No description available.

No description available.

The International Commission on Intervention on State Sovereignty was established with the intent of articulating more robust guidelines on how the international community should respond to humanitarian crises. In 2001, the Commission released its official report in which it proposed the creation of new concept called the Responsibility to Protect (R2P). R2P sought to make nations more willing to address humanitarian crises. This thesis examines how the concept of R2P has the potential of impacting state behaviour. Through examining its normative evolution and current impact on state behaviour, this thesis argues that while the concept clearly has led to an increase political will to react, it is occasionally limited by the surrounding political realities.

The International Commission on Intervention on State Sovereignty was established with the intent of articulating more robust guidelines on how the international community should respond to humanitarian crises. In 2001, the Commission released its official report in which it proposed the creation of new concept called the Responsibility to Protect (R2P). R2P sought to make nations more willing to address humanitarian crises. This thesis examines how the concept of R2P has the potential of impacting state behaviour. Through examining its normative evolution and current impact on state behaviour, this thesis argues that while the concept clearly has led to an increase political will to react, it is occasionally limited by the surrounding political realities.

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.

Interstate arbitration is commonly viewed as an essentially judicial process, suitable for the resolution of legal questions but inappropriate to deal with “political” issues. This conception, however, arguably flies in the face of both the origins and historical function of interstate arbitration and the complex legal-political nature of most interstate disputes. This paper offers an alternative account of interstate arbitration, which views it as a sui generis hybrid mechanism that combines “legal” and “diplomatic” dimensions to effectively resolve all aspects of interstate disputes. The paper examines this proposed account by analyzing four complex interstate territorial disputes that were submitted to arbitration and assessing the extent to which these two dimensions were recognized and employed, and how this may have affected the resolution of the disputes. Based on this analysis, the paper offers a two-dimensional operative framework intended to guide states and arbitrators in the resolution of future complex interstate disputes.

This thesis provides an account of the history and the status quo of the death penalty in China, along with an analysis of its possible reform in the future. It begins by looking at the history of the use of the death penalty in China from the pre-Qin-Han era to the present. It revolves around consideration of the international law context, the drawbacks of and challenges to the Chinese legal system concerning the use of the death penalty and the would-be approaches to death penalty reform in China against the background of the global abolition movement. It examines the debates between reformists/neo-liberal cosmopolitans and conservatives in Chinese legal history from the end of the Qing dynasty to present-day China. Concerning the international law context, this thesis analyses how China treats international treaties, especially capital punishment related human rights treaties (mainly the ICCPR), on the legislative and judicial level. It studies the factors that have influenced the abolition movement in European countries. The thesis examines the Chinese Criminal Law and the Criminal Procedure Law to find challenges and gaps concerning the use of the death penalty between the Chinese legal system and the requirements of international human rights treaties. It also analyses case studies and empirical studies of capital crimes. Subsequently, the work outlines a number of alternative punishments to the death penalty and possible approaches to reform. It also analyses the present impetus for reform of the death penalty in China from a socio-economic perspective. The thesis further examines Chinese public opinion concerning the reform/abolition of the death penalty, as reflected in various surveys conducted by the author herself, as well as other Chinese or foreign scholars, for which a detailed analysis is provided in Appendix 6. Finally some possible suggestions and solutions are provided for the future reform of the death penalty in China.

While the basic premise of precaution has been widely endorsed in environmental treaties since its inclusion in the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, as a legal principle, it has been framed in such vastly dissimilar ways that it continues to generate significant disagreement over its precise nature, standing and legal effect. Despite the rich and extensive scholarship aimed at clarifying its normative content and operation, the ongoing lack of consensus on when the precautionary principle is applicable and what its application entails points to fundamental definitional challenges as well as its overall limitations as a regulatory tool. This thesis attempts to move beyond this impasse by reassessing the precautionary principle in light of the distinction traditionally made in formal scientific discourse between risk and uncertainty. While this technical distinction is fundamental to defining the proper scope of the principle’s application, the thesis finds that much of the existing legal discourse has either overlooked or marginalised the risk/uncertainty dichotomy, which in turn has blurred the distinction between the principles of precaution and prevention. The thesis sets out what is meant by these analytically distinct concepts in the legal context, focusing on their implications for the processes of legal reasoning and regulatory decision-making. Having examined the conceptual underpinnings of the precautionary principle, and of the principle of prevention, the thesis proceeds to address a central research question – if uncertainty, as opposed to risk, determines the operational scope of the precautionary principle, to what extent do the current applications of the precautionary principle actually fall within its proper domain? To answer this, the thesis embarks on a deconstruction of the precautionary principle in practice by analysing how precaution has been deployed as an operational principle in particular treaty contexts. The treaty regimes examined here include: international fisheries; persistent organic pollutants; ocean dumping; sanitary and phytosanitary threats under the WTO; and atmospheric pollution and climate change. In each case, the thesis scrutinises the extent to which assumptions, obligations and measures contained therein are consistent with the theoretical underpinnings of precaution. Despite the pervasive use of the precautionary rhetoric in treaty texts and practice, the thesis ultimately finds that, for the most part, these instruments are in fact aimed at specific, scientifically-determined risks, and thus what is often upheld in the name of precaution is actually the prevention principle. The thesis argues that it is better to frame risk regulation through prevention, and not precaution, by considering the implications of abandoning the precautionary principle in those areas where the prevention principle is clearly at play. The thesis completes the analysis by addressing what is actually left for the precautionary principle and discussing some of the distinct ways in which precaution functions within its specific, circumscribed domain.

Animal welfare has emerged as a pervasive concern in modern international law. The purpose of this study is to situate the international legal principle protecting the welfare of animals within the broader framework of international law. The study uses a constructivist model to develop a theory of the place of animal welfare in the international legal regime that has due regard for cultural differences and the diversity of international society. The historical antecedents for an obligation to protect animal welfare in various global cultures are considered. The argument posits an internationally recognized principle of humane treatment of animals based on a test of necessity, in accordance with which the infliction of suffering on animals can only be justified by balancing means against ends. It proposes that Canadian criminal law on animal cruelty, particularly as it relates to animals raised for food, is inconsistent with this internationally recognized principle.

Interstate arbitration is commonly viewed as an essentially judicial process, suitable for the resolution of legal questions but inappropriate to deal with “political” issues. This conception, however, arguably flies in the face of both the origins and historical function of interstate arbitration and the complex legal-political nature of most interstate disputes. This paper offers an alternative account of interstate arbitration, which views it as a sui generis hybrid mechanism that combines “legal” and “diplomatic” dimensions to effectively resolve all aspects of interstate disputes. The paper examines this proposed account by analyzing four complex interstate territorial disputes that were submitted to arbitration and assessing the extent to which these two dimensions were recognized and employed, and how this may have affected the resolution of the disputes. Based on this analysis, the paper offers a two-dimensional operative framework intended to guide states and arbitrators in the resolution of future complex interstate disputes.