In this reflective chapter, we examine the structural biases and empirical challenges underlying human trafficking ‘indicators’ (especially problem, risk and performance indicators) that are... Show moreIn this reflective chapter, we examine the structural biases and empirical challenges underlying human trafficking ‘indicators’ (especially problem, risk and performance indicators) that are routinely used to describe and measure human trafficking, assess risk, identify abuses, evaluate responses, and encourage accountability. While frequently used, such indicators can give an undue illusion of objectivity and reliability when they are neither neutral nor unskewed. In fact, numerous factors affect which elements are privileged as ‘indicators’ and which are obscured. We therefore examine here the selectivity, politics, racialized and gendered concerns that relate to the production and use of human trafficking indicators. Since human trafficking is a complex, highly-contested, and multi-faceted practice, it is not easily reduced to the crude generalizations upon which many indicators rest. We explore how the uncritical use of indicators can both contribute to stereotypical and unachievable ideals of victimhood and engender undue criminalization or withholding of victim support. In doing so, we disentangle some paradoxes around who is deemed ‘vulnerable’, ‘at risk’, ‘worthy of support’ and requiring ‘protection’. We highlight the – routinely overlooked – weak empirical basis and other limitations of many commonplace ‘indicators’ and challenges in building empirically-stronger and more robust indicators. The chapter concludes with overall implications of these critical reflections for policy, interventions, and research. Show less
It is difficult to imagine contemporary heritage protection without the numerous international heritage conventions that have proliferated over the course of the twentieth century. Although these... Show moreIt is difficult to imagine contemporary heritage protection without the numerous international heritage conventions that have proliferated over the course of the twentieth century. Although these instruments are governed by the rules of international law, they are reliant upon the actions of individual states in order to ensure their implementation at the domestic level. It is precisely this process of translation to the domestic legal sphere which remains invisible within many discussions surrounding international heritage law. Yet these modes of translation can facilitate – or, conversely, silence – opportunities for actors other than the state to shape cultural heritage law. As such, they can play a critical role in many of the current debates surrounding heritage governance. It is thus important that those working and living in, with or around heritage are aware of the legal techniques through which international heritage standards find their expression in domestic law. In order to elucidate these techniques, this chapter will touch upon a range of core legal concepts related to the implementation of international law in domestic legal settings, such as the distinctions between common and civil law and monist and dualist legal systems. While the focus of the chapter is on the international treaties adopted within the scope of UNESCO, it will also discuss how so-called ‘soft law’ heritage standards can play a role in domestic legal settings despite their formally non-binding nature. This chapter argues that the apparent universality of rules relating to the protection of cultural heritage at an international level belies the diversity of methods through which they are implemented at the national level, the actors involved in this process, and the interaction of international standards with existing domestic legal traditions aimed at the protection of cultural heritage. Moreover, given that many of the norms established by international heritage conventions do not have a ‘self-executing’ character, they remain beyond the reach of domestic legal actors. In many cases it is thus more illuminating to interrogate precisely which elements of cultural heritage law are commonly not translated into domestic law and why. Show less
The article outlines a brief constitutional-institutional scenario of the Netherlands as background to analyze two paradigmatic cases, the Urgenda case and the childcare allowance scandal. These... Show moreThe article outlines a brief constitutional-institutional scenario of the Netherlands as background to analyze two paradigmatic cases, the Urgenda case and the childcare allowance scandal. These two cases bring to light different behaviours of the judge in offering legal protection to fundamental rights. The analysis of these cases in the Dutch model, in which there is no judicial constitutional review, is enlightening about the new challenges faced by the State -climate change and the advent of the digital era- and the need to rethink the theory of separation of powers aiming to offering effective legal protection to fundamental rights. Show less
The contribution looks at procedures before the Court of Justice of the European Union dealing with legal questions relating to the EU-Swiss sectoral agreements, i.e. cases that have occurred in... Show moreThe contribution looks at procedures before the Court of Justice of the European Union dealing with legal questions relating to the EU-Swiss sectoral agreements, i.e. cases that have occurred in this context. Particular emphasis is put on the annulment procedure (Art. 263 TFEU). Show less
This chapter addresses the current developments in the taxation of the digital economy including the current unilateral, multilateral, and EU proposals including objectives, challenges, and... Show moreThis chapter addresses the current developments in the taxation of the digital economy including the current unilateral, multilateral, and EU proposals including objectives, challenges, and problems arising when implementing these proposals. The chapter also provides some elements of analysis regarding the evolution from e-commerce to the digital economy, as well as addresses the concerns regarding the requirement of local presence that may constitute a barrier to trade and investment. The diversity of the proposals reveals that there is no clarity on the best way to deal with highly digitalised business, with the multilateral approaches facing similar scrutiny, especially by developing countries. Therefore, as in trade and investment, multilateral approaches will need to do more to gain legitimacy vis-à-vis developing countries. The chapter concludes with some recommendations regarding the steps that can be taken to address this topic by governments, as well as policymakers at the national, EU, and international levels. Show less
Het preadvies aan de Vereeniging ‘Handelsrecht’ gaat over de toepassing van open normen in het financiële toezicht, met name als het gaat om het handhaven van de duurzaamheidsverplichtingen van... Show moreHet preadvies aan de Vereeniging ‘Handelsrecht’ gaat over de toepassing van open normen in het financiële toezicht, met name als het gaat om het handhaven van de duurzaamheidsverplichtingen van financiële ondernemingen, maar ook ter handhaving van de vereiste risicobeheersing door financiële ondernemingen ten aanzien van klimaatrisico’s, milieurisico’s en mensenrechten. Het preadvies belicht de mate waarin de toekomstige Europese ‘Richtlijn inzake passende zorgvuldigheid in het bedrijfsleven op het gebied van duurzaamheid (CSDDD)’ en de daarin opgenomen open normen zal leiden tot botsingen met de gehandhaafde open normen in de financiële sector, wat betreft de duurzaamheidrisico’s, de in dat verband te ontwikkelen transitieplannen en de toepassing van mensenrechten bij het ontwikkelen van beleid en in relatie tot cliënten van financiële ondernemingen. Show less
This chapter examines global tax governance. By assuming that the term global tax governance is used to impose outcomes on people, the question that should be asked would be, if this is true, and... Show moreThis chapter examines global tax governance. By assuming that the term global tax governance is used to impose outcomes on people, the question that should be asked would be, if this is true, and countries still follow these outcomes by the Organization for Economic Development and Co-operation (OECD), under what conditions can the model of global tax governance be feasible and legitimate for both developed and developing countries? The chapter begins by looking at the recent international tax standards, mainly exchange of information and BEPS as developed by the OECD with the political mandate of the G20. It then addresses the use of soft law vs. hard law to introduce international tax standards, before considering the role of developing countries in the BEPS Inclusive Framework and the peer review of the BEPS Minimum Standards. Finally, the chapter studies the validity of the outcome of these international tax standards and discusses the role of the actors in global tax governance. Show less
