globe
  1. General Texts on International Law 13 items
    1. Blackstone's international law documents 2017

      Book  A previous edition is acceptable as well.

    2. International law - Malcolm N. Shaw 2017

      Book 

    3. International law - Malcolm D. Evans 2014

      Book 

    4. International law and the use of force - Christine D. Gray 2008

      Book 

    5. Brownlie's principles of public international law - James Crawford, Ian Brownlie 2012

      Book 

    6. Cases & materials on international law - Martin Dixon, Robert McCorquodale, Sarah Williams 2016

      Book 

    7. Problems and process: international law and how we use it - Rosalyn Higgins 1993

      Book 

    8. International law - Antonio Cassese 2005

      Book 

    9. International law - A. V. Lowe 2007

      Book 

    10. Textbook on international law - Martin Dixon 2010

      Book  This book is a good introduction to international law if you do not have a thorough background in it.

    11. Oppenheim's international law: Vol.1: Peace - L. F. L. Oppenheim, Robert Yewdall Jennings, Arthur Desmond Watts 1992

      Book 

    12. America unbound: the Bush revolution in foreign policy - Ivo H. Daalder, James M. Lindsay, Brookings Institution 2003

      Book 

  2. General Texts on Comparative Constitutional Law 7 items
    1. The migration of constitutional ideas - Sujit Choudhry 2006 (electronic resource)

      Book 

    2. The Oxford handbook of comparative constitutional law - Michel Rosenfeld, András Sajó 2012

      Book 

    3. Routledge handbook of constitutional law - Mark V. Tushnet, Thomas Fleiner-Gerster, Cheryl Saunders 2013

      Book 

  3. Selected Texts on National Constitutional Law 20 items
    1. Specifically on Foreign Relations and Use of Force 4 items
      1. European military law systems - Georg Nolte 2003

        Book 

      2. Harvard law review - Harvard Law Review Association

        Journal  Sitaraman G and Wuerth I, ‘The Normalization of Foreign Relations Law’ (2015) 128 Harvard Law Review 1897

    2. UK 5 items
      1. Constitutional and administrative law - A. W Bradley, K. D Ewing, K. D Ewing, Christopher Knight 2014

        Book 

      2. Cohn, Margit, ‘Non-statutory Executive Powers: Assessing Global Constitutionalism in a Structural-Institutional Context’ (2015) 64 ICLQ 65. - Society of Comparative Legislation, British Institute of International and Comparative Law 1952-

        Journal 

      3. Democracy in Britain: a reader - Jack F Lively, Adam Lively, British Council 1994

        Book 

    3. General Literature on Constitutional Law 2 items
      1. Public law

        Journal  Munro CR, ‘The Separation of Powers: Not Such a Myth’ [1981] Public Law 19

      2. The nature of the crown: a legal and political analysis - Maurice Sunkin, Sebastian Payne 1999 (electronic resource)

        Book 

    4. Germany 2 items
      1. The constitution of Germany: a contextual analysis - Werner Heun 2011

        Book 

      2. The constitutional jurisprudence of the Federal Republic of Germany - Donald P. Kommers, Russell A. Miller, Ruth Bader Ginsburg 2012

        Book 

    5. USA 2 items
      1. American constitutional law - Laurence H. Tribe 1988

        Book 

    6. Others 2 items
      1. The constitution of France: a contextual analysis - Sophie Boyron 2013

        Book 

    7. Parliamentary Control of War Powers 1 item
      1. Born H and Hänggi H, 'The Use of Force under International Auspices: Strengthening Parliamentary Accountability' (2005) Geneva Centre for the Democratic Control of Armed Forces (DCAF) Policy Paper No 7

        *Sandra Dieterich, Hartwig Hummel, Stefan Marschall, 'Parliamentary War Powers: A Survey of 25 European Parliaments' (2010), Geneva Centre for the Democratic Control of Armed Forces (DCAF) Occasional Paper, available at http://www.dcaf.ch/Publications/Parliamentary-War-Powers

        Damrosch LF, 'Constitutional Control Over War Powers: A Common Core of Accountability in Democratic Societies?' (1995) 50 University of Miami Law Review 181

        Damrosch LF, 'Is There a General Trend in Constitutional Democracies Toward Parliamentary Control Over War-and-Peace Decisions? ' (1996) 90 Proceedings American Society of International Law 36

        *Damrosch LF, 'The Interface of National Constitutional Systems with International Law and Institutions on Using Military Forces: Changing Trends in Executive and Legislative Powers' in Ku C and Jacobson HK (eds), Democratic Accountability and the Use of Force in International Law (Cambridge University Press 2003) 39

        Dellinger W, 'After the Cold War: Presidential Power and the Use of Military Force' (1995) 50 University of Miami Law Review 107

        Doyle J, 'Common Law Rights and Democratic Rights' in Finn P (ed), Essays on Law and Government, vol 1 (Law Book Company 1995) 144

        Ely JH, War and Responsibility: Constitutional Lessons of Vietnam and its Aftermath (Princeton University Press 1993)

        Ely JH, 'Suppose Congress Wanted a War Powers Act That Worked' (1988) 88 Columbia Law Review 1379

        Fascell D, 'War Powers and Congress' (1995) 50 U Miami L Rev 121

        Franck T, The Tethered Presidency: Congressional Restraints on Executive Power (1981)

        Gearty C, 'Reconciling Parliamentary Democracy and Human Rights' (2002) 118 Law Quarterly Review 248

        Glennon MJ, 'Too Far Apart: Repeal the War Powers Resolution' (1995) 50 University of Miami Law Review 17

        Hardt S, Verhey L and van der Woude W (eds), Parliaments and Military Missions (Europa Law Publishing 2012)

        Henkin L, 'War Powers "Short of War"' (1995) 50 U Miami L Rev 201

        House of Lords, Select Committee on the Constitution, Second Report of Session 2013-14: Constitutional arrangements for the use of armed force (HL Paper 46, 24 July 2013), Chapter 3 and Government Response available at http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/lords-select/constitution-committee/publications/?type=&session=1&sort=false&inquiry=585

        Ku C and Jacobson HK (eds), Democratic Accountability and the Use of Force in International Law (Cambridge University Press 2003)

        Lobel J, 'The Relationship Between the Process and Substance of the National Security Constitution' (1990) 15 Yale Journal of International law 360

        *Nolte G, 'Germany: Ensuring Political Legitimacy for the Use of Military Forces by Requiring Constitutional Accountability' in Ku C and Jacobson HK (eds), Democratic Accountability and the Use of Force in International Law (Cambridge University Press 2003) 231

        *Oxman BH, 'The Relevance of the International Order to the Internal Allocation of Powers to Use Force' (1995) 50 U Miami L Rev 129

        Sofaer AD, War, Foreign Affairs, and Constitutional Power: The Origins (Ballinger 1976)

        Sofaer AD, 'Power over War ' (1995) 50 University of Miami Law Review 33

        Stromseth JE, 'Collective Force and Constitutional Responsibility: War Powers in the Post-Cold War Era' (1995) 50 U Miami L Rev 145

        Taylor C, Armed Forces (Parliamentary Approval for Participation in Armed Conflict) Bill. Bill 16 of 2005-06 (2005)

        Troncho M, 'National Parliamentary Scrutiny of Intervention Abroad by Armed Forces Engaged in International Missions: The Current Position in Law' Assembly of the Western European Union, Document A/1762 of 4 December 2001

        *White ND, 'The United Kingdom: Increasing Commitment Requires Greater Parliamentary Involvement' in Ku C and Jacobson HK (eds), Democratic Accountability and the Use of Force in International Law (Cambrige University Press 2002) 300

         

        *Ziegler KS, 'Executive Powers in Foreign Policy: The Decision to Despatch the Military' in Katja S. Ziegler, Baranger D and Bradley AW (eds), Constitutionalism and the Role of Parliaments (Hart Publishing 2007) 141

    8. General Literature on the Role of Courts 1 item
      1. *Allan T, 'Human Rights and Judicial Review: A Critique of "Due Deference"' (2006) 65 Cambridge Law Journal 671

        *Benvenisti E and Downs GW, 'National Courts, Domestic Democracy, and the Evolution of International Law' (2010) 20 European Journal of International Law 59

        Bingham T, The Rule of Law (Allen Lane 2010)

        Dyzenhaus D, 'The Politics of Deference: Judicial Review and Democracy' in Taggart M (ed), The Province of Administrative Law (Hart 1997)

        *Dyzenhaus D, 'Deference, Security and Human Rights' in Goold BJ and Lazarus L (eds), Security and Human Rights (Hart Publishing 2007) 125

        Falk R, 'The Role of Domestic Courts in the International Legal Order' (1964) 39 Indiana Law Journal 429

        Feldman D, 'Human Rights, Terrorism and Risk: the Roles of Politicians and Judges' [2006] Public Law 364

        Jowell J, 'Judicial Deference: Servility, Civility or Institutional Capacity? ' [2003] Public Law 592

        Masterman R, The Separation of Powers in the Contemporary Constitution. Judicial Competence and Independence in the United Kingdom (Cambridge University Press 2011)

        *McGoldrick, D, 'The Boundaries of Justiciability' (2010) 59 International and Comparative Law Quarterly 981

        *Moosavian R, 'Judges and High Prerogative: The Enduring Influence of Expertise and Legal Purity' [2012] Public Law 724

        Poole T, 'Judicial Review at the Margins: Law, Power and Prerogative' (2010) 60 University of Toronto Law Journal 81

        Slaughter A-M, 'Judicial Globalization ' (2000) 41 VJIL 1103

        Stein E, 'Lawyers, Judges and the Making of a Transnational Constitution' (1981) 75 AJIL 1

         

        Tomkins A, 'National Security and the Role of the Court: A Changed Landscape' (2010) 126 Law Quarterly Review 543

    9. Constitutionalism of International Law 1 item
      1. Besson S, 'Whose Constitution(s)? International Law, Constitutionalism and Democracy' in Dunoff JL and Trachtman JP (eds), Ruling the World? Constitutionalism, International Law and Global Governance (CUP 2009) 381

        Dorsen Nea, Comparative Constitutionalism: Cases and Materials (West Group 2003)

        Doyle MW, 'The UN Charter - A Global Constitution' in Dunoff JL and Trachtman JP (eds), Ruling the World? Constitutionalism, International Law and Global Governance (CUP 2009) 113

        Falk R, 'The Pathways of Global Constitutionalism' in The Foundations of World Peace (State University of New York Press 1993) 13

        Fassbender B, 'The Meaning of International Constitutional Law' in Macdonald RSJ and Johnston DM (eds), Towards World Constitutionalism: Issues in the Legal Ordering of the World Community (Martinus Nijhoff 2005) 837

        *Franck TM, 'The Emerging Right to Democratic Governance' (1992) 86 AJIL 8

        Gardbaum S, 'Human Rights and International Constitutionalism' in Dunoff JL and Trachtman JP (eds), Ruling the World? Constitutionalism, International Law and Global Governance (CUP 2009) 233

        Klabbers J, Peters A and Ulfstein G, The Constitutionalization of International Law (2009)

        Kumm M, 'Constitutional Democracy Encounters International Law: Terms of Engagement' in Choudhry S (ed), The Migration of Constutional Ideas (CUP 2007) 256

        Marks S, 'What has Become of the Emerging Right to Democratic Governance?' (2011) 22 European Journal of International Law 507

        **Nollkaemper A, National Courts and the International Rule of Law (Oxford University Press 2011)

        Nolte G, European and US Constitutionalism (Cambridge University Press 1995)

        Peters A, 'Compensatory Constitutionalism: The Function and Potential of Fundamental International Norms and Structures' (2006) 19 Leiden Journal of International Law 579

        *Roberts, Anthea, 'Comparative International Law: The Role of National Courts in Creating and Enforcing International Law' (2011) 60 International and Comparative Law Quarterly 57

        Rogoff M, 'A Comparison of Constitutionalism in France and in the United States' (1997) 49 Maine Law Review 21

        Rosenfeld, M, 'Is Global Constitutionalism Meaningful or Desirable?' (2014) 25 EJIL 177

        Slaughter A-M, 'International Law in a World of Liberal States' (1995) 6 European Journal of International Law 503

        Walter C, 'Constitutionalizing (Inter)national Governance: Possibilities for and Limits to the Development of International Constitutional Law' (2001) 44 German YIL 170

         

        *Walter C, 'International Law in a Process of Constitutionalization' in Nijman J and Nollkaemper A (eds), New Perspectives on the Divide Between National and International Law (Oxford University Press 2007) 191

  4. Seminars 7 items
    1. Seminar #1 Introduction to ‘Use of Force by States’ and the Comparative Method 1 item
      1. To prepare for the seminar, you might want to refresh your knowledge of the regulation of the use of force in international law, discussed last semester in the General Principles course.

        ·         C Gray, International Law and the Use of Force (3rd Oxford University Press 2008, see also her chapter in Evans, International Law, 4th edn).

         

        You might want to look at the following text to gain a flavour of the comparative law method

        ·         *Reitz, John C, 'How to do comparative law' (1998) 46 Am J Comp L 617

        ·         Zweigert, K and H Kötz, An Introduction to Comparative Law 3rd edn(translated by Tony Weir, Oxford University Press 1998, section A, Chapters 1-3

        In which way and situations may comparative law be used?

         

        For a flavour of some of the substantive issues we will discuss this semester, you might look at

        ·         Ku C and Jacobson HK, 'Introduction: Broaching the Issues, in Ku and Jacobsen (eds), Democratic Accountability and the Use of Force in International Law (Cambridge University Press 2003), 3

        ·         The Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament v Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, Secretary of State for Defence [2002] EWHC 2777 (Admin)

         

        ·         P Rowe, Legal Accountability and Britains Wars 2000-2015 (Routledge 2016), browse generally, read Ch 1, 2 and 6

    2. Seminar #2: International Law in National Law 1 item
      1. Make sure you will have gained a general understanding of the interaction between national and international law from at least one source in the essential reading section and read the UK Supreme Court judgment in Belhaj of 17 January 2017 (available at https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2014-0264.html ) which we will discuss in class.

         

        Essential Reading

        ·         *Denza in:Evans (ed.)  International Law (4th edn, 2014) Ch 14 OR Shaw, International Law (7th edn, 2014) Ch 4 OR Brownlie, Principles of PIL (7th edn, 2012) Ch 3

        ·         Harris, Cases and Materials on International Law, (8th edn, 2015) Ch 3 OR Dixon & McCorquodale, Cases and Materials on International Law (6th edn, 2016) Ch 4

        ·         McGoldrick, D, 'The Boundaries of Justiciability' (2010) 59 International and Comparative Law Quarterly 981

        Cases to Read (in addition to the cases in Harris and Dixon & McCorquodale)

        ·         Trendtex Trading Corp v. Central Bank of Nigeria [1977] QB 529.

        ·         *R v Bow Street Metropolitan Stipendiary Magistrate and others ex parte Pinochet Ugarte Amnesty International and others intervening) (No 3) [1999] 2 All ER 97, [2000] AC 147, 276.

        ·         *R v Jones (Margaret) and others [2006] UKHL 16.

         

        o   followed recently by the High Court in Abdul Waheed Shannan Al Rabat v Westminster Magistrates Court [2017] EWHC 1969 (Admin) - application to prosecute former Prime Minister Tony Blair and former Foreign Secretary Jack Straw for the crime of aggression for the decision to invade Iraq in 2003.

         

        ·          *The Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament v Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, [2002] EWHC 2777 (QB).

        ·         A v Secretary of State for the Home Department (No. 2) [2005] UKHL 71; [2006] 2 A.C. 221.

        ·         *R (Al-Jedda) v Secretary of State for Defence, 12 December 2007, [2007] UKHL 58, [2008] 2 W.L.R. 31.

        ·         *Al-Jedda v United Kingdom Appl no 27021/08, (2011) 53 EHRR 23 (esp para 102).

        ·         R (Al-Saadoon) v. Secretary of State for Defence [2009] EWCA Civ 7.

        ·         Joined Cases C-402/05P & C-415/05P Kadi and Al Barakaat v Council [2008] ECR I-6351 (esp paras 284, 290, 303-305, 316); see also recently Joined Cases C‑584/10 P, C‑593/10 P and C‑595/10 P Commission and others v Kadi, judgment of18 July 2013.

        ·         Hay v HM Treasury and Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs [2009] EWHC 1677 (Admin).

        ·         HM Treasury v Ahmed and others [2010] UKSC 2.

        ·         ****Belhaj v Straw, Rahmatullah (no 1) v MOD, [2017] UKSC 3, upholding High Court  (see Belhaj v Straw [2014] EWCA Civ 1394, para 81), available at https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2014-0264.html. For discussion see M Nicholson, 'The Political Unconscious and the English Foreign Act of State' (2015) 64 International and Comparative Law Quarterly 743

        Further Recommended Reading

        ·         Oppenheim's International Law, Vol. 1 (9th ed., Jennings & Watts eds.), pp. 52-70, 74-86.

        ·         Warbrick , 'International Law in English Courts – Recent Cases', (2003) 52 ICLQ 815.

        ·         Higgins, Problems and Process: International Law and How We Use It (1994) Ch 12.

        ·         Higgins, 'Dualism in the Face of a Changing Legal Culture', in M. Andenas (ed) Judicial Review in International Perspective: Liber Amicorum in Honour of Lord Slynn (2000), Vol. II, 9-22.

        ·         O'Keefe, 'Customary International Crimes in English Courts', (2001) 72 BYIL 293.

        ·         Collier, 'Is International Law Really Part of the Law of England?', (1989) 38 ICLQ 924.

        ·         P Sales and J Clement, 'International Law in Domestic Courts' (2008) 124 LQR 388 – for an overview of some of the issues.

        ·         J Dugard, 'International Law and the South African Constitution' (1997) 8 EJIL 77.

        ·         E Benvenisti, 'Judicial Misgivings Regarding the Application of International Law...', (1993) 4 EJIL 159.

        ·         Jackson, 'Status of Treaties in Domestic Legal Systems: A Policy Analysis' (1992) 86 AJIL 310.

        ·         Shaheed Fatima Using International Law in Domestic Courts (Oxford, Hart 2005).

        ·         L Collins, 'Foreign Relations and the Judiciary', (2002) 51 ICLQ 485

        ·         A Nollkaemper, J Nijman (eds) New Perspectives on the Divide Between National and International Law (OUP 2007).

        ·         *Anthea Roberts, 'Comparative International Law? The Role of National Courts in Creating and Enforcing International Law, (2011) 60 ICLQ 57.

         

        ·         Note also Database: International Law in Domestic Courts (ILDC) 

    3. Seminar 3: International Consequences of an Internationally Illegal Use of Force 1 item
      1. Point of Departure: Some examples of state liability cases under national law – and possible limitations of such actions

         

        Germany

        ·         Kunduz litigation:District Court of Bonn, judgment of 11 December 2013, 1 O 460/11, upheld by Court of Appeal of Cologne, judgment of 30 April 2015, upheld by Federal Supreme Court, judgment of 16 October 2016, III ZR 140/15, see discussion by P Starski, 'The Kunduz Affair and the German State Liability Regime – The Federal Court of Justice's Turn to Anachronism' EJIL Talk! 5 December 2016, at http://www.ejiltalk.org/the-kunduz-affair-and-the-german-state-liability-regime-the-federal-court-of-justices-turn-to-anachronism/ (pending in Federal Constitutional Court)  – state liability for bombardment of civilians in Afghanistan (so-called 'Kunduz massacre') – case note of the District Court Judgment by E Henn, 'The Development of German Jurisprudence on Individual Compensation for Victims of Armed Conflict' (2014) 12 Journal of International Criminal Justice 615.

        ·         Varvarin case: German Federal Constitutional Court, 2 BvR 2660/06, 2 BvR 487/07, Order of 13 August 2013 Constitutional Complaint of victims of NATO bombardment in Serbia (so-called 'Varvarin Bridge' case) – case notes by S Mehring, 'The Judgment of the German Bundesverfassungsgericht concerning Reparations for the Victims of the Varvarin Bombing' (2015) 15 International Criminal Law Review 191 and S Kirchner and K Geler-Noch, 'Compensation for Violations of the Laws of War: The Varvarin Case before German and International Courts' (2014) 62 Belgrade Law Review (on BB and at http://ojs.ius.bg.ac.rs/index.php/anali/article/view/29/66

         

         

        UK

        ·         Smith, Ellis and Allbutt and others v Ministry of Defence [2013] UKSC 41

        ·         Rahmatullah (No 2) (Respondent) v Ministry of Defence and another (Appellants) [2017] UKSC 1

         

        Netherlands

        ·         Supreme Court of the Netherlands, Nuhanovic v The Netherlands, judgment of 6 September 2013, upholding Court of Appeal in holding the Netherlands accountable for acts of its forces in relation to the Screbrenica massacre of Bosnians, available at  http://www.internationalcrimesdatabase.org/Case/1005/The-Netherlands-v-Nuhanovi%C4%87/

        ·         *Mothers of Srebrenica Association et al v The Netherlands (2012) 51 International Legal Materials 1322

         

        See also in this context the extensive case law on extraterritorial application of human rights

        ·         *Bankovic & others v Belgium & others, no. 53307/99, 12 December 2001 44 E.H.R.R. SE5

        ·         for detailed analysis of the question of exterritorial application of the ECHR see: M Milanovic, Extraterritorial Application of Human Rights Treaties (OUP 2011) 19-41

        ·         R (on the application of Al-Jedda) v Secretary of State for Defence [2007] UKHL 58

        ·         *R (on the application of Al-Skeini) v Secretary of State for Defence [2007] UKHL 26

        ·         *Al-Skeini v United Kingdom, Appl. No. 55721/07, 7 July 2011 (European Court of Human Rights, available on HUDOC)

        ·         Smith, Ellis and Allbutt and others v Ministry of Defence [2013] UKSC 41

        ·         Al-Jedda v United Kingdom, Appl. No. 27021/08, 7 July 2011

        ·         Behrami & Saramati, App no. 71412/01 & 78166/01, 2 May 2007, E.H.R.R. SE10

        ·         Bosphorus v Ireland, App no. 45036/98, 30 June 2005

        ·         R (Al-Saadoon) v. Secretary of State for Defence [2009] EWCA Civ 7

        ·         Al-Saadoon and Mufdhi v. UK, App. no. 61498/08, 2 March 2010

        ·         *R (Noor Khan) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs [2014] EWCA Civ 24

        o   See also The Queen on The Application of Noor Khan v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs [2012] EWHC 3728 (Admin)

         

         

         

        Essential General Reading on State Responsibility

        ·         J Crawford and S Olleson, in:M Evans (ed)  International Law (3rd edn, 2010) Ch 15, esp pp 463-467 OR M Shaw, International Law (6th edn, 2008) Ch 14 OR J Crawford, Brownlie's Principles of PIL (7th edn, 2012) Ch 25, 26

        ·         Harris, Cases and Materials on International Law, (7th edn, 2010) Ch 8.

        ·         D Shelton, 'Righting Wrongs: Reparations in the Articles on State Responsibility, Symposium: The ILC's State Responsibility Articles' (2002) 96 American Journal of International Law 833–856.

        ·         FA Mann, 'The Consequences of an International Wrong in International and National Law' (1978) 48 BYIL 1

         

         

        Further Reading

        On state responsibility generally

        ·         J Crawford, The international Law Commission's Articles of State Responsibility: Introduction, Text and Commentaries (CUP 2002).

        ·         J Crawford, State Responsibility: The General Part (CUP 2013), esp, part 5 and ch 15.

        ·         Oppenheim's International Law, Vol. 1 (9th ed., Jennings & Watts eds.)

        ·         Ian Brownlie, System of the Law of Nations: State Responsibility. Part I (Oxford, Clarendon Press 1983)

         

        On remedies, obligation of reparation

        ·         C Gray, Judicial Remedies in International Law (OUP 1987)

        ·         James Crawford, Alain Pellet, and Simon Olleson (eds), The Law of International Responsibility (OUP 2010), part IV, and in particular:

        o   40: Brigitte Stern: The Obligation of Reparation

        o   41: Yann Kerbrat: Interaction Between the Forms of Reparation

        o   42: Christine Gray, John Barker, Elihu Lauterpacht, Eric Wyler & Alain Papaux: The Different Forms of Reparation

        o   Ch 51: Susan Marks, Fiorentina Azizi, Raphaële Rivier, Jean-Paul Costa & Habib Gherari: Responsibility for Violations of Human Rights Obligations

        ·         Evans, Malcolm, and Stratos Konstadinides (eds) Remedies in International Law: The Institutional Dilemma (Oxford, Hart 1998) - Includes essays by scholars and practitioners on reparations before a range of institutions, including the International Court of Justice, the Law of the Sea Convention, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade/World Trade Organization (GATT/WTO), and environmental settlement systems as well as under the European Union and Community law.

        ·         Nollkaemper, André, 'State Responsibility for International Crimes: A Review of Principles of Reparation', in Aristotle Constantinides and Nikos Zaikos (eds),  The Diversity of International Law: Essays in Honour of Professor Kalliopi K. Koufa (Leiden, The Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff 2009).

        ·         International Bureau of the Permanent Court of Arbitration, ed. Redressing Injustices through Mass Claims Processes: Innovative Responses to Unique Challenges (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2006) - handling and processing of massive-scale claims, including Holocaust restitution programmes

        ·         M Whiteman, Damages in International Law (3 vols, Washington 1937-43)

        On Rights of Individuals to Reparation

        ·         *M C Bassiouni, M. Cherif, 'International Recognition of Victims' Rights' (2006) 6 Human Rights Law Review 203–279 - Critical article analyzing the progressive normative development of victims' rights and the status of the victim under international law.

        ·         Albrecht Randelzhofer and Christian Tomuschat (eds), State Responsibility and the Individual: Reparation in Instances of Grave Violations of Human Rights (The Hague, Kluwer 1999).

        ·         Craig Scott (ed) Torture as Tort: Comparative Perspectives on the Development of Transnational Human Rights Litigation (Oxford, Hart 2001).

        ·         Koen de Feyter, Stephan Parmentier, Marc Bossuyt, and Paul Lemmens (eds), Out of the Ashes: Reparation for Victims of Gross and Systematic Human Rights Violations (Antwerp, Intersentia 2006)

        ·         *Riccardo Pisillo Mazzeschi, 'International Obligations to Provide for Reparation Claims', in: Randelzhofer and Tomuschat (eds), State Responsibility and the Individual: Reparation in Instances of Grave Violations of Human Rights (The Hague, Kluwer 1999).

        ·         *Dinah Shelton, Remedies in International Human Rights Law, 2d edn (OUP 2005). - A classic and authoritative text providing arguably the most comprehensive overview of the subject.

        ·         Theodor van Boven, Study concerning the Right to Restitution, Compensation and Rehabilitation for Victims of Gross Violations of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms(UN Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1993/8, 2 July 1993). - Seminal study by the special rapporteur, the findings of which led to the eventual adoption of the UN Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Gross Violations of International Human Rights Law and Serious Violations of International Humanitarian

        War Reparations

        ·         Article 304 of the Treaty of Versailles 1919: mixed arbitral tribunals to determine war losses.

        ·         UN Compensation Commission (established by the UN Security Council): Iraq's liability under international law "for any direct loss, damage, including environmental damage and the depletion of natural resources, or injury to foreign Governments, nationals and corporations" for its illegal invasion of Kuwait

        ·         Ethiopia-Eritrea Claims Commission (agreement of 12 December 2000)

        ·         Rainer Hofmann and Frank Rieman,Compensation for Victims of War. Background Report for the ILA Committee on Compensation for Victims of War, 17 March 2004. - Detailed study considering the historical development of the topic by claims commissions, regional and international courts, and tribunals and domestic courts; provides an account of the various legal questions a war victim would face in claiming reparation for injury.

        ·         under international humanitarian law

        o   Emanuela-Chiara Gillard, 'Reparation for Violations of International Humanitarian Law' (2003) 85 International Review of the Red Cross 529–553. - On the challenges to the justiciability and enforceability of victims' right to a remedy for international humanitarian law violations.

        o   Rainer Hofmann, 'Reparation for Victims of War and Non-state Actors?' (2007) 32 South African Year Book of International Law 291–311. - Is there an individual right to reparation for violations of international humanitarian law?

        o   Liesbeth Zegveld, 'Remedies for Victims of Violations of International Humanitarian Law' (2003) 85 International Review of the Red Cross 497–526 - survey of national and international practice, considers enforceability of remedies for victims of violations of international humanitarian law.

        ·         under ius ad bellum

        o   *Andrea Gattini, 'The UN Compensation Commission: Old Rules, New Procedures on War Reparations' (2002) 13 European Journal of International Law 161–181.

        o   Richard B Lillich (ed) The United Nations Compensation Commission (Irvington, NY, Transnational Publishers 1995)

        ·         under HR

        o   Lutz Oette, 'Bringing Justice to Victims? Responses of Regional and International Human Rights Courts and Treaty Bodies to Mass Violations', in Carla Ferstman, Mariana Goetz and Alan Stephens (eds), Reparations for Victims of Genocide, War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity: Systems in Place and Systems in the Making (Leiden, Martinus Nijhoff 2009) 217–242. - comparative analysis of the treatment of mass claims by regional courts and international treaty bodies. Precise consideration of the Human Rights Committee's views and challenges for enforcement.

         

         

        BEYOND THE SCOPE OF OUR SEMINAR, BUT FOR REFERENCE if you would like to study this area of the topic further

        On reparation for Nazi crimes – Holocaust, forced labour raparations

        ·         Roland Bank, 'The New Programs for Payments to Victims of National Socialist Injustice.' (2001) 44 German Yearbook of International Law 307–352.

        ·         Michael Bazyler and Roger Alford (eds), Holocaust Restitution: Perspectives on the Litigation and Its Legacy (New York University Press 2006). - Wide-ranging perspectives on Holocaust-era restitution, from the perspective of the civil litigation commenced to compensate for frozen bank accounts, slave labor, insurance claims, and looted art.

        ·         Benjamin B Ferencz, Less Than Slaves: Jewish Forced Labor and the Quest for Compensation (Bloomington, Indiana University Press 1979).

        ·         Kurt Schwerin, 'German Compensation for Victims of Nazi Persecution' (1972) 67 Northwestern University Law Review 479–527.

        ·         István Vásárhelyi, Restitution in International Law (Budapest, Publishing House of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences 1964) - Early consideration of Holocaust-era restitution, written by the former Hungarian secretary of state.

        Reparations for Large-Scale Historical Wrongs

        ·         S Peté and Max du Plessis (eds) Repairing the Past? International Perspectives on Reparations for Gross Human Rights Abuses (Series on Transitional Justice 1. Antwerp, Intersentia 2007).  - analysis of the theoretical and legal underpinnings of reparation as well as numerous case studies, including sections on South Africa, the Holocaust, the Great Lakes region of Africa, apartheid, African American slavery, residential school abuse in Canada, Korean 'Comfort Women', and the Herero of Namibia.

        Liability of Individuals (under universal jurisdiction) as an Alternative to State Responsibility?

        ·         Donald Donovan and Anthea Roberts, 'The Emerging Recognition of Universal Civil Jurisdiction' (2006) 100 American Journal of International Law 142.

        ·         Beth Stephens, 'Translating Filartiga: A Comparative and International Law Analysis of Domestic Remedies for International Human Rights Violations', (2002) 27 Yale Journal of International Law 1–57. - Classic article on the practice of US courts in applying domestic tort legislation against human rights violators in which she posits several theories as to why the practice has not been successful outside the United States.

        ·         Andrew Clapham, Human Rights Obligations of Non-State Actors (Oxford University Press 2006) - Classic text on nonstate actors that provides an excellent overview.

        ·         John Ruggie, Protect, Respect and Remedy: A Framework for Business and Human Rights: Report of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the Issue of Human Rights and Transnational Corporations and Other Business Enterprises (UN Doc. A/HRC/8/5, 7 April 2008) - Special Representative's main report setting out his framework on remedies, which ultimately led to his issuance of draft guiding principles for their implementation. 

    4. Seminar 4: Limits to Executive Power by Courts I: The Question of the Legality of State Action Abroad in the Context of Military Deployment (ius in bello and human rights) 1 item
      1. Essential Reading

        ·         starred cases (*) below

        ·         *J Paust, 'Human Rights on the Battlefield' (2015) 47 George Washington International Law Review 509 (available on SSRN)

         

        Further Reading

        ·         A Sari, 'The Juridification of British Armed Forces and the European Convention on Human Rights: "Because it's Judgment that Defeats Us"', available at SSRN http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2411070

        ·         House of Commons Defence Committee, UK Armed Forces Personnel and the Legal Framework for Future Operations (12th Report of Session 2013-14, HC 931), pdf version of report and evidence available at http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/defence-committee/news/lawfare---publication-of-report/

        ·         R McLaughlin, 'The Law of Armed Conflict and International Human Rights Law: Some Pardigmatic Differences and Operational Implications' (2010) 13 Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law 213

        ·         *McGoldrick, D, 'The Boundaries of Justiciability' (2010) ICLQ 981

        ·         K Roach, 'Substitute Justice? Challenges to American Counterterrorism Activities in Non-American Courts' (2013) 82 Missisippi Law Journal 907

        ·         For literature on deference/non-justiciability see further Seminar 5 handout.

         

         

        Cases to Read

         

        Direct Challenges to the legality of state action

         

        On the applicability of human rights in exterritorial deployment situations

        ·         R (on the application of Al-Skeini) v Secretary of State for Defence [2007] UKHL 26

        ·         Al-Skeini v United Kingdom, Appl. No. 55721/07, 7 July 2011 (European Court of Human Rights, available on HUDOC), modifying the earlier approach in:

        o   contrast with *Bankovic & others v Belgium & others, no. 53307/99, 12 December 2001 44 E.H.R.R. SE5

        ·         **Contrast with the earlier cases leading up to Smith (UKSC 2013)

        § *§ *The Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament v Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, [2002] EWHC 2777 (QB)

        § R (on the application of Smith) v Secretary of State for Defence and another [2010] UKSC 29

        § cf Bici v Ministry of Defence [2004] EWHC 786 (QB)

         

        On the operation and content of human rights in exterritorial and deployment situations see

        ·         *Jaloud v Netherlands, Application no 47708/08, judgment of 6 October 2014

        ·         Hassan v United Kingdom, Application no 29750/09, judgment of 16 September 2014, (2014) 38 BHRC 358

        ·         Abd Ali Hameed Al-Waheed (Appellant) v Ministry of Defence, Serdar Mohammed v MOD [2017] UKSC 2

         

        For comparison:

        Germany

        ·         District Court of Bonn, judgment of 11 December 2013, 1 O 460/11, upheld by Court of Appeal of Cologne, judgment of 30 April 2015, upheld by Federal Supreme Court, judgment of 16 October 2016, III ZR 140/15, see discussion by P Starski, 'The Kunduz Affair and the German State Liability Regime – The Federal Court of Justice's Turn to Anachronism' EJIL Talk! 5 December 2016, at http://www.ejiltalk.org/the-kunduz-affair-and-the-german-state-liability-regime-the-federal-court-of-justices-turn-to-anachronism/ (pending in Federal Constitutional Court)  – state liability for bombardment of civilians in Afghanistan (so-called 'Kunduz massacre') – case note of the District Court Judgment by E Henn, 'The Development of German Jurisprudence on Individual Compensation for Victims of Armed Conflict' (2014) 12 Journal of International Criminal Justice 615.

        ·         German Federal Constitutional Court, 2 BvR 2660/06, 2 BvR 487/07, Order of 13 August 2013 Constitutional Complaint of victims of NATO bombardment in Serbia (so-called 'Varvarin Bridge' case) – case notes by S Mehring, 'The Judgment of the German Bundesverfassungsgericht concerning Reparations for the Victims of the Varvarin Bombing' (2015) 15 International Criminal Law Review 191 and S Kirchner and K Geler-Noch, 'Compensation for Violations of the Laws of War: The Varvarin Case before German and International Courts' (2014) 62 Belgrade Law Review (on BB and at http://ojs.ius.bg.ac.rs/index.php/anali/article/view/29/66

         

         

        The Netherlands

        ·         Supreme Court of the Netherlands, Nuhanovic v The Netherlands, judgment of 6 September 2013, upholding Court of Appeal in holding the Netherlands accountable for acts of its forces in relation to the Screbrenica massacre of Bosnians, available at  http://www.internationalcrimesdatabase.org/Case/1005/The-Netherlands-v-Nuhanovi%C4%87/

        o   van Dam, 'The Netherlands Found Liable for Srebrenica Deaths' ASIL insights (September 2011) availble at http://www.asil.org/insights/volume/15/issue/27/netherlands-found-liable-srebrenica-deaths

        o   Nollkaemper A, 'Dual attribution: Liiability of the Netherlands for conduct of Dutchbat in Srebrenica' (2011) 9 Journal of International Criminal Justice 1143

        o   Note also in this context the lititation of the Mothers of Srebrenica Association et al v The Netherlands (2012) 51 International Legal Materials 1322 which has also been brought against the UN and which failed in the Dutch Supreme Court because of the immunity of the UN

        o   The European Court of Human Rights held the Application no. 65542/12 Stichting Moathers of Srebrenica and others v The Netherlands to be inadmissible (decision of 11 June 2013)

        o   K Faith, Recent Developments: Stichting Mothers of Srebrenica Association v The Netherlands: Does UN Immunity Trup the Right of Access to a Court? (2014) 22 Tulane Journal of International and Comparative Law 359.

         

        France

        Cour d'Appel de Paris, Dossier no 2015/06648, 12 April 2016 – Uzbin ambush (criminal responsibility of commanders for negligence of sending paratroopers into action), on BB, in French

         

        Israel

        ·         Supreme Court, The Public Committee against Torture in Israel et al v The Government of Israel et al, judgment of 11 December 2005 (on BB)

         

        For further case law of the European Court of Human Rights on the exterritorial application of human rights see:

        ·         Al-Jedda v United Kingdom, Appl. No. 27021/08, 7 July 2011

        ·         Behrami & Saramati, App no. 71412/01 & 78166/01, 2 May 2007, E.H.R.R. SE10

        ·         Bosphorus v Ireland, App no. 45036/98, 30 June 2005

        ·         R (Al-Saadoon) v. Secretary of State for Defence [2009] EWCA Civ 7

        ·         Al-Saadoon and Mufdhi v. UK, App. no. 61498/08, 2 March 2010

        ·         Medvedyev v France, Application no 3394/03, judgment of 29 March 2010.

        ·         for detailed analysis of the question of exterritorial application of the ECHR see: M Milanovic, Extraterritorial Application of Human Rights Treaties (OUP 2011) 19-41

         

         

        Incidental relevance of the legality in relation to another state's actions with effects abroad

         

        ·         **Belhaj v Straw, Rahmatullah (no 1) v MOD, [2017] UKSC 3, available at https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2014-0264.html.

        Joint NGO submission of the International Commission of Jurists, Amnesty and Redress of 1 October 2015available at http://www.redress.org/case-docket/belhadj-v-jack-straw-and-others

        ·         For discussion see M Nicholson, 'The Political Unconscious and the English Foreign Act of State' (2015) 64 International and Comparative Law Quarterly 743

         

        Contrast the situation of a claim brought against a foreign state in another state, raisng the issue of state immunity:

        ·         Jones v United Kingdom, App no 34356/06 & 40528/06, upholding the House of Lords decision Jones v Saudi Arabia [2006] UKHL 26

         

         

    5. Semiar 5: Limits to Executive Power by Courts II: Question of the Legality of a Deployment under International Law (Ius ad bellum) 1 item
      1. Essential Reading

        ·         Cases with an asterix (*)

        ·         *Allan T, 'Human Rights and Judicial Review: A Critique of "Due Deference"' (2006) 65 Cambridge Law Journal 671

        ·         *Dyzenhaus D, 'Deference, Security and Human Rights' in Goold BJ and Lazarus L (eds), Security and Human Rights (Hart Publishing 2007) 125

        ·         *McGoldrick, D, 'The Boundaries of Justiciability' (2010) ICLQ 981

        ·         *Moosavian R, 'Judges and High Prerogative: The Enduring Influence of Expertise and Legal Purity' [2012] Public Law 724

         

        Cases to Read

         

        Direct Challenges to the legality of a state's use of force

        ·         *The Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament v Prime Minister of the United Kingdom,[2002] EWHC 2777 (QB)

        ·         *Bankovic & others v Belgium & others, no. 53307/99, 12 December 2001 44 E.H.R.R. SE5

         

        Incidental relevance of the legality of the use of force to the claim

        ·         *combine reading Gentle with the recent case of **R v Jones (Margaret) and others [2006] UKHL 16.

         

        Incidental relevance of the legality of the use of force to the claim in relation to another state's actions

        ·         *R(Noor Kahn) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs [2014] EWCA Civ 24

        ·         Peshawar High Court, Noor Khan, judgment of 11 April 2013,  at http://www.peshawarhighcourt.gov.pk/images/wp%201551-p%2020212.pdf

         

         

        For comparison:

        ·         County Court Berlin-Tiergarten, 239 Ds 446/99, judgment of 2 March 2000 (calls for desertion of soldiers during the Kosovo intervention of NATO), unfortunately not available in full in translation, but see extracts at S Talmon, 'Changing Views on the Use of Force: The German Position' (2005) 5 Baltic Yearbook of International Law 41, esp. 64 ff and German cases at 68-70 (BB) (contrasting judgments of the County Court Berlin-Tiergarten and District Court of Berlin).

        ·         German Federal Administrative Court, 2 WD 12.04, judgment of 22 June 2005 (Major Pfaff case – refusal to obey orders to render services within the German army that would facilitate Iraq war; acquittal – not available in English; summary in J Rose, 'Conscience in lieu of Obedience: Cases of Selective Conscientious Objection in the German Bundeswehr', in A Ellner, D Whetham and P Robinson (eds), When Soldiers Say No (Ashgate 2014), ch 11 (pp 177 ff) – ebook in Library.

         

        Deference in the context of foreign relations

        ·         R (on the application of Lord Carlile of Berriew QC and others) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2014] UKSC 60 (majority in favour of deference to the executive, Lord Kerr dissenting)

        ·         Rahmatullah v FCO and MOD [2011] EWCA Cov 1540 – contrast with damages action in  R (on the application of Abbasi and others) v FCO and SSHD [2002] EWCA Civ 1598 and R (on the application of Al-Jedda v MOD) [2008] UKHL 58, and most recently:

        ·         **Belhaj v Straw, Rahmatullah (no 1) v MOD, [2017] UKSC 3

        ·         Rahmatullah (No 2) (Respondent) v Ministry of Defence and another (Appellants) [2017] UKSC 1

        ·         R(on the application of Al-Haq) v FCO [2009] EWHC 1910 (Admin) (compare with CND)

         

         

        Further Reading

        ·         Feldman D, 'Human Rights, Terrorism and Risk: the Roles of Politicians and Judges' [2006] Public Law 364

        ·         Jowell J, 'Judicial Deference: Servility, Civility or Institutional Capacity? ' [2003] Public Law 592

        ·         Poole T, 'Judicial Review at the Margins: Law, Power and Prerogative' (2010) 60 University of Toronto Law Journal 81

        ·         Tomkins A, 'National Security and the Role of the Court: A Changed Landscape' (2010) 126 Law Quarterly Review 543

        ·         J King, 'Institutional Approaches to Judicial Restraint' (2008) 28 Oxford Journal of

        Legal Studies 409

        For US debate see

        ·         Wuerth, I, and G Sitaraman, 'The Normalization of Foreign Relations Law' (2015) 128 Harvard Law Review 1899

        o   response by C Bradley, 'Foreign Relations Law and the Purported Shift Away from "Exceptionalism"' (2015) 128 Harvard Law Review 294

        o   C M Vazquez, 'The Abiding Exceptionalism of Foreign Relations Doctrine' (2015) 128 Harvard Law Review 305

        ·         For a recent analysis of the US Supreme Court's approach see David Rudenstime, The Age of Deference. The Supreme Court, National Security, and the Constitutional Order (OUP 2016).

         

        ·         On a possible conceptual justification of judicial review of 'essential questions' and what is essential see

        o   Judgment by the German Federal Constitutional Court on the Deployment of the Federal Armed Forces [Bundeswehr] in International Operations of 12 July 1994 [BVerfGE 90, 286] ('AWACS I'), (1997) 106 International Law Reports 320-52. (in Library, LR/6 I8240).

        o   German Federal Constitutional Court, 2 BvE 1/03, Judgment of 7 May 2008, at http://www.bverfg.de/entscheidungen/es20080507_2bve000103en.html  (deployment  of German AWACS fighter planes in NATO operation to control airspace over Southern Turkey/Northern Iraq), para. 71.

        o   KS Ziegler, 'Executive Powers in Foreign Policy: The Decision to Despatch the Military' in Katja S. Ziegler, Baranger D and Bradley AW (eds), Constitutionalism and the Role of Parliaments (Hart Publishing 2007) 141, in particular 158-160 (153 ff)

        o   KS Ziegler, 'AWACS I (Ger)', in R Grote, R Wolfrum and F Lachenmann (eds) Max Planck Encyclopedia of Comparative Constitutional Law (MPECCoL), forthcoming, posted on BB (see folder for seminar 6).

         

        o   *

    6. Seminar 6: War Powers of Parliaments – Theory and Comparative Perspectives 1 item
      1.  

        1.      Theory: The Separation of Powers

         

        Essential Reading is marked by an asterix *

         

        Theoretical and Comparative Perspectives

        ·         *M Vile, Constitutionalism and the Separation of Powers (2nd edn, Liberty Fund,

        1998), chapters 1 and 12

        ·         *John Ferejohn and Pasquale Pasquino, 'Constitutional Structures and Institutional Designs: Constitutional Adjudication: Lessons from Europe' (2004) 82 Texas Law Review 1671-1704

        ·         *German Federal Constitutional Court, Pershing, BVerfGE 68,1  (judgment of 18 December 1984), extract in English on BB.

        ·         Cohn, Margit, 'Non-statutory Executive Powers: Assessing Global Constitutionalism in a Structural-Institutional Context' (2015) 64 ICLQ 65.

         

        ·         Montesquieu, Spirit of the Laws, Book XI (1748)

        ·         J Madison, The Federalist Papers, Books 46-49

        ·         H Kelsen, General Theory of Law and State (New York 1945) 269-282

        ·         B Ackerman, 'The New Separation of Powers' (2000) 113 Harvard Law Review 633

        ·         N Komesar, Imperfect Alternatives (University of Chicago Press 1996), chapters 1, 5, 7

        ·         L Claus, 'Montesquieu's Mistakes and the True Meaning of Separation' (2005) 25 Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 419-451

        ·         J King, 'Institutional Approaches to Judicial Restraint' (2008) 28 Oxford Journal of

        Legal Studies 409

        ·         Dyzenhaus D, 'Deference, Security and Human Rights' in Goold BJ and Lazarus L (eds), Security and Human Rights (Hart Publishing 2007) 125

         

        Separation of Powers in the UK

        ·         *AW Bradley and Keith Ewing, Constitutional and Administrative Law (15th edn, Longman 2011), Chapter 5

        ·         *Eric Barendt, 'Separation of Powers and Constitutional Government' [1995] Public Law 599

        ·         Adam Tomkins, Public Law (OUP 2003), ch 2

        ·         C Munro, 'The Separation of Powers' [1981] Public Law 19

        ·         White 'Separation of Powers and Parliamentary Sovereignty' (2011) 127 LQR 456

        ·         G Marshall, Constitutional Theory Ch 5

        ·         Roger Masterman, The Separation of Powers in the Contemporary Constitution. Judicial Competence and Independence in the United Kingdom (CUP 2011), esp ch 1 and 9

        ·         Martin Loughlin, 'The State, the Crown and the Law' in: Maurice Sunkin and Sebastian Payne (eds), The Nature of the Crown: A Legal and Political Analysis (OUP 1999) 33

        ·         J Jowell and D Oliver, The Changing Constitution (7th edn, OUP 2011), chapters 2, 3, 6, 7.

        ·         E Carolan, The New Separation of Powers (Oxford 2009), esp. chapters 5 and 6

         

        ·         Recall also underlying separation of powers arguments in

        o   R(Gentle and Clarke) v Prime Minister [2008] UKHL 20 (discussed in Seminar 5)

        o   and cases for Seminar 2 in relation to unincorporated treaties and prerogative powers in foreign policy

        § R (on the application of Bancoult) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs [2008] UKHL 61.

        § R. v. Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, ex parte Ferhut Butt 116 ILR 607 (1999).

        § R (on the application of Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament) v Prime Minister, [2002] EWHC 2777 (QBD);

         

        Separation of Powers in the US - Debates

        ·         Juan J Linz, 'The Perils of Presidentialism' (1990) 1 Journal of Democracy 51

        ·         P. Verkuil, 'Separation of Powers, the Rule of Law and the Idea of Independence'

        (1989) 30 William and Mary Law Review

        ·         Donald Horowitz, 'Comparing Democratic Systems' (1990) 1 Journal of Democracy 73

        ·         David J Bederman, The Classical Foundations of the American Constitution: Prevailing Wisdom (Cambridge University Press, 2008). - argues that the founders' understandings of structural aspects of the design of the Constitution-including federalism, bicameralism and the Senate, executive power, the judiciary, and the powers of war and foreign relations-were drawn from classical models.

        ·         Charles Kesler (ed), Saving the Revolution: The Federalist Papers and the American Founding (New York, Free Press 1987). -

        ·         Louis Fischer, 'The Efficiency Side of Separated Powers' (1971) 5 Journal of American Studies 113–131 - explores the conception of separation of powers put forth in the writings of Washington, Hamilton, Jay, Jefferson, Adams, and Madison. Argues against the view that the framers envisioned separation of powers and an independent executive as promoting a division of labour between the branches to promote the efficient use of those powers, not simply to prevent tyranny or arbitrary government.

         

        2.      On Parliamentary involvement in deployment decisions in international comparison:

         

        ·         *Sandra Dieterich, Hartwig Hummel, Stefan Marschall, 'Parliamentary War Powers: A Survey of 25 European Parliaments' (2010), Geneva Centre for the Democratic Control of Armed Forces (DCAF) Occasional Paper, available at http://www.dcaf.ch/Publications/Parliamentary-War-Powers

        ·         *Born H and Hänggi H, 'The Use of Force under International Auspices: Strengthening Parliamentary Accountability' (2005) Geneva Centre for the Democratic Control of Armed Forces (DCAF) Policy Paper No 7  (uploaded on BB)

        ·         *Damrosch LF, 'Constitutional Control Over War Powers: A Common Core of Accountability in Democratic Societies?' (1995) 50 University of Miami Law Review 181 (BB)

        ·         Damrosch LF, 'Is There a General Trend in Constitutional Democracies Toward Parliamentary Control Over War-and-Peace Decisions? ' (1996) 90 Proceedings American Society of International Law 36

        ·         *Damrosch LF, 'The Interface of National Constitutional Systems with International Law and Institutions on Using Military Forces: Changing Trends in Executive and Legislative Powers' in Ku C and Jacobson HK (eds), Democratic Accountability and the Use of Force in International Law (Cambridge University Press 2003) 39

        ·         Hardt S, Verhey L and van der Woude W (eds), Parliaments and Military Missions (Europa Law Publishing 2012)

        ·         **Ku C and Jacobson HK (eds), Democratic Accountability and the Use of Force in International Law (Cambridge University Press 2003)

        ·         G Nolte and H Krieger, in Nolte (ed), European Military Law Systems (Berlin 2003) ch 1, 2, 6

        ·         *Oxman BH, 'The Relevance of the International Order to the Internal Allocation of Powers to Use Force' (1995) 50 U Miami L Rev 129

        ·         Troncho M, 'National Parliamentary Scrutiny of Intervention Abroad by Armed Forces Engaged in International Missions: The Current Position in Law' Assembly of the Western European Union, Document A/1762 of 4 December 2001

        ·         *Ziegler KS, 'Executive Powers in Foreign Policy: The Decision to Despatch the Military' in Katja S. Ziegler, Baranger D and Bradley AW (eds), Constitutionalism and the Role of Parliaments (Hart Publishing 2007) 141

         

        UK: The Royal Prerogative in Foreign Policy/War

         

        ·         Bradley AW and Ewing KD, Constitutional and Administrative Law (15th edn, Pearson Longman 2011) ch 12, 15

        ·         Sunkin M and Payne S (eds), The Nature of the Crown: A Legal and Political Analysis (Oxford University Press 1999), ch 4 (by S Payne and ch 10 by Rowe)

        ·         Joseph, Rosara, The War Prerogative: History, Reform, and Constitutional Design (OUP 2013)

         

        Specifically on the debates in the UK about limiting the war prerogative

        ·         *Mills, Claire, Parliamentary Approval for Military Action (House of Commons Briefing Paper 7166, 12 May 2015) available at

         http://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/CBP-7166

        ·         *House of Lords, Select Committee on the Constitution, Second Report: Constitutional arrangements for the use of armed force (HL Paper 46, 24 July 2013), Chapter 3 and Government Response available at http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/lords-select/constitution-committee/publications/?type=&session=1&sort=false&inquiry=585

        ·         *House of Lords, Select Committee on the Constitution, Waging War: Parliament's Role and Responsibility (Volume I: Report, 15th Report of Session 2005–06)

        ·         Bill 1654/1 Armed Forces (Parliamentary Approval for Participation in Armed Conflict) Bill  (introduced by then Secretary of State for International Development Clare Short during the Blair Government; failed on second reading) (BB), see also research paper by C Taylor, Armed Forces (Parliamentary Approval for Participation in Armed Conflict) Bill. Bill 16 of 2005-06 (2005)

        ·         White ND, 'The United Kingdom: Increasing Commitment Requires Greater Parliamentary Involvement' in Ku C and Jacobson HK (eds), Democratic Accountability and the Use of Force in International Law (Cambrige University Press 2002) 300

        ·         ND White, 'International Law, the United Kingdlom and Decisions to Deploy Troops Overseas' (2010) 59 ICLQ 814.

        ·         G. Phillipson, ' 'Historic' Commons' Syria vote: The Constitutional Significance (Part I)'  UK Const. L. Blog (19th September 2013) (available at http://ukconstitutionallaw.org ),   http://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2013/09/19/gavin-phillipson-historic-commons-syria-vote-the-constitutional-significance-part-i/ and

        Part II at http://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2013/11/29/gavin-phillipson-historic-commons-syria-vote-the-constitutional-significance-part-ii-the-way-forward/

        ·         C R G Murray and A O'Donoghue, 'Towards Unilateralism? House of Commons Oversight of the Use of Force' (2016) 65 International and Comparative Law Quarterly 305

         

        USA: War Powers Resolution 1973

        ·         *Text for example at http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/warpower.asp

        ·         Brief introduction: R McMahon, 'Balance of War Powers: The U.S. President and Congress' (Council on Foreign Relations June 2011), http://www.cfr.org/united-states/balance-war-powers-us-president-congress/p13092#p6; see also For recent debates see also Alton Frye, 'Applying the War Powers Resolution to the War on Terrorism' (Council on Foreign Relations April 2002)

        ·         *Michael J Glennon, 'The United States: Democracy, Hegemony, and Accountability' in Ku C and Jacobson HK (eds), Democratic Accountability and the Use of Force in International Law (Cambrige University Press 2002) Ch 14.

        ·         Eric Talbot Jensen, 'Future War and the War Powers Resolution' (2015) 29 Emory International Law Review 499.

        ·         Michael J Glennon, 'The Executive's Misplaced Reliance on War Powers "Custom"' (2015) 109 AJIL 551

        ·         Dellinger W, 'After the Cold War: Presidential Power and the Use of Military Force' (1995) 50 University of Miami Law Review 107

        ·         Ely JH, War and Responsibility: Constitutional Lessons of Vietnam and its Aftermath (Princeton University Press 1993)

        ·         *JH Ely, 'Suppose Congress Wanted a War Powers Act That Worked' (1988) 88 Columbia Law Review 1379

        ·         D Fascell, 'War Powers and Congress' (1995) 50 U Miami L Rev 121

        ·         T Franck, The Tethered Presidency: Congressional Restraints on Executive Power (1981)

        ·         MJ Glennon, 'Too Far Apart: Repeal the War Powers Resolution' (1995) 50 University of Miami Law Review 17

        ·         L Henkin, 'War Powers "Short of War"' (1995) 50 U Miami L Rev 201

        ·         Pious RM, 'Inherent War and Executive Powers and Prerogative Politics' (2007) 37 Presidential Studies Quarterly 66

        ·         AD Sofaer, War, Foreign Affairs, and Constitutional Power: The Origins (Ballinger 1976)

        ·         *AD Sofaer, 'Power over War ' (1995) 50 University of Miami Law Review 33

        ·         Stromseth JE, 'Collective Force and Constitutional Responsibility: War Powers in the Post-Cold War Era' (1995) 50 U Miami L Rev 145

         

        Germany: Parliamentary Participation Act

        ·         *Parliamentary Participation Act 2005 (see BB)

        ·         Judgment by the German Federal Constitutional Court on the Deployment of the Federal Armed Forces [Bundeswehr] in International Operations of 12 July 1994 [BVerfGE 90, 286] ('AWACS I'), (1997) 106 International Law Reports 320-52. (in Library, LR/6 I8240).

        ·         KS Ziegler, 'AWACS I (Ger)', in R Grote, R Wolfrum and F Lachenmann (eds) Max Planck Encyclopedia of Comparative Constitutional Law (MPECCoL), forthcoming, posted on BB.

        ·         G Nolte and H Krieger, in Nolte (ed), European Military Law Systems (Berlin 2003) (pp 337 ff on Germany) – only sections regarding control&accountability.

        ·         Nolte G, 'Germany: Ensuring Political Legitimacy for the Use of Military Forces by Requiring Constitutional Accountability' in Ku C and Jacobson HK (eds), Democratic Accountability and the Use of Force in International Law (Cambridge University Press 2003) 231

        ·         *Ziegler KS, 'Executive Powers in Foreign Policy: The Decision to Despatch the Military' in Katja S. Ziegler, Baranger D and Bradley AW (eds), Constitutionalism and the Role of Parliaments (Hart Publishing 2007) 141

        ·         KS Ziegler, 'The Model of a "Parliamentary Army" under the German Constitution', in: House of Lords Select Committee on the Constitution, Waging War: Parliament's Role and Responsibility (15th Report of Session 2005-06), Volume II: Evidence (HL Paper 236-II, London, The Stationary Office 2006) pp. 31-46 (BB)

        ·         For an example of the enforcement of the Parliamentary Participation Act by the Federal Constitutional Court see Case 2 BvE 1/03, Judgment of 7 May 2008, at http://www.bverfg.de/entscheidungen/es20080507_2bve000103en.html  (deployment  of German AWACS fighter planes in NATO operation to control airspace over Southern Turkey/Northern Iraq border during the Iraq war without parliamentary approval was unconstitutional; the decision also attempts to clarify the threshold of 'deployment of armed forces' of the Parliamentary Participation Act 2005 which triggers the parliamentary consent requirment). The substantive law reasons start at paragraph 56 ff. Consider also in particular para. 71.

        ·         For a recent example of how the consent requirement of the Parliamentary Participation Act has been interpreted in the context of the 'emergency' deployments see Federal Constitutional Court see Case 2 BvE 6/11, Judgment of 23 September 2015, discussed by Anne Peters, at EJIL Talk! At http://www.ejiltalk.org/the-non-judicialisation-of-war-german-constitutional-court-judgment-on-rescue-operation-pegasus-in-libya-of-23-september-2015-part-1/ and http://www.ejiltalk.org/the-non-judicialisation-of-war-german-constitutional-court-judgment-on-rescue-operation-pegasus-in-libya-of-23-september-2015-part-2/

        (judgment in German at http://www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de/SharedDocs/Entscheidungen/DE/2015/09/es20150923_2bve000611.html)

        ·         Ekkehard Brose, When Germany Sends Troops Abroad. The Case for a Limited Reform of the Parliamentary Participation Act (German Institute for International and Security Affairs Research Paper 9, September 2013) (BB)

         

        ·         Donald P Kommers and Russell A Miller, The Constitutional Jurisprudence of the Federal Republic of Germany (Duke University Press Durham and London 2012).

    7. Seminar 7: International Law Limits on Deployment Decisions of States’ Executive? 1 item
      1. Reading

         

        On intersection of national and international law in the context of use of force specifically

        ·         *LF Damrosch, 'The Interface of National Constitutional Systems with International Law and Institutions on Using Military Forces: Changing Trends in Executive and Legislative Powers' in Ku C and Jacobson HK (eds), Democratic Accountability and the Use of Force in International Law (Cambridge University Press 2003) 39

        ·         *BH Oxman, 'The Relevance of the International Order to the Internal Allocation of Powers to Use Force' (1995) 50 U Miami L Rev 129

        ·         *N White, 'International Law, The United Kingdom and Decisions to Deploy Troops Overseas' (2010) 59 International and Comparative Law Quarterly 814

         

        On intersection of national and international law generally

        ·         *E Benvenisti and GW Downs, 'National Courts, Domestic Democracy, and the Evolution of International Law' (2010) 20 European Journal of International Law 59

        ·         A Nollkaemper, National Courts and the International Rule of Law (Oxford University Press 2011)

        ·         E Benvenisti, 'Reclaiming Democracy: The Strategic Use of Foreign and International Law by National Courts' (2008) 102 AJIL 241

        ·         R Uruena, 'Law-making through Comparative International Law? Rethinking the role of domestic law in the international legal system', in:  Rain Liivoja and Jarna Petman (eds), International Law-making. Essays in Honour of Jan Klabbers (Routledge 2013).

        ·         A Roberts, 'Comparative International Law: The Role of National Courts in Creating and Enforcing International Law' (2011) 60 International and Comparative Law Quarterly 57

        ·         J Nijman and A Nollkaemper (eds), New Perspectives on the Divide Between National and International Law (Oxford University Press 2007), in particular chapters by:

        o   *C Walter, 'International Law in a Process of Constitutionalization' , ch 8, pp 191 ff

        o   A Paulus, 'The Emergence of the International Community and the Divide Between International and Domestic Law', ch 9

        o   J Nijman and A Nollkaemper, 'Beyond the Divide', ch 12

        o   *Olga Frishman and Eyal Benvenisti, 'National Courts and Interpretive Approaches to International Law: The Case Against Convergence', in Helmut Philipp Aust and Georg Nolte (eds), The Interpretation of International Law by Domestic Courts. Uniformity, Diversity, Convergence (OUP 2016) Ch 16, on SSRN https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2504988

         

        On the constitutionalisation of international law  (or global constitutionalism)

        ·         Introductory: see Max Planck Encyclopaedia of Public International Law (online database available via the library), entries: 'Governance, Theory of' (Teubner, 2010), International Public Order (Hoffmeister and Kleinlein 2013), 'Global Administrative Law' (Kingsbury and Donaldson, 2011), 'Community Interest' (Feichtner, 2007)

        ·         J Klabbers, A Peters and G Ulfstein (eds), The Constitutionalization of International Law (OUP 2011), in particular chapters by:

        o   J Klabbers, 'Setting the Scene', pp  1, esp pp. 19-31, 37-44.

        o   *A Peters, 'Dual Democracy', pp 263

        o   A Peters, 'Conclusions', p 342.

        ·         *C Walter, 'Constitutionalizing (Inter)national Governance: Possibilities for and Limits to the Development of International Constitutional Law' (2001) 44 German YIL 170

         

        ·         **JL Dunoff and JP Trachtman (eds), Ruling the World? Constitutionalism, International Law and Global Governance (CUP 2009), in particular chapters by:

        o   *Dunoff JL and Trachtman JP, 'A Functional Approach to International Constitutionalization', pp 3 ff

        o   *A Paulus, 'The International Legal System as a Constitution', pp 69 ff

        o   *Stephen Gardbaum, 'Human Rights and International Constitutionalism', pp 233 ff

        o   Samantha Besson, 'Whose Constitution(s)? International Law, Constitutionalism, and Democracy', pp 381 ff

         

        ·         A Peters, 'Humanity as the A and Ω of Sovereignty' (2009) 20 European Journal of International Law 513

        ·         A Peters, 'Compensatory Constitutionalism: The Function and Potential of Fundamental International Norms and Structures' (2006) 19 Leiden Journal of International Law 579

        ·         Rosenfeld, M, 'Is Global Constitutionalism Meaningful or Desirable?' (2014) 25 EJIL 177

        ·         Ronald St. John Macdonald and Douglas M. Johnston (eds), Towards World Constitutionalism, Issues in the Legal Ordering of the World Community (Leiden, Martinus Nijhoff, 2005). See esp. chapter by Fassbender providing an overview of the different schools of thought of international constitutionalism.

        ·         Colin Warbrick and Stephen Tierney (eds), Towards an International Legal Community? The Sovereignty of States and the Sovereignty of International Law (London, The British Institute of International and Comparative Law, 2006).

        ·         C Schwöbel, Global Constitutionalism in International Legal Perspective (Leiden, Martinus Nijhoff 2011)

         

         

        On specific aspects of constitutionalisation

        The Democratic Principle

        ·         *TM Franck, 'The Emerging Right to Democratic Governance' (1992) 86 AJIL 8

        ·         *S Marks, 'What has Become of the Emerging Right to Democratic Governance?' (2011) 22 European Journal of International Law 507

        ·         S Wheatley, The Democratic Legitimacy of International Law  (Hart 2010), esp chapters 4 and 5.

        ·         G H Fox and B R Roth (eds), Democratic Governance and International Law (CUP 2000), esp ch 3 by J Crawford, 'Democracy and the Body of International Law', pp 91 ff.

        ·         AW Bradley, KS Ziegler and D Baranger, 'Introduction: Constitutionalism and the Role of Parliaments' in Katja S. Ziegler, Baranger D and Bradley AW (eds), Constitutionalism and the Role of Parliaments (Hart Publishing 2007) 1

         

        The Rule of Law Principle

        ·         A Nollkaemper, National Courts and the International Rule of Law (Oxford University Press 2011)

        ·         G Fitzmaurice, 'The General Principles of International Law considered from the Standpoint of the Rule of Law' (1957-II) 92 Recueil des Cours 1

        ·         *T Bingham, The Rule of Law (Allen Lane 2010), ch 10.

        ·         *UN and the rule of law: see http://www.un.org/en/ruleoflaw/See also in the context of the EU – as a partial legal order of international law (defined as a priority by the Dutch Presidency of the EU in their Agenda published in January 2016):

        o   http://ec.europa.eu/justice/effective-justice/rule-of-law/index_en.htm

        o   Commission Communication of 11 March 2014: A new EU Framework to strengthen the Rule of Law, COM(2014) 158 final  at                                         http://ec.europa.eu/justice/effective-justice/files/com_2014_158_en.pdf

        o   Lucy Moxham  and Justine Stefanelli, Safeguarding the Rule of Law, Democracy and Fundamental Rights: A Monitoring Model for the European Union (Bingham Centre for the Rule of Law, 15 November 2013) at http://www.biicl.org/files/6758_main_report_15_11_2013_commission_consultation.pdf

         

        On "Lawfare"

         

        ·         Thomas Tugendhat and Laura Croft, The Fog of Law. An introduction to the legal erosion of British fighting power (Policy Exchange 2013) and Richard Ekins, Jonathan Morgan, and Tom Tugendhat,Clearing the Fog of Law: Saving Our Armed Forces from Defeat by Judicial Diktat (Policy Exchange report 2015) at https://policyexchange.org.uk/publication/clearing-the-fog-of-law-saving-our-armed-forces-from-defeat-by-judicial-diktat/

        ·         See critically: E Bjorge, 'The Fogmachine of War: A Comment on the Report "Clearing the Fog of Law"' EJIL Talk! athttp://www.ejiltalk.org/the-fogmachine-of-war-a-comment-on-the-report-clearing-the-fog-of-law/

         

        ·         O Kittrie, Lawfare: Law as a Weapon of War (OUP 2016)

All rights reserved ©