Search results

This paper aims to discuss the positioning of international organisations (IOs) in the realm of international law. It proposes a more robust approach, arguing IOs have legal obligations akin to states to the extent which could be fulfilled by them. This paper suggests making IOs parties to international treaties like the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), International Covenant on Economic Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) and Geneva Convention 1949 to codify their international responsibilities. In addition, it proposes amending multilateral treaties to grant IOs membership and create binding legal obligations for them, thereby enhancing the overall legal framework for IOs.

The paper opted for qualitative analytical approach of research by referring to international treaties and scholarly papers.

The authors have evaluated the bindingness of international law on IOs. The authors argue that jus cogens and customary international law are equally binding on IOs. However, treaties could only be binding on IOs to the extent of their consent. The authors have assessed prior violations of IOs. The authors argue that, to prevent such violations by IOs, creating obligations is the first step. Second, amendments are required in the existing international treaties that reflect the foundations of international humanitarian and international human rights law like the Geneva Convention 1949, ICCPR, and ICESCR, to permit IOs to join these treaties, resulting in binding international legal obligations.

The most prominent assertion of this paper is that IOs as subjects of international law are bound by the principles of international law, including treaty law with consent, customary international laws, general principles of law and peremptory norms. To fulfil these obligations, a regime needs to be introduced wherein amendment is made in treaties to make IOs parties to them and structuring the law on responsibility for IOs. Considering the multifaceted nature of IO, the role it performs in contemporary times requires them to be bound by rules of international law just like states. There is a need to settle their position in global governance and give them more teeth to understand and fulfil their duties to ensure smooth functioning in the long run.

The paper fulfils an identified gap in the positioning of IOs under the international law.

This chapter examines the explosion in International Humanitarian Law between the US Civil War and World War I. The primary foci are the Hague Conventions on land warfare and the Geneva Conventions for the sick and wounded. This body of treaties is the foundation of IHL and the modern laws of war. Most of central issues in the international laws of war emerge in this period.

This chapter provides a brief overview of the history of the laws of war up to the mid-1800s CE. It discusses the interconnection between social and historical forces, armies, and the laws that govern them.

This chapter focuses on the US Civil War of 1861–1864, the application of the laws of war to a civil war, and gives great attention to US Army General Order 100 (aka The Lieber Code), the first set of laws to direct and constrain the behavior of troops in the field.

This chapter explores the nature of military law and IHL during the cold war period. It explores what treaties were completed, Additional Protocols I and II of the 1949 Geneva Conventions, the ad hoc international tribunals of the 1990s and 2000s, and examines the ICJ’s ruling of the legality of nuclear weapons.

The rule of law has been tried in many countries under the state of exception during COVID-19. This chapter focusses on the case of Finland, the only Nordic country to declare a state of exception during the pandemic. Drawing from theoretical accounts on the state of exception, it analyses to what extent the Finnish democratic Rechtsstaat has coped in the state of exception.

The authors propose the concepts of a radical and restrained state of exception and argue that while the Finnish states of exception were rather restrained than radical, there are risks involved in the fact that powers granted by the Emergency Powers Act to be used during a state of exception are moved to normal legislation. Indeed, as Giorgio Agamben, among others, has warned, the state of exception may become permanent and undermine democracy and the rule of law. The chapter provides a dialogue between theory and empirics related to a state of exception, applying theoretical insights on the case of Finland during COVID-19.

Regulated differently in modern constitutions, emergency rule is a case of awkward, and dilemmatic, legal fine-tuning of an ambivalent political move that leads the executive of a democratic regime to the verge of the constitutional system. For that reason, as an utmost situation, emergency rule becomes a testing field for the resilience of the constitutional order. It affects its own foundations, the basic rights, and thus the constitutional capability to make possible their fulfilment. It also serves to appraise the workings of democratic regimes and, accordingly, the type of legitimacy derived from their institutional performance. Furthermore, it provides a vantage point to watch the reactions of both their representatives and their publics. Focussed on the COVID-19 pandemic, this chapter compares the cases of Germany and Spain through their legal regulations of emergency rule and their governments’ responses. Having rather analogous emergency legislations, from 2020 through 2022, there have been significant differences in their decision-making patterns.

This chapter examines World War II and its impact on international and military law. It covers the war’s key crimes, the Nürnberg and Tokyo tribunals, and the creation of the United Nations, the Four Geneva Conventions of 1949, and the Genocide Convention of 1948.

This study presents time-series data estimations on the association between the indicators of institutional environment and inward foreign direct investment (FDI) in India utilizing a comprehensive data set from 1996 to 2021.

The study employs the nonlinear autoregressive distributive lag (NARDL) model. The asymmetric ARDL framework evaluates the existence of cointegration among the factors under study and highlights the underlying nonlinear effects that may exist in the long and short run.

The significance of coefficients of negative shock to “control of corruption” and positive shock to “rule of law” is greater when compared to “government effectiveness, regulatory quality, political stability/absence of violence.” The empirical outcomes suggest the positive influence of rule of law, political stability and government effectiveness on FDI inflows. A high “regulatory quality” is observed to deter foreign investment. The “voice and accountability” index and negative shocks to the “rule of law” are exhibited to have no substantial impact on the amount of FDI that the country receives.

This study empirically examines the institutional determinants of FDI in India for a comprehensive period of 1996–2021. The study's findings imply that quality of the institutional environment has a significant bearing on India's inward FDI.

The peer review history for this article is available at: https://publons.com/publon/10.1108/IJSE-05-2023-0375

This study aims to understand why some social and environmental reporting (SER) regulations are more successful than others in modifying collective corporate reporting behaviour and expectations. More specifically, it presents a qualitative and historically informed exploration of the construction of the enabling conditions for corporate adoption of SER regulation in a national context.

Drawing on insights from structuration theory and the sociological approach to legal studies, the authors examined the normative persuasion of the first regulation in Spain requiring firms to disclose social and environmental information in a stand-alone report: Article 39 of the Spanish Sustainable Economy Law. The case study is based primarily on 38 semi-structured interviews with relevant actors involved in this SER regulation from 2008 to 2014. Other sources such as legal and policy documents, historical documents, books, press reports and field notes from attendance at technical meetings related to the phenomenon under study help inform and complement the analysis of the interviews.

The analysis reveals that the agency of regulators, regulatees and other relevant actors involved in the SER regulation led to the law becoming a dead letter. However, only by examining the structural circumstances, shaped by history and socio-economic context, can the authors understand how the normative persuasion of law is constructed or undermined.

The study underscores the importance of the national context in developing corporate social responsibility (CSR) regulation and the crucial role of history. The results of this research also suggest that significant progress towards a more transformative CSR regulation cannot be achieved without the support of enabling structures/

Recent SER regulations (European Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive and IFRS sustainability standards, to mention those that are gaining most traction) may not achieve sufficient compliance if those responsible for drafting them do not ensure that the conditions for the emergence of regulatory persuasion are met. Regulators must therefore have a profound understanding of how these conditions are constructed as part of a historical process inextricably linked to the social structures of the environment in which the law is to be applied.

The study reveals the changing landscape of corporate social responsibility, where scientists, academics, NGO activists and civil society organisations struggle to gain some agency in a field populated by actors, such as trade unions or employers, who were constitutive of Western industrial liberal democracies.

This study presents an in-depth and historically grounded analysis of the dynamics involved in creating the conditions that lead to successful SER legislation in a national context.