented by UN21, which may serve as a model for other sections.] LISTSERV: The members' listserv continues to generate an exchange of informational resources. The listserv archive is at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/un21. ANNUAL MEETINGS: The section meets once each year during the Society's Annual Meeting in Washington, DC. An agenda is proposed in two ways. First, via the section's electronic newsletter; and second, via the section's listserv – as a reminder before the annual meeting. See, e.g., Agenda for the April 2003 UN21 Business Meeting. 1. NEWSLETTER: The section published three newsletters in the last year: REVAMPED ELECTION PROCESS: The following is contained in the section's latest newsletter -- which may be of interest to other section chairs. We will leave the decision whether to disseminate this approach to the other sections. 2. ELECTION: BACKGROUND: ASIL section Chairs are normally elected for a three-year period (this time, from April 2003 to April 2006). I will end my third year in the current term as of the April 2003 UN21 business meeting. I am willing to serve as Chair for another term; however, I do not want to do so, if others feel that it is time for a change. It appears to me that the best way to handle this matter is to ensure a wider degree of voting than possible before we had this e-mail listserv. NOMINATION PERIOD: I am hereby soliciting nominations for Chair-during the months of January and February 2003. Please privately contact our Vice Chair Martha Trofimenko trofimenko@mail.dol.net, or post publicly to the UN21 listserv at un21@yahoogroups.com. (One person, from Argentina, has already done so, by nominating the current UN21 Chair for another three-year term.) This approach thus provides both public and private ways of communicating the voting desires of all section members, on a grander scale than in the past. Martha has kindly responded to my suggestion by allowing you to privately submit any other nominations you may have. VOTING PERIOD. The voting, unless this is an uncontested election, will be conducted by private ballot to Martha Trofimenko trofimenko@mail.dol.net during the month of March. Martha can announce the results at our UN21 business meeting. The Editor can submit the result to all members via this listserv when the meeting is completed. DIFFERENT PROCEDURE. If you have another procedure you would prefer, please feel free to submit it to me [Chair] or Martha as soon as possible. Submitted by ASIL IG REDESIGNATION PROGRAM [Editor’s Note: This portion of the Newsletter contains: (1) the memo distributed at the 7:30 AM April 5th breakfast meeting of IG chairs; and (2) the UN21 IG Chair’s preliminary response. This program is one which helps the ASIL ensure that its sections are operating and that they are properly serving the needs of its members. Thanks to Cindy Marciel, Faculty Secretary, Thomas Jefferson School of Law, for converting this memo to it’s current "e" version.] ASIL Interest Groups: Preliminary
Questions for Discussion Current ASIL Interest Groups vary widely as to size, breadth of subject matter, and type - as well as level - of activity. Similarly, there are differing expectations throughout ASIL about the appropriate role of Interest Groups. Some ASIL members who sign up for Interest Groups, for example, are disappointed or frustrated to receive no communication from Interest Group leadership outside of the Annual Meeting. On the other hand, some Interest Group leaders view the Annual Meeting as the primary, if not sole, appropriate focus of the group’s activities. Similarly, while some Interest Groups see their activities as a supplement to – if not entirely independent of – the activities of the Society as a whole, others believe that Interest Groups should be driving the activities of the Society. The issue of differing expectations also arises with respect to what kind of support the Society, including the Tillar House staff, can and should provide to Interest Groups. The redesignation process for a large number of Interest Groups this year provides an opportunity to reflect upon the following question: what are the appropriate, or desirable, functions of an Interest Group? Interest Groups can, of course, serve multiple functions, and generally, these are not mutually exclusive. Constraints of time and resources, however, may mean that an emphasis on one function will necessarily result in a de-emphasis on another. Examples of potential Interest Group functions follow, as a basis for starting discussion of this issue. Vis-a-vis ASIL membership as a whole:
membership "magnet": the existence of an Interest Groups can draw members to ASIL
by demonstrating that other members share their interest in a particular
topic
identification of scholarly interests: i.e., provide a means for individuals to identify for others their own interest in particular subjects, and to learn which other ASIL members share their similar interests portal to greater involvement in Society: the possibility of joining an Interest Group may give members an easy opportunity to become more "active" in ASIL Vis-a-vis Interest Group members:
news sharing: can serve a "distribution list" function for notices of
pertinent activities and events, which may occur informally (e.g., through
a Listserv) or formally (e.g., through a newsletter).
informal scholarly exchange and collaboration: at initiative of individual members, perhaps facilitated by a Listserv or newsletter formal scholarly collaboration: this can run the gamut from planning short programs aimed primarily at other Interest Group members (e.g., at a business meeting), to programs with a wider audience (e.g., Annual Meeting panel, or an entire academic conference) to production of publicity available research (e.g., creation of a research database, publication of anthologies or collective research) Vis-a-vis ASIL as an organization:
can provide increased opportunities for direct member involvement in
Society activities: e.g., less than 20% of Annual Meeting registrants are
actually on the program; Executive Council presents opportunity for only
small number of participants
locus of member activity and collaboration, beyond the Annual Meeting: can provide a means for more members to take an active role in ASIL, and increased opportunities for member interaction throughout the calendar year and outside of Washington source for Annual Meeting programming: can provide suggestions for meeting theme; propose panels for other programs; identify subject-matter experts for roles as panelists, speakers can provide structure for increased member awareness of an involvement in other Society activities: Interest Groups, for example, could be tapped to participate in over-arching Society initiatives such as membership, outreach, etc. encourage member involvement in other Society activities: members active in Interest Groups may be more likely to learn about, and become involved in other Society activities; Interest Groups may also serve as "incubators" for future ASIL leadership positions [Editor’s note: The Chair’s ensuing e-mail sought further information regarding the redesgination program, so that our members would be aware of this important feature of ASIL activity, designed to help Society members.] April 17, 2003 I've had a chance to review the Preliminary Questions for Discussion memo handed out at the breakfast meeting for IG Chairs. I think it's a great description of the various IG attributes. I thought I'd help get this ball rolling by asking a few questions. Maybe the preliminary, preliminary questions would include whether the objective of the "redesignation process" should be to: * revitalize existing IGs? With this focus question(s) in mind, we could then move onto assessment of the various IG features mentioned in your well-conceived shopping list of useful attributes. I'm hoping this helps to move things along, and thanks so much for assembling that memo. Regards, [Editor’s Note: What follows is Kathleen’s response. It was sent to all IG Chairs.] From: Kathleen Wilson kwilson@asil.org Hi Bill-- Thanks for the message and the comments. The question you raise below is a good one. I know that Charlotte (who is out of the office for the next week) is planning to send an explanation of the redesignation process to all IG chairs, once all IGs that held elections at the Annual Meeting have reported the names of their new officers. As I understand it--subject to future clarification--the redesignation requirement was established in the Society's regulations in the early 1990s. In light of the fact that IGs are a relatively new phenomenon in ASIL history (all but one having been founded in 1982 or later) and arose as somewhat of a grassroots initiative with minimal rules and structure, it was decided that a periodic redesignation process would provide an opportunity for the Executive Council to review the development of each IG and to assess whether it is continuing to serve a useful and appropriate function in the Society. Because such a large number of IGs are coming up for redesignation this fall, the Executive Council has an additional opportunity to take a step back and reflect on the development of IGs generally, including what roles they have been playing and/or should be playing vis-a-vis the Society as whole, and to provide additional guidance on the latter point. I believe these are the general objectives of the redesignation process; while in theory, I think that any (or all) of things you raise below could potentially be a result of this process, I wouldn't expect any of them to the objective of the process per se. I will leave it to Charlotte, however, to address this issue more formally in her forthcoming e-mail. I hope that's somewhat useful for the moment--I didn't want to leave your message hanging for a week without a response. Btw, I have not forgotten that I agreed to summarize and circulate my notes from the IG heads breakfast meeting; hope to get to that in the next week or so. Thanks, and best regards -- Kathleen Kathleen A. Wilson Director of Research and Outreach The American Society of International Law tel: (202) 939-5364 e-mail: kwilson@asil.org BUDGET ALLOCATION PROPOSAL I have attempted, albeit not very successfully, to explore how we should allocate our approximately USD3,600.00 budget surplus. We have been carrying this "large" surplus for several years. The reason for the surplus is not a huge annual interest group membership fee (only USD10.00). It emerged after I converted our group activities to an electronic format – i.e., this newsletter and our UN21 e-mail listserv. The following is my latest e-mail plea to UN21, copy to ASIL: To: un21@yahoogroups.com I've reported over the last several years that we have a somewhat sizeable budget surplus–mostly b/c we shifted to an electronic format for our newsletters & can now communicate regularly via our e-mail listserv. I will not be given the exact amount available until the ASIL annual meeting in DC in a few weeks. But it's in the vicinity of USD3,500.00. While it's probably good to have a bit of a reserve, that fund is just "collecting dust." Thus, I'm soliciting ideas for using (most of) the surplus for a worthy cause. One which occurs to me, for example, is maybe too "close to home" for me personally: the law school in Kosovo (University of Pristina) is having some tough times. The heating unit for example, is broken and it's now around several degrees F. In the summer, one student motivation for coming to class is that we usually sweat off five pounds each day, b/c there are not enough fans (assuming the power is up & running). There are not many computers for on campus student access to e-mail and the Internet. Like I said, this maybe too close to home for me, because I teach the Public International Law course there each summer. But this is just one idea, that is not necessarily the best idea for distributing our surplus. Any ideas on what we can do with our budget surplus? If we reserve, say USD500.00, we would have some USD3,000.00 to "spare." Best, ______________ To try to move this budget matter along, I have hatched a devious, self-serving plot to generate more discussion about this matter (which will also be sent via e-mail). I am a Visiting Professor at Pristina University (Kosovo) each summer. They have begun the process of translating my course textbook, Fundamental Perspectives on International Law, 4th ed (2002) into Albanian. The process of translating is very time consuming and expensive. The Dutch Government has allocated 1000 Euro to this project, based on translation fees of 10 Euro (about USD10.00 per page). The book is 694 pages, with an electronic component of about 250 more pages that I assign for my summer course. See my overall Course Web Page at http://home.att.net/~slomansonb/txtcsesite.html and my Kosovo course assignments webpage at http://home.att.net/~slomansonb/kosovo.html. I receive no pay for my summer teaching in Kosovo. I receive no royalties from my book. For the last two years, my publisher has donated the 3rd and now 4th ed course books to the university, because of Kosovo’s economic posture. Bottom line: USD3,600.00 & the Dutch government’s roughly USD 1000.00 existing donation toward this translation project would get about half of the book translated. The purpose is to use the book, not only in my summer program, but also in the Fall and Spring programs, where what materials are available are quite out of date. Finally, I would not handle any of this money. The Dutch Government’s representative would do so. There would be a clear financial trail between ASIL, who would write the check and the appropriate Dutch representative. I cannot provide further details, because I would first have to know how UN21 members feel about this particular use of our budget surplus. My rationale for this request now is also geared toward moving my aging quest for our group to use this monet in a way it deems appropriate, rather than it’s collecting dust in a Washington, D.C. ASIL bank account. As I said at the outset, this is a self-serving (not financially in any way) proposal. However, it would further the UN program in Kosovo, specifically that of the Dutch Government who is responsible for the educational piece of reforming education in the Balkans. As my earlier post indicates, Pristina (the only university in Kosov) has many other needs. So, it’s your turn to accept or substitute another proposal! MEMBERS' ACTIVITIES: Please advise the
Editor of your significant professional developments. We can thus keep in
touch and serve as resources for one another. OP-ED UNITED NATIONS II – THE NEW
HOPE Part One: The Failure of UN I The US in Gulf War II abandoned the UN Charter process of creating international peace and security–at least temporarily. This act has brought to an end the first major phase of the history of the United Nations–its formation and growth to universal membership, but its failure, nonetheless, to achieve its basic missions. Acknowledging the UN’s "failure" is, however, at the same time, a precious and precarious opportunity to create a better world community: UN II, the New Hope. It is now 57 years since the founding of the UN in 1945. The Member States and the UN agencies have created numerous human rights declarations and treaties. They have saved hundreds of millions of lives through humanitarian efforts and international cooperation. Enormous good has been done by the United Nations – far more than the local and national US media ever reveal. We must celebrate and be proud of these successes, which show human spirituality and good will at their best. But those same Member States — including the US — have not yet imposed upon themselves the legal and political self-constraints necessary to secure full and comprehensive disarmament under international inspection. Nor have they cooperated sufficiently to eliminate screaming global poverty and disease, or to create an ecologically sustainable world economy. Nor have they adequately quelled the fires of religious fanaticism with the waters of intercultural good will and friendly relations. As a result, the world is a bloody, polluted, exploited, and increasingly weaponized, fanaticized, and terrorized mess. The mess is the fault, primarily, not of the UN Organization, but of the political structures and cultures of the Member States. The US has the power either to upgrade the Organization to remedy these failings or to make the UN — and global survival along with it — "irrelevant." UN II, with proper design and in line with the better side of US political idealism, should: This long wish-list, far from being too maximal, reflects what realistically must minimally happen if we are to solve our global problems democratically and without forceful, literal, divine intervention–intervention which we would be scripturally and ethically very unwise to rely on. Failing vast amounts of international cooperation on these issues, we will not solve our global problems. They will solve us instead. Where and when should all this happen? At a global assembly of Governments and Non-Governmental Organizations, and as soon as possible and no later than 2005, the 60th anniversary of the UN. We need to start NOW. Part Two: Political Consensus Before a global assembly to reform the UN can be successful, however, people in the United States must start to think and talk together. They must depolarize themselves in the interests of future generations and of avoiding some form of global social and ecological meltdown. The 21st century is going to be extremely stressful. Nothing short of a Washington- and world-supported overhaul of the entire UN system—one that democratizes and legally enforces that system—will survive those stresses. The patterns and methods of self-government we choose at the global level vitally affect the quality of self-government at all other levels. The question is not whether the world will be governed, but how well and in whose interests. Civilization is literally at stake in how well we govern ourselves at the global level in the interests of the global middle and lower classes. Liberals and conservatives could start building consensus by owning the failings of their current visions. Liberals have ignored the realistic conservative complaint that many of the governments represented at the UN do not implement basic human rights. They fail to acknowledge the conservatives’ fears of losing freedom, of being crushed under a one-world "pyramid" police-state government of fallible, corruptible individuals–the scenario envisioned under early socialism and communism and under Fascism. Liberals tend to flail at the US and Israel but not equally at certain other governments. Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, and Saddam Hussein are seen as only accidentally aberrant. Liberals — and Conservatives too — do not seriously question the systemic, fundamental pathology and instability of alpha-male and individual top-dog leadership structures. They both ignore the need for gender balance and for group executive decision-making at the top of pyramids, in place of the current system, which is overly subject to the psychopathologies of a single individual. Despite their stated interests in democratic procedure, Liberals have been too slow to criticize the lack of it in the international institutions which they themselves helped build back in the 1940s. Under their watch, the bureaucratic status quo at the UN drifted on for far too long. Conservatives, on the other hand, are too willing to tear down the UN, rather than build a UN that actually works. They are too paranoid about its alleged political ambitions to take over the world and confiscate hand-guns. They over-react to the "threat" of the "bloated" UN budget -- minuscule in relation to may corporate budgets. Conservatives are too involved in Biblical theological fantasy rather than Biblical ethical action for human self-betterment. They are too quick to condemn the failings of other religions while ignoring their own. They rightly fear a diabolical world pyramid of power and corruption but then fail to conceptualize alternatives. READER'S CORNER:
Prior Newsletter Reader's Corner Reviews Amnesty A. O’Shea, Amnesty for Crime in International Law and Practice (Kluwer: 2002) [376] ISBN 90-411-1759-8. Price: USD92.00. This publication is a welcome addition to the rather sparse literature on amnesty for crimes, including those which would otherwise subject the perpetrator to prosecution in an international criminal tribunal. It addresses the degree to which states are free to grant amnesties, given the developing moral and legal restraints on providing what is, in effect, a clean slate for those who have violated norms deemed fundamental to the international community. The Rome Statute, for example, does not address this troubling scenario. There was widespread reaction to South Africa’s expressed quest for truth, given the atrocities occurring there before the fall of Apartheid. The author addresses the potential for an emerging norm of Customary International Law, dedicated to introducing constraints upon States that would otherwise abuse the Truth and Reconciliation Commission model. The author proposes a vivid Protocol to the Rome Statute in this thoughtful analysis. States would thus be limited in their ability to rely on amnesty principles when seeking to opt out of their duty to prosecute those responsible for crimes of major interest to the international community. Arms ° D. Gallik & D. Fisher (ed.), World Military Expenditures and Arms Transfers 1999-2000 (DOS: 2002) [paper: 200] ISBN 0-16-05190-9. Price: None given Courts C. Amerasinghe, Jurisdiction of International Tribunals (Kluwer: 2003) [881] ISBN 90-411-1838-1. Price: Eur 215. This treatise is a remarkably comprehensive collation of jurisdictional predicates for the world’s international tribunals. Its broad array of related topics focus on dispute resolution themes and fora for a variety of problems–not just between States, but also commercial and investment conflicts between States and individuals, between internal groups subject to international norms, and intergovernmental organizations. The introductory Parts I and II unveil the nature of "international" disputes, the various adjudicatory methods employed, and the status of various tribunals. As Part II unfolds, one may thus have access to the general principles that any lawyer or researcher would need to digest for successful participation in the various arenas. There is guidance, for example, regarding forum selection clause interpretation, jurisdictional competence, admissibility of claims, remedies, and advisory jurisdiction. Part III addresses specific tribunals: judicial, arbitral, administrative, and the role of court-related commissions. This treatise is another notable work product by this already accomplished author. It will no doubt be an indispensable addition to the shelves of any collection focusing on both general legal principles, and the specifics of the world’s major dispute resolution tribunals. Globalization M. Likosky (ed.), Transnational Legal Processes: Globalisation and Power Disparities (Buttwerworths: 2002) [505] ISBN 0-406-94674-4. Price: GBP 31.95. This is a multiple-author collation of analytical essays on an indisputably "hot button" topic–which one might refer to as the "G" word (globalization). The predominantly British and US scholars present refreshing perspectives from various disciplines, including law and the social sciences. They assess the related legal processes in Africa, Asia, Europe, Latin America, and the US. This is an informative and general reader, for both novices and experts on the increasingly tense issues spawned by globalization. The supposed global interdependence is aptly questioned. There are of course international networks, supported by inter-State diplomacy tied to crossborder individual relations. But the globalization phenomenon, widely characterized as representing the contemporary state of the world, is not necessarily anything new. The scale of interdependence is new, but its underlying commercial engine has merely been driven by new propellants. For too many inhabitants, their horizons remain local in scope. As noted in the introductory materials on the so-called global village: "We talk in global terms; but we live locally." The essays in the first of four parts assesses the overall "framework" of the public legal order. The second, commercial integration, global elites, markets, and corruption. The third part addresses how modern States are changing as a result of globalization–both promise and peril (e.g., cultural imperialism). The final Part illuminates contemporary transnational legal process: globalization’s challenge to both nation State and international legal order, and its impact within various human rights regimes. This collection is highly recommended for a scholarly, but practical, well-documented, but intense, assessment of a theme which begs for more balanced treatments like this one. Human Rights Compilation of Decisions on Communications of the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (2d ed. Institute for Human Rights and Development: 2002) [paper: 432] ISBN 9983-9907-0-9. Price: USD40.00. This strikingly useful report is extracted from the Commission’s Activity Reports from 1994-2001. It conveniently collates, between two covers, the Communications (reports) of thirty-six OAU nations, and nine communications from non-OAU entities. Communications can be submitted against OAU member States that have ratified the African Charter. Human rights advocates and researchers thus have access to the principal approaches to, and the legal foundations of, the work of the African Commission. Its very publication attests to not only wide dissemination of matters of great concern to human rights advocates, but also implementation of the 1998 Protocol of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights calling for Creation of an African Court of Human and Peoples’ Rights. Under the Article 55 communications procedure, individuals and NGOs may bring cases to the Commission which challenge any ratifying State’s relevant practice which allegedly violates the African Charter. The Commission does not have the authority to determine whether States have implemented its decisions. This lack of authority is complicated by the vast majority of cases being declared inadmissible, because they have been brought against States that have not ratified the Charter. Nevertheless, this book provides an account of those submissions, which at least places such nations on notice that alleged abuses have not gone unnoticed. Given the compelling circumstances leading to the mere publication of
this account, all international libraries should endeavor to obtain this
edition, and be certain to remain on any publisher’s mailing list that
either exists or will be developed as a result of the publication (and
review) of this compilation. This prominent writer’s latest publication strikes an intellectual spark in the burgeoning hinterland of human rights materials. His booklet compiles various articles he has written about protecting minorities in Europe. It yields a succinct but authoritative snapshot of the application of the relevant legal instruments: the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages and the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities in Europe. The materials in these eight accounts are well-written and documented. They illustrate both the strong and weak points of these treaties (which entered into force in 1998). The analysis focuses on the State as an institution which is expected to implement and harmonize the individual and collective minority rights embraced by this regime. A. Zhelyazkove, et al., The Roma in Central Europe: Avoiding the Dependency Trap (UN: 2002) [paper: 126]. ISBN 92-1-126153-8. Price: USD20.00. This UN Development Programme report focuses on the plight of a rather neglected minority –Europe’s Central and Eastern European Roma (gypsies). The origin of their deprivation is neither exclusively legal nor political – and thus incapable of being undone by merely passing new laws, without more. An extremely high percentage derive their income from various national programs including allowances for children, unemployment benefits, and pensions. State subsidies effectively contribute to disproportionate unemployment, lack of education, and socio-economic dependency. The UN’s analysis illustrates that the Roma desire integration, but not at the cost of losing their distinctive cultural identity. They do not have to be assimilated. Yet the international community must reshape its efforts to provide for their broader human developmental needs. Its eight chapters thus unearth the crucial details about the history, demographics, and social structure that so prominently factor into maintaining this dependency trap. Immunity H. Fox, The Law of State Immunity (Oxford: 2002) [572] ISBN 0-19-829836-6. Price: GBP80. This outstanding analysis focuses on the full range of critical issues concerning the law of State immunity. The many debatable matters covered in this well-written and superbly documented work include: the degree to which human rights violations should trump State immunity; whether the diversity of national decisions on point should be supplanted by a treaty; and whether the enforcement of the various international norms, by national court judgments against other States, is far more theoretical than practical. The publication commences with a resourceful summary of the historical justification for State immunity, and the related sources of this branch of the law. The author authoritatively presents the current state of affairs, followed by her skillful thickening of the plot when integrating the "other" immunities: Heads of State, diplomats and their missions, armed forces, and international organizations. The author delves into the controversy over contemporary blows to the vintage rule of absolute immunity for Heads of State and high ranking officials, who heretofore ruled under the protective umbrella of "sovereign immunity." Such matters are the prelude to the English Pinochet and ICJ Arrest Warrant cases–in a book which by no means is limited to just those cases. The later chapters assess the full array of controversy within the contemporary legal order, as well as the author’s predictions about future immunity models. This publication is a must for any public or private collection shelving the classics of international legal literature. Law of the Sea N. Poulantzas, The Right of Hot Pursuit in International Law (2nd ed. Martinus Nijhoff, 2002) [451]. ISBN 90-411-1786-5. Price: Euro 125. The author herein unveils the major legal handicap presented by convenient reliance on international legal norms, in a context often resulting in law trumping justice. He quite successfully meets, and exceeds, his stated objective of correcting misapplications of the law which only distort underlying intent. This extensively revised and updated version of the definitive 1969 book-length analysis of hot pursuit has more than adequately met the demand for a sequel. Its three parts address hot pursuit by land, sea, and air. He analyzes these varied contexts, including: guerilla warfare; fishing and continental shelf violations; the operations of pirates and pirate radio stations; and pursuit of highjacked and intruding aircraft. Organizations P. Sands & P. Klein, Bowett’s Law of International Institutions (5th ed. Street & Maxwell: 2001) [paper: 610] ISBN 0-421-53690 X. Price: ^30. Bowett has been the clear front-runner in a growing field of qualified candidates. These authors have fortunately provided the much-needed service of updating this most serviceable of guides to the law of international organizations. This new edition’s updates include comprehensive materials about the major global and regional institutions; the UN and its associated agencies; new organizations such as the WTO; analyses of international judicial arms of the various organizations; the work of the various EU institutions and newer regional economic organizations. There are now a number of courses and textbooks in this field. Classroom instructors, especially those teaching an I.O. course, would do their students well to assign this supplement for a law school course–and reader for undergraduates. It is readable and an example of the finest of scholarship in an area in need of critical guidance. Professor Bowett will no doubt be ecstatic about his pioneering work now demonstrating the same degree of mastery, as when it was exclusively penned by his own hand. Palestine C. Mansour (ed.), The Palestine Yearbook of International Law: Volume XI 2000/2001 (Kluwer: 2003) [433]. ISBN 90-411-1817-9. Price: Euro 160. There is a continuing need for fresh, dependable source materials on Palestine–especially now that the so-called "Roadmap" has been unveiled for achieving a Palestinian State by 2005. This publication series serves that need in a remarkable fashion. Its editorial board is distinguished and quite well-known in and out of the area. This volume carries a host of useful documents. The articles analyze Palestinian refugees, absentee property rights, who speaks for this group as a whole, an the amicus brief for the US Board of Immigration Appeals case regarding the regime for Palestinian refugees. Its Law Reports section contains the Israeli Torture case, Palestinian and Israeli legislation regarding legal practice and right of return. There are a host of other major international legal documents, all of which bear upon the status of Palestine and its "peoples." In addition to a fascinating book review section, it carries a useful bibliography of further resources. It would be hard to imagine a complete library that does not have this useful insight into what is happening legally, where, when, and "on the ground." Finally, its well-conceived Index promotes ready access to content. Patents ° G. Dinwoodie, W. Hennessey & S. Perlmutter, International and Comparative Patent Law (LexisNexis: 2002) [paper: 875 + Index] ISBN 0-8205-5468-5. Price: Unknown. Statehood R. Ramcharan, Forging a Singaporean Statehood 1965-1995: The Contribution of Japan (Kluwer: 2002) [375]. ISBN 90-411-1952-3. Price: Euro 106. This publication provides a detailed analysis of Japan’s role in Singapore’s economic program for achieving statehood. This book provides useful background for interpreting the May 2003 US-Singapore free trade agreement, the largest for the US since NAFTA. A geographically tiny "city-State" is now the twelfth largest trading partner. One can readily appreciate how an economic superpower provided the essential impetus for an aspiring city-State, which emulates Japan’s post-WWII success. This is no small feat, given the comparatively homogenous culture of Japan vis-a-vis Singapore’s multi-ethnic society. One may herein comprehend the complex methodology employed to apply economic and political pressure to facilitate Singapore’s rise to its current economic prowess. This is a marvelous account of the forces which facilitated this international success story. Few–other than Dr. Ramcharan–have devoted the much needed time, patience, and skill to produce an informative assessment of this economic drama. Publishers Contact Info Akademiai Kiado: P.O. Box 245, H-1519, Budapest, Hungary. Butterworths: Halsbury House, 35 Chancery Lane, London WC2A 1EL, England. DOS: U.S. Department of State, Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-0001. Institute for Human Rights and Development: P.O. Box 1896, Banjul, The Gambia. Kluwer: Kluwer Law International, P.O. Box 85889, 2508 CN, The Hague, The Netherlands. LexisNexis: 744 Broad Street, Newark, NJ 07102, USA. Martinus Nijhoff: P.O. Box 85889, 2508 CN, The Hague, The Netherlands. Oxford: Oxford University Press, Great Clarendon Street, Oxford OX2 6DP, England. Street & Maxwell: 100 Avenue Road, Swiss Cottage, London NW3 3PF, England. YOUR TURN: Please provide any feedback you wish and ask any questions you have. You can call, fax, or e-mail to any of the contact persons listed in the shadowed box at the top of this newsletter. © Copyright 2003 American Society
of International Law |