The past decades have shown an increase in recourse to international legal bodies to address disputes over land distribution, uses and rehabilitation. This raises the question as to whether and to... Show moreThe past decades have shown an increase in recourse to international legal bodies to address disputes over land distribution, uses and rehabilitation. This raises the question as to whether and to what extent international law offers a coherent framework for addressing land as part of environmental peacebuilding. Since land issues have played a role in most armed conflicts that occurred over the past decades, addressing such issues in peace processes is essential for the resolution of these conflicts and for maintaining the peace that has been so hard won. This chapter therefore first examines how international law impacts on decisions with respect to land uses, distribution and rehabilitation in peace processes. This chapter then explores whether and how the notion of environmental peacebuilding can be instrumental in mainstreaming international legal responses for the purpose of achieving a sustainable peace. Show less
This chapter examines the position of the UN Security Council within the institutional framework on environmental peacebuilding. It starts with an analysis of the UN's peacebuilding architecture,... Show moreThis chapter examines the position of the UN Security Council within the institutional framework on environmental peacebuilding. It starts with an analysis of the UN's peacebuilding architecture, which assigns complementary roles to the Security Council, the General Assembly and the Economic and Social Council, based on each organ's respective function within the UN system. The chapter then turns to the practice of the Security Council with respect to 'conflict resources' on the one hand and environmental degradation more broadly on the other. This analysis demonstrates major differences in the substantive contributions by the Security Council with respect to 'conflict resources' on the one hand and to climate change and other ecological threats on the other. It argues that the institutional division of responsibilities between the three main UN organs provides a powerful rationale for explaining these differences. Show less
Environmental factors increasingly define today’s global security landscape. In recognition of the role that environmental factors play in triggering, fueling and sustaining armed conflicts at the... Show moreEnvironmental factors increasingly define today’s global security landscape. In recognition of the role that environmental factors play in triggering, fueling and sustaining armed conflicts at the local, regional and even global level, environmental peacebuilding has emerged as a new field of research and practice. This chapter introduces the reader to the growing scholarship in this field and discusses the contributions that international normative and institutional frameworks make to it. In this way, it sets the scene for more detailed discussions on the role of these normative and institutional frameworks in the other chapters in the book. It concludes with an appraisal of the contributions that the book makes to existing scholarship and identifies future areas for research. Show less
Het Hof van Justitie oordeelt dat de publieke toegankelijkheid van het UBO-register in strijd is met het recht op privéleven en bescherming van persoonsgegevens neergelegd in artikel 7 en 8... Show moreHet Hof van Justitie oordeelt dat de publieke toegankelijkheid van het UBO-register in strijd is met het recht op privéleven en bescherming van persoonsgegevens neergelegd in artikel 7 en 8 Handvest. In deze annotatie gaan de auteurs in op het beoordelingskader van het Hof van Justitie ten aanzien van openbare registers. Daarbij bespreken zij de vraag of de openbare toegang tot het Handelsregister gevaar loopt vanuit het perspectief van bescherming van het recht op privéleven en persoonsgegevens na Luxembourg Business Registers. Show less
The present article aims to briefly connect two procedural questions that loomed large at two academic events in May 2023. In the first, the authors in this symposium convened for a warm and... Show moreThe present article aims to briefly connect two procedural questions that loomed large at two academic events in May 2023. In the first, the authors in this symposium convened for a warm and friendly discussion at the University of Bologna. Among other stimulating questions, participants debated the relationship between, on the one hand, the procedure of third-State intervention in international legal proceedings, and on the other, the doctrine of obligations erga omnes in the invocation of State responsibility. In the latter (much larger) event, Judge Giorgio Gaja, a highly regarded former Member of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), addressed the centenary conference of the Hague Academy of International Law. In his prepared remarks, Judge Gaja recalled that an interest in the fulfilment of obligations erga omnes partes is sufficient to establish the judicial standing of the applicant State when instituting ICJ proceedings. He then observed that he ‘cannot understand’ how the same interest could be insufficient to establish the legal interest required to intervene in those same proceedings. One could infer from Judge Gaja’s statement that our Bologna debate on this very point had been but a dream (or at least exceedingly brief). Yet with the utmost respect to Judge Gaja and his important contributions to international law, this must instead be considered an unsettled debate – one which the ICJ has thus far not been called upon to resolve. Indeed, as set out below, the author considers that a legal interest in the fulfilment of obligations erga omnes or erga omnes partes is itself an insufficient basis to admit third States in the Court’s contentious proceedings. The aim of this article is thus to briefly probe and challenge a point that some of the most renowned figures in our field have framed as indisputable. Show less
Schuurmans, Y.E.; Barkhuysen, T.; Ouden, W. den 2023
This article addresses the role of third States in public interest litigation – i.e., ongoing proceedings concerning interests which they share with the international community. It scrutinizes... Show moreThis article addresses the role of third States in public interest litigation – i.e., ongoing proceedings concerning interests which they share with the international community. It scrutinizes third-State intervention in inter-State cases through the prism of rules and principles arising in public interest litigation, and aims to clarify the limits of such participation. Having synthesized the relevant law and doctrine of intervention practice before the ICJ and other institutional courts, it considers the extent to which third-State interests find expression through Articles 62 and 63 of the ICJ Statute. It examines the invocation of international legal responsibility on the basis of obligations erga omnes and erga omnes partes, as well as the prospect of intervention on this basis. It then identifies and addresses jurisdictional and procedural questions arising in these and other instances of “public interest” intervention. It concludes by envisaging the prospective institutional development of multilateral participation in public interest litigation. Show less
While the very existence of community interests has arguably motivated states to engage in multilateral treaty-making, create international organisations and criminalise conduct internationally, ... Show moreWhile the very existence of community interests has arguably motivated states to engage in multilateral treaty-making, create international organisations and criminalise conduct internationally, among other things, the foundational ‘publicness’ of public international law appears largely under-explored among public international lawyers. A turn to publicness is rendered all the more necessary by the blurring divide between public/private, in the face of globalisation processes that have been affecting the way in which public interests, goods and functions traditionally thought to be within the exclusive remit of state sovereignty are defined, negotiated and acted upon by private entities. Looking at ‘publicness’ as an epistemic tool, this contribution critically revisits how private actors engaging with areas of common interest have actually shaped the contours of ‘public’ in a public international law context. It suggests to (re)imagine the ‘publicness’ in order to be able to guide practices instead of being forged by them. Show less
