Applying the Responsibility to Protect to the ‘Arab Spring’

The doctrine of the responsibility to protect, since its inception in the ICISS report of 2001, has been the subject of considerable discussion. Arguably its most publicised component is the principle that the international community has the responsibility to protect civilian populations against severe suffering where the relevant national authorities are unable or unwilling to do so. Consequently, the main focus of discourse upon the responsibility to protect has centred on its impact upon the approach of the international community to intervention in respect of situations posing considerable humanitarian crises. The events of the Arab Spring, in which full blown conflict in some states gave rise to serious human suffering, provided a real opportunity for the international community to evaluate the role of the responsibility to protect in decision-making over responding to such instances, and potentially to develop it into a practical and meaningfully implementable concept. However, due to political flaws inherent in the doctrine, and its arguably overstated significance, the doctrine at best played a minimal role in guiding the international response to developments in the Arab World. Nonetheless, responses to the Arab Spring do allow certain conclusions to be drawn in respect of the future relevance of the doctrine.     

About the Impossibility of Absolute State Sovereignty

State sovereignty is often thought to be absolute, unlimited. This paper argues that there is no such a thing as absolute State sovereignty. Indeed, absolute sovereignty is impossible because all sovereignty is necessarily underpinned by its conditions of possibility—i.e. limited sovereignty is the norm, though the nature of the limitations varies. The article consists of two main sections: (a) the concept of sovereignty: this section is focused on some of the limitations the concept of sovereignty itself presents; and (b) a historical account of the notion of sovereignty as it was used in the Ancient Times. The particular focus on early notions of a modern concept such as sovereignty has to do with the fact that this early notion has been anthropomorphised with societal evolution. Therein, the current concept of State sovereignty embraces the same limitations it had in its ancient form as a non-fully developed conceptual idea. The implications of understanding State sovereignty as limited rather than absolute are several, both directly and indirectly. A main immediate consequence is that sovereign States can cooperate together, limit their sovereignty and still be considered sovereign.     

The ARAB Spring’s Constitutional Indigestion: Has Democracy Failed in the Middle East?

In 2013, 3 years after the advent of the ‘Arab Spring’, there is still no single unifying political reform narrative in the Arab World. The unprecedented opportunity for reform and state building appears to have stalled with Islamist movements more concerned with questions of Islamic identity and religious ethics rather than constitutionalism. Incoming governments have lapsed back to the use of police power to curb dissent and protest thus raising the crucial questions: Have post-revolution events proven that the Middle East is incompatible with democracy? Is entrenching democracy in the Middle East failing?     

The Sovereignty Game States Play: (Quasi-)States in the International Order

This article discusses the puzzle of sovereign statehood in the context of state failure and anarchy in Sub-Saharan Africa. In the first section it suggests to analyse sovereignty as a discursive fact in terms of a Wittgensteinian language game. This renders recognition a pivotal element and rejects foundationalist notions of sovereignty. The second section analyses the ‘quasi-statehood narrative’. Whereas this narrative presents sovereignty as a game, it applies two different notions of games concomitantly. This article argues that the notion of quasi-statehood maintains an empirical kernel as the core of ‘real’ sovereign statehood and as such remains within the conventional sovereignty discourse. The epilogue states that such foundationalism is not an innocent analytical move. It shows how language can have far-reaching political impact in terms of legitimation of political actions, and how, ultimately, the conventional discourse drains international relations of its content. This will be illustrated by U.S. position to state failure in their War on Terrorism.     

国际法与人本秩序的建构

在国际法上建构人本秩序是国际社会发展的重要倾向,也是人类社会发展的需要。当前,国际法的许多新发展正在昭示着国际社会对人本秩序的肯定性态度。由于人本秩序关注的是国家主权范围内的"人",因此它会与国际法中的国家主权原则发生冲突。这个矛盾不能否定人本秩序作为国际法的价值取向。     

主权的现代性反思与公共性回归

主权是国家最基本的构成要素,也是宪法哲学的基本范畴之一。现代化进程中,主权概念似乎从来也没有像今天那样呈现出如此多的争议和矛盾。现代性中存在两股力量,内在性力量和超验性力量。前者导致了人文主义和主体性权利的产生,后者则引起了国家主权和主权传统信条的出现。内在性力量和超验性力量的对立和斗争在主权概念中得以延续。在它的影响下,主权概念发生了分裂,使主权的发展陷入了危机。主权作为一种公权力,具有来源的公共性和行使的代表性(间接性)。为了解决危机,我们必须对主权进行反思,寻求主权公共性的回归。     

中国与北非中东变局中的国际法

北非中东一些国家的形势突变,反映了西方国家正在努力构建有利于己方价值观的世界格局,也表明在构建国际秩序方面,除了经济、政治及军事因素以外,还有"人道"和"人权"的考量。联合国安理会关于利比亚问题的决议与国际法的新走向,反映了国际关系中新的价值取向。然而,国际法规则存在于多个领域,有多种视角和原则。在这些领域,不同的规则有不同的的考量:基于一定价值理念的"人权"或"人道",与国家主权原则等国际法其他规则之间存在冲突。当今国际社会对是否要对叙利亚局势予以干涉的博弈,反映了国际法规则在国际秩序形成过程中的重要性。所以它不仅事关叙利亚国家和人民,也关乎整个世界局势的走向与发展。中国在联合国安理会合理运用国际法,体现了她作为大国对国际责任的坚持。     

试论国家税收管辖权及其冲突之协调

国家税收管辖权是国家主权在国际税收领域的具体体现。一国在尊重他国主权和遵守国际税收惯例的前提下,便可独立自主地行使征税权。正由于各国选择适用的税收管辖权类型不同,而导致了税收管辖权的冲突。对国际上普遍实行的居民税收管辖权和所得来源地税收管辖权及其认定标准进行探讨,同时也对国际税收协定与中外税收协定中关于管辖权冲突的解决原则和方法加以比较分析,以期为我国征税权的公平实施提供有益的参考。     

A dilemma for feudal China: To launch a copyright scheme in the late 19<Superscript>th</Superscript> century

Based on copyright law and its jurisprudential basis in the late 19^th century of China, this article is focused on the external conditions affecting or restricting the formation and development of copyright law during this period, and also reviews the tortuous process of copyright law and theories in China, and explores the underlying influences of Chinese traditional culture and other elements. Furthermore, it analyses the significant influences of western copyright concepts on the practical development of Chinese copyright protection system. Last but not least, it argues the fundamental barriers to the development of copyright law in China resulting from the persistent gap between the notions that forced upon the legal system and those embodied in social axiology, and the conflicts and tensions induced have affected both the law making and enforcement in copyright.     

The “Discourse” of International Law and Humanitarian Intervention

This essay analyzes the doctrine of “humanitarian intervention” in the frame of international law in the second half of nineteenth century and identifies the ground of legitimation of this intervention in the violation of presumed universal laws of humanity. The analysis emphasizes the transformation of the paradigm of “humanitarian intervention” into the current doctrine of the “responsibility to protect,” which under the rubric of “responsibility” legitimizes limitations on a state's sovereignty in cases where the state fails to guarantee the protection of its own population. This reconstruction of the genealogy of “humanitarian intervention” illustrates the continual exceptions to the principle of nonintervention, which means that the Westphalian principle of sovereignty has always been violated. Both doctrines—humanitarian intervention and the responsibility to protect—can be considered “hegemonic techniques” that use so‐called universal concepts in order to legitimize unilateral power interests.     

互联网背景下对国家主权的思考

互联网的飞速发展对传统的主权概念提出了一系列现实挑战已经成为不争的事实,传统主权观念陷于困境。主权和互联网的关系应该是对立统一的关系,互联网并没有从根本上动摇主权在国际法上的神圣地位,但是传统的主权观念亟待更新,主权的行使日益受到外在的限制,加强国际合作是解决互联网背景下主权困境的唯一途径。     

论自决权的性质——一种国际法与国内法的综合分析

在国际政治和国际法领域里,自决权是一个难以明确界定的有争议的概念。它的内容、主体和适用范围始终在不断适应国际政治的变化和发展,它的重心也必将随着其内容、主体和适用范围的发展变化而发生相应的转移。这一重心转移的过程,既是自决权从外部自决向内部自决回归的过程;也是自决权由以国际法原则为重心转移到以国内法原则为重心的过程;同时也是自决权自身内涵不断扩大的历史过程。在这一过程中,自决权先后主要是独立权、国家主权、人权、发展权、人民主权和自治权。自决权的内涵及其重心转移说明,台湾当局企图分裂国家,搞“独立公投”的所谓“自决”,既违背国际法原则,也违背国内法原则,实际上是行不通的。     

论国际法上的人权保护

尊重和保护人权是各国应负的国际义务 ,各国均应采取必要的措施来保护人权。作者指出 ,保护人权与维护主权二者并不相悖 ,各国只有在平等、相互尊重主权的基础上 ,才能促进人权保护的发展。     

“WTO中-美欧墨原材料贸易案”解读与思考

全球化的发展使得资源和环境逐渐被纳入国家主权的范畴,随之而来的是自由贸易与资源、环境、主权的冲突。随着资源竞争的日益激烈,原材料贸易与资源主权、原材料贸易与环境保护的矛盾日益凸显,现行多边贸易体制的改革也面临决择。     

民族/国家视角下的立法主体质疑

法律经历了一个由私向公再到私的转化过程;以主权确证国家的过程中经历了一个主权观念由弱到强再到弱的过程。立法主体在这一转变中经历了一个从个人担当到国家机关立法,再到多元主体立法的发展过程。     

海牙《选择法院协议公约》之防御性机制研究

作为目标宏大的《民商事管辖权与判决公约》难产的情况下达成的最大共识的产物,《选择法院协议公约》包含了大量的排除公约适用的防御性条款,对此深入研究可以为我国批准和加入公约后更好地解决国际民事诉讼中管辖权的冲突,以及更好的保护我国的司法主权提供理论基础。     

民主价值的司法维护机理

民主治理的理念、权利保障的意识和权力制约的价值取向是现代宪法的基本精神,维护和实现宪法的民主价值是人民主权的内在要求,也是司法的应有功能。司法的组织结构、程序机制和管辖范围决定了法院可以通过政治渠道的疏通实现形式民主与实质民主的有机统一,通过价值整合实现民主秩序结构与文化秩序结构的有机融合,通过宪法阐释实现法律意志与公众政治意愿的有机结合,从而有效解决形式民主与实质民主、集体自主与个人选择、过去的法律意志与现时的民众意愿之间的冲突。     

Criminogenic needs and human needs: A theoretical model

Over the last two decades, empirical evidence has increasingly supported the view that it is possible to reduce reoffending rates by treating or rehabilitating offenders rather than simply punishing them. In fact, this shift from a punishment to a rehabilitation model is arguably one of the most significant events in modern correctional policy. Criminogenic needs, dynamic risk factors, have been the focus of a considerable amount of research and are viewed as primary intervention targets. Drawing from the correctional, psychological, philosophical, and social policy literature, we distinguish between instrumental and categorical needs. The latter are derived from assumptions about human nature and provide the theoretical grounds for the former, as well as for criminogenic needs. We argue that an enriched concept of needs embedded in the notion of human well being, can provide a coherent conceptual basis for rehabilitation and also avoid the problems apparent in the concept of criminogenic needs. From this perspective, criminogenic needs are usefully construed as the internal and external obstacles associated with need distortion. Therefore, they are directly linked to basic need distortion and the absence of the internal and external conditions necessary for a person to lead a fulfilling life. Finally, we outline a possible framework utilising categorical needs and discuss the clinical and policy implications of our perspective.     

Cultural Sovereignty, Relativism, and International Human Rights: New Excuses for Old Strategies

Abstract. Although the Charter of the United Nations embodied an unresolved tension between state sovereignty and the inviolability of human rights, the fall of the Berlin Wall seemed to herald universal acceptance of the legitimacy of international concern for the protection of human rights. Since that time, however, the sovereignty of states has been pushed with renewed vigour under the guise of cultural sovereignty. Three examples of the role of cultural sovereignty in the international human rights sphere are proposed to demonstrate that the real interest of states is not the protection of cultural identity, but non-interference, supremacy and control. The paper identifies cultural sovereignty with cultural relativism and argues that the ideology of relativism, combined with the inadequacies of legal positivism, have significantly harmed the efficacy and character of the international human rights regime.     

论人权国际保护与国家主权

人权国际保护与国家主权的关系 ,是现代国际法上的一个基本理论问题。人权国际保护与国家主权并不是绝对对立的 ,而是互相统一、互相促进的。一方面 ,人权国际保护对国家主权提出了新的挑战 ;另一方面 ,国家主权又对人权国际保护产生制约。在承认不干涉内政原则的情况下 ,国际社会在特定情势下为保护人权可进行干涉。