This thesis examines the constitutional performance of Hong Kong’s Court of Final Appeal (the CFA or the Court), and explores the appropriate role it should play in Hong Kong’s new constitutional order defined by China’s “one country, two systems” principle. It includes a wider discussion of China’s political and constitutional structure within which the Court’s operational context is defined, a consideration of the legitimate role of senior courts, and an investigation of relevant UK and EU constitutional practices. It evaluates the Court’s part, inter alia, in constitutional judicial review, the interpretation of the Hong Kong Basic Law, human rights protection, and the resulting constitutional and political implications. The Court’s role mirrors questions in relation not only to the internal political and legal order of Hong Kong itself but also to the broader constitutional order as to the central-regional relationship in China. It is the only institutional connection between Hong Kong’s common law legal system and Mainland China’s communist civil law system. When exercising its power of constitutional review and Basic Law interpretation, the Court faces dilemmas and sensitive situations, in which it has to handle with care the relationships between individual freedoms and collective good, judicial independence and executive efficiency, judicial scrutiny and legislative authority, regional interests and national concerns, the region’s autonomy and the centre’s power. A tendency of judicial supremacy emerges in post- handover Hong Kong, with profound implications for Hong Kong’s political life. While playing a significant role in human rights protection, the maintenance of good governance, and the achievements in constitutionalism and the rule of law in Hong Kong, the Court may also make some positive contributions to Mainland China’s own development in these areas. It is suggested that the Court adopt a modest and restrained approach in deciding politically sensitive constitutional questions, defining itself not only as a regional supreme court safeguarding Hong Kong’s autonomy but also as a national court protecting sovereign interests. A relationship of coordination, reciprocity, mutual trust and mutual respect between Hong Kong and the Central Government, and between Hong Kong courts (the CFA in particular) and other Hong Kong institutions should be built.

This dissertation explores the relationship between state sovereignty and major instances of crimes against humanity committed in the latter 20 th century. In order to examine this dynamics of this relationship, the author analyzes the history and theory of the concept of sovereignty and examines five case studies of crimes against humanity: Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge, Argentina during the military junta from 1976 to 1983, the breakup of the former Yugoslavia, Rwanda in 1994, and the ongoing conflict in the Darfur region of Sudan. State sovereign power is shown to be an important facilitating factor in these atrocities as well as a major source of contention during the civil conflicts in which these crimes have taken place. International efforts to control or mitigate the damaging effects of state sovereignty, including humanitarian intervention, the International Criminal Court, and the promotion of democratization, are shown to be largely ineffectual and often end up strengthening state sovereignty.

Mexico and Turkey experienced significant changes in their political systems in recent decades including a series of reforms to improve their semi-democratic regimes. Both countries had established similar political and socio-economic structures in the early years of their modern republican regimes. Protectionist, state-led development models and highly regulated, corporatist forms of interest mediation continued until they faced severe crisis in the 1980s. Subsequently, both countries adopted the hegemonic neoliberal model. Rapid economic liberalization initiatives were coupled with gradual expansion in political rights and civil liberties. At the turn of the new millenium, the political apertura had beared fruit in Mexico as it successfully ended the seven-decade long single party rule through peaceful, electoral means. Despite its strong centralist state legacy, Mexico managed to improve its democratic status by establishing genuinely competitive elections and expanding its democratic space to include a vocal and pluralist civil society. While Mexico seems to have beaten its structural odds, Turkey continues to struggle with the same political problems that haunted its democracy relentlessly. When we consider Turkey’s long experience with multi-party politics and its close engagement with the EU –a quintessentially democratic union, the underperformance of Turkey becomes even more puzzling. This dissertation attempts to grasp the mechanisms behind the apparent performance gap in the democratic deepening of Mexico and Turkey through a comparative historical framework of analysis.

Climate change is an inevitable scenario that already endangers millions of lives. The phenomenon occurs in an area of international law where there is an urgent need for international co-operation in order to solve the problem. It is a global problem that needs a global solution. Since treaty-based collaborations, aimed at battling the consequences of climate change, have been difficult to achieve or implement, the question arises whether the United Nations Security Council, with its ability to pass binding resolutions, could thus be a successful alternative to address the issues resulting from climate change. In contrast to conventional treatymaking, United Nations Security Council Resolution are often more efficient in their decision making as they require less compromise and can result in a stronger impact due to faster implementation.

Despite Zambia's ratification of several of international and regional human rights instruments, the country's domestic legislation frustrates its international obligations in so far as protection of asylum seekers human rights is concerned. Principally there are two main pieces of legislation which create this ‘quagmire,' but also make provision for the entry and exit of persons in Zambia, these are the Immigration and Deportation Act No. 18 of 2010 (hereinafter referred to as the Immigration Act) and the Refugees Act No. 1 of 2017 (hereinafter the Refugees Act). Although these two pieces of legislation apply to different types of migrants, there is a predisposition on the part of the authorities of enforcing immigration laws and not refugee laws on asylum seekers especially those found unlawfully present in country. This is in contravention of the non-penalisation clause under the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees (hereinafter the 1951 Refugee Convention), which creates a dilemma for asylum seekers. Zambia has an international obligation to receive and not to expel asylum seekers present within its territory irrespective of their mode of entry, this responsibility emanates from Article 31(1) and Article 33(2) 1951 Refugee Convention. However, the misapplication of the Immigration Act on asylum seekers conflicts with this obligation.

The activities and the level of influence of International Organisations (IOs) have grown extensively in recent years. This has resulted in IOs having a greater impact, both positively and negatively, on the lives of individuals. In as far as the negative impact is concerned, it is a well established principal of international law that the wrongful conduct of an IO attracts the responsibility of that IO. The reality however is that holding IOs responsible for their wrongful acts is an uphill task. In this regard, there has been an increase in calls for more effective ways of holding IOs accountable for their actions. This thesis adds its voice to those calls. The point of departure however, is that in this thesis, the question of IO responsibility is approached from the perspective of the victims of the wrongful conduct of IOs. The call for greater effectiveness in holding IOs to account is made through an illustration of the difficulties faced by those attempting to seek redress for wrongs committed by IOs. Additionally, the thesis examines the role of domestic courts and institutions in holding IOs to account. This examination is necessary in light of the increasing trend of domestic and regional courts piercing the immunity veil of an IO, where that IO has not provided alternative dispute settlement mechanisms.

This research reviews the application of the law on the right of refugee children to education and the challenges inhibiting this right. Radical changes in the legal framework protecting refugee children's right to education has occurred since South Africa became a democratic state in 1994. The enactment of international law into the 1994 Constitution contributed into the protection of various children right and insured equal access into the education system. However, refugee children have been prejudiced in the right to access education based on numerous challenges. The lack of access education for refugee children is an unconstitutional practice in schools rather than a legislative injustice. This paper uses journal reports, newspaper articles, academic writing on both national and international perspective on the infringement of education rights on refugee children. The findings provide clarity on unconstitutional practices and the legal standpoint on such practices. The right to education constitutes a valuable foundation for integration. South Africa is obligated by both national and international law to provide immediate education to refugee children.

Includes bibliographical references / Edward Snowden is a hero. In 2013, he leaked what can arguably be considered as the greatest quantity of classified and top - secret foreign intelligence in history. The leak revealed the extent of pervasive global government surveillance that has been and continues to be conducted by foreign intelligence agencies such as the National Security Agency (NSA) in the United States and the Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) in the United Kingdom. His actions have led to international security sector reform of the international regulation of foreign intelligence liaison. Citizen Four, the 2015 Oscar award-winning documentary, is the story of Snowden. When asked by Glen Greenwald and Laura Poitras, the journalist and documentarian who covered his journey , why he did what he did, Snowden's response was that : '[I]t all comes down to state power against the people's ability to meaningfully oppose that power .. . if the policy switches that are the only thing that restrain these states were changed, you couldn't meaningfully oppose these ... that hardened me into action.' When closing a TED talk on how we take back the internet, Snowden's idea worth sharing was that: '... [D]emocracy may die behind closed doors but we as individuals are born behind those same closed doors ... We don't have to give up our privacy to have good government ... We don't have to give up our liberty to have security ... By working together, we can have both open government and private lives ... . ' The relationship between state power and people's opposition, the individual and democracy, privacy and good government, liberty and security are themes that run throughout this dissertation. They are thematic relationships that underlie the importance of the international regulation of foreign intelligence liaison. The international regulation of foreign intelligence liaison will continue to be shaped by these relationships. Chapter I picks up on these themes by reviewing the international regulation of foreign intelligence liaison as a phenomenon. Part II defines foreign intelligence, part III sets up the objectives of a regime for international law in liberal democracies, part IV recognises the challenges to effective oversight of foreign intelligence agencies and part V maps out different reasons for and uses and forms of foreign intelligence liaison. A core argument is that the inevitable abuse and misuse of foreign intelligence liaison should be regulated through a horizontal accountability mechanism as an international best practice. Chapter II focuses on the international regulation of foreign intelligence liaison through a legal analysis. It draws on the themes by summarising (part II) and critiquing (part III) two landmark judgments having the potential to set an international best - practice precedent that contributes to the international regulation of foreign intelligence liaison. The core argument is that communications interception warrants should be regulated by judicial pre-authorisation. This is a practical application of Chapter I's core theoretical argument mentioned above. Chapter III develops these themes by analysing the international regulation of foreign intelligence liaison through recommendations. Part II explores the regulation of signals intelligence (SIGINT) in South Africa. Part III sets out the national and regional applications of art 17 of the ICCPR with regard to private communications. Finally, by summarising and applying the core arguments of Chapters I and II to Chapter III, part IV recommends legal reform through a General Intelligence Laws Amendment Bill 2015 (the Bill).

On 30 October 2014 South Africa's Constitutional Court unanimously stated that the South African Police Service was obligated to investigate allegations of torture in Zimbabwe. This landmark decision, based on South Africa's international obligations and domestic legislation, is rooted in the Court's interpretation of universal jurisdiction and in particular its application of the presumption of the "anticipated presence" of the accused. The case, first heard in the North Gauteng High Court in 2012 before being taken on appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal and Constitutional Court, concerned allegations of torture against ZANU-PF officials and Zimbabwean police during the run-up to elections in 2007. This final judgment imposes a binding obligation on the South African Police Service to investigate the allegations, prior to any decision on further prosecution. This dissertation begins by providing a background to South Africa's implementation of the Rome Statute domestically before focusing on the theoretical framework of universal jurisdiction. This is followed by an examination of the South African jurisprudence, in particular the judgment of the Constitutional Court in National Commissioner of the South African Police Service v Southern African Human Rights Litigation Centre and Another. The Constitutional Court's decision to allow for the exercise of universal jurisdiction in absentia (otherwise known as "anticipated presence") must be located within the broader concept of jurisdiction. Anticipated presence is a controversial issue and this paper will explain both the Court's reasoning as well as possible implications of this judgment. The fight against impunity for perpetrators of international crimes, emphasised by both the Rome Statute and South Africa's own legislation, has been strengthened by this judgment. This paper will also examine the remaining areas of concern which were not addressed by the Constitutional Court. This Constitutional Court judgment will define the approach of South African courts in forthcoming cases concerning the application of the Rome Statute. Despite the Constitutional Court's failure to take all factors into account in its judgment, this landmark decision has changed the legal landscape considerably and will be a powerful tool to counter the culture of impunity.

Since the twentieth century, the proliferation of new States has not declined in the twenty first century. Several small territories have declared themselves as sovereign States by claiming statehood in international law. These developments have a significant measure in many respects of international law notions of self-determination, secession, recognition and de-colonisation. A State remains a primary subject of international law. Despite the fundamental legal framework on the creation of States enshrined in the Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States 1933 (Montevideo Convention), the creation of States and unilateral secession remain part of the controversial and unsettled issues of international law. This is because of the legal and factual situation that evolves around the concept of State creation and unilateral secession. While the legal framework on State creation is in place, other new criteria continue to develop, alongside are the concepts of unilateral secession and self-determination. It therefore follows that in any given situation of contemporary international law, the concepts of State creation, secession and self-determination cannot be discussed in isolation. In this thesis, I will analyse the notions of statehood, secession and recognition. I will argue that in contemporary international law or post-colonial era, unilateral secession and satisfying the traditional criteria of statehood does not qualify the clamant entity to become a new State. Secondly, I will argue that although recognition is not a rule of customary international law, State practice on recognition and other suggested criteria play a significant role with regards to creation of States in international law. Thirdly, the Republic of Somaliland as a case study will be analysed against the criteria of statehood and the application thereof. The study will also provide a general analysis of a few specific cases of successful and unsuccessful attempts at secession.