DiscussionResponse

“P” for Partnership or “R” for Regime?

A Pamphlet on TTIP and the Fragmentation of International Law

A response to Maximilian Oehl and Jelena Bäumler In their attentive and stimulating posts, Maximilian Oehl and Jelena Bäumler considered the condition of the WTO and the role of public debate for TTIP differently. My intention is to take a step back and to reflect on the “important questions relating to the framing of the debate” as Maximilian Oehl put it. Maximilian Oehl started his text spelling out the abbreviation …

READ MORE →

Current Developments

A new Solange judgment from Germany – or nothing to worry about?

In its recent decision (in German, press release in English) on Mr R the Bundesverfassungsgericht (BVerfG or the Court) rejected an extradition request pursuant to the European Arrest Warrant (EAW). The Court invalidated a decision of the Higher Regional Court of Düsseldorf to extradite Mr R to Italy under the EAW because the decision would violate human dignity as protected by Art 1(1) of the German Constitution.

READ MORE →

SymposiumThe Promises of International Law and Society

Should we call a lawyer?

Towards a conceptualisation of norm conflicts for International Relations Lea Wisken In this post, I argue that traditional legal conceptualisations of norm conflicts do not capture the phenomenon that International Relations (IR) scholars are interested in. I propose an alternative definition, which links norm conflicts to political contestation. The number of international treaties registered with the UN approximates 50.000. What are the odds of all these treaties being consistent? Infinitesimally small, one …

READ MORE →

DiscussionResponse

The Proportionality Critique Still Stands

A Rejoinder to Johann Ruben Leiss Sué González Hauck Johann Ruben Leiss critically remarks that the perception underlying my original post “overburdens proportionality balancing with assumptions and expectations that do not reflect its character”. This rejoinder aims at resolving some apparent misunderstandings about both the object and the thrust of my critique. My aim is to once again highlight the dangers inherent in the overuse of the prevalent concept of …

READ MORE →

DiscussionResponse

Towards an Integrated, Predictable and Coherent International Legal System: A Defence of Proportionality Balancing

A response to Sué González Hauck Johann Ruben Leiss In her post Sué González Hauck provides a thoughtful and critical perspective on proportionality balancing as a means to overcome fragmentation in international law. In my view, however, her perception overburdens proportionality balancing with assumptions and expectations that do not reflect its character. I will first lay out the understanding of proportionality which this comment relies on, before then discussing the arguments …

READ MORE →

DiscussionKick-off

A Critique of Proportionality Balancing as a Harmonization Technique in International Law

Since the publication of the Fragmentation Report by the International Law Commission, international legal scholars and practitioners alike seem to be less concerned about the theoretical questions raised by the fragmentation debate. Instead, they have turned to identifying and examining tools which could avoid or resolve normative conflicts between norms of different specialized areas of international law (also referred to as “regimes”). Proportionality balancing is one of these tools of …

READ MORE →