Submitted by Filipe dos Santos (fsantos@pucsp.br) on 2017-10-26T13:05:03Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Monica Yumi Shida Oizumi.pdf: 1670224 bytes, checksum: 48981fff104b765115e699d017c7ccc3 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2017-10-26T13:05:03Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Monica Yumi Shida Oizumi.pdf: 1670224 bytes, checksum: 48981fff104b765115e699d017c7ccc3 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2017-10-10 / The phenomenon of globalization has made competition issues related to economic infractions and mergers affect more than one State at the same time. In order to prevent or repress conduct that would harm their domestic markets or has the potential to do so, States have started to apply their national legislation extraterritorially. It occurs that the countries adopt different interpretations and understandings that justify the extraterritorial jurisdiction, so that the national laws, most of the times are not well received by the opposing country, leading to jurisdiction conflicts. Thus, instruments are created to prohibit the application of a foreign law in national territory, in order to render ineffective the extraterritorial jurisdiction. In face of this scenario, in the interest of dealing with possible alternatives to mitigate conflict of jurisdiction, the forms of cooperation between the States are analyzed, either bilateral, regional and multilateral, as well as their classification as binding or not, in order to conclude that the most effective option would be a binding multilateral system on international competition law / O fenômeno da globalização fez com que as questões concorrenciais relativas às infrações econômicas e atos de concentração afetassem mais de um Estado ao mesmo tempo. Nesse sentido, a fim de prevenir ou reprimir condutas que prejudiquem o seu mercado interno ou tenham potencial para tanto, os Estados passaram a aplicar suas legislações nacionais extraterritorialmente. Ocorre que os países adotam diferentes interpretações e entendimentos que justificam a jurisdição extraterritorial, de forma que as leis nacionais, na maioria das vezes não são bem recepcionadas pelo país adversário, gerando então conflitos de jurisdição. Dessa forma, são criados instrumentos que vedam a aplicação de outro Estado no território nacional, de forma a tornar ineficaz a jurisdição extraterritorial. Diante desse cenário, no interesse de tratar sobre as possíveis alternativas para mitigação do conflito de jurisdição, são analisadas as formas de cooperação entre os Estados, bilaterais, regionais e multilaterais, assim como a classificação das mesmas em vinculativas ou não, para no final concluir que a opção mais efetiva seria um sistema multilateral vinculativo sobre o direito da concorrência em âmbito internacional

This dissertation examines two different perspectives on refugee status and state sovereignty respectively, and their bearings on refugee protection regimes. It reveals how dominant views of refugee status and state sovereignty have contributed to establishing restrictive refugee law and policy associated with various forms of external migration controls in the 21st century, and provides alternative views that may contribute to creating more “just” refugee protection regimes.   When refugees came to be regarded as those who fled from various push factors, such as persecution, distress and wars etc. (the persecution perspective), refugee policies were developed to provide “push factors-free” environments. These have not necessarily included surrogate political membership in the country of asylum (particularly, in developed countries).  Instead, developed countries have endorsed humanitarian assistance schemes that aim to provide aid to refugees in regions of their origin rather than providing settlement in their own territories. Moreover, in refugee law, the fear of “persecution”, as a push factor, has become a critical factor in determining refugee status. As a parallel, governments have developed various forms of deterrence policies based on a traditional concept of state sovereignty that allows states to implement migration polices at their own discretion.  Under these circumstances, refugees find it difficult to reach developed countries, and many of them end up being “contained” in refugee camps or other facilities in regions of their origin for a long time.   This dissertation calls into question these views of refugee status and state sovereignty, by providing alternative views: the protection perspective and an account of sovereignty that requires “responsible” border control. The protection perspective regards the ruptured protection relationship between a state and a citizen (thus, the lack of state protection) as the core element of refugee status. According to this view, refugee status is inextricably associated with systemic failure of the nation-states system (not merely with push factors) that is designed to secure political membership for each individual in the international state system. Therefore, as a matter of justice, the ultimate remedy for refugeehood is to provide surrogate political membership in the country of asylum or to restore original political membership in the home country. This project also proposes a concept of “responsible” border control, according to which, a state should exercise state sovereignty in relation to border control within institutional frameworks in which multiple authorities, including human rights norms, have been institutionalized. In this way, the dissertation aims to provide a more “just” framework in which to propose, adopt and implement refugee law and policy. From this alternative perspective, refugees are perceived as those who have right to political membership in the country of asylum rather than mere humanitarian assistance in refugee camps or somewhere else. / Graduate

Recently many States have legalised the production and retail of recreational cannabis, which is already a big business worldwide, and therefore, thoroughly attractive to international investors who would – reasonably – seek to develop their business in cannabis-friendly jurisdictions but, more so than many investments, this one carries with it a certain risk: Many influential and capital-exporting states are reticent to legalise cannabis for themselves and many times even criminalise any and all cannabis-related activities.  This work uses this dilema to explore the influence of the home-State of the investment on the legality of an investment, and question the uniletarality of the obligations derived from "Free Movement of Liquid Assets" or "repatriation" clauses, arguing that there is a multilateral obligation to protect the movement of investments' returns and that home-States to the investor must fulfill it by not impeding or upseting the repatriation of liquid assets.

It has been two decades since the terrorist attacks on September 11. These events were the starting shot for the US war on terrorism, which has resulted in extreme challenges for human rights treaties. Several people have fallen victim to the US protection measures, which have included a detention and interrogation program and extraordinary renditions. The US protection measures have resulted in military invasions, kidnappings, detentions, and acts of torture. Even though black sites are no longer secret, has nobody ever been held responsible for these crimes. The question of who should be held responsible for the systematic violations of the United States is therefore necessary to discuss as this is a problem that characterizes the international legal system still today. The purpose of this paper is to investigate whether the US legal argument for justifying enhanced interrogation techniques and extraordinary renditions is consistent with the human rights treaties. The study examines the extent to which the US exercises jurisdiction over people who are subject to extraordinary renditions. Furthermore, it is also important to investigate if extraordinary renditions conflict with two treaties that have been approved in the United States and consequently the legitimacy of the arguments will be tested against CAT and ICCPR. The problem has been analysed in the light of jurisdiction. The interpretation of the concept of jurisdiction in general international law and human rights treaties constitutes an essential issue regarding states’ responsibilities to uphold and respect the human rights within the research area and research questions. The study focuses primarily on the question of when a state has obligations under human right treaties outside of its own territory. The issue of jurisdiction has been discussed primarily in international courts since Bankovic. The investigation shows that people that have been subject to extraordinary renditions as well as the detention and interrogation program fall under US jurisdiction. According to case law, the study establishes that the United States exercises effective control over the people in the event of extraordinary renditions. Moreover, the study claims that state responsibility can be attributed to the US for having failed in its obligations to respect and protect human rights in the war on terrorism.

Almost four decades have passed since the European Court of Human Rights introduced the concept of positive obligations. Positive obligations mean that the member states must take affirmative action in order to secure the rights and freedoms provided for by the European Convention on Human Rights. Since then, the scope of positive obligations has extended tremendously, and today all substantive rights generally contain positive obligations. The reason behind the development is to maintain the full effectiveness of human rights enforcement within the European context, and it has been enabled, inter alia, through dynamic interpretation and because the European Convention on Human Rights is considered a living instrument.  The fact that European companies operating transnationally, i.e. in a non-European context, sometimes through its commercial activities violates human rights has given rise to discussion in legal doctrine on whether the scope of positive obligations should be further extended so that the member states to the European Convention on Human Rights will incur state responsibility for national corporates’ extraterritorial human rights violations. Thus, the purpose of the thesis is to examine whether the European Court of Human Rights can and should proceed with such expansion. An expansion creates methodological and technical problems as it challenges the traditional notion of jurisdiction, however, it is not impossible. Whatever the European Court of Human Rights will decide to do, the thesis will provide arguments both for why home state responsibility for national corporates’ extraterritorial activities that violates human rights can and should be imposed, as well for why it is beyond its (the European Court of Human Rights) competence.

Avec l’accentuation du libéralisme, les entreprises multinationales ne cessent d’être de plus en plus présentes dans les États en développement, et certaines sont peu scrupuleuses du respect des normes environnementales. Par ailleurs, notons que la plupart de ces États ne disposent pas de mécanismes juridiques contraignant ces entreprises de répondre à d’éventuels crimes contre l’environnement qu’elles sont susceptibles de commettre sur leurs territoires. Or, en l’absence de telles dispositions, peu de sociétés se conforment aux politiques permettant d’internaliser les risques en raison de leur coût élevé. La volonté de maximiser le profit amène ces entreprises à se livrer à des actes attentatoires à l’environnement, à la santé et à la sécurité des individus lorsque rien ne les contraint à procéder autrement. De façon générale, il appartient à l’État sur le territoire duquel opère une société de réglementer ses activités. Précisons que dans plusieurs États en développement, les entreprises multinationales échappent aux mesures contraignantes en vertu de l’influence financière qu’elles exercent sur les dirigeants de ces États. De même, l’impunité des crimes contre l’environnement commis dans les pays en développement découle aussi du manque de volonté politique accentué par le phénomène de la corruption. Malgré la multiplicité de traités et de conventions internationales dédiés à la protection de l'environnement, ces instruments ne sont pas directement applicables aux sociétés multinationales, considérées comme des acteurs non-étatiques. Alors, les pays développés d’où proviennent la majeure partie des entreprises multinationales sont appelés à combler cette lacune en prenant des mesures qui obligent leurs entreprises à se préoccuper de la préservation de l’environnement dans leurs activités. Cette thèse propose d’examiner les mécanismes juridiques par lesquels les crimes contre l’environnement survenus dans les pays en développement peuvent entraîner des poursuites pénales au Canada. En l’absence de législation ayant une portée extraterritoriale explicite en la matière, cela exige de se référer au droit existant et de proposer une nouvelle approche d’interprétation et d’adaptation tenant compte des récents développements envisageant la protection de l’environnement comme une valeur fondamentale pour la société canadienne. De nos jours, la portée de la protection de l’environnement au Canada requiert l’abandon des anciennes conceptions du principe de la territorialité pour adopter une autre approche plus soucieuse des nouvelles réalités entraînées par la mondialisation économique. Il serait donc légitime pour le Canada d’étendre sa compétence pour réprimer les crimes contre l’environnement survenus à l’étranger lors des activités menées par ses ressortissants. La nécessité de réprimer les atteintes à l’environnement survenues à l’étranger devient plus pressante lorsque ces crimes présentent un degré de gravité comparable à celui des crimes internationaux. / Due to trade liberalization, multinational enterprises (MNEs) are overwhelmingly engaged in developing countries’ industries. Unfortunately, many of those MNEs pay scant attention to environmental preservation. Yet, almost all developing countries lack effective rules designed to protect the environment from polluting activities operated by MNEs. In the absence of any incentive, it is impossible for MNEs to avoid environmentally harmful operations. As economic agents, MNEs are not willing to adopt environmental protection costs without any legislation compelling them to do so. The profit maximization rationale underlying corporate policy leaves little room for incurring environmental preservation costs and only voluntary measures are applied in the management of polluting operations. As a general principle, the regulation of MNEs’ conduct falls upon the State whose territory is directly harmed by polluting operations. However, the lack of resources of developing countries as well as the financial influence of MNEs has weakened environmental protection regulation in many states. The preservation of the environment from polluting activities of MNEs has also undermined by the lack of political will of developing countries which is increased by the corruption phenomenon. Despite the large number of international treaties and conventions designed to protect the environment from pollutant threats, those international instruments cannot directly apply to MNEs as they are non-state actors. Hence, developed countries, under whose law many MNEs are incorporated, are required to fill this gap in regulating their MNEs’ activities abroad. This dissertation suggests the examination of juridical mechanisms by which environmental crimes which take place in developing countries may trigger criminal prosecution in Canada. Given the absence of Canadian regulation dealing explicitly with extraterritorial criminal conduct of MNEs, this research seeks to provide a new approach to existing law in order to deal with transnational environmental crimes, bearing in mind that environmental protection has emerged as a fundamental value in Canadian society. Nowadays, the values represented by environmental protection entail the shift of the traditional territoriality principle since worldwide economic activities have brought transnational threats of global concern. Therefore, we hold that Canada would be entitled to extend its competence so as to assert jurisdiction over environmental crimes occurred abroad during operations conducted by Canadian citizens. The need to assert extraterritorial jurisdiction to environmental crimes committed within foreign sovereignty becomes more pressing if those crimes reach the same level of gravity as international crimes.

每當論及清朝中國自鴉片戰爭以來的對外關係，一般都認為是清朝中國被迫簽訂大量不停等條約之「屈辱外交」的開始，特別是在對外司法審判的議題上，大多認為清朝給與外國所謂「領事裁判權」的權利，造成中國司法管轄權的損害。但事實上，這種所謂「領事裁判權」的現象，在中國本身涉及外人在華犯罪的處置上，是普遍被採行的作法，不僅是過去中國歷代均有的慣例，就連清朝本身與俄羅斯簽訂的〈尼布楚條約〉，也被學界公認為是清朝中國第一個對等互惠的對外條約。姑且不論日後領事裁判權對中國的傷害為何，僅以清朝中國在簽約當下的時空背景來看，中國給予西方國家「領事裁判權」一事究竟該如何理解，值得後人重新檢視。 本文研究主旨在於用「同時代史觀」的視角，以清朝簽約當下的時空背景，來重新檢視清朝中國涉外司法審判。本文首先整理了中國自唐朝至明朝以來對涉外司法審判的沿革，並且爬梳清朝中國涉外司法審判的模式，從中發現清朝中國給予西方國家「領事裁判權」的做法，是符合清朝中國對外關係的邏輯思維，並證明清朝中國隊在華外人的司法態度，與中國自唐代以來的對在華外人的司法態度是一致的。本文認為，領事裁判權成為「屈辱外交」的意涵，是因為後人以歐洲近代國際法話語權下的「民族國家」視角來檢視過去清朝中國的對外關係，並且在不理解清朝中國固有對外秩序的邏輯下所做出的評斷。 / When it comes to China’s foreign relations in late Qing dynasty, the government has been criticized for its “humiliated diplomacy”, especially on the issue of extraterritorial jurisdiction since the Treaty of Nanking between China and Britain. The authorization of consular jurisdiction to foreign countries is often considered as sabotage for the jurisdiction of China. However, the criticism is questionable because offering extraterritorial jurisdiction is ubiquitous among every dynasty in China. Even in Qing dynasty, the juridical attitude of China in the Treaty of Nerchinsk signed in 1689 with Russia is often recognized by academia as reciprocity to foreign country. Regardless of the disadvantages in the future, this act of giving extraterritorial jurisdiction by Qing dynasty at that time is worth to be scrutinized again. With this in mind, the purpose of this thesis is to discover the pattern of judgments involving foreigners from Tang to Qing dynasty in China. We also discuss about the response of Qing government when it faced the request of extraterritorial jurisdiction from foreign countries. In addition, a reinterpretation of the attitude toward the judgments involving foreigners of Qing dynasty is based on the perspective of China indigenous order to foreign relations. The research analyzes the settlement of judgments involving foreigners in different dynasties of China, confirming the consistency to China indigenous order to foreign relations and evolution during the Qing period. At last, this thesis overthrew the humiliation impression in contemporary understanding of the diplomacy in Qing dynasty, arguing such attitude is interpreted later by the concept of “nation state” , which is developed from early modern European countries to judge the international relations of Qing dynasty without understanding the Chinese foreign relations comprehensively.

No description available.

La double incrimination est une condition « classique » en droit pénal international, que l'on trouve formulée dans les instruments normatifs relatifs à la coopération pénale internationale, ainsi que dans ceux consacrés aux compétences extraterritoriales. Dans ces deux domaines la condition de la double incrimination est considérée comme remplie lorsque les faits en question sont punis par les droits internes des deux États concernés (État requérant et État requis, ou État de poursuite et État de commission). Toutefois, l'application de cette condition n'est pas sans poser de difficultés, aussi bien sur un plan substantiel que sur un plan procédural. Des difficultés qui ont conduit les États européens à la remettre en cause, du moins pour partie ; une remise en cause totale de la double incrimination s'avérant, en l'état, impossible. / Double criminality is a “classic” condition in international criminal law, which is found in normative instruments relating to international cooperation in criminal matters, as well as those relating to extraterritorial jurisdiction. In these two fields, the condition of double criminality is considered fulfilled when the conduct in question is punishable under the domestic law of both states (the requesting state and the requested state, or the prosecuting State and the State in which the act was committed). Moreover, the application of this condition continues to pose difficulties, not only in substance but also in procedure. The difficulties have driven the European states to call the condition into question, at least partially; even though a total removal of the condition in its current state is impossible.

L’application de la compétence internationale pénale dans l'affaire Pinochet à laissé un précédent important dans le domaine de la lutte contre l'impunité, comme le démontre la procédure mise en œuvre par l'Audiencia Nacional d'Espagne, ainsi que par la Cour d'Assises de Paris avec application du principe de la personnalité passive. En effet, avec le mandat d’arrêt international aux fins d'extradition émis par les autorités judiciaires espagnols, qui a permis l'arrestation de Pinochet à Londres, la négation de son immunité par la chambre des Lords et le jugement par défaut en France de son administration militaire, le droit international connait un avant et in après. Le droit international pénal est ainsi mis en exergue en tant que fondement juridique de la compétence extra-territoriale des Etats. Il permet d'utiliser tant le principe de la compétence universelle que celui. Il permet d'utiliser tant le principe de la compétence universelle que celui de la personnalité passive, toutes deux appliquées, dans cette affaire précise, dans le but d'exercer une justice internationale. / The application of the criminal international jurisdiction in the Pinochet case left an important precedent in the area of the fight against impunity, as shown by the procedure brought into play by the Spanish Audiencia Nacional and also by the Cour d'Assises of Paris, with the enforcement of the passive personality principle. Actually, with the international arrest warrant for extradition issued by the Spanish judicial authorities, which made possible the arrest of Pinochet in London; the denial of his immunity by the House of Lords and the judgment in absentia in France of his military organization, the international law has a before and an after. The international criminal law is under lined as the juridical foundation of the extraterritorial jurisdiction of the legal authorities of a state. It allows the application as well of the universal jurisdiction principle as of the passible personality principle, both used, in this precise case, with the objective to exercise an international justice.