Michigan Journal of International Law最新文献

{"title":"Fixing the Problem of Incompetent Defense Counsel Before the International Criminal Court","authors":"M. Catallo","doi":"10.36642/mjil.41.2.fixing","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.36642/mjil.41.2.fixing","url":null,"abstract":"Throughout the latter half of the twentieth-century, defense counsel arguing before international criminal tribunals provided notoriously ineffective assistance. This note examines whether defense counsel similarly fail to provide competent assistance at the International Criminal Court––and if they do so for similar reasons. In examining the ICC’s procedural and regulatory framework, this note highlights the systemic inequities at the Court that favor the prosecution and devalue the defense, thereby hindering the acquisition of competent defense counsel and promoting the retention of incompetent defense counsel.\u0000\u0000To address these iniquities, this note promotes various administrative reforms, all of which could be implemented without requiring significant overhauls of the ICC’s current structure. Failure to take action, this note cautions, risks depriving the accused of a competent defense, jeopardizing the equality of arms and the ICC’s perceived legitimacy.","PeriodicalId":331401,"journal":{"name":"Michigan Journal of International Law","volume":"41 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129550128","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Let Them Eat Rights: Re-Framing the Food Insecurity Problem Using a Rights-Based Approach","authors":"B. Sheehy, Ying Chen","doi":"10.36642/mjil.43.3.let","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.36642/mjil.43.3.let","url":null,"abstract":"Food insecurity is a global issue. Large parts of the global population are unable to feed themselves adequately with hundreds of millions of people suffering from hunger and malnutrition. This problem is recognized widely by governments, industry and civil society and is usually understood using one of three approaches or frames: a basic production problem solved by technology and increased industrialization of agricultural, and an economic problem solved by economic growth and a commercial problem resolved by expanding markets. Much of the discussion and policy advice is based on the premise that hunger is primarily a wealth issue and, that as wealthy countries do not have hunger, the solution is economic development. Using Erving Goffman’s theory of framing, we argue that these frames are inadequate as evidenced by the failure to solve this very basic, but complex problem in both poor and wealthy countries on the one hand nor explain the success of some developing countries on the other. After analyzing the three frames and their limitations, we propose a rights-based frame and explain how rights are an important part of solving the complex problem of hunger. We examine how rights-based approaches have worked by creating three categories based on the status of food rights within the respective constitutional frameworks of those jurisdictions. In each of the three categories, we examine specific jurisdictional frameworks, evidence of performance and evaluate their success. Based on that review, analysis and evaluation, we identify the legal elements of an effective right to food.","PeriodicalId":331401,"journal":{"name":"Michigan Journal of International Law","volume":"21 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133918636","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Labor and the Global Economy: Four Approaches to Transnational Labor Regulation","authors":"K. Stone","doi":"10.31228/osf.io/8rxby","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.31228/osf.io/8rxby","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":331401,"journal":{"name":"Michigan Journal of International Law","volume":"18 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132036422","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"CEDAW and Transformative Judicial Obligations: The Vulnerable Migrant Domestic Worker and Root Causes of Abuse","authors":"Cheah L.","doi":"10.36642/mjil.43.1.cedaw","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.36642/mjil.43.1.cedaw","url":null,"abstract":"The first part of this article sets out CEDAW’s transformative approach to rights and its implications for MDWs and state actors such as courts. It then juxtaposes this approach to the tendency of state officials in destination countries to condemn the abuse of vulnerable MDWs by errant employers without recognizing the impact of official laws and policies on MDWs’ vulnerabilities. The second part of this article examines judicial discussions of MDWs’ vulnerabilities in Hong Kong, Singapore, and Malaysia. Judges in these countries have primarily drawn attention to the isolation of MDWs in their employers’ homes, the dependence of MDWs on their employers for their basic needs, and their lack of financial resources. While such judicial developments are important, the third part of this article argues that these courts need to go beyond discussing specific MDW’s vulnerabilities and their individual criminal cases by identifying and critiquing the root causes of MDWs’ vulnerabilities. It analyzes cases where courts have advanced or overlooked CEDAW’s transformative objectives to argue that criminal law courts can and should advance CEDAW’s goals by naming and contesting the laws, policies, and prejudices enabling MDW rights violations. Such a systemic or transformative approach to adjudication that pinpoints the root causes of MDW abuse can catalyze change at both the legal and policy levels, leading to a more rights-centered approach to MDWs that is consistent with CEDAW requirements.","PeriodicalId":331401,"journal":{"name":"Michigan Journal of International Law","volume":"32 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134639612","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Measuring Corruption as a Threat to International Security: An Emerging Indicator for Enhancement of Global Corruption Governance","authors":"Sungyong Kang","doi":"10.36642/mjil.44.1.measuring","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.36642/mjil.44.1.measuring","url":null,"abstract":"The conceptual changes to international security after the end of the Cold War, and particularly those following the al-Qaeda attacks of 2001, clarified the symbiotic relationship between corruption and international security: Corruption destroys the social political environment required to create human security and to ensure safety from terrorist attacks, and national borders increasingly fail to restrain its negative consequences.\u0000\u0000To achieve human security though policy intervention in domestic affairs, global corruption governance relies on numerical indicators that measure corruption. By evaluating states through public comparison, indicators pressure states to improve their domestic institutions and structures to align them with the international legal regime against corruption. However, existing indicators, including the Corruption Perceptions Index and Control of Corruption, have serious deficiencies that precipitate strong criticism from scholars and practitioners.\u0000\u0000This article suggests that the objective numerical measurement of “Corruption (0703),” one of the statistical measurements under the International Classification of Crime for Statistical Purposes (ICCS) of United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), is an emerging indicator that can enhance global corruption governance by supplementing or substituting existing indicators which are subjective numerical measurement of corruption. The significance of corruption as a threat to international security, not simply to international business, thus increases the absolute gains of Corruption (0703). Therefore, it is vital that states utilize and comply with Corruption (0703).\u0000\u0000For this recommendation to be persuasive, however, the following three questions must be answered. Does Corruption (0703) have the qualities necessary to exert pressure on states by negatively impacting their power in a way that existing indicators cannot? Can states, which are both the subjects and objects of the Corruption (0703) measurement, realistically comply with it, and will they do so? How can the problem of state cheating to achieve a more favorable score be overcome?\u0000\u0000To answer these questions, this article contemplates distinct characteristics of corruption between domestic criminal law and international agreements, and ultimately adopts the approach of neo-liberals, who prioritize absolute gain over relative gain and are thus optimistic about the potential for international organization and cooperation in implementing and enforcing this metric. In addition, this article often refers to the Republic of Korea as a case study because it has reached the most advanced stage of ICCS implementation.","PeriodicalId":331401,"journal":{"name":"Michigan Journal of International Law","volume":"16 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133003110","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The Consent-Based Problems Surrounding the Persistent Objector Doctrine","authors":"Moisés Mogollón","doi":"10.36642/mjil.43.2.consent-based","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.36642/mjil.43.2.consent-based","url":null,"abstract":"Most analyses of the persistent objector doctrine seem to omit the impact that its application has on the general requirement of consent as a cornerstone of the international legal order, and as an unavoidable requisite in the formation of rules of customary international law. The present work holds that the persistent objector rule not only undermines the consensual nature of obligations in international law, but also generates issues of normative authority, dubious attribution of meaning to silence, temporal determination, and with self-determination and equality. It concludes that the doctrine, furthermore, lacks practice and opinio juris, meaning that its validity and existence in the realm of customary international law is highly questionable.","PeriodicalId":331401,"journal":{"name":"Michigan Journal of International Law","volume":"61 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121699340","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Asylum-Seekers are Not Bananas Either: Limitations on Transferring Asylum-Seekers to Third Countries","authors":"T. Kritzman-Amir","doi":"10.36642/mjil.43.3.asylum-seekers","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.36642/mjil.43.3.asylum-seekers","url":null,"abstract":"Despite the similarities between the movement of people and the movement of goods, many developed nations have maintained high barriers to migration even as barriers to trade have fallen sharply. However, as Jennifer Gordon points out, both bilateral and multilateral treaties governing migration have proliferated within this weaker global patchwork of regulation. For example, the ability of developed states to gain concessions on other matters such as trade or investment has led to the proliferation multilateral agreements, while bilateral agreements have arisen due to a desire to refrain from integrating migrant workers in destination states.\u0000\u0000This paper focuses on a particular subset of migrants—asylum-seekers— and aims to explain why they should not be treated like bananas, so to speak. Their rights, status, and protection, as well as their transfer from destination countries to third countries, are regulated by multilateral, regional, and bilateral agreements that simultaneously highlight the differences between goods and asylum-seekers while also treating them, in some ways, like objects or commodities. The “banananization” of persons through third-country agreements is a result of these agreements’ strong focus on the sovereign interests of destination and third countries instead of on the effects of the transfer on asylum-seekers and refugees.\u0000\u0000This paper argues that transfer agreements should require an individualized assessment of the connections between asylum-seekers and the destination country and refrain from removing individuals from places where they have relationships and connections to countries where they have significantly fewer networks or none at all. The legal validity of third country agreements should, therefore, be examined through two questions: First, the extent to which the transfer agreement supports (or impedes) the asylum-seeker’s autonomy in choosing a state that would grant them surrogate protection; and second, the degree to which relational considerations are given adequate weight prior to the transfer by taking into account global movements and by placing the asylum-seeker in a place where her meaningful relationships would be preserved.\u0000\u0000This article undertakes this task and concludes with recommendations for the implementation of future third-country transfer agreements.","PeriodicalId":331401,"journal":{"name":"Michigan Journal of International Law","volume":"4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126086335","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The Trees Speak for Themselves: Nature’s Rights Under International Law","authors":"Samantha Franks","doi":"10.36642/mjil.42.3.trees","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.36642/mjil.42.3.trees","url":null,"abstract":"This note argues that the United Nations should center nature’s rights in the upcoming Global Pact on the Environment, solidifying the patchwork of international environmental law and encouraging domestic protection of the environment. Part II explores the current state of international environmental law, outlining the ways in which the doctrine remains incomplete. Part III establishes that Earth jurisprudence is an effective method to fill the gaps existing within traditional international environmental law. Part IV emphasizes the importance of soft law in international law. It draws a parallel between the creation of the Universal Declaration of Human’s Rights and a potential global Declaration of Nature’s Rights, thus establishing the possibility for a path forward for the Global Pact. Part V concludes.","PeriodicalId":331401,"journal":{"name":"Michigan Journal of International Law","volume":"132 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123415287","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Rejecting Customary Regression: Unilateral Humanitarian Intervention & the Evolution of Customary International Law","authors":"Elisabeth Elisabeth","doi":"10.36642/mjil.43.1.rejecting","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.36642/mjil.43.1.rejecting","url":null,"abstract":"Humanitarian intervention is perhaps one of the most important topics in international affairs. It raises questions of morality and militarism, becoming a platform for sharp debate in international law. This note discusses both the moral and legal questions presented by unilateral humanitarian intervention (“UHI”). It argues that UHI is antithetical to the progression of customary international law due to customary international law’s evolutive nature and the ongoing importance of decolonization. UHI is not only normatively undesirable, but the particular normative criticisms of the doctrine – that it is regressively imperialist and neo-colonial – render it fundamentally incompatible with customary international law.","PeriodicalId":331401,"journal":{"name":"Michigan Journal of International Law","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122411550","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Ending Corporate Anonymity: Beneficial Ownership, Sanctions Evasion, and What the United Nations Should Do About It","authors":"Vineet V. Chandra","doi":"10.36642/MJIL.42.1.ENDING","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.36642/MJIL.42.1.ENDING","url":null,"abstract":"In the vast majority of jurisdictions around the world, there is a generous array of corporate forms available to persons and companies looking to do business. These entities come with varying degrees of regulation regarding how much information about the businesses’ principal owners must be disclosed at the time of registration and how much of that information is subsequently available to the public. There is little policy harmonization around the world on this matter. Dictators and despots have long taken advantage of this unintended identity shield to evade sanctions which target them; in July of 2019, the Center for Advanced Defense Studies (C4ADS) published a comprehensive, investigative report into North Korea’s supply chain for luxury vehicles outlawed by U.N.S.C resolution 1718. C4ADS found eighty-two previously unreported shipments of 803 luxury vehicles – including two armored Mercedes limousines Kim Jong-Un was later pictured in – between 2015 and 2017 alone. At least twenty-four corporate entities, mostly based in China and Russia, participated in the process of covertly moving the cars to North Korea as guarantors, consignors, or consignees. Hugh Griffiths, Senior Researcher and Head of Countering Illicit Trafficking-Mechanism Assessment Program at the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute and coordinator for the U.N. panel convened to monitor North Korean sanctions compliance, summed up the significance of the problem succinctly. “If you can smuggle luxury limos into North Korea, which is done by shipping container,” he says, “that means you can smuggle in smaller components – dual-use items for ballistic and nuclear programs.” Deficient beneficial ownership protections around the world are not just the esoteric consequence of complicated legal systems; they present a significant threat to international peace and security as a vehicle for terrorism financing, sanctions evasion, and other forms of criminal activity.\u0000\u0000In six parts, this paper considers the development of beneficial ownership regulation since the 1990s, describes current efforts to harmonize jurisdiction-specific approaches, suggests more intensive involvement by the United Nations, establishes the legal basis for the use of the U.N. Security Council’s legislative powers on this issue, and argues that the United Nations is the international organization best-suited to drive towards universal, international compliance with the modern regulatory consensus.","PeriodicalId":331401,"journal":{"name":"Michigan Journal of International Law","volume":"85 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122630813","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}