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 →

DiscussionResponse

TTIP and the WTO: Anatomy of a murder story and the future of the world trading system

A response to Maximilian Oehl In his thoughtful post, Maximilian Oehl placed TTIP into the wider context of the world trade system and discussed some of the critical questions surrounding the negotiations. While there is certainly no fault in the portrayal of events and facts presented, it may only be one view of the cathedral. Let me add a slightly different one.

READ MORE →

DiscussionResponse

Lawfare? We need the states to interpret international humanitarian law

A response to Raphael Schäfer Raphael Schäfer has thoughtfully worked out the main issues surrounding lawfare and counter-lawfare. I will take up his analysis and develop it further in order to provide a complementary perspective. I will explain the struggles over the law – quickly termed “counter-lawfare” by some –as the ordinary course rather than the exception.

READ MORE →

DiscussionResponse

Yes, redressing past wrongs in the present!

A rejoinder to Maximilian Pichl and Mieke van der Linden I fully support Mieke van der Linden’s thesis that the illegal nature of the colonization in Africa, and indeed everywhere else needs to be recognized. This is one way of redressing past wrongs. Just one way, which is why I have to oppose the notion that it is an alternative to claims for reparation. The one might not even be …

READ MORE →

DiscussionResponse

Customary international law identification as constrained law-making

A response to David Koppe There has been a resurgence of interest in recent years in how customary international law is identified, and this interest will likely intensify as a result of the International Law Commission’s current work on the subject. Somewhat ironically, this resurgence of interest comes at a time when there are increasing doubts about the continued usefulness of customary international law in addressing the world’s problems, and …

READ MORE →

DiscussionResponse

Redressing Colonial Wrongs?

A response to Maximilian Pichl On 12 May 1883, the Germans set foot ashore on the coast of South-West Africa – now known as Namibia. The settlement of Germans on natives’ lands immediately became a fact. The native peoples inhabiting the area, the Herero and the Nama, resisted to the German presence on and expropriation of their lands. As a reaction, the Germans launched a war of extermination during the …

READ MORE →

DiscussionResponse

Das Internetgrundrecht zwischen Völkerrecht, Staatsrecht und Europarecht (III)

In Teil I habe ich gezeigt, dass das Völkerrecht den Zugang zum Internet in seinen beiden Dimensionen als Vorbedingung zur Ausübung kommunikativer Rechte schützt. In Teil II habe ich nachgewiesen, dass dem Grundgesetz ein unmittelbarer verfassungsrechtlicher Leistungsanspruch auf Gewährleistung eines menschenwürdigen Existenzminimums zu entnehmen ist. Dieser schützt in der Auslegung des BVerfG ein Recht auf Teilhabe am kommunikativen Leben, das zu den Bedingungen der Informationsgesellschaft nur durch Internetzugang gesichert werden …

READ MORE →

DiscussionResponse

Das Internetgrundrecht zwischen Völkerrecht, Staatsrecht und Europarecht (II)

In Teil I habe ich gezeigt, dass das Völkerrecht den Internetzugang in beiden Dimensionen – Zugang zum Internet (Infrastrukturdimension) und Zugang zu Internetinhalten (Inhaltsdimension) – schützt. Ein Recht auf Internetzugang (oder kürzer: ein Recht auf Internet) ist Vorbedingung der Realisierung aller anderen Menschenrechte über das Internet. Es setzt jedoch zumindest eine grundlegende staatlich garantierte Kommunikationsinfrastruktur voraus. Nationales Verfassungsrecht, Völkerrecht und auch Europarecht spielen hier ineinander.

READ MORE →

DiscussionResponse

The pandemic dilemma

A reply to Pedro Villarreal Pedro Villareal wonders whether and how global health security can be enhanced through international law. He raises two interrelated questions: First, should an expert body be able to force the WHO Director-General to declare a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC)? And second: Should there be sanctions against states that exceed the security measures recommended by the WHO? In other words: Should they be …

READ MORE →

DiscussionResponse

The Proportionality Critique Still Stands

A Rejoinder to Johann Ruben Leiss 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 proportionality balancing in …

READ MORE →