The Nubian Sandstone Aquifer System is one of the world’s largest transboundary fossil aquifers and stretches underneath the territories of the North African States of Egypt, Libya, Sudan and Chad. All four States have strong Islamic cultural backgrounds, and Egypt, Libya and Sudan have enshrined Shari'a as a fundamental source of law in their constitutions. This thesis assesses the extent to which the 2008 Draft Articles on the Law of Transboundary Aquifers, proposed to the UN General Assembly by the International Law Commission, are compatible with general principles of Islamic water law. Both the 2008 Draft Articles as the current culmination of international groundwater law and Islamic law suffer from certain shortcomings. Whilst the former lacks the same binding authority Islamic law enjoys and to date does not elaborate the potential issue of water commercialisation in water scarce regions, the latter lacks the transboundary perspective in relation to groundwater. This highlights the impact Islamic law could have on the on-going negotiations between the NSAS Aquifer States, whereby specific Islamic provisions could provide stepping-stones towards an innovative utilisation framework for the NSAS that adequately addresses the need for precaution and intergenerational equity, which, inter alia, could instil new impetus for a refined set of Draft Articles. An alternative future is likely to evolve along the lines of separate agreements and a more fragmented corpus of international law rather than a coherent body of codified international law on transboundary fossil aquifers, which would run counter to the International Law Commission’s objective.

This thesis engages with and intervenes in a number of insurgent, emergent, and re-emergent, pedagogies and theoretical frameworks of increasing relevance to area studies and, more broadly, challenges the discipline of American Studies to expand its theoretical and textual bases. Here the challenges of transnationalism (as a concern which all area studies need to address) and hemispherism (a concern more specifically related to American Studies) are the key motivating factors for the proposed reconfiguration of the discipline outlined in the thesis. These are pervasive and important strands of political, economic, social, cultural, and academic life, but which the discipline of American Studies has been slow to recognise and incorporate in any meaningful way. The problem here lies in the fact that for American Studies the nation remains an unquestioned and seemingly immoveable priority: studies of the U.S. become as exceptionalist as the object of their study. This project proposes that this subservience to the centre (the nation-state) at the expense of the periphery (the nation’s borders) can be redressed by returning to a much narrower sphere of experience: the region. Paradoxically, this will allow for an expansion of the purview of American Studies, enabling centrifugal readings of American (in its continental sense) culture to develop, rather than the centripetal analyses which have been the subject of much vexed discussion amongst scholars over recent years. By focusing on borders – regions which are always already transnational – this thesis aims to demonstrate that in shifting our focus only slightly beyond national boundaries, new critical techniques might be developed which can revitalise American Studies. The study’s introductory chapter contextualises the theoretical framework from which the entire thesis proceeds, and develops and articulates the broader challenge to the discipline of American Studies which motivates the research. U.S. regionalism is introduced and interrogated through short case studies of New Mexico (the region considered the capital of early twentieth-century regionalism) and The Federal Writers Project (the New Deal venture that sought to tap into the potential of regionalism). Herein, regionalism is demonstrated to be far from autonomous of nation and nationalism. Woven alongside these studies is an overview of the founding principles of American Studies, demonstrating how the concept of region always collapses into the broader concept of nation in both regionalism and American Studies itself. In counterpoint to these homogenising moves, the real-and-imagined cross-border North American territories of Cascadia and Aztlán are introduced and make way for an examination of the concept and practise of regionalism in both Canada and Mexico, revealing its manifestations in these territories to be much closer to the supposedly oppositional stance which U.S. regionalism originally suggests as its primary intention. With this potential oppositional regionalism outlined, the thesis moves to answer the various calls for new critical vocabularies to articulate the heterogeneous cultural life of North America and finds such a language in the work of Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari. Taking their concepts of the rhizome, nomadism and minor literature – as ideas that are designed with the task of challenging binary and hierarchical theorising specifically in mind – the thesis demonstrates that such concepts are immanent in a number of literary texts that emerge from and engage with North America’s borders. Works by Américo Paredes, Laurie Ricou and Guillermo Verdecchia are thus positioned as texts that simultaneously produce and enact narrative strategies that give voice to alternative identities that are not beholden to singular national identities. Having thus dislodged the nation-state as the predominant determiner of identity and ideology the thesis, via an in-depth discussion of nomadism, then seeks to draw an alternative critical cartography through which the Mexican and Canadian borders with the U.S. can enter into dialogue with one another in ways that disrupt the privileged subjectivity that U.S. ideology holds over representations of these sites. Tracing the shared histories of the trickster Coyote, and coyote the people smuggler, the thesis gestures towards ways in which critics can subvert (in the manner of Coyote) understandings of border regions, and smuggle new perspectives on region into view (in the manner of the coyote). Finally the thesis moves to answer its key hypothesis: whether canonical material can be opened up to new avenues of interpretation if it is considered from a borderlands position and, relatedly, whether crossing the borders of North America can allow more marginal material to speak more loudly within the field of American Studies. Studying the music of Bruce Springsteen and The Band, the thesis argues that, in so doing, a multitude of alternative understandings of nation and unconventional regional affiliations can be uncovered. This has much to offer, in particular, to recently re-emergent considerations of Indigenous sovereignty in North America and the thesis concludes by gesturing towards possible further avenues of research that place regional considerations above those of nations.

This project explores the issue of selectivity within contemporary international politics, particularly in relation to the implementation of the United Nations’ Responsibility to Protect principle, from a postcolonial perspective. It argues that in order to fully understand the selective implementation of policy in contemporary contexts, it is necessary to examine the historical origins of the United Nations and to highlight the institutionalisation of postcolonial privilege in international political organisations. Through the use of archival data, it shows that the United Nations is an institution that has been committed to the perpetuation of colonial power structures through the development of new forms of government and structures of control, relying on problematic discourses of civilisation and progress that legitimate a global power structure that has its roots in colonialism. It begins with the provision of an alternative historical narrative that highlights the significance of colonialism in the founding of the United Nations and that seeks to undermine the discourse of equality that is frequently attributed to the organisation. It then moves on to explore more concrete examples of the structures of the United Nations that have allowed for the continuation of colonial power relations before examining these ideas in relation to the contemporary politics of intervention, particularly focusing on the role of the Security Council as the locus of postcolonial and neocolonial power.

After more than three decades of legal reform under a promotion of the rule of law, it is opportune to assess and conceptualize the relationship between the legal reform and protection of human rights in China. The rule of law in China has been subjected to much controversy and debate. There are views that China at best desires and practices a rule by law under which the protection of human rights is a far-fetch goal. What further complicates the matter is that China’s legal reform is arriving at “crossroads” as it has exhausted most of the easy part of the reform. Legal reform today faces more difficulty in trying to accommodate and prioritize conflicting values and interests. This thesis aims to explore whether China’s legal reform towards the rule of law promote the protection of human rights. Using the distinction of thin and thick versions of rule of law, it is argued that the party-state aims to establish a Chinese rule of law integrating many basic standards of a thin rule of law. After decades of intensive reform many areas of law have incorporated certain principles of the thin rule of law. This process led to the advancement of human rights protection and rise of rights-consciousness. However, as the reform increasingly concerns more complicated issues that goes beyond “thin” solutions, the thesis argues that the conception of human rights come to play an important role in the decision-making.

In this PhD by Published Work the author is advocating a right to security broadly grounded in ‘communitarian’ ideals. The ‘absolutist’ state theory of, say, Thomas Hobbes, to protect society from collapse, pays too little attention to genuine fears that the state can actually pose a threat to security; in giving the state significant powers of security, it can undermine the very values one is seeking to secure; and is there actual evidence that substantial gains in state power over the last fifteen years or so, since ‘9/11’, for example, have actually made nations more safe? But liberalism, at least the form suggested by, say, Ronald Dworkin, in being unprepared to accept a balance between rights and security, seemingly overlooks threats that undermine the very freedoms liberals like Dworkin wish to protect. And the liberal philosophy, at least its John Locke traditions, of absolute freedoms is too individualistic and attaches too little weight to responsibilities. Plotting a course, therefore, through these criticisms of state absolutism and liberalism one therefore ‘finds’ communitarianism as a philosophy to support a right to security. The author’s ‘communitarian’, right to security is based on an expansive interpretation of ‘positive’ duties of the state, to protect, say, the rights to life of individuals from violations by non-state actors such as suspected terrorists. The author is therefore not proposing an autonomous right to security; he is developing an existing one. And as the author still sees his right to security as largely a justiciable one enforceable before the courts, his approach is a more moderate aspect of communitarianism embracing some liberal ideas of constitutionalism such as judicial review.

Islamic veiling has been the subject of many theological, social and legal debates, which are fluid and their intensity has been further influenced by its contextualised meanings such as religiosity, modesty, identity, resistance, protest, choice and subjugation. Literature on Muslim veiling has either examined its treatment by legal or socio-feminist perspectives, whereas this thesis critiques the religious, socio-feministic and the legal discourses. The contemporary discourse is dominated by competing binaries that label it as a tool of oppression or one of empowerment. Many of the assertions are based not on the veil’s multiple meanings or the wearer’s true motivations but on misplaced assumptions of moral authority by those who oppose or defend the practice, as well as native informants professing to represent veiled Muslim women, leaving Muslim veiled women’s voices muted. Having examined the religious imperative that has a patriarchal basis, the thesis constructs a critique of the two dominant discourses central to the contemporary debates on veiling. One discourse defends the practice as empowering whilst the other calls for prohibitions on the practice using liberation from oppression as a justification, particularly with issues surrounding the wearing of the full face veil. This is followed by a critique of the key cases generated under Article 9 ECHR, which attempts to balance the religious rights of those who veil with the rights of others. The case law highlights that the ECtHR not only falls short in disclosing satisfactorily how it has struck a balance between these competing rights, but also fails to adopt a neutral stance to religious expression through symbols, its reasoning being based on contradictory stereotypes of Muslim women as passive and victims of gender oppression in need of liberation. The influence of such stereotypes and an inadequate application of the margin of appreciation doctrine have led the ECtHR in validating state prohibitions on the hijab and the full face veil, thereby failing to acknowledge the voices of the veiled women at the centre of a human rights claim, delivering a further blow to them. Post the case of S.A.S. v. France the ECtHR has exasperated this even further by allowing an abstract principle of ‘living together’ as a justification for the full face veil’s prohibition in public spaces, resulting in Article 9 rights of Muslim women who veil being endangered even further by the introduction of such an open-ended ground.

In this thesis I argue against the proportionality test in human rights adjudication, and provide a framework for understanding the proportionality debate. I identify two accounts of proportionality. One sees proportionality as a doctrinal tool aimed at maximising rights and public interests. The other sees proportionality as allowing for open- ended moral reasoning. I analyse the two accounts and identify their main deficiencies. I argue against both conceptions, and conclude that defenders of proportionality are in the following dilemma: either proportionality is insensitive to important moral considerations related to human rights and their limitations, and thus it is an unsuitable tool for human rights adjudication; or proportionality can accommodate the relevant moral considerations, but at the price of leaving the judge undirected, unaided by the law. I will further argue that lack of guidance is a deficiency in legal adjudication, which has important negative effects.

This thesis sets out an argument against the present interpretation of the concept of autonomy under the European Court of Human Rights (the ECtHR) Article 8 jurisprudence and proposes a new reading of the concept that is rooted in an acknowledgment and appreciation of human interdependence. Following the prevailing political, legal and socio-cultural ideas and ideals about autonomy, the ECtHR has chosen to furnish its recent Article 8 case law according to the values characteristic of the notion of individual autonomy – independence, selfsufficiency, and the ability to conduct one’s life in a manner of one’s own choosing. Adopting this individualistic view on autonomy, the ECtHR sets normative standards for behaviour that the thesis challenges as being detrimental for the quality of interpersonal relationships. The work draws on sociological theory to argue that in modern individualised societies people are increasingly tied to each other – one has to be socially sensitive and to be able to relate to others and to obligate oneself, in order to manage and organise the complexities of everyday life. This also means that there are attendant obligations between individuals to be sensitive towards, and care for, each other. It is argued that an effective exercise of one’s autonomy becomes necessarily dependent on the existence of caring and trusting relationships. This in turn requires the ECtHR to adopt an appropriate conceptualisation of autonomy that embraces this knowledge and gives full effect to it. The concept of caring autonomy is proposed as a replacement for an individualistic concept of autonomy. It will be argued that this concept captures better the essentiality of human interdependence and the morality it calls for. The implications of this for the future direction of the ECtHR jurisprudence are also considered.

The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child was unanimously adopted in 1989. It was hoped that the Convention would have a positive impact on all children however, despite a country ratifying the Convention and proclaiming to have laws in the interests of children it is still possible for that country to fail in the attempt to implement children’s rights effectively. This can clearly be seen in Kurdistan, Iraq where implementation of children’s rights remains limited. With the continuing violence in Iraq, children’s rights have been somewhat neglected and as with many such situations children are the innocent victims. Ensuring and improving the rights of the next generation of Iraq is vitally important at a time when the country is going through important changes and re-generation. This thesis gives information on the historical background of the UNCRC and looks at its substantive provisions in detail, it then goes on to compare the implementation of children’s rights in Kurdistan and the UK. The thesis highlights methods of implementation in both countries and looks at ways in which some of the Convention’s articles are written into law. The thesis concludes with recommendations on how Kurdistan can move forward to achieve better implementation of children’s rights.

The unprecedented degradation of freshwater ecosystems due to the rampant exploitation of water resources re-establishes the importance of preserving freshwater ecosystems in order to ensure their continued viability that supports the attainment of sustainable development. This concern is addressed in Article 20 of the 1997 Watercourses Convention that specifically provides for the preservation of ecosystems of international watercourses. However, the interpretation and the subsequent application of this obligation are complicated by the proliferation of international instruments concerning the environment, which leads to the fragmentation of international law. In response to the apprehension raised over the undesirable consequences of the fragmentation of international law, the potential of Article 31(3)(c) of the 1969 Vienna Convention as an interpretative mechanism that enables the systemic integration of rules has come into the limelight. The objective of the present thesis, titled ‘Preservation of Ecosystems of International Watercourses and the Integration of Relevant Rules’ is to develop a interpretative framework for the operationalisation of Article 31(3)(c) that allows the full realisation of its potential as a tool of integration. A three-tier operationalisation framework that re-interprets the salient features of Article 31(3)(c) through the prism of an interactional understanding of international law is developed and executed through Chapters Two to Eight, where Chapter Nine provides a general conclusion of the thesis. The reconstruction of existing interpretation of Article 31(3)(c) provides a new understanding of this Article, which enables the realisation of its systemic integration potential. The application of this framework of operationalisation in the interpretation of the obligation to preserve ecosystems of international watercourses stipulated under Article 20 reflects contemporaneous development in international environmental law, and enhances the normative content and scope of Article 20.