This thesis considers the intersection of international investment law and international human rights law in ICSID arbitration by reference to the ‘fragmentation’ of public international law. More specifically, it argues that it is possible to establish a procedural basis for a host state human rights defence in ICSID arbitration. Utilising a systemic conception of public international law driven by state consent, it is posited that regime conflict between international investment law and international human rights law in ICSID arbitration justifies the introduction of a host state human rights defence. By reference to the ICSID Arbitral Rules, this thesis establishes a viable basis for the introduction of international human rights law into ICSID arbitration by a host state. Finally, it is argued that a procedural basis for a host state human rights defence in ICSID arbitration has the ability to ‘de-fragment’ international investment law and international human rights law.

This thesis addresses the question whether there is a basis for active assisted dying to fall within the protection of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). With desperate individuals addressing the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in order to be granted a right to die, but being denied it, the right to life is turned into a de facto duty to live. An evaluation of the concepts of dignity and autonomy will highlight the need for a right to die, to counterbalance the right to life. Seeing dignity as a subjective element means that a dignified life can only be evaluated by the person living it. If therefore a dignified death is believed to be one brought about with assistance before natural death would occur, this should not be dismissed based on a general idea of how and when people should best die. Believing in a right to a dignified life asks for a right to die in dignity. Seeing autonomy as a relational concept, meaning that for a truly autonomous life we are dependent on others and society as a whole, stresses the need for a legalisation of assisted dying. The thesis analyses the ECtHR’s approach towards assisted dying and what factors prevent it from adopting a more forthright approach towards a right to die. Based on a lack of consensus among the Member States, the Court relies on the margin of appreciation and shies away from taking a stand. While seeing that dying is a part of life and consequently falls within the ambit of Article 8, the protection of private and family life, nonetheless Article 2, the right to life, acts as a barrier to any claim for a right to die, which arguably turns the right to life in a duty to live. Looking at the legal situation in England and Germany highlights the difficulty in reaching a European consensus on assisted dying. Actively assisting someone in dying, who is unable to commit suicide unaided, is a criminal offence in both countries. However, there are significant differences between the two jurisdictions. In England, assisting someone in committing suicide is prohibited under Section 2 of the Suicide Act 1961, whereas in Germany it is in theory legally possible. Yet, in England, assistants can hope to avoid prosecution based on the Director of Public Prosecution’s guidelines of 2009, whilst in Germany assistants face prosecution based on other legal provisions like the Narcotics Act. While Germany moves towards a criminalisation of assistance in suicide offered for a fee (commercial assisted suicide), in England, debates on Bills focus on attempts to legalise some categories of assisted dying. The comparison suggests that a European consensus is not likely to be achieved in the near future. The thesis concludes that based on dignity and autonomy the national approaches towards assisted dying should be revised and legalisation should be considered. This is necessary so that the ECtHR can counterbalance the right to life with a right to die.

This thesis seeks to determine the most effective jurisdiction for criminal accountability for UN peacekeeping personnel who engage in sexual exploitation and abuse of women, and other conduct amounting to violence against women. As criminalisation is sought as the appropriate method of prevention and punishment of such conduct, it is first examined why criminalisation is necessary. The impact of sexual exploitation and abuse (SEA) on women in the territories in which peace operations are located is detailed as harms in the form of violations of the rights of these women. Alternatives to criminal sanctions are then considered, in particular the actions of the UN towards prevention and prohibition of SEA. While such regulations are necessary, they are ultimately inadequate in preventing and punishing SEA. Included is an assessment of the Draft Convention on Criminal Accountability of UN Officials and Experts on Mission, the adoption of which would support criminalisation. However, the UN itself is unable to exercise criminal jurisdiction, and thus it is essential to examine which jurisdictions would be most effective in undertaking criminal prosecution of peacekeeping personnel. The choice between national jurisdictions and international criminal justice is debated. Which jurisdiction offers a more effectual forum for ensuring accountability? What potential impediments exist and how can such hindrances can be overcome? This thesis argues that gender-based crimes by UN peacekeepers should be criminalised, and that, while the International Criminal Court should not be discounted as a potential forum for prosecuting perpetrators, domestic prosecutions are far more likely and far more effective.

The issue of piracy and maritime terrorism becomes complicated when it is discussed in relation to the rights of the coastal states regarding the right of passage in straits used for international navigation. One of the issues in this respect is the conflicting interests of littoral states that insist on sovereignty over the sea areas adjacent to their coast and the needs of user states to retain and indeed to have more freedom in navigation while passing through and overflying these straits. The Straits of Malacca is a region where the concepts of respective freedom have been tested. To further complicate the matter, in law and perceptions, the 11 September 2001 atrocities brought about an urgent need for more radical changes to the existing international law to deal with possible terrorist attacks at sea. This resulted in the rapid adoption under the IMO of the ISPS Code through amendments to the SOLAS Convention 1974. More radical changes affecting the basic rights of freedom of the high seas are taking place in the amendments of the SUA Convention 1988. Against this backdrop, the issue of maritime security and the way in which the littoral states deal with it while maintaining their rights and sovereignty has had fundamental effects in the Straits of Malacca. The main purpose of this thesis is to trace the legal developments and changes that have taken place in regional and international law since the September 11 atrocities, which have fundamentally affected the question of the littoral states' sovereignty and rights over adjacent maritime zones against the rights of user states and interested maritime powers as applied in new security outlooks and threats of international terrorism. Through case studies to examine fundamentals, this thesis attempts to answer the question as to whether the trend to further 'internationalise' the Straits of Malacca is justified under the international conventions and customary law. The thesis will trace the use of the issue of piratical attacks in the straits, which have enabled third parties to offer security arrangements to the littoral states, and how diplomatic negotiations on this question between the littoral states themselves are compounded by complex historical, legal and political issues and by related organizational structures at national, regional and international levels. These objectives can be achieved only by a rigorous evaluation of the law of the sea with respect to security, accompanied by examinations of actual processes and practices in the form of case studies. A summing up of the evidence so examined is provided in the final chapter of the thesis.

This thesis considers the maritime boundary dispute between China and Japan in the East China Sea in an attempt to resolve the dilemma of continental shelf entitlement and delimitation. The dispute concerns how to delimit a maritime boundary where the parties rely on the different basis for continental shelf entitlement provided for in Article 76(1) of UNCLOS, namely natural prolongation and distance, and the area to be delimited is less than 400 nautical miles when measured from the coasts of both States. China asserts its entitlement based on natural prolongation to the outer edge of the continental margin, while Japan claims a 200 nautical mile distance continental shelf. Using the doctrinal approach, this thesis notes that delimitation must be carried out in accordance with entitlement and focuses on an analysis of the meaning of Article 76(1), enquiring into the role of natural prolongation in the establishment of the outer edge of the continental margin beyond 200 nautical miles. It re-assesses the ICJ's decision in the Libya/Malta case where it was held that unless the delimitation area is at least 400 nautical miles, natural prolongation is irrelevant. This thesis considers the status of natural prolongation under customary international law and UNCLOS, arguing that natural prolongation is a valid basis for continental shelf entitlement. In critiquing the Libya/Malta decision, this thesis argues that there is no 400 nautical mile rule in UNCLOS, that the determination of each State's entitlement must be conducted on an individual basis, the length of the delimitation area being immaterial. Arguing that the two criteria of natural prolongation and distance are equally valid, this thesis found that they could be applied simultaneously over the same area to determine the area of overlapping entitlements, which is then the area to be delimited. Other connected issues to this dispute including the role of the Diaoyu/Senkaku Island dispute and the duty of States in disputed maritime areas are also discussed in relation to the main delimitation question. On the basis of the analysis, two options for delimiting the East China Sea were considered: the three-stage methodology and an alternative involving the use of a median line to divide the area of overlapping entitlements. In both methods, the position taken was that natural prolongation and distance should be reflected as relevant circumstances. Thus, it was acknowledged that both methods could produce similar results. However, the second option was shown to be preferable as it is embodies the quality of objectivity compared with the threestage methodology where adjusting the line in the second stage to take account of relevant circumstances proved to be subjective and unpredictable.

The presence of asylum seekers within the UK and their claims to social welfare and employment rights presents one of the greatest challenges to sovereignty and the traditional constructs of Marshallian citizenship. Yet in an increasingly cosmopolitan world the UK’s obligations stretch beyond responsibility for its own citizens, as evidenced by the case of asylum seekers whom upon the declaration of seeking refuge must be admitted to the State and provided with subsistence to avoid destitution. Accordingly, the UK is bound by a number of international instruments that provide rights outside the legal constructs of UK citizenship which results in conflict between the traditional boundaries of social inclusion centred on citizenship, and those based on universal human rights. Drawing upon a number of primary and secondary sources, including international human rights law and cosmopolitan theory, this thesis analyses the welfare and employment arrangements for asylum seekers in the UK using NGO data to ascertain the impact of policies in practise. It argues that the withdrawal of social rights from the asylum seeking community over the last two decades has resulted in a significant imbalance between the rights and interests of the State and those of asylum seekers. In light of these conclusions, the thesis recommends that the Government adopt a cosmopolitan approach to welfare provision which prioritises human need over immigration status and suggests a number of reforms which will better respect the asylum seeking community. In doing so, it is hoped that the study will contribute to the development of an ethical asylum support system which reflects the humanity of its subjects. Within the current political climate such an exploration is considered crucial as the specific policies of the asylum support system and their impact upon human rights remain relatively unexplored within academic literature.

Against the backdrop that multiculturalism has failed in Western Europe, this thesis argues that minority rights standards should be applied to Western European Muslims. Western European States have consistently excluded Muslims from minority rights protection under international law on the basis that they constitute 'new minorities'. However, this thesis asserts that the justifications given by States for the exclusion of Western European Muslims from minority rights protection no longer hold true and have the potential to undermine the object and purpose of the minority rights regime – security and justice. Furthermore, by considering the content of both generally applicable human rights standards and minority rights standards in the light of the situation and specific claims made by Muslim minorities in Western Europe, in relation to the preservation of their identity, this thesis proves that there is an added-value to minority rights protection for these communities. Minority rights standards and multiculturalist policies adopt a similar approach to the accommodation of societal diversity. Thus, given the exclusion of Western European Muslims from the additional protection offered by minority rights standards, this thesis submits that multiculturalist approaches to the accommodation of European Muslims have not failed; insufficient measures have been adopted to ensure their success. If a multiculturalist approach to the accommodation of diversity is to be pursued in Western Europe, States must allow Muslim minorities to benefit from the protection available under minority rights standards.

The story of indigenous peoples’ knowledge systems, also known as indigenous knowledge (hereafter IK), is a complex one tangled with different and sometimes conflicting interests, values, and interpretations from a variety of disciplines, or specialized fields. A number of international treaty and trade agreements that want to ‘harness’ IK also turned it into an object of global governance, as this PhD study argues. This study also argues that the well-being of IK has gradually emerged as a global agenda for sustainable development and intergenerational justice, which constitute the defining characteristics of contemporary discourse of heritage. Consequently, IK issues and debates have become more versatile and multifaceted with a widening scope and mounting stakes. This is a sociological and legal study of knowledge that analyses the epistemological struggle resulting from different understandings of the nature and purpose of IK, which has causal relationship with the inadequacies of the governing regimes documented in this study. This study argues that such struggle and inadequacy form the core problem for IK governance. Furthermore, this study takes a novel approach guided by indigenous peoples’ epistemology, which represents ties between ecology, landscape, and people in a web of connections, to argue that IK is a cross-cutting subject and a form of emplaced knowledge. Hence it is not simply a property issue or debate as most literature tends to focus on. This study further argues that what constitutes the cornerstone of IK claims by indigenous peoples is essentially biocultural diversity that nurtured and sustained IK as well as IK-holder communities as distinct peoples. Through an interdisciplinary approach of synergy and synthesis, this study developed a number of original ideas and frameworks to analyse this complex story of IK. By doing so, this study shows how IK is a challenging subject that is inevitably political; it is also tangled with inherently heterogenetic and incoherent regimes of governance, from intellectual property and trade to environmental governance and development to natural and cultural heritage and human rights. This study takes these regimes as sites of inquiry in the tradition of critical theory to further unpack and problematize the development imperative and the private-property-based system exercised by these regimes. Finally, this study concludes that IK governance can make or break vulnerable groups like indigenous peoples to a point of prosperity or deeper poverty and extinction. Therefore, it requires particular care with an integrated approach. This study aims to fill an important gap in the literature with recommendations for future policy and research.

The death of Ian Tomlinson at the G20 protests in London in April 2009 triggered a haemorrhaging of public confidence in public order policing. The protests were swiftly followed by a plethora of official inquiries and reports tasked with investigating the legitimacy of existing public order policing tactics and the associated mechanisms of accountability. Events since Tomlinson’s death indicate that this is an issue that is unlikely to dissipate any time soon. Dramatic footage taken during the 2010-11 student protests, including police officers charging protesters on horseback and dragging a disabled activist from his wheelchair, attracted widespread condemnation. The on-going revelations into the activities of undercover police officers suggest that such practices may be the tip of the iceberg. These disclosures have caused a serious crisis of legitimacy for an institution supposedly founded on a principle of ‘policing by consent’. Paradoxically, these developments have occurred during a period in which the right to protest is for the first time reflected in law. In October 2000 the much trumpeted Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA 1998) came into force in England and Wales, incorporating into domestic law the rights and freedoms enshrined in the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Although the ECHR does not establish a legal right to protest per se, it does guarantee positive rights to “freedom of expression” and “freedom of peaceful assembly”, as well as prohibiting arbitrary state interferences with an individual’s liberty and security, thought, conscious and religion and right to privacy. The HRA 1998 appeared to mark a radical departure from the traditional approach and was celebrated as signalling a “constitutional shift” in the state’s approach towards public protest. A principle aim of this thesis is to examine the impact of the HRA 1998 on the regulation of public protest in England and Wales. Whilst a growing body of academic literature has analysed public order law and policy against abstract human rights principles, relatively few have attempted to ground the analysis in the experiences of protesters. This thesis seeks to begin to fill this lacuna. Moving away from a doctrinal analysis of human rights law, I utilise a socio-legal framework to examine contemporary developments in the regulation of public protest in the context of a view from below. Drawing on extensive ethnographic data and analyses of policy documents, newspaper reports, case-law, legislation and Hansard, I adopt a critical normative perspective to assess the legitimacy of the current restrictive interpretations of human rights principles in legal, political and policing-policy discourses.

Les flux migratoires dans le monde concernent aujourd'hui une population de près de deux cent trente-deux millions d'individus si on en croit les statistiques les plus récentes. L'impact de ce phénomène sur les pays d'Europe est considérable et porte sur de très nombreux domaines. Il s'agit d'analyser si les outils juridiques dont disposent les États d'Europe sont adaptés aux enjeux polymorphes de la gestion des flux migratoires. Notre étude porte sur certains des aspects juridiques relatifs aux statuts des populations migrantes dans les pays où elles se trouvent. Nous nous intéressons plus particulièrement au cas des populations immigrées, de même origine géographique, ethnique, linguistique, culturelle, et qui faisant souche dans un pays donné, s'y constituent en minorité par suite d'une incapacité à s'y intégrer pour des raisons multiples (difficultés linguistiques, culturelles, religieuses, discriminations diverses, repli communautaire, hostilité du pays d'accueil, etc.) La question à laquelle nous tentons d'apporter une réponse sur le plan juridique est celle de la mutation du statut« d'immigré» à celui de « minorité». Les définitions précises de ces notions, leurs champs d'application, la façon dont le droit international et les juridictions nationales et européennes les comprennent constitue la première étape de notre travail. Cette mutation statutaire, aux implications très nombreuses quant aux droits qui en découlent, est examinée dans ses implications juridiques. / As most recent statistics show, international migration has become a phenomena of considerable magnitude, totaling over 232 million people. The impact of this phenomena on the countries of Europe has been substantial, having been felt in many domains. This paper will examine the question of whether the legal tools available to the European states are sufficient and appropriate in dealing with the outcomes of their immigration policy, most notably the aforementioned change in status. This research paper touches upon several legal aspects having to do with the status of migrants in the host European countries in which they have settled. As a case in point, this paper will specifically discuss the case of distinguished migrant groups- sharing such things as identical point of origin, ethnicity, culture, and language- who, as a result of their failure/inability to integrate into the broader society of the host country (resulting from hardships encountered due to language, culture, religion, discrimination or rejection which in turn encourage processes of social insulation/identity redicalization) become a differentiated cultural minority. This research paper will follow the process by which the status of these groups morphs, or rather mutates, from 'migrants' to that of a 'minority'. Part One will discuss the concept of 'minority', its field of application and the way in which international law and the legal institutions of the European Union understand it. Part Two will discuss the many implications of this change/mutation in status as it pertains to the different rights with which the group is endowed.