Advancing Direct Corporate Accountability in International Human Rights Law: The Role of State-Owned Enterprises

Resorting to the immensely state-centric international legal system to regulate corporate human rights abuses is often viewed as inadequate. Among many proposals aiming at filling the international regulatory gaps, imposing international human rights obligations directly on corporations is a bold one, which, due to profound doctrinal and practical challenges, is yet to be materialized. However, state-owned enterprises (SOEs), given their prima facie “state–business nexus” that blurs the traditional public–private divide, might provide a renewed opportunity to push forward the “direct international corporate accountability” campaign. This study investigates whether SOEs represent a golden chance for direct corporate accountability in the international legal regime. This study provides a legal analysis supported by case law, and by comparative and empirical research when appropriate. After providing a definitional account of SOEs, it examines the legal status of SOEs under international law. Then, in the reverse direction, it proceeds to explore if the state–business nexus of SOEs as non-state actors could render the argument toward direct international corporation accountability more convincing. Major findings reveal that SOEs, to a limited extent, represent a renewed opportunity to rethink direct corporate accountability under international law.     

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF INTERNATIONAL CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY RAILWAY BETWEEN CIM AND SMGS

China and some of its trade partners in Western Europe apply different legal regimes for international carriage of goods by railway — respectively Agreement on International Railway Freight Transportation (SMGS) and Uniform Rules Concerning the Contract of International Carriage of Goods by Rail (CIM). For transportation of goods by railway between China and Western Europe both the CIM and the SMGS are often applicable. China’s initiative “the Belt and Road” promotes development of railway transport in Eurasia and creates new incentives for comparative study between those two international legal systems. This article provides a brief historical outline of comparative studies between the CIM and SMGS. This article also purports to show that some similarities and differences between the two regimes might be better understood from the perspective of comparative legal history. Taking into account inter alia the common origin of the current versions of the CIM and SMGS in the 4th revision of the CIM of 1933, differences and similarities between two legal regimes have been analysed with regard to the following topics: the scope of application of the CIM and SMGS; the nature of the carrier’s liability under the CIM and SMGS; exclusivity of the CIM, exclusivity of the contract of carriage under the SMGS; period of responsibility; persons for whom the carrier is liable.     

Advancing Accountability: Moving Toward Victim Restoration

One of the goals of Pennsylvania's juvenile justice system is the “imposition of accountability” for offenses committed. This White Paper, originally published in 2006, takes the position that true accountability requires juvenile offenders to repair the harm caused by their offending behavior and to understand and acknowledge the wrongfulness of their actions, their responsibility for causing harm, and the impact of the crime on the crime victim and community. It identifies system responsibilities, restorative practices, and outcomes relative to accountability. This White Paper was the result of debate among focus group participants under the auspices of the State Advisory Group.     

Unaccountable: The Current State of Private Military and Security Companies

Abstract

The current accountability system for private military and security contractors (PMSCs) is woefully inadequate, and mere enhancements in oversight cannot hope to remedy that failing. I contend that once we recognize the kind of accountability required of PMSCs, we will realize that radical changes in the foundational relationship between PMSCs and the state are required. More specifically, in order to be appropriately accountable, members of PMSCs must become a part of or, at the very least, directly responsible to the legitimate authoritative military or police structures, and there must be a clear and precise delineation of responsibility among public officials for holding individual members of PMSCs criminally liable.     

A U.N. Convention to Regulate PMSCs?

Abstract

In the last 20 years the ruthless competition for natural resources, political instability, armed conflicts, and the terrorist attacks of 9/11 have paved the way for private military and security companies (PMSCs) to operate in areas which were until recently the preserve of the state. PMSCs, less regulated than the toy industry, commit grave human rights violations with impunity. The United Nations has elaborated an international binding instrument to regulate their activities but the opposition of the U.S., U.K., and other Western governments—and from PMSCs, which prefer self-regulation—have prevented any advancement.     

Updating International Law Enforcement Ethics: International Codes of Conduct

For any profession, establishing codes of ethics that are both practically relevant and up to date is an ongoing challenge. Law enforcement is no exception to this as agencies are faced with an evolving modern environment. With changes in technology, types of policing, and sources of societal conflict there is a potential array of new or evolving ethical considerations that confront the profession. Attempts to distill and prescribe law enforcement ethics at the international level have resulted in the creation of the “Law Enforcement Code of Conduct” of the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) and the “Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials” of the United Nations (U.N.). However, both these codes were created decades ago, so they do not cover some of the more contemporary ethical issues that have arisen. This article compares the content of the IACP and UN codes and identifies a range of ethical issues either absent or insufficiently addressed. Normative themes and issues are organized around the following topics: difficulties in applying the codes, human rights and the use of force, misconduct and integrity, and enforcement and accountability.     

Neither Confirm nor Deny: Secrecy and Disclosure in Undercover Policing

Recent scandals in U.K. undercover policing have prompted a public re-examination of the basis for continued secrecy with respect to cases in which serious historical misconduct is suspected. As part of its approach to balancing the competing demands of secrecy and accountability, the current legal process requires the police to provide case-by-case risk assessments of the harm to policing threatened by disclosure. This article considers the role of risk assessments in this process. It critically examines two arguments put forward by police in support of their claim that such assessments will nearly always support a refusal to disclose and thus a “neither confirm nor deny” response to requests for information about undercover policing. It argues that these arguments apply in fewer cases and/or less conclusively than police routinely suppose, and that their obligation to provide detailed case-by-case risk assessments therefore cannot be thereby evaded.     

The Force of International Law: Lawyers' Diplomacy on the International Scene in the 1920s

Where does international law (IL) draw its authority from a still weakly institutionalized international scene deprived of the warrants of a state? To address this classical debate, the article draws from a case study on the social and professional structure of the “international legal community” as it emerged during the 1920s as part of the rise of multilateralism and international organizations. It focuses on the “situation of the international lawyers” of the time, starting with the multiple and often antagonistic roles they play (as legal advisers, scholars, judges, diplomats, politicians, etc.) and the variety of interests and causes they defend (states, international organizations, professional interests, etc.) in international politics. It argues this heteronomy of international lawyers helps understand the autonomization of international law. Far from being opposed to one another it has often been assumed—realism and idealism, national loyalty and international loyalty, political logic and learned logic—actually gain when analyzed as various modes of affirming a single cause—that of an international rule of law. This attention given to the “situation of international lawyers” and to the way they manage their various allegiances also accounts for the particular vision of the “International” and of “Law and Politics” relationships that are encapsulated in this emerging international corpus juris.     

Competition and Cooperation in International Commercial Arbitration: The Birth of a Transnational Legal Profession

This paper revisits the sociology of international commercial arbitration on the basis of unexploited archives and data. This material casts new light on the competition between “grand old men” and “young technocrats” in the 1980s and 1990s, a theme that has structured the analysis of international commercial arbitration since the pioneering work of Yves Dezalay and Bryant G. Garth (Dealing in Virtue). In contrast, the data show that the crucial transformative period actually took place between the 1950s and 1970s, when a relatively well‐defined group of individuals emerged as the leading arbitrators at the International Chamber of Commerce. These individuals— the “secant marginals”—succeeded in constructing a cooperative interface (rather than competition) between otherwise separate legal systems and professions. In doing so, they created the conditions necessary for the emergence of a new transnational legal profession. At a more general level, the article proposes an alternative narrative of globalization, wherein actors operating at the intersection of various systems, create new arenas of governance on the basis of inter‐system cooperation.     

个人国际法主体地位评析

随着现代国际法的发展,国际人权保护领域、国际海洋法领域等出现了个人参与国际活动的现象。但是,无论是从国际法的定义、国际法主体的构成要素、还是从法律的最终目的、国际法的调整对象等方面分析,个人不能取得国际法主体地位,而只能是国际法的保护和惩治对象。不适当地扩大国际法主体的范围,把个人与国家相提并论,超越了当代国际关系的现实。     

Due Diligence Obligations of Conduct: Developing a Responsibility Regime for PMSCs

Abstract

As non-state actors, PMSCs are not embraced by traditional state-dominated doctrines of international law. However, international law has itself failed to keep pace with the evolution of states and state-based actors, to which strong Westphalian notions of sovereignty are no longer applicable. It is argued that these structural inadequacies stand in the way of international regulation of PMSCs, rather than defects in international human rights and humanitarian law per se. By analyzing understandings of legal responsibility, where such structural issues come to the fore, it is argued that, rather than attempting to resolve the essentially ideological dispute about the inherent functions of a state, regulatory regimes should focus on the positive obligations of states and PMSCs, and the interactions between them. Applying the results of this analysis, current and proposed regulatory regimes are evaluated and their shortcomings revealed.     

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。     

中外合作经营企业外方先行回收投资的法律性质新探

对于中外合作经营企业外方先行回收投资的法律性质,现行的各种学说均不能作出准确的界定。其中的“优先补偿说”、“让利说”和“保本经营说”实际上只是分析了该制度的经济性质;而“股权(资本)转让说”和“减资说”对该制度的法律定性,则都存在着以偏概全,难以自圆其说的缺陷。似惟有本文提出的“特殊信贷说”,可比较适当地说明中外合作经营企业外方先行回收投资法律制度的基本特征。     

国际犯罪的类型研究:回顾、反思与探寻

在理论研究的层面,国际犯罪的范围包括战争罪、侵略罪、危害人类罪等31种犯罪。在对这些国际犯罪进行类分时,根本立足点是国际犯罪,即以国际犯罪的自身特性为视角。由于国际犯罪是一定的主体所实施的严重危害国际社会共同利益,依据国际刑法应当承担刑事责任的行为,因此,在划分国际犯罪的基本类型时,可以采取如下几项标准:一是国际刑法的"两重性";二是国际犯罪的主体;三是国际犯罪的行为特征;四是国际犯罪侵害的法益。     

凯尔森的国际法治理论及其现实意义

随着全球化程度的不断深入,对和平与安全的期盼使得国际法治成为国际社会的理想与目标。为了建立以和平为目标的国际法律秩序,凯尔森提出了国际法治理论,即通过有强制管辖权的国际法院和确立个人违反国际法的责任来构建世界和平。本文将以此为基础,探讨凯尔森的国际法治理论对国际刑事秩序法治化所具有的现实意义,分析国际刑事法院在实现国际刑事法治化过程中面临的政治制约因素,以期国际刑事法治和国际法治的进一步完善和发展。     

国际航空犯罪法人刑事责任及其国内立法转化研究

2010年《北京公约》和《北京议定书》首次规定了国际航空犯罪法人责任,法人责任以法人的高级管理人员代表法人实施劫持航空器等国际航空犯罪为要件,法人为此承担刑事、民事或行政责任。公约对法人犯罪及其责任的立法需要转化为国内法才能适用。世界各国国内法对法人犯罪及其责任的态度差别较大,英国、加拿大、法国等国刑法规定有航空犯罪的法人刑事责任,德国国内法规定有航空犯罪的法人行政责任,意大利刑法规定有航空犯罪的法人民事责任,我国仅在个别航空犯罪中规定有法人犯罪及其刑事责任。我国法人犯罪及其刑事责任的立法和理论具有较强的包容性,可在我国刑法中取消法人犯罪法定化限制,全面规定包括航空犯罪在内的法人犯罪及其刑事责任。     

论“和”文化语境下的国际法治建设

国际秩序建立在国际法律制度基础之上,新格局之下的国际政治经济秩序需要相应的良法善治。以西方宗教文化为精神内核的当代国际法,面对人类当下存在的公共问题,已经难以做出有效应对。构建人类命运共同体之理念正是充分吸取了中国传统“和”文化的有益成分,对现存国际法治基础理论给予了补充和创新,对人类未来国际法治建设给予指导,因为“和”文化完全不同于西方“利”文化,更有助于实现不同文化、文明的和解和共荣。     

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.     

MANDATED CUSTODY EVALUATIONS AND THE LIMITS OF JUDICIAL POWER

Kelly and Ramsey are clearly correct that a shift from a “how to” approach to custody evaluations to one that asks the more fundamental question “why” is long overdue. However, in addition to assessing the efficacy of custody evaluations (which Kelly and Ramsey propose), the legal system must also clarify the justification for imposing this extensive—and often expensive—intrusion into the privacy of parents. Three possible justifications for these intrusions are examined in this article: privilege, harm, and voluntariness. Is divorce a privilege, rather than a right, and can qualifications (including intrusive and expensive ones) be attached to requesting that privilege? Are custody evaluations instead justified as a means of avoiding harm to children? If a harm justification is asserted, exactly what harm do evaluations prevent, and how do they accomplish this harm avoidance? Finally, given the high value placed on parental cooperation by the family courts, is it simply too perilous for a parent to oppose a custody evaluation if one is suggested, either by the other parent or by the court? If so, are consents to custody evaluations truly voluntary?     

变动中的北极治理国际法律体系及中国的挑战和机遇

现行的北极治理国际法律体系不足以应对由于全球变暖、海冰融化所带来的挑战,处在变化、重构之中。中国应把握机遇、采取灵活务实的态度、利用现有的各种国际平台,比如国际海事组织、联合国粮农组织、北极理事会等机构,在诸如极地航行船舶强制性规则的制定、斯瓦尔巴德群岛周边海域法律地位等问题上最大化中国的国家利益。