States, International Organizations and Courts as Organs of the International Community

General Course at The Hague Academy

July, 2024

Outline
Class 1: Introduction: is international law the constitution for the international order?
Class 2: International law as a parcellation project: sovereignty as freedom for peoples to
exercise self-determination
Class 3: International law as a hegemonic project: sovereignty as power
Class 4: International law as a shared project: sovereignty as responsibility
Class 5: Case study: From formal sovereign equality to substantive equality in the management
of common resources
Class 6: The functions and limits of international organisations: a functional overview of
promise and limits
Class 7: The contemporary law on international organisations: legal personality, competences
and obligations
Class 8: IOs as organs of international law: internal rule of law requirements
Class 9: Reforming IO law: external rule of law requirements
Class 10: Case study: global health governance
Class 11: International courts as system builders
Class 12: National courts as partners in the judicial system-building project
Class 13: The interaction of courts: the promise and limits of a global system of checks and
balances
Class 14: Case study: the rise of private regulation and responses
Class 15: Conclusion: a meta law for the law of humanity

Seminar I: The extra-territorial scope of human rights obligations

Seminar II: The IMCO Advisory Opinion

Seminar III: The multilayered system of international human rights law

1.1 - List of documents to be put online by the Academy :

(i) necessary

Class 1:
1. John R. Bolton, Is There Really Law in International Affairs, 10 TRANSNAT'L L. & CONTEMP.
PROBS. 1, 1-14 (2000).
2. Anthony D’Amato, Is International Law Really Law, 79 Nw. U. L. Rev. 1293 (1984-1985)
(pp.8-16).
3. Pierre-Marie Dupuy, Taking International Law Seriously: The German Approach to
International Law, 50 GERMAN Y.B. INT'L L. 375, 282-290 (2007).Island of Palmas case (1928),
(pp. 838-840).

Class 2:
1. The Case of the S.S. "Lotus", PCIJ (1927) (esp. pp. 18-22).
2. Case of the S.S. “Wimbledon”, PCIJ (1923) (esp. pp. 25-28).
3. Legal Consequences of the Separation of the Chagos Archipelago from Mauritius in 1965,
ICJ (2019) (esp. paras. 144-161).

Class 3:
1. Luis Eslava and Sundhya Pahuja, The State and International Law: A Reading from the
Global South, 11 Humanity 118 (2020).
2. B.S. Chimni, The international law of jurisdiction: A TWAIL perspective, 35 Leiden J.
Int’l L 29 (2022) (pp. 42-54).
3. Eyal Benvenisti and Doreen Lustig, Monopolizing War: Codifying the Laws of War to
Reassert Governmental Authority, 1856–1874, 31 European J Int’l L 127, 145-68
(2020).
4. The Corfu Channel Case (merits), ICJ (1949) (pp. 22, 28) and J. Krylov dissent, (p. 74).
5. ICJ, Case concerning The Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary/Slovakia) I1. C. J.
Reports 1997, p. 7, para. 104.

Class 4:
1. An Hertogen, Letting Lotus Bloom, 26 EJIL 901, 904-913 (2015).
2. Novartis v. India, Supreme Court of India (2007) (paras. 66-67, 76-79).
3. Inter-American Court for Human Rights Advisory Opinion requested by the Republic of
Colombia (trans., 2017) (paras. 81-82, 93-94).
4. Case of Neubauer, The Federal Constitutional Court of Germany (2021) (paras. 143-149,
178-181)
5. Eyal Benvenisti, Sovereigns as Trustees for Humanity, 107 AJIL 295, 295-305 (2013).

2
6. David Luban, Responsibility to Humanity and Threats to Peace: An Essay on Sovereignty,
38 BERKELEY J. INT'l L. 185, 212-221 (2020).

Class 5:
1. UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, Arts. 86-90, 136-140
2. Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of
Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies (1966)
3. Agreement governing the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies
(1979).
4. Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (Argentina v. Uruguay), Judgment, I.C.J. Rep. 2010 (Apr.
20), p. 14, ¶ 101;
5. Construction of a Road in Costa Rica along the San Juan River (Nicaragua v. Costa Rica),
Judgment, I.C.J. Rep. 2015 (II) (Dec. 16), p. 706, ¶ 104;
6. Dispute over the Status and Use of the Waters of the Silala (Chile v. Bolivia), Judgment,
I.C.J. Rep. 2022 (Dec. 1), p. 614, ¶¶ 83, 99.

Class 6:
1. Stephen Wertheim, Tomorrow the World, the Birth of U.S. Global Supremacy 135-144
(2020) added 7 May 2024
2. Robert Axelrod & Robert O. Keohane, Achieving Cooperation under Anarchy: Strategies
and Institutions, 38(1) WORLD POL. 226, 247-254 (1985).
3. Kenneth Abbott & Duncan Snidal, Why States Act Through Formal International
Organizations, 42(1) J. CONFLICT RESOL. 3, 6-27 (1998).
4. Eyal Benvenisti & George W. Downs, The Empire’s New Clothes: Political Economy and
the Fragmentation of International Law, 60 Stan. L. Rev. 595, 604-619 (2007).
5. B.S. Chimni, International Institutions Today: An Imperial Global State in the Making, 15
European Journal of International Law 1, 1-17 (2004).

Class 7:
1. International Court of Justice, Reparation for Injuries Suffered in the Service of the
United Nations, Advisory Opinion, ICJ Reports 1949, pp. 174-181
2. International Court of Justice, Certain Expenses of the United Nations (Article 17,
Paragraph 2, of the Charter), Advisory Opinion, ICJ Reports 1962, 151, pp. 167-170.
3. International Court of Justice, Interpretation of the Agreement of 25 March 1951
between the WHO and Egypt, Advisory Opinion, ICJ Reports 1980, para. 37
4. International Law Commission’s Articles on the Responsibility of international
organizations, Articles 58-63 (2011).
5. Tim Clark, The Teleological Turn in the Law of International Organisations, 70 ICLQ
533 (2021).

3
Class 8:
1. International Court of Justice, Legal Consequences for States of the Continued
Presence of South Africa in Namibia (South West Africa) notwithstanding Security
Council Resolution 276, Advisory Opinion, ICJ Reports 1971 16, para. 22.
2. International Court of Justice, Effect of awards of compensation made by the U.
N. Administrative Tribunal, Advisory Opinion of July 13th, I954: I.C. J. Reports
1954, p. 47, pp. 55-57.
3. International Court of Justice: Legality of the Use by a State of Nuclear Weapons
in Armed Conflict, Advisory Opinion, (Request by WHO) ICJ Reports 1996 66, para.
19.
4. International Court of Justice, Constitution of the Maritime Safety Committee of
the Inter-Governmental Maritime Consultative Organization, Advisory Opinion,
1960 I.C.J. 150 (June 8).
5. ICJ, Certain Expenses of the United Nations (Article 17, Paragraph 2, of the
Charter), Advisory Opinion, 1962 I.C.J. 151 (July 20), pp. 167-170
6. ICJ, Case Concerning Questions of Interpretation And Application of The 1971
Montreal Convention Arising from the Aerial Incident at Lockerbie (Libyan Arab
Jamahiriya v. U.S.A), Preliminary Objections, 1997 I.C.J. 115 (Feb. 27); Diss Op
Schwebel, pp. 164-172; Sep Op Rezek; and Oscar Schachter’s pleadings on behalf
of the US in CR 1997/19, paras. 4.1-4.19
7. De Merode and Others v. World Bank, World Bank Admin. Trib. Decision no. 1
(1981), 83 ILR 639, paras. 28, 47.
8. Richard B. Stewart, Remedying Disregard in Global Regulatory Governance:
Accountability, Participation, and Responsiveness, 108 Am. J. Int'l L. 211, 236-268
(2014)
9. Megan Donaldson & Surabhi Ranganathan, Accountability, in THE CAMBRIDGE
COMPANION TO INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS LAW, 50 (Jan Klabbers ed., 2022).

Class 9:
1. Bustani v. Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (2003)
Administrative Tribunal of the International Labour Organization.
2. ECtHR, Waite and Kennedy v. Germany (1999), paras. 11-19, 47, 67-69.
3. European Commission v. Kadi (July 18, 2013) ECJ Grand Chamber, paras. 27-46,
97-165.
4. German Federal Constitutional Court, the Weiss judgment (2 BvR 859/15, May
2020), paras. 106-123.
5. European Court for Human Rights, Stichting Mothers of Srebrenica v. the
Netherlands (2013).
6. S.Ct. of the Netherlands, The Netherlands v. Stichting Mothers of Srebrenica
(2019).
7. U.S. Supreme Court Jam v. International Finance Corporation (2019).
8. CJEU, Supreme Site Services and Others v. SHAPE (2020)

4
Class 10:
1. Adam Kamradt-Scott, The International Health Regulations (2005): Strengthening
Their Effective Implementation and Utilisation, 16 INT’L ORG. L. REV. 242 (2019).
2. Report of the Review Committee on the Functioning of the International Health
Regulations (2005) during the COVID-19 response 2021
3. Eyal Benvenisti, ‘The WHO—Destined to Fail?: Political Cooperation and the Covid-19
Pandemic’ 114 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW 588 (2020).
4. Gian Luigi Burci, Global Health (Klabbers Edited Companion Book 2022)
5. Institut de Droit International 2021 Resolution on “Epidemics, Pandemics and
International Law”

Class 11:
1. Eyal Benvenisti, Community Interests in International Adjudication, in Community
Interests Across International Law 70 (Eyal Benvenisti and Georg Nolte, Eds., 2018)
2. Armin von Bogdandy & Ingo Venzke, On the Functions of International Courts: An
Appraisal in Light of Their Burgeoning Public Authority, 26 Leiden J. Intʼl L. 49 (2013).
3. Yuval Shany, No Longer a Weak Department of Power? Reflections on the Emergence
of a New International Judiciary, 20 Eur. J. Intʼl L. 73 (2009).
4. Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide
(The Gambia v. Myanmar), Preliminary Objections, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2022 (II), pp.
516-517, paras. 107-108 and 112.

Class 12:
1. Institut de Droit International, ‘The Activities of National Judges and the
International Relational of their State’ (Milan, 7 September 1993)
<http://www.idi-iil.org/idiE/resolutionsE/1993_mil_01_en.PDF>
2. André Nollkaemper, National Courts and the International Rule of Law, 1-18
(2011)
3. Nevsun Resources Ltd. v Araya, 2020 SCC 5, paras 1–15; 60–133 [briefly
noted by Andrew Sanger, Corporate Liability for Breaches of International
Law Abroad: Canadian Supreme Court Opens the Door but Questions
Remain, 79 CAMBRIDGE LJ 381 (2020)
4. Eyal Benvenisti, Reclaiming Democracy: The Strategic Uses of Foreign and
International Law by National Courts, 102 Am. J. Int’l L. 241 (2008)

Class 13:
1. Eyal Benvenisti and George W. Downs, Democratizing Courts: How National and
International Courts Promote Democracy in an Era of Global Governance, 46 NYU J
Int’l L Pol’y 741 (2014).

5
 2. European Commission v. Kadi (July 18, 2013) ECJ Grand Chamber, paras. 27-46, 97-
165.
3. German Federal Constitutional Court, the Weiss judgment (2 BvR 859/15, May
2020), paras. 106-123.

Class 14:
1. The UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (2021).
2. Andrew Sanger, Transnational Corporate Responsibility in Domestic Courts: Still Out
of Reach? 113 AJIL Unbound 4–9. (2019)
3. Facebook’s Oversight Board, Case decision 2021-001-FB-FBR (concerning the
restricting of then President Donald Trump’s access to his Facebook page and
Instagram account
4. European Court for Human Rights (ECtHR), Mutu and Pechstein v. Switzerland (2018).

Class 15:
1. Susan Marks, Empire's Law, 10 Indiana J. Global Legal Studies (nu in PPL Discovery RR),
449 (2003). Zie dit zoekresultaat, wel beschikbaar als e-jounal, maar geen link: Indiana
journal of global legal studies | Peace Palace Library (worldcat.org)
2. Supreme Court of India, Novartis v. India, (2007) (paras. 66-67, 76-79).
3. Inter-American Court for Human Rights, Advisory Opinion requested by the Republic
of Colombia (trans., 2017) (paras. 81-82, 93-94).
4. The Federal Constitutional Court of Germany, Case of Neubauer, (2021) (paras. 143-
149, 178-181).
5. Eyal Benvenisti, Sovereigns as Trustees of Humanity: On the Accountability of States
to Foreign Stakeholders, 107 Am. J. Intʼl L. 295 (2013).

(ii) recommended

Class 1:
1. United States Declaration of Independence, July 4, 1776 (first, second and last
paragraphs).
2. Martti Koskenniemi, ‘What Use for Sovereignty Today?’ 1 Asian Journal of
International Law 61 (2011).
3. Matsudaira, Tokujin, Tianxia, or another Grossraum? U.S.–China Competition and
Paradigm Change in the International Legal Order, 23 Chicago Journal of
International Law, 130 (2022).
4. Christian Tomuschat, The Status of the 'Islamic State' under International Law, 90 Die
Friedens-Warte, 223 (2015).

6
 5. Eyal Benvenisti, The Conception of International Law as a Legal System, 50 German
Yearbook of International Law, 393 (2008).

Class 2:
1. Xue Hanqin, "Basic issues revisited: sovereignty, communal interests and
international obligations." in Chinese Contemporary Perspectives on International
Law : History, Culture and International Law Collected Courses of the Hague
Academy of International Law (2012) Pp. 88-116.
2. Eyal Benvenisti, The Origins of the Concept of Belligerent Occupation, 26 L. & HIST. REV.
621, 627-635 (2008).
3. ICJ, Western Sahara Advisory Opinion, ICJ Reports 1975, 12 (paras. 80-81).
4. James R. Crawford, The Creation of States in International Law, 56-60 (2nd Ed.,
2007).

Class 3:
1. Eyal Benvenisti, Exit and Voice in the Age of Globalization, 98 Mich L Rev 167, 180-
195 (1999).
2. W.E.B. DuBois and National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, ‘An
Appeal to the World’ (1947)
3. Greta Thunberg to World Leaders: 'How Dare You!' (youtube clip), The 2019 UN
climate action summit, New York, (2019).
4. Nico Krisch, Jurisdiction Unbound: (Extra)territorial Regulation as Global Governance,
33 Europ. J. Int’l L. 481 (2022).
5. Max Huber, Rapport sur les responsabilités de l'État dans les situations visées par les
réclamations britanniques (Report on the responsibility of the state under the
situations contemplated by the British claims), II REPORTS OF INTERNATIONAL
ARBITRAL AWARDS, 639 – 650 (1924) (p. 641).
6. Ntina Tzouvala, ‘TWAIL and the “Unwilling or Unable” Doctrine: Continuities and
Ruptures’ (2015) 109 American Journal of International Law Unbound 266

Class 4:
1. Arash Abizadeh, Democratic Theory and Border Coercion: No Right to Unilaterally
Control Your Own Borders, 36 POLITICAL THEORY 37 (2008).
2. Lassa Oppenheim, The Future of International Law (Clarendon 1921)
3. James L. Brierly, The Shortcomings of International Law 5 Brit. Y.B. Int’l L., 4 (1924)
4. Statut juridique des apatrides et des réfugiés, INSTITUT DE DROIT INTERNATIONAL
Session de Bruxelles (1936).
5. ICJ, Whaling in the Antarctic (Australia v. Japan; New Zealand intervening) (2014).

7
 6. Federal Intelligence Service Case, The Federal Constitutional Court of Germany,
Judgment of 19 May 2020 (English press release) paras 87-110
7. Hirsi Jamaa and Others v. Italy ECtHR Grand Chamber (2012).
8. WTO Appellate Body Report, China — Measures Related to the Exportation of
Various Raw Materials, ¶ 307, WT/DS394/AB/R, WT/DS4395/AB/R, and
WT/DS398/AB/R (Jan. 30, 2012).
9. Panel Reports, China – Measures Relating to the Exportation of Rare Earths,
Tungsten, and Molybdenum, WT/DS431/R, WT/DS432/R, and WT/DS433/R (Mar. 26,
2014)
10. Sivan Shlomo Agon and Eyal Benvenisti, The law of strangers: The form and substance
of other-regarding international adjudication, 68 U Toronto L J, 598, 598-605 (2018).

Class 5:
1. Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and
Cooperation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, 24th
October 1970
2. Hanqin Xue, TRANSBOUNDARY DAMAGE IN INTERNATIONAL LAW 180-181, 193–196
(Cambridge University Press 2003)
3. Juraj Andrassy, LES RELATIONS INTERNATIONALES DE VOISINAGE 79 (Vol. 79 RdC,
1951) (French, discussion within 73–182)
4. Case Relating to the Territorial Jurisdiction of the International Commission of the River Oder,
1929 P.C.I.J. (ser. A) No. 23
5. Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary/Slovakia), Judgment, I.C.J. Rep. 1997 (Sept. 25), p.
7
6. Convention on the Law of the Non-navigational Uses of International Watercourses, May 21,
1997, 2999 U.N.T.S 77 (entered into force Aug. 17, 2014)
7. Certain Activities Carried Out by Nicaragua in the Border Area (Costa Rica v. Nicaragua)
I.C.J. Rep. 2018 (Feb. 2), p. 15
8. Surabhi Ranganathan, Sea Change, in Brett, Donaldson and Koskenniemi (eds.),
History, Politics, Law (2021)
9. Surabhi Ranganathan, Ocean Floor Grab: International Law and the Making of an
Extractive Imaginary (2019) 30 Eur. J. Int’l L. 573
10. Isabel Feichtner, Mining for humanity in the deep sea and outer space: The role of
small states and international law in the extraterritorial expansion of extraction 32
Leiden Journal of International Law 255 (2019), 32.
11. Report of the Group of Governmental Experts on Advancing Responsible State
Behaviour in Cyberspace in the Context of International Security (2021)

Class 6:
1. Ian Hurd, The case against international cooperation International Theory, 1, 1-11 (2020).
2. David Kennedy, The Move to Institutions, 8 CARDOZO L. REV. 841, 841-907, 979-989
(1987).

8
3. Patricia Clavin, Securing the World Economy: The Reinvention of the League of Nations,
1920-1946 (skim) Chapters 2 & 9 (2013).
4. Patricia Clavin and Jens-Wilhelm Wessels, Transnationalism and the League of Nations:
Understanding the Work of Its Economic and Financial Organisation, 14 Contemp. Eur.
Hist. 465, 468-477 (2005).
5. Jan Klabbers, The Life and Times of the Law of International organizations, 70 Nordic J.
Int’l L. 287 (2001).

Class 7:
1. International Court of Justice, Appeal Relating to the Jurisdiction of the ICAO Council
(India v. Pakistan), ICJ Reports 1972, Sep. Op. Judge De Castro, p. 130
2. Josef L. Kunz, General International Law and the Law of International Organizations,
47 AJIL, 456 (1953).
3. Hans Kelsen, Recent Trends in the law of the United Nations 18 SOCIAL RESEARCH 135
(1951).
4. Oscar Schachter, Book Review: The Law of the United Nations by Hans Kelsen, 60 YALE
L.J., 189 (1951).
5. Felice Morgenstern, Legality in International Organizations, 48 British Yearbook of
International Law, 241, 249-57 (1976).
6. Ebere Osieke, The Legal Validity of Ultra Vires Decisions of International
Organizations, 77 AJIL 239 (1983).
7. Antony Anghie, Time Present and Time Past: Globalization, International Financial
Institutions, and the Third World, 32 NYU J. Int'l L. & Pol. 243 (2000).
8. Jan Klabbers, The EJIL Foreword: The Transformation of International Organizations
Law, 26 EUR. J. INT’L L. 9 (2015).
9. Jan Klabbers, Schermers’ Dilemma, 31 EJIL 565 (2020).
10. Eyal Benvenisti, EJIL Foreword: Upholding Democracy Amid the Challenges of New
Technology: What Role for the Law of Global Governance? 29 EJIL 9, 9-26 (2018)
11. Guy Fiti Sinclair, C. Wilfred Jenks and the Futures of International Organizations Law,
31 EJIL 525 (2020).
12. Portmann, Legal Personality in International Law (2010), Chapters 6 and 8
13. Verdirame, The UN and Human Rights: Who Guards the Guardians? (2013), Chapter
2

Class 8:
1. Benedict Kingsbury, Nico Krisch, & Richard B. Stewart, The Emergence of Global
Administrative Law 68 Law & Contemp. Prob. 15 (2005).
2. Wasserstrom v. Secretary-General of the United Nations (2012) UN Dispute Tribunal,
Judgment No. UNDT/2012/092
3. Wasserstrom v. Secretary-General of the United Nations (2014) UN Appeals Tribunal,
Judgment No. 2014-UNAT-457

9
 4. Prosecutor v. Tadić, Case No. IT-94-1-AR72, Decision on Defence Motion for
Interlocutory Appeal on Jurisdiction (International Criminal Tribunal for the former
Yugoslavia 2 October 1995) (paras. 1-48).
5. Ms. "EE” v. International Monetary Fund, IMFAT Judgment No. 2010-4 (2010), paras.
143-199.
6. Int'l L. Ass'n, Comm. Accountability Int'l Org., Accountability of International
Organisations Final Report, Berlin Conference, pp. 4-18 (2004).
7. Report of an Institute for International Law commission (Rapporteur: Rudiger
Wolfrum) on judicial control of UN Security Council decisions (2015): http://www.idi-
iil.org/app/uploads/2017/06/04-Wolfrum-JuridictionONU.pdf read pp 49-74.

Class 9:

1. UN Human Rights Committee, Concluding Observations on Kosovo (Serbia) (2006).

2. Prosecutor v. Tadić, Case No. IT-94-1-AR72, Decision on Defence Motion for
Interlocutory Appeal on Jurisdiction (International Criminal Tribunal for the former
Yugoslavia 2 October 1995) (paras. 1-48).
3. Eyal Benvenisti and George W. Downs, Democratizing Courts: How National and
International Courts Promote Democracy in an Era of Global Governance, 46 NYU J
Int’l L Pol’y 741 (2014).
4. International Court of Justice, Appeal relating to the Jurisdiction of the ICAO Council
under Article 84 of the Convention on International Civil Aviation (Bahrain, Egypt, Saudi
Arabia and United Arab Emirates v. Qatar) (2020), paras 108-125.
5. International Court of Justice, Judgments of the Administrative Tribunal of the ILO
upon Complaints Made against UNESCO, Advisory Opinion, 1956 I.C.J. 77 (Oct. 23).
6. German Constitutional Court, The Lisbon Treaty Judgment (2009) paras. 100(a), 106,
174-175, 210-233, 239-241, 247, 249, 295.
7. Eyal Benvenisti, The Law of Global Governance, Chapter 6 (2014).

Class 10:
1. Constitution of the World Health Organization (1946) (skim)
2. International Health Regulations (2005) (skim)

3. Published: 1 January 2015The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights:

Statement on the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic and economic, social and
cultural rights (April, 2020)
4. The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights: Statement on universal and
equitable access to vaccines for the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) (December, 2020)

Class 11:

10
 1. José E. Alvarez, What Are International Judges for? The Main Functions of
International Adjudication, in The Oxford Handbook of International Adjudication
158 (Karen J. Alter, Cesare Romano & Yuval Shany eds., 2014).
2. Erik Voeten, International Judicial Behavior, in The Oxford Handbook of
International Adjudication, 550 (Karen J. Alter, Cesare Romano & Yuval Shany
eds., 2014).
3. Clifford J. Carrubba and Matthew Gabel, International Courts: A Theoretical
Assessment, 20 Annu. Rev. Polit. Sci. 55 (2017).
4. Niels Petersen, The International Court of Justice and the Judicial Politics of
Identifying Customary International Law, 28 EJIL 357 (2017).
5. Sivan Shlomo-Agon and Eyal Benvenisti, The Law of Strangers: The Form and
Substance of Other-Regarding International Adjudication 68 U. Toronto L. J., 598
(Fall 2018), pp. 625-649.
6. Eyal Benvenisti, Customary International Law as a Judicial Tool for Promoting
Efficiency, in The Impact of International Law on International Cooperation 85
(Benvenisti and Hirsch, Eds, 2004).
7. Eyal Benvenisti, Margin of Appreciation, Consensus and Universal Standards, 31
NYU J. INT’L L & POL. 843 (1999).
8. Rohini Singh Sisodia and Ranjeev Khatana, Standard of Review in Investment
Arbitrations and India’s Approach Towards Addressing the Legitimacy Crisis, 14
Global Trade and Customs Journal, 366 (2019)
9. Mikael Rask Madsen, The Challenging Authority of the European Court of Human
Rights: From Cold War Legal Diplomacy to the Brighton Declaration and Backlash,
79 LAW AND CONTEMPORARY PROBLEMS 141, 141-145, 167-175 (2016).

Class 12:
1. Beth A. Simmons, Mobilizing for Human Rights International Law in Domestic Politics,
125-148 (2012).
2. Michael Jacobs, High pressure for low emissions: How civil society created the Paris
climate agreement, 22 (4) Juncture (2016).
3. Brian J Preston, The Influence of the Paris Agreement on Climate Litigation: Legal
Obligations and Norms (Part I), J Environmental Law 1 (2020)
4. Andrew Sanger, Transnational Corporate Responsibility in Domestic Courts: Still Out of
Reach? 113 AJIL Unbound 4–9. (2019)
5. Vedanta Resources PLC v Lungowe, focusing on paras 42–62 [briefly noted by Andrew
Sanger, Parent Company Duty of Care to Third Parties Harmed by Overseas Subsidiaries’
78 CAMBRIDGE LJ 486–90 (2019)]
6. Okpabi v Royal Dutch Shell Plc [2021] UKSC 3, paras, 129–59.
7. Milieudefensie v Shell (2021) [see also a summary/commentary by Bernaz]

Case study: climate change litigation “from below”:

8. Lahore High Court, Leghari v Federation of Pakistan (2018).
9. Supreme Court of Colombia, Demanda Generaciones Futuras v Minambiente, (2018).

11
10. The Netherlands Supreme Court, Urgenda Foundation v. State of the Netherlands,
(2019), ¶¶2.3.2., 5.2.1-4, 5.1-5.10, 7.2.7, 7.2.9, 7.4.3, 7.4.6.
11. The Federal Constitutional Court of Germany, Case of Neubauer, (2021) (paras. 143-149,
178-181).
12. André Nollkaemper and Laura Burgers, A New Classic in Climate Change Litigation: The
Dutch Supreme Court Decision in the Urgenda Case, EJILTalk! 6 January, 2020
13. Thomson v. Minister for Climate Change Issues, The High Court of New Zealand [2017]
NZHC 733
14. Juliana v. US, 947 F.3d 1159 (9th cir. 2020).
15. Association les Amis de la Terre France c. SA Total Tribunal judiciaire de Nanterre, 30
Jan 2021

Class 13:
1. Anthea Roberts et al., Conceptualizing Comparative International Law in Comparative
International Law, (Anthea Roberts, Paul B. Stephan, Pierre-Hugues Verdier & Mila
Versteeg, eds, 2018).
2. André Nollkaemper, Grounds for the Application of International Rules
of Interpretation in National Courts, in The Interpretation of International Law by
Domestic Courts: Uniformity, Diversity, Convergence 34 (Helmut Philipp Aust and
Georg Nolte Eds., 2016).
3. Olga Frishman and Eyal Benvenisti, National Courts and Interpretive Approaches to
International Law, in The Interpretation of International Law by Domestic Courts:
Uniformity, Diversity, Convergence 317 (Helmut Philipp Aust and Georg Nolte Eds.,
2016).

Class 14:
1. John Ruggie, The Social Construction of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and
Human Rights in RESEARCH HANDBOOK ON HUMAN RIGHTS AND BUSINESS (Deva and Birchall
Eds., 2020).
2. Committee on Legal Affairs, Draft Report with recommendations to the Commission
on corporate due diligence and corporate accountability (2020/2129)
3. National due diligence obligations, including France (2017), Germany (2021).
4. Council of the European Union, Council Conclusions on Human Rights and Decent
Work in Global Supply Chains (1 December 2020).
5. Kate Klonick, The Facebook Oversight Board: Creating an Independent Institution to
Adjudicate Online Free Expression Links to an external site., 129(8) Yale L.J. 2418,
2427-35, 2439-51, 2462-65, 2474-98 (2020).
6. Evelyn Douek, The Limits of International Law in Content Moderation, 6 UC Irvine J.
Int'l Transnat'l & Competition. L. 37, 37-49, skim 50-74 (2021).

Suing corporations for climate harms:

12
 7. Geetanjali Ganguly, Joana Setzer & Veerle Heyvaert, If at First You Don’t Succeed: Suing
Corporations for Climate Change, 38 OXF. J. L. STUDIES 841, 850 (2018).
8. Chiara Machhi, The Climate Change Dimension of Business and Human Rights: The
Gradual Consolidation of a Concept of ‘Climate Due Diligence’, 6 Business & Human
Rights J. 93, 97 (2021).

Class 15:
1. Anthea Roberts et al., Conceptualizing Comparative International Law in Comparative
International Law, (Anthea Roberts, Paul B. Stephan, Pierre-Hugues Verdier & Mila
Versteeg, eds, 2018).
2. David Luban, Responsibility to Humanity and Threats to Peace: An Essay on
Sovereignty, 38 Berkeley Journal of International Law, 185 (2021).
3. Jutta Brunnée, Sic utere tuo ut alienum non laedas, Max Planck Encyclopedia of
Public International Law, on-line edition 2010)
4. Eyal Benvenisti, Ensuring Access to Information: International Law’s Contribution to
Global Justice, in The International Rule of Law: Rise or Decline? 344 (Heike Krieger,
Georg Nolte, Andreas Zimmermann, Eds., 2019).

1.2 - List of references: for further study (iii)

Class 1:
• Jack Goldsmith and Eric Posner, The Limits of International Law (OUP 2005), Intro. + Ch. 1
• Eyal Benvenisti and Alon Harel. Embracing the tension between national and international
human rights law: The case for discordant parity, 15 I-CON. 36 (2017).
• Austin, The Province of Jurisprudence Determined ([1832] Rumble, ed., CUP 2009), esp.
Lec 5
• James Brown Scott, ‘The Legal Nature of International Law’ (1905) 5 Colum. L. Rev. 124
• Hersch Lauterpacht, The Function of Law in the International Community ([1933] OUP
2011) esp Chapters 1, 20.
• Morgenthau, ‘Positivism, Functionalism and International Law’ (1940) 34 Am. J. Int’l L. 260
• HLA Hart, The Concept of Law ([1961] 3rd ed, 2012) 213-237
• Thomas Franck, Fairness in International Law and Institutions (OUP 1995) esp. Ch. 1
• Philip Allot, ‘The True Function of Law in the International Community’ (1998) 5 Ind. J.
Glob. Leg. Stud. 391.

Class 2:
• Edward James Kolla, Sovereignty, International Law, and the French Revolution (CUP,
2017).
• Alberto Alesina and Enrico Spolaore, The Size of Nations (2003).

Class 3:

13
• Michael J. Mazarr, “The Rise and Fall of the Failed-State Paradigm: Requiem for a
Decade of Distraction” Foreign Affairs 93, no. 1 (January/February 2014): 113-121
• Jonathan Hill, ‘Beyond the Other? A postcolonial critique of the failed state thesis’
(2005) African Identities, 3:2, 139-154
• Balakrishnan Rajagopal, International Law from Below (CUP 2003) Introduction.
• Doreen Lustig, Veiled Power – International law and the Private Corporation, 1886-1981
(2020).
• Robert D. Putnam, Diplomacy and Domestic Politics: The Logic of Two-Level Games 42
Int'l Org. 427 (1988).
• Andrew Moravscik, The Origin of Human Rights Regimes: Democratic Delegation in Post
War Europe, 54 International Organization 217 (2000).
• Richard B. Stewart, Remedying Disregard in Global Regulatory Governance:
Accountability, Participation, and Responsiveness, 108 Am. J. Int'l L. 211, 216-231
(2014).
• Eyal Benvenisti & Amichai Cohen, War is Governance: Explaining the Logic of the Laws of
War from a Principal–Agent Perspective, 112 MICH. L. REV. 1363 (2014).
• Eyal Benvenisti, The Birth and Life of the Definition of Military Objectives, 71 INT’L &
COMP. L. Q. 269 (2022).

Class 4:
• Sarah Fine, The Ethics of Immigration: Self-Determination and the Right to Exclude, 8
PHILOSOPHY COMPASS 254 (2013).
• David Miller, Border Regimes and Human Rights, 7 LAW & ETHICS OF HUMAN RIGHTS 1
(2013).
• EU Regulation on the making available on the Union market and the export from the
Union of certain commodities and products associated with deforestation and forest
degradation (31 May 2023).
• Justine Bendel, Bringing Deforestation before an International Court? EJIL:Talk! (6
December, 2019).
• Food Security Law: The Bali WTO Ministerial Conference’s decision on public
stockholding for food security and the impact on others.
• Roger O'Keefe, World Cultural Heritage: Obligations to the International Community as a
Whole? 53 Int’l & Comp. L. Q., 189 (2004).

Class 5:
• Laurence Boissons de Chazourness and Danio Campanelli, Neighbour States, OXFORD PUBLIC
INTERNATIONAL LAW: MAX PLANCK ENCYCLOPEDIAS OF INTERNATIONAL LAW [MPIL] (Dec. 2006),
available at https://opil.ouplaw.com/display/10.1093/law:epil/9780199231690/law-9780199231690-
e1072#;
• ULRICH BEYERLIN, THILO MARAUHN, INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW 285 (1st ed. 2011) (
• Juttaa Brunnée, Sic utere tuo it alienum non laedas, Oxford Public Internaitonal Law: Max Planck
Encyclopedias of International Law [MPIL] (Jan. 2022)

14
 https://opil.ouplaw.com/display/10.1093/law:epil/9780199231690/law-9780199231690-
e1607?prd=MPIL#law-9780199231690-e1607-div1-1.
• Institut de Droit International, Réglementation internationale de l'usage des cours d'eau
internationaux en dehors de l'exercice du droit de navigation, Déclaration de Madrid (Apr. 20,
1911), ¶ 1
• Institut de Droit International, Utilisation of Non-maritime International Waters (Except for
Navigation), Session of Salzburg (Sept. 11, 1961).
• Armitage (ed), The Free Sea by Hugo Grotius (Liberty Fund 2004)
• Khoday and Natarajan (eds), Locating Nature: Making and Unmaking International Law,
Symposium, (2014) 27 Leiden J. Int’l L. 571-660
• Feichtner and Ranganathan (eds), International law and Economic Exploitation in the
Global Commons, Symposium, (2019) 30 Eur. J. Int’l L. 541-663
• Steinberg, The Social Construction of the Ocean (CUP 2001)
• Jones, Lines in the Ocean: Thinking with the Sea about Territory and International Law,
(2016) 4 Lond. Rev. Int’l L. 307
• Ranganathan, The Law of the Sea and Natural Resources, in Benvenisti and Downs (eds)
Community Interests Across International Law (OUP 2017)
• Collins and French, A Guardian of Universal Interest or Increasingly Out of its Depth?
The International Seabed Authority Turns 25, International Organizations Law Review
(2019) 1-31
• Feichtner, Sharing the Riches of the Sea: The Redistributive and Fiscal Dimensions of
Deep Seabed Exploitation, (2019) 30(2) EJIL 601-633
• Mickelson, Common Heritage of Mankind as a Limit to the Exploitation of the Global
Commons, (2019) 30(2) EJIL 635-663
• Greenpeace In Deep Water: The Emerging Threat of Deep Sea Mining, 3 July 2019 AND
Barbara Lewis, U.N. deep sea mining body rejects Greenpeace criticism, Reuters, 5 July
2019
• Deep Sea Mining Campaign, London Mining Network, Mining Watch Canada. 2019.
Why the Rush? Seabed Mining in the Pacific Ocean. July. pp 26
• Geneva Internet Platform Digital Watch UN GGE and OEWG
• Global Commission on Internet Governance One Internet
•
Symposium on Sovereignty, Cyberspace, and Tallinn Manual 2.0
• Gary P. Corn, Robert Taylor,Sovereignty in the Age of Cyber
• Michael N. Schmitt, Liis Vihul, Sovereignty, Cyberspace, and Tallinn Manual 2.0
• Phil Spector, In Defense of Sovereignty, in the Wake of Tallinn 2.0
• Ahmed Ghappour, Tallinn, Hacking, and Customary International Law
Gary P. Corn, Robert Taylor, Concluding Observations on Sovereignty in Cyberspace

Class 6:
• Dag Hammarskjöld, ‘The International Civil Servant in Law and in Fact’ (The Oxford Address,
30 May 1961).
• Felice Morgenstern, Legality in International Organizations, 48 British Yearbook of
International Law, 241 (1976).

15
• Jochen von Bernstorff, Autorité oblige: The Rise and Fall of Hans Kelsen’s Legal Concept
of International Institutions 31 EJIL 497 (2020).
• C. Wilfred Jenks, Co-Ordination : A New Problem of International Organization, in Recueil
des cours 70 (1950) at 153
• Kenneth W. Abbott, Philipp Genschel, Duncan Snidal and Bernhard Zangl, Orchestrating
global governance: from empirical findings to theoretical implications, in International
Organizations as Orchestrators (2015).
• Dieter Kerwer and Rainer Hülsse, How International Organizations Rule the World: The
Case of the Financial Action Task Force on Money Laundering 2 J Int’l Org. Studies 50
(2011).
• Thilo Grüning, Tobacco industry attempts to influence and use the German government
to undermine the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (2011).
• Derek Yach, The origins, development, effects, and future of the WHO Framework
Convention on Tobacco Control: a personal perspective, 383 Lancet 1771 (2014).

General perspectives about the theory of cooperation:

• Mancur Olson, The Logic of Collective Action 5-16, 33-36 (1965).

• Albert O. Hirschman, Exit, Voice and Loyalty 1-5, 15-17, 22-25, 30-39 (1970)
• Elinor Ostrom, Governing the Commons (1990), Chapter 2.
• John G. Ruggie, Multilateralism: The Anatomy of an Institution (1992).

Class 7:
• Lorenzo Gasbarri, The Concept of an International Organization in International Law
(2021).
• Ahlborn, ‘The rules of international organizations and the law of international
responsibility’ (2012) 8 International Organizations Law Review 397
• Amerasinghe, ‘International legal personality revisited’ (1995) 47 Austrian Journal of
Public and International Law 123
• Fernando Lusa Bordin, The Analogy between States and International Organizations
(Cambridge: CUP, 2018), Chapter 2
• Kristina Daugirdas, How and why international law binds international organizations,
57 Harvard International Law Journal 325 (2016).
• JAMES HARRISON, MAKING THE LAW OF THE SEA, Chapter 8: Cooperation, coordination and
conflict between international institutions (2011)
• Vincent Chetail The International Organization for Migration and the Duty to Protect
Migrants Revisiting the Law of International Organizations in REVISITING THE LAW OF
INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS, 244 (Jan Klabbers, Ed., 2022).
• Peter Quayle, Treaties of a Particular Type: The ICJ’s Interpretative Approach to the
Constituent Instruments of International Organizations International Organizations
29 Leiden Journal of International Law 853 (2016).

16
 • Elihu Lauterpacht, The Legal Effect of Illegal Acts of International Organisations, in
Cambridge Essays in International Law (1965).
• Institut de Droit International, Resolution: Limits to Evolutive Interpretation of the
Constituent Instruments of the Organizations within the United Nations System by
their Internal Organs (Online Session, 2021).
• Mahnoush Arsanjani, Report of the 7th Commission of the Institut de Droit
International, Are there Limits to the Dynamic Interpretation of the Constitution and
Statutes of International Organizations by the Internal Organs of such Organizations
(with Particular Reference to the UN System)? (2021).

Class 8:
• Grant Ruth & Robert O. Keohane, Accountability and Abuses of Power in World
Politics, 99 Am. Poli. Sci. Rev. 29 (2005).
• Paul Mertenskötter & Richard B. Stewart, Remote Control: Treaty Requirements for
Regulatory Procedures, 104 CORNELL L. REV. 165 (2018).
• Eyal Benvenisti, The Law of Global Governance, Chapter 4 (2014)
• James Crawford, Chance, Order, Change: The Course of International Law, (Collected
Courses of the Hague Academy of International Law vo. 365, 2013) paras. 536-566.
• Jose Alvarez, International Organizations as Law-makers, Chapter 2 (2005).
• Jose Alvarez, The Security Council’s War on Terrorism: Problems and Policy Options,
in Review of the Security Council by Member States, 119-135 (de Wet &
Nollkaemper eds., 2003).
• Antonios Tzanakopoulos, Collective Security and Human Rights, in Hierarchy in
International Law: The Place of Human Rights, 42-70, (Erika de Wet and Jure Vidmar,
eds., 2012).
• Harlow Carol, Global Administrative Law: The Quest for Principles and Values, 17 Eur.
J. Int’l L. 187 (2006).
• Melissa J. Durkee, International Lobbying Law, 127(7) YALE L.J. 1742, 1753-69, 1775-
84, 1788-1826 (2018).
• August Reinisch & Christina Knahr, From the United Nations Administrative Tribunals
to the United Nations Appeals Tribunals- Reform of the Administration of Justice
System within the United Nations, 8 Max-Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law 447
(2008)
• Tamara A. Shockley, Ethics and the United Nations International Civil Servant: The
Jurisprudence of the United Nations Dispute Tribunals and the United Nations Appeals
Tribunal on Workplace Retaliation - The Rights of the 'Whistleblower' in the United
Nations, 20 2 Southwestern J. Int’l Law 1 (2013).
• Meron Theodor & Betty Elder, The New Administrative Tribunal of the World Bank, 14
N.Y.U. J. Int’l L. & Pol. 1 (1981).
• Devika Hovell, ‘Due Process in the United Nations’ (2016) 110 AJIL 1, pp. 1-29

Class 9:

17
 • August Reinisch, Challenging Acts of International Organisations Before
National Courts (2010).
• August Reinisch (ed.), The Privileges and Immunities of International
Organizations in Domestic Courts (2013).
• August Reinisch, International Organizations Before National Courts (2004)
• Fernando Bordin, The Analogy between States and International Organizations
(Cambridge: CUP, 2018), esp. Chapter 2.
• Cedric Ryngaert, The Immunity of International Organizations Before Domestic
Courts: Recent Trends, 7 International Organization Law Review 121 (2010).
• Mohammed Bedjaoui, The New World Order and the Security Council (1993).
• R (on the application of Corner House Research and others) v Director of the
Serious Fraud Office (Appellant) [2008] UKHL 60 (Opinion of Lord Bingham)
• Anthea Roberts, Comparative International Law? The Role of National Courts
in Creating and Enforcing International Law 60 ICLQ 57, 61-64 (2001).
• Kristina Daugirdas, Congress Underestimated: The Case of the World Bank, 107 AM.
J. INT'L L. 517, esp. 536-40, 550-53 (2013).
• Tim Dorlach and Paul Mertenskötter, Interpreters of International Economic Law:
Corporations and Bureaucrats in Contest over Chile's Nutrition Label, 54 Law & Soc.
Rev. 571 (2020).
• Eric Crosbie, Angela Carriedo, Laura Schmidt, Hollow Threats: Transnational Food and
Beverage Companies’ Use of International Agreements to Fight Front-of-Pack
Nutrition Labeling in Mexico and Beyond, Int J Health Policy Manag. 1 (2020).
• Abigail Deshman, Horizontal Review Between International Organizations: Why, How,
and Who Cares About Corporate Regulatory Capture, 22(4) J. Int'l L. 1089, skim 1090-
99, 1099-1113 (2011).
• Rebecca Everly, Reviewing Governmental Acts of the United Nations in Kosovo, 8 GER.
L.J. 21 (2007).
On inter-IO relations:
• Vincent Chetail The International Organization for Migration and the Duty to Protect
Migrants Revisiting the Law of International Organizations in Revisiting the Law of
International Organizations, 244 (Jan Klabbers, Ed., 2022).
• Rene Urueña, Interaction between International Organizations, in in THE CAMBRIDGE
COMPANION TO INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS LAW, 222 (Jan Klabbers ed., 2022)..
• Additional Readings:
• Benjamin Faude, Coordination or conflict? The causes and consequences of
institutional overlap in a disaggregated world order Global Constitutionalism (2020),
9:2, 268–28
• C. Wilfred Jenks, CO-ORDINATION: A NEW PROBLEM OF INTERNATIONAL
ORGANIZATION Recueil des cours 153, esp. Chapter 3
• L. Boisson de Chazournes, Interactions between Regional and Universal
Organizations: A Legal Perspective (Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff, 2017)
• Karen J. Alter and Kal Raustiala, The Rise of International Regime Complexity, 14
Annu. Rev. Law Soc. Sci. 329 (2018)
• Mark A. Pollack and Gregory C. Shaffer, When Cooperation Fails: The International
Law and Politics of Genetically Modified Foods (2019).

18
Class 10:
• Jennifer M. Welsh, International Cooperation Failures in the Face of the COVID-19
Pandemic Learning from Past Efforts to Address Common Threats (2022)
• Armin Von Bogdandy, and Pedro Villareal, ‘International Law on Pandemic Response:
A First Stocktaking in Light of the Coronavirus Crisis’ (Max Plank Institute for
Comparative Public Law and International Law, Research Paper No 2020-07).
• Governance Challenges in Global Health Julio Frenk, M.D., M.P.H., Ph.D., and Suerie
Moon, M.P.A., Ph.D.
• From sovereignty to solidarity: a renewed concept of global health for an era of complex
interdependence Julio Frenk, Octavio Gómez-Dantés, Suerie Moon
• Jan Klabbers, ‘The Normative Gap in International Organizations Law: The Case of the
World Health Organization’ (2019) 16 International Organization Law Review 272
• Adam Kamradt-Scott, The Evolving WHO: Implications for Global Health Security, 6:8
GLOBAL PUBLIC HEALTH, 801 (2011)
• Adam Kamradt-Scott, Kelley Lee, and Jingying Xu, The International Health Regulations
(2005) Asia’s contribution to a global health governance framework, in Asia's Role in
Governing Global Health, 83 (Kelley Lee, et al., Eds., 2012).
• DAVID P. FIDLER, GOVERNANCE AND THE GLOBALIZATION OF DISEASE (2004)
• Nitsan Chorev, The World Health Organization between North and South (Cornell
University Press 2012).
• Sharifa Sekalala, Soft Law and Global Health Problems (Cambridge University Press 2017)
• Jeremy Shiffman, ‘Networks and global health governance’ (2016) 31 Health Policy and
Planning i1
• , Jeremy Shiffman et al, ‘A framework on the emergence and effectiveness of global health
networks’ (2016) 31 Health Policy and Planning i3

The League of Nations Health Organisation:

• Heidi J. S. Tworek, Communicable Disease: Information, Health, and Globalization in the

Interwar Period, 124 American Historical Review, 813 (2019).
• Valeska Huber, Pandemics and the politics of difference: rewriting the history of
internationalism through nineteenth-century cholera, 15 Journal of Global History 394
(2020)
• Martin David Dubin, The League of Nations Health Organisation in International Health
Organisations and Movements, 1918–1939, 56 (Paul Weindling ed., 1995).

Class 11:

19
 • Karen J. Alter, The New Terrain of International Law: Courts, Politics, Rights (2014).
• Laurence R. Helfer, The Effectiveness of International Adjudicators, in The Oxford
Handbook of International Adjudication 464 (Karen J. Alter, Cesare Romano & Yuval
Shany eds., 2014).
• Markus Jachtenfuchs and Nico Krisch, Subsidiarity in Global Governance, 79 Law &
Contemp. Probs. 1 (2016)
• Andreas von Staden, The democratic legitimacy of judicial review beyond the state:
Normative subsidiarity and judicial standards of review 10 I•CON 1023 (2012).
• Benedict Kingsbury and Stephan Schill, Investor-State Arbitration as Governance: Fair
and Equitable Treatment, Proportionality and the Emerging Global Administrative
Law, IILJ Working paper 2009/6
• David Schneiderman, Investing in Democracy? Political Process and International
Investment Law, 60 University of Toronto Law Journal, 909 (2010).
• Andreas Føllesdal, Subsidiarity and International Human-Rights Courts: Respecting
Self-Governance and Protecting Human Rights—Or Neither? 79 Law and
Contemporary Problems, 147 (2016)
• Michael Ioannidis, Beyond the Standard of Review: Deference Criteria in WTO Law
and the Case for a Procedural Approach in Deference in International Courts and
Tribunals 91 (Lukasz Gruszczynski and Wouter Werner Eds., 2014).

Class 12:
• Utility Air Regulatory Group v. EPA, 134 S. CT. 2427 (2014).
• Massachusetts v. EPA, 127 S. Ct. 1438, (2007).
• California V. Trump (2020).
• Louisiana v. Biden, (2022).

Literature on climate litigation:

• Edith Brown Weiss, In Fairness to Future Generations and Sustainable Development, 8

AM. U. J. INT'L L. & POL'Y 19 (1992).
• César Rodríguez-Garavito, Litigating the Climate Emergency: The Global Rise of Human
Rights–Based Litigation for Climate Action, in LITIGATING THE CLIMATE EMERGENCY:
HOW HUMAN RIGHTS, COURTS, AND LEGAL MOBILIZATION CAN BOLSTER CLIMATE
ACTION 9, (César Rodríguez-Garavito ed., 2022);
• Jacqueline Peel & Hari M. Osofsky, A Rights Turn in Climate Change Litigation?, 7(1) TRANS.
ENVTL. L. 37, 40, 61 (2018);
• Jacqueline Peel & Hari M. Osofsky, Climate Change Litigation, 16 ANNU. REV. L. SOC. SCI. 21,
34 (2020).
• Jacqueline Peel and Jolene Lin, Transnational Climate Litigation: The Contribution of the Global
South, 113 Am J Int’l L 679 (2019).
• Elizabeth Donger, Children and Youth in Strategic Climate Litigation: Advancing Rights through
Legal Argument and Legal Mobilization, 11(2) TRANS. ENVTL. L. 263 (2022).
• Larissa Parker et al., When the Kids Put Climate Change on Trial: Youth-Focused Rights-Based
Climate Litigation around the World, 13(1) J. HUM. RTS. ENV'T. 64 (2022).

20
• Elizabeth D. Gibbons, Climate Change, Children's Rights, and the Pursuit of Intergenerational
Climate Justice, HEALTH & HUM. RTS. J., July 2014.
• Christine Bakker, Climate Change and Children's Rights, in THE OXFORD HANDBOOK OF
CHILDREN'S RIGHTS LAW 449 (Jonathan Todres & Shani M. King ed., 2020).
• Anna-Julia Saiger, Domestic Courts and the Paris Agreement's Climate Goals: The Need for a
Comparative Approach Transnational Environmental Law (2019).

Class 13:
• Jenny S. Martinez, Antislavery Courts and the Dawn of International Human Rights
Law, 117 Yale L.J. 550, 552-569 (2008).
• Jean Allain, The Nineteenth Century Law of the Sea and the British Abolition of the
Slave Trade, 78 British Yearbook of International Law 342 (2007).

Class 14:
• Doreen Lustig, The Enduring Charter: Corporations, States, and International Law, in The
Law and Logics of Attribution: Constructing the Identity and Responsibility of States and
Firms (Melissa J. Durkee ed., Cambridge U. Press, FRecorthcoming)
• Doreen Lustig and Eyal Benvenisti, The Multinational Corporation as “the Good Despot”:
The Democratic Costs of Privatization in Global Settings, 15 Theoretical Inquiries in Law
125 (2014).
• Ruggie, Multinationals as global institution: Power, authority and relative autonomy
Regulation & Governance 1–17, (2017).
• Julian Arato, Corporations as Lawmakers, 56 HARV. INT’L L. J. 229 (2015).
• Buhmann, Business and Human Rights: Understanding the UN Guiding Principles from
the Perspective of Transnational Business Governance Interactions’ 6 Transnational
Legal Theory 399 (2015).
• Bueno and Bright, Implementing Human Rights Due Diligence through Corporate Civil
Liability 69 International & Comparative Law Quarterly 789–818 (2020).
• Ratner, Introduction to the Symposium on Soft and Hard Law on Business and Human
Rights’ 114 American Journal of International Law Unbound 163, (2020).
• Simons, International law’s invisible hand and the future of corporate accountability for
violations of human rights 3 Journal of Human Rights and the Environment 5 (2012).
• If you are interested in an historical perspective, see: Lustig, Veiled Power: International
Law and the Private Corporation 1886-1981 (OUP 2020), especially chapter 7.
• Doctorow, ‘African WhatsApp Modders are the Masters of Worldwide Adversarial
Interoperability’, Electronic Frontier Foundation (18 March 2020).
• Jennifer Cobbe, ‘Algorithmic Censorship by Social Platforms: Power and Resistance’
(2020) Philosophy & Technology.
• Gorwa, ‘What is platform governance?’ (2019) 22(6) Information, Community &
Society 854.
• Report of the Secretary-General Roadmap for Digital Cooperation (June 2020) (see also
https://www.un.org/en/digital-cooperation-panel/).

21
 • EU Digital Services Act and Digital Markets Act (replacing the E-Commerce Directive)
– see Proposal of the European Parliament and of the Council (take a look at Sections
1 (‘Context of the Proposal’) and 5 (‘Other Elements – the section ‘Detailed
explanation of the specific provisions of the proposal’). You can also find a summary
of the proposal on the EU Commission website.
• Kaye, Report of the Special Rapporteur on the Promotion and Protection of the Right
to Freedom of Opinion and Expression, UN Doc A/74/486 (9 October 2019).
• Aswad, ‘In a World of “Fake News”, What's a Social Media Company to Do?’ (2020) 4(4)
Utah Law Review 1009.
• Jones, Online Disinformation and Political Discourse: Applying a Human Rights
Framework (6 Nov 2019).

Class 15:
• Thomas Nagel, The Problem with Global Justice 33 Philosophy and Public Affairs 113
(2005).
• Joshua Cohen and Charles Sabel, Extra Rempublicam Nulla Justitia? 34 Philosophy
and Public Affairs 147 (2006).

1.3 - Useful Internet Links

International Organizations Law Review (journal)

International Organizations (journal)

Institute for International Law and Justice, NYU School of Law

Seminar I: The extra-territorial scope of human rights obligations

Seminar II: The IMCO Advisory Opinion

Seminar III: The multilayered system of international human rights law

2.2 - List of documents to be put online 1:

(i) necessary / nécessaires

22
For Seminar 1:

1. Ukraine and the Netherlands v. Russia, ECtHR (applications nos. 8019/16, 43800/14
and 28525/20) (2023) paras. 547-575.
2. Human Rights Committee, General comment No. 36 (2018) on the right to life, Para.
63.
3. Case of Neubauer, The Federal Constitutional Court of Germany (2021) (paras. 143-
149, 178-181)
4. Inter-American Court for Human Rights Advisory Opinion requested by the Republic
of Colombia (trans., 2017) (esp. paras. 81-82, 93-94).
5. The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights: Statement on the
coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic and economic, social and cultural rights
(April, 2020) paras. 19-25; Statement on universal and equitable access to vaccines
for the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) (December, 2020) paras. 9-12.

For Seminar 2:

1. Constitution of the Maritime Safety Committee of the Inter-Governmental Maritime

Consultative Organization, Advisory Opinion, 1960 I.C.J. 150, 154, 170-1 [hereinafter, IMCO
Advisory Opinion] (June 8).
2. Written Statement of the Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, 1959 I.C.J.
Pleadings 247, 250-52 (Dec. 4).
3. Leo Gross, the Advisory Opinion “espouse[d] arbitrariness against order”: Leo Gross, Some
Observations on the International Court of Justice, 56 AM. J. INT’L L. 33 (1962)
4. K. R. Simmonds, The Constitution of the Maritime Safety Committee of IMCO, 12 INT’L & COMP.
L.Q. 56 (1963).

For Seminar 3:

1. Andrew Moravscik, The Origin of Human Rights Regimes: Democratic Delegation in

Post War Europe, 54 INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION 217, 217-220, 225-246 (2000).
2. Beth A. Simmons, Mobilizing for Human Rights International Law in Domestic Politics,
125-148 (2012).
3. Eyal Benvenisti, The Margin of Appreciation, Subsidiarity and Global Challenges to
Democracy, 9 J. Int’l Dispute Settlement, 240 (2018).

(ii) recommended / recommandé

For Seminar I:

1. Al-Waheed & Serder Mohammed v Ministry of Defence [2017] UKSC 2 (paras. 46-58).
2. Report and Recommendations of The President’s Review Group on Intelligence and
Communications Technologies, Liberty and Security In a Changing World 151-162
(2013)

23
 3. Federal Intelligence Service – foreign surveillance, German Federal Constitutional Law
(2020), paras. 245-64.
4. Teitiota v. New Zealand, Human Rights Committee View No. 2728/2016.
5. Case of Georgia v. Russia (II) (ECtHR, Application no. 38263/08) (2021), paras. 8, 50-
58, 109-144, 164-175, 214-220, 293-295, 329-332.
6. Banković v Belgium, Grand Chamber, ECtHR, App no 52207/99 (2001)
7. Human Rights Committee, General Comment No 31, CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add. 13 (para
[10]).
8. Committee against Torture, General Comment No 2, CAT/C/GC/2 (para [7]).
9. Samantha Besson, ‘The Extraterritoriality of the European Convention on Human
Rights: Why Human Rights Depend on Jurisdiction and What Jurisdiction Amounts to’
(2012) Leiden Journal of International Law 857.
10. Joseph Raz, Human Rights in the Emerging World Order (2010) 1 Transnational Legal
Theory 31–47
11. Yuval Shany, The Extraterritorial Application of International Human Rights Law, 409
Collected Courses of the Hauge Academy of International Law, 14, 24-49, 88-92, 93-
100 (2020).
12. Eyal Benvenisti, Sovereigns as Trustees of Humanity: On the Accountability of States
to Foreign Stakeholders 107 Am. J. Int’l L 295 (2013).

For Seminar II:

1. Eyal Benvenisti, How the Power of the Idea Disempowered the Law: Understanding the
Resilience of the Law of International Organisations, University of Cambridge Faculty of Law
Research Paper No. 29/2023, available at
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4613839
2. S Borg, ‘The Influence of International Case Law on Aspects of International Law Relating to
the Conservation of Living Marine Resources Beyond National Jurisdiction’ (2012) 23
Yearbook of International Environmental Law 44, 56.

3. Christian Hendriksen, Navigating norms and invisible rules: Explaining the case of business
influence in international shipping regulation, 24 BUS. POLIT. 79, 80 (2022).
4. also Harilaos N. Psaraftis & Christos A. Kontovas, Influence and Transparency at the IMO: The
Name of the Game, 22 MAR. ECON. & LOGISTICS 151 (2020).

For Seminar III:

1. Eyal Benvenisti, Reclaiming Democracy: The Strategic Uses of Foreign and

International Law by National Courts, 102 AM. J. INT’L L. 241, 244-252, 268-273 (2008).
2. Ed Bates, The Evolution of the European Convention on Human Rights From Its
Inception to the Creation of a Permanent Court of Human Rights Chapter 6 (2010).

24
2.3. - List of references: for further study (iii) 2

For Seminar 1:

• Lord Dyson, Master of the Rolls, ‘The Extraterritorial Application of the European
Convention on Human Rights: Now on a Firmer Footing, But is it a Sound One?’ (Lecture,
Essex University, January 2014) (available here).
• Marko Milanovic, Extraterritorial Application of Human Rights Treaties (OUP 2011)
(available as an Ebook).
• Marko Milanovic, ‘Al-Skeini and Al-Jedda in Strasbourg’ (2012) 23 EJIL 121.
• Robert Howse and Tim Josling, Agricultural Export Restrictions and International Trade
Law: A Way Forward (2012).
• The Law on Natural Disasters: http://globaltrust.tau.ac.il/the-duty-to-provide-
humanitarian-assistance-in-the-event-of-disasters/
• Robert McCorquodale and Penelope Simons, Responsibility Beyond Borders: State
Responsibility for Extraterritorial Violations by Corporations of International Human
Rights Law 70 Modern Law Review 598 (2007).
• Maastricht Principles on Extraterritorial Obligations of States in the area of Economic,
Social and Cultural Rights (2012).
• Vedanta Resources PLC v Lungowe [2019] UKSC 20.
• Jodie A. Kirshner, A Call for the EU to Assume Jurisdiction over Extraterritorial Corporate
Human Rights Abuses, 13 Nw. J. Int'l Hum. Rts. 1 (2015).
• Marko Milanovic, Human Rights Treaties and Foreign Surveillance: Privacy in the Digital
Age 56 HARVARD INTERNATIONAL LAW JOURNAL 81 (2015)

For Seminar 2:

• MD SAIFUL KARIM, PREVENTION OF POLLUTION OF THE MARINE ENVIRONMENT FROM

VESSELS: THE POTENTIAL AND LIMITS OF THE INTERNATIONAL MARITIME ORGANISATION
(2015).
• ALAN KHEE-JIN TAN, VESSEL-SOURCE MARINE POLLUTION: THE LAW AND POLITICS OF INTERNATIONAL
REGULATION 61 (2006)
• See eg regarding Liberia, Carlos Felipe Llinas Negret, Pretending to Be Liberian and
Panamanian; Flags of Convenience and the Weakening of the Nation State on the High Seas,
47 J. MARIT. LAW COMMER. 1 (2016)
• BOLESLAW ADAM BOCZEK, FLAGS OF CONVENIENCE: AN INTERNATIONAL LEGAL STUDY (1962).
• Paul Stephen Dempsey & Lisa L. Helling, Oil Pollution by Ocean Vessels – An Environmental
Tragedy: The Legal Regime of Flags of Convenience, Multilateral Conventions, and Coastal
States, 10 DENV. J. INT’L L. & POL’Y 37 (1980)
• ELIZABETH R. DESOMBRE, FLAGGING STANDARDS: GLOBALIZATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL,
SAFETY, AND LABOR REGULATIONS AT SEA (2006)
• Robin Geiß & Christian Tams, Non-Flag States as Guardians of the Maritime Order: Creeping
Jurisdiction of a Different Kind?, in JURISDICTION OVER SHIPS: POST-UNCLOS
DEVELOPMENTS IN THE LAW OF THE SEA 19, 24 (Henrik Ringbom ed. 2015)

25
For Seminar 3:

• MARKO DURANTI, THE CONSERVATIVE HUMAN RIGHTS REVOLUTION (2017).

• Bruce Bueno de Mesquita & George W. Downs, Development and Democracy, 84 FOREIGN
AFFAIRS 77 (2005).
• Erik Voeten and Yonatan Lupu, Precedent in International Courts: A Network Analysis of
Case Citations by the European Court of Human Rights, 42 BRITISH JOURNAL OF POLITICAL
SCIENCE 413 (2012).
• Mikael Rask Madsen, The Challenging Authority of the European Court of Human Rights:
From Cold War Legal Diplomacy to the Brighton Declaration and Backlash, 79 LAW AND
CONTEMPORARY PROBLEMS 141 (2016).
• Mikael Rask Madsen, The Legitimization Strategies of International Judges: The Case of
the European Court of Human Rights, in SELECTING EUROPE’S JUDGES (Michal Bobek Ed.,
2015).
• Helga Molbæk-Steensig and Alexandre Quemy, Judicial Independence and Impartiality:
Tenure Changes at the European Court of Human Rights, EUROP. J. INT’L L (advance access,
2023).

2.4. - Useful Internet Links

26