CALL FOR PAPERS: “Hidden Figures”: The United Nations War Crimes Commission and the Codification of the international criminal Law (Ludwigsburg, 20-21 February 2020) (DEADLINE: 30 November 2019)

(Source: Hsozkult)

Via Hsozkult, We learned of a call for papers for junior researchers on the impact of the UNWCC (created during World War II) on the Codification of the international criminal law.

““Crimes against peace” and “crimes against humanity” are undoubtfully two elements of a crime which have acquired enormous resonance in the legal and moral discussions in the aftermath of the WWII. They are often connected to the International Military Tribunal and the person of the American chief prosecutor at Nuremberg, Robert Jackson, who also was the head of the American delegation to the London Conference. It is frequently overlooked, that the way for the London Charter was paved by the United Nations War Crimes Commission (UNWCC). The UNWCC was established in October 1943 by seventeen of the Allied nations, including the European occupied countries like France and Poland but also New Zeeland and China, the only Non-Western independent nation. Its main function was to formulate and implement general measures for trial and punishment of alleged Axis war criminals. […]”

The full call can be found on Hsozkult

(source: ESCLH Blog)

CALL FOR PAPERS: Roman Yearbook of International Law, Inaugural Issue, DEADLINE: 28 FEBRUARY 2019

(Source: RYIL)

We learned of a Call for Papers for the inaugural issue of the Roman Yearbook of International Law. The focus theme is “The 90th anniversary of the creation of the Vatican City State: an international law perspective”. Here the call:

The Editors of RYIL invite submissions for the Inaugural Issue Vol. No. 1 (2019) of the RYIL.

Focus Theme

The Focus Theme for the Issue Vol. No. 1 is:

The 90th anniversary of the creation of the Vatican City State: an international law perspective.

The following topics have been optioned:

Editorial

The creation of the Vatican City State and the discussion of the international legal personality of the Holy See within the European context between the 19th and the 20th century.

G. Dalla Torre, The enhanced mutual legal assistance between the Holy See and Italy pursuant to the Lateran Treaty

T. Di Ruzza, The territory of the Vatican City State and the extraterritorial areas of the Holy See

R. Ranjeva, The recognition of the Holy See and the Westphalian State system: an alternative paradigm of State?

General Section

The General Section hosts Articles, Notes and Comments addressing general issues of international law and practice not necessarily linked to the practice of the Holy See and the Vatican City State.

The following topics have been optioned:

V. Buonomo, The reception of the international law in the Vatican City State legal order

E. Decaux, The Holy See as State party to human rights law treaties

E. Mikos-Skuza, The Holy See and the development of the humanitarian law

Deadline

Submissions, including a statement of affiliation, brief abstract and confirmation of exclusive submission, shall be sent by 28 February 2019 via e‐mail at the address: submissions@ryil.org.

Language

The RYIL publishes manuscripts in English.

Double blind review

All manuscripts submitted will be evaluated for their scientific quality and contribution to the academic debate. They will be subject to double blind review.

Statement of Affiliation

Authors must provide a brief statement of affiliation in the first footnote of their manuscripts.

Abstract and Keywords

Manuscripts proposed as articles must include an abstract (100-200 words) and keywords (6 to 8 words).

Original Work

Authors must confirm that the article they wish to submit has only been submitted to the RYIL, that the article has not been previously published and that it is not currently under consideration for another Publication and/or by another Publisher.

Length Requirements

Word counts for manuscripts vary by section and subject matter. These counts are therefore intended as guidance rather than as strict requirements. Submissions significantly above or below these ranges may be returned to authors for revision. All word counts are inclusive of footnotes.

Articles: 8.000-15.000 words

Notes and Comments: 2.000-7.000 words

Reviews: 1.500-3.000 words

Technical Requirements

Articles must be submitted in MS Word (up to version 2010) or WordPerfect (up to X5).

Formatting

Submissions must be saved in a standard format (Times New Roman or Arial) with unjustified right margins, 1.5 lines spacing and without automatic hyphenation.

Reference style

Footnotes and reference must be presented according to the Oxford Reference Style.

Editorial policy

The Editors accept manuscripts with the understanding that the contents are original and unpublished materials and that they have not been submitted for publication elsewhere.

Authors using previous and unpublished materials (working papers, research-projects, lectures, conferences, short shots etc.) or their parts must indicate their intentions at the time of the submission.

Authors submitting manuscripts consent to the double blind review process and expressly confirm that their manuscripts have not been submitted and are not under consideration for publication elsewhere. Double submissions will be rejected without exception.

Authors intending to republish RYIL’s Articles (as well as Notes, Comments, or Reviews) must have the prior consent of the Editors.

The Editors reserve the right to return manuscripts if they do not meet RYIL’s standards. If a manuscript is accepted for publication but does not conform to the RYIL’s standards, the Editors reserve the right to return the manuscript to the Author for revisions.

Authors have the right to make final corrections to the proofs prior to printing within the given deadline, bearing in mind that only minor corrections can be made to proofs.

Authors of published Articles, Notes, Comments and Reviews receive an off-prints of the Issue.

The CIDIR has the ownership of the copyright of any published manuscript.

More information here

(source: ESCLH Blog)

CALL FOR PAPERS: SEMINAR: On the Origins of International Legal Thought (Cambridge: Lauterpacht Centre, 7 Dec 2018) DEADLINE 31 JUL 2018

(image source: Lauterpacht centre)

Comprehension of the development of legal thought over time is necessary for any historical, philosophical, practical, or theoretical enquiry into the subject today. Perspective is everything. When seen against the background of broad geopolitical, diplomatic, administrative, intellectual, religious, and commercial changes, law begins to appear very resilient. It withstands the rise and fall of empires. It provides the framework for the establishment of new orders in the place of the old. Today what analogies, principles, and authorities of law have survived these changes continue to inform so much of the international legal tradition, and it is unobvious why tomorrow will be any different.

An intimate seminar will take place across one day at the Lauterpacht Centre for International Law towards the end of Michaelmas Term. Participation is open to academics from around the world. The conference is free, with little chance of a per diem reimbursement, however there may be some prospect for the remuneration of a portion of travel and accommodation expenses in exceptional cases.

A handful of candidates will be invited to participate personally, and this line-up will be confirmed at a later date. On top of this, there are between three and four positions available to be filled. Although the call is open to historians and legal scholars working in any period from Ancient Rome to the present, preference will be shown towards historical research framed within the period between 1860 and 1939, especially if concern is shown for private international law, public international law, or legal/state personality in this period. Sympathy towards imperial, interpolitical, and/or interreligious perspectives will be especially welcome. More than anything else, participants should be prepared to contemplate the dynamism of legal thought in various contexts. If your work meets a good standard, there is every prospect of inclusion within an edited collection of chapters, entitled Empire and Legal Thought (Oxford University Press). If you would like to be included within this collection, a full chapter of 8,000 words will need to be provided before the end of the calendar year. Please, therefore, send an abstract of between 200 and 500 words, along with some indication of whether or not you would like to contribute a chapter to a volume for OUP, to lawandempirecambridge@gmail.com, by July 31st, 2018. All things considered, participants who are prepared to publish a chapter along the lines of the presentation will be favoured at the shortlisting stage.

This seminar will be organised and led by Dr Edward Cavanagh FRHistS is a Fellow of Downing College, a Fellow of the Lauterpacht Centre of International Law, an Associate Fellow at the Institute for Commonwealth Studies, and a member of the Faculty of History at the University of Cambridge. He has published several articles across law and history in a number of well reputed outlets, including Law and History Review, Itinerario, Modern Intellectual History, Historical Journal, Comparative Legal History, History Compass, South African Journal on Human Rights, and Journal of Imperial and Commonwealth History.

(source: ESCLH Blog)

CALL FOR PAPERS: The Paris Peace Conference and the Challenge of a New World Order (Paris, June 2019); DEADLINE 1 JUNE 2018

                                              (Source: H-Net)

A call for papers has been announced at H-Announce for a conference on "The Paris Peace Conference and the Challenge of a New World Order", to be held in Paris in June 2019.

Type: 

Call for Papers

Date: 

September 26, 2017 to June 1, 2018

Location: 

France

Subject Fields: 

Colonial and Post-Colonial History / Studies, Diplomacy and International Relations, Nationalism History / Studies, Women's & Gender History / Studies, World History / Studies

The Peace Conference held in Paris in the aftermath of the Great War remains among the most important yet also most controversial events in modern history. Although it is often considered to have made a second global war all but inevitable, it has also been praised for providing the basis for an enduring peace that was squandered recklessly by poor international leadership during the 1930s.

A major international conference will take place in Paris in June 2019 to commemorate the centenary of the 1919 Conference from a global perspective. The purpose of this event is to re-examine the history of the Peace Conference through a thematic focus on the different approaches to order in world politics in the aftermath of the First World War. A remarkably wide range of actors in Paris - from political leaders, soldiers and diplomats to colonial nationalist envoys and trade unionists, economists, women's associations and ordinary citizens - produced a wide array of proposals for a future international and, indeed, global order. These proposals were often based on vastly different understandings of world politics. They went beyond the articulation of specific national security interests to make claims about the construction and maintenance of peace and the need for new norms and new institutions to achieve this aim. To what extent the treaties and their subsequent implementation represented a coherent world order remains a question of debate. 

By 'order', we mean in the first instance, the articulation and development of systematic ideas, institutions and practices aimed at promoting a durable peace that would deliver security, economic recovery and social justice. This distinguishes thinking about 'order' from discussions of 'national interests' - though there was of course overlap between these two modes of thinking about future international relations. Second, we are interested in 'order' as an analytical concept in its own right. This encourages historians to identify, as Paul Schroeder has argued, the shared rules, assumptions and understandings about a particular set of political relations and to show how specific decisions reflect the norms of the order.

Emphasising the preoccupation of peace-makers with the problem of world order broadens the scope of the familiar questions and debates that have dominated the literature on the Peace Conference. It also opens the way for posing new questions and for thinking about more familiar questions in new ways. We therefore invite papers addressing the following questions:

1. What were different conceptions of political, economic and social order advocated at the Paris Conference? What was the relationship between different ideas about the international order, such as a system based on national self-determination and one based on the rule of law? Were there broad over-arching conceptions of an international order, such as liberal and socialist internationalism, that could accommodate more narrowly focused ideas such as free trade or labour rights? How did people conceive of the relationships between self-interest and order? What role did power politics play in conceptions of international order? Were the absentees from Paris - notably the Germans and the Bolsheviks - able to shape the debate about the emerging international order?
2. What were the origins of these different ideas about order? Why was there such an interest in the systematic development of particular orders both during and after the war? Who produced ideas about order, and why? What was in particular the role of NGOs and ordinary citizens? Can an approache based on different 'generations' of international actors illuminate this problem in new ways? Was the idea of 'order' a reaction to international politics before and during the war? Or did it represent a continuity with certain strands of thinking about international politics that pre-dated the outbreak of war in 1914? What was the relationship between the articulation of war aims and ideas about post-war order?
3. To what extent did contending visions of an international order shape the peace treaties? Did the organization and proceedings of the Conference reflect tensions between the national, the regional and the global? What was the role of regional orders in shaping broader conceptions of a new world order? To what extent did discourses concerning new regional orders reflect fundamental changes in the conceptualization of world politics? To what extent were they a repackaging of the more familiar themes of empire or spheres of influence?
4. How were the peace treaties legitimated to domestic and international audiences? Were subsequent negotiations on the implementation and revision of the peace treaties shaped by the profound debates about international politics that took place before and during the Peace Conference? Were conceptions of international order systematically subordinated to concerns about national security? Conversely, to what extent can it be argued that the Paris Peace Conference produced or contributed to a disorder in European politics that led ultimately to the Second World War?
5. What was the impact of the Paris Peace Conference on views of world order based on gender, class and race? How did women, workers and colonial subjects respond to the peace conference and what was its impact on the emergence of alternative voices in international affairs? Whose voices were heard at Paris in 1919 and whose remained silent or were silenced?
6. What political and diplomatic practices were implied in these various conceptions of international order? To what extent did these practices shape the course of international relations in 1919? Did the intellectual debate and political experience of the Paris Peace Conference play a role in shaping a future generation of leaders (such as Jean Monnet and John Foster Dulles)?

Paper proposals

The conference organisers aim to ensure the conference provides a global perspective on the Paris Peace Conference. We are therefore particularly keen to receive proposals from scholars working on topics pertaining to the non-western world.

The conference languages will be English and French

Regardless of language, all proposals will receive serious consideration.

The deadline for proposals is: 1 June 2018

Please send your proposal (abstract in English or French of no more than 500 words) and short CV to Axel Dröber: ADroeber@dhi-paris.fr.

Conference Steering Committee

Laurence Badel (Université de Paris I Panthéon-Sorbonne)

Eckart Conze (Philipps-Universität Margurg)

Norman Ingram (Concordia University)

Peter Jackson (University of Glasgow)

Stefan Martens (Deutsches Historisches Institut, Paris)

Matthias Schulz (Université de Genève)

William Mulligan (University College Dublin)

Comité scientifique

Andrew Barros (Université de Québec à Montréal)

Carl Bouchard (Université de Montréal)

Eric Bussière (LABEX EHNE)

Michael Clinton (Gwynedd Mercy University)

Olivier Compagnon (Paris III - Sorbonne Nouvelle)

Beatrice de Graaf (Utrecht)

Vincent Dujardin (Université catholique de Louvain)

Olivier Forcade (Université de Paris - Sorbonne)

Erik Goldstein (Boston University)

Jean-Michel Guieu (Université de Paris I - Panthéon-Sorbonne)

Talbot Imlay (Université Laval)

Stanislas Jeannesson (Université de Nantes)

John Keiger (Cambridge University)

William Keylor (Boston University)

Antoine Marès (Université de Paris I - Panthéon-Sorbonne)

Holger Nehring (University of Stirling)

Jennifer Siegel (The Ohio State University)

Glenda Sluga (University of Sydney)

Georges-Henri Soutou (Collège de France)

Christian Tams (University of Glasgow)

Hugues Tertrais (Commission of History of International Relations - ICHS)

Martin Thomas (University of Exeter)

Antonio Varsori (University of Padua)

Hirotake Watanabe (Tokyo University of Foreign Studies)

Xu Guoqi (University of Hong Kong)

CALL FOR ABSTRACTS: Law and Empire in the Longue Durée (Cambridge, 23-24 Mar 2018); DEADLINE 31 JUL 2017

(image source: Wikimedia Commons)

The Legal History Blog advertises the following call for abstracts:

This is a general call for papers in anticipation of an intimate two-day seminar to be held at the University of Cambridge on Friday 23rd March and Saturday 24th March, 2018. This will be an advanced workshop, with drafts circulated in advance. The event will showcase a number of rare and searching attempts to identify continuities and differences across ancient, medieval, and modern legal and imperial contexts. This moves back towards Braudel while also tailing in the direction of all that heat left by David Armitage and Jo Guildi’s fiery interventions in The History Manifesto, which calls for newly ambitious historical studies to break from long-set moulds. Empire lends itself naturally to explorations of this kind using large time-frames. Not only is this due to the endurance of many empires across centuries, but this also owes to the presence (and comparability) of empires within different periods. Legal source materials are helpful for facilitating this kind of approach, whether relating to private law events or the public nature of imperium. In the right hands, legal texts, court records, official opinions, drafted constitutions and acts, along with the correspondences and commentaries relating thereto can push us to contemplate a number of bold conclusions about economics, politics, society, religiosity, and humanity in general.

Abstracts of proposals (between 200 and 500 words) will be accepted until July 31st, 2017, at lawandempirecambridge@gmail.com. PhD students and postdoctoral scholars are encouraged to include a CV with their proposal. Your proposal will be especially welcome if you anticipate to be able to share work according to the following guidelines:
1)      It will extend across at least three centuries OR will otherwise offer an original reinterpretation of a more focused period with the explicit goal to allow for new studies across periodizations;2)      It will cover any period from Ancient Greece to the present day (900 BC — 2017 AD), with preference, however, shown for the period between the latter Roman Empire and the interwar period (500 AD – 1939 AD);3)      It will explore a historical topic relevant to law (broadly encompassing legal thought, legal process, public law, private law, and constitutionalism) OR empire (pertaining either to specific imperial regimes or to imperium as synonym for public authority, sovereignty, authority), with preference shown to approaches that consider BOTH;
4)      It will be laid out in a thematic or chronological narrative style, or otherwise in case studies unified appropriately in conclusion.
For enquiries and submissions, please contact Dr Edward Cavanagh, at lawandempirecambridge@gmail.com. 

CALL FOR PAPERS: Rethinking the World Order: International Law and International Relations at the End of the First World War, Oxford, 31 Aug-1 Sep 2017 (DEADLINE 31 MAR 2017)

(image source: Rethinking the World Order)

The horrors of the Great War and the desire for peace shaped scholarship in International Law and International Relations (IR) during the late 1910s—a stimulating time for both disciplines. Scholars observed and analysed political events as they unfolded but also took an active part, as governmental advisors or diplomatic officials, in devising the new international order. The Paris Peace Conference and the subsequent birth of the League of Nations as well as the Permanent Court of International Justice served as testing grounds for new legal and political concepts. The end of the First World War was in many ways a milestone for both disciplines, prompting scholars to reflect on the consequences of the war on society, politics, and the world economy. How could another world war be avoided in the future? How could states be held accountable for violations of international law? What were the preconditions for peaceful international governance? These questions led to pioneering research on issues such as arbitration, sanctions, revision of treaties, supra-national governance, disarmament, self-determination, migration, and the protection of minorities. At the same time, the study of International Law and IR also advanced in terms of methodology and teaching, including new professorships, journals, conferences and research centres.
A century later, it is a good moment to reflect upon disciplinary histories and revisit some of the theoretical and practical debates that shaped the period from 1914 to 1945. The workshop conveners are particularly (but not exclusively) interested in the following research questions:

• Was the First World War a watershed moment for the development of International Law and IR?
• Which were the key debates in both disciplines? And how can they be re-interpreted today?
• What were the connections and/or dividing lines between the two disciplines?
• Did International Law and IR evolve similarly across different countries?
• Who were the principle actors, both individuals and institutions, in the respective fields?
• Which role did International Law and IR respectively play in shaping ‘real-world’ policy? And to what extent were theoretical developments shaped by political events?
• How did ideas float between academia and politics?
• How successful were non-governmental organisations—such as academic societies, arbitration clubs, political pressure groups, League of Nations clubs, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), etc.—in achieving their goals?

The two-day interdisciplinary workshop will be held at the European Studies Centre (ESC) at St Antony’s College, Oxford from 31 August to 1 September 2017. We invite abstracts from early career researchers and advanced postgraduate students in history, law, IR and other related disciplines to share their research in a multi-disciplinary environment. By facilitating this exchange we hope to open new avenues of research and to encourage new approaches to the history of both disciplines. We are planning to have six panels, one keynote address, and an open plenary session that allows all participants to pitch their research projects.

Please submit your proposal (including a title, 300 words abstract, and a short bio) to jan.stoeckmann@new.ox.ac.uk by 31 March 2017. Successful applicants will be notified by 30 April 2017. We are currently working on logistical details, including reimbursements and publication plans, and will keep you updated. For updates see: www.rethinkingtheworldorder.wordpress.com.

Contact:

Dr Gabriela Frei
British Academy Postdoctoral Research Fellow
Junior Research Fellow in History
Jesus College, Oxford
gabriela.frei@jesus.ox.ac.uk 

Jan Stöckmann
DPhil Candidate in History
New College, Oxford
jan.stoeckmann@new.ox.ac.uk
www.rethinkingtheworldorder.wordpress.com

CONFERENCE: ‘A Violent World? Changes and Limits to Large-Scale Violence in Early Modernity’ (Oxford, 29 June-1 July 2017) DEADLINE 31 DEC 2016

(image source: Oxford University)

The University of Oxford's Centre for Global History organizes a conference on violence in early modernity.

Conference description:

This conference brings global approaches to the history of violence, reassessing the nature of violence during the early modern period. Using violence and the restraint of violence as a unifying theme, participants are encouraged to make trans-national comparisons and connections across the early modern world. 

An abstract of 400 words, accompanied by a short (two-page) CV, should be submitted to globalviolence@history.ox.ac.uk by 31 December 2016. 
The history of violence and its restraint has been crucial to definitions of ‘Western civilization’ and the modern world, often by contrasting them with barbaric predecessors and the cultures that they claim to have tamed. Yet, evidence for the restraint of violence varies according to one’s viewpoint: the sharp decline of homicide in seventeenth-century Europe, for example, diverges from the simultaneous rise in violence of Atlantic colonial societies. As histories of violence and restraint are usually written from national and nationalist perspectives, this conference brings global approaches to the study of violence in order to probe historical assumptions about the limits of violence and its decline during the early modern period. It thereby also questions narratives of the inexorable rise of the nation-state alongside historical periodization of the ‘early modern’ and ‘modern.’ 
Recent historical approaches to violence, shaped by the cultural turn, have tended to focus on inter-personal violence and its patterns in civil society. This conference will integrate warfare and other crucial forms of large-scale violence with recent scholarship on the history of collective and inter-individual violence. By examining large-scale, organized violence alongside broader social and cultural patterns, this conference will explore the boundaries between ‘war’ and ‘violence’, as well as how they relate to ideas of morality, social order, law, and political legitimacy in the early modern world. We encourage scholars to address contemporary perceptions of violence and its restraint, framing analysis through thematic, rather than geographic, approaches. 
Given that we are encouraging scholars to probe assumptions about historical periods, our definition of ‘early modern’ is purposefully flexible.
Confirmed speakers include: Wayne Lee, Alan McFarlane, Stuart Carroll, Pratyay Nath, Brian Sandberg, Cecile Vidal, Lauren Benton, Adam Clulow, Simon Layton, Richard Reid, and James Belich.
We welcome papers that address:
- Global comparisons and indicators of violence
- Definitions of organized violence and crime, such as banditry and piracy
- Linkages between organized, collective and interpersonal violence
- Law’s penetration into oceanic, battlefield, domestic, and/or other novel arenas
- The nature of extra-territorial violence
- Actual practices of violence
- Toleration and restraint of violence
- Methods of measurement, used by contemporaries and/or historians, in assessing what is or was appropriate
We particularly welcome papers on violence in regions not covered by confirmed speakers, such as China, Russia, the Ottoman Empire, and Africa.

Organisation:

Peter H. Wilson, Chichele Professor of the History of War, University of Oxford
Marie Houllemare, Institut Universitaire de France, Université d’Amiens (CHSSC)
Erica Charters, Oxford Centre for Global History Centre, University of Oxford

CALL FOR ABSTRACTS: ESIL RESEARCH FORUM, Granada: Workshop "Neutrality in the History of International Law - Myths and Evolving Realities"; DEADLINE 15 DEC 2016

(image source: Wikimedia Commons)

No law is neutral. Law is always a mirror of the value-system and the power structure  underlying  any  given  society  at  any  point  in  time and international law has never been an exception to this rule. A different, and yet related matter, is the extent to which the law applies equally (or not) to all members of any given society, the extent to which these members participate as equals (or not) in the formation of international law and the extent to which the law is effectively (or not) applied in an objective and un-biased manner (what is, commonly known, as 'neutrally') by international bodies and adjudicators charged with applying it to international situations or with settling disputes between any given parties. The aspiration towards 'neutrality'  (as  such  conceived)  of  international  law  in  its  quest  for  an ever-greater  legitimacy,  has, undoubtedly, evolved  throughout  different historical  periods.  

Neutrality  in  the  history  of  international  law can,  on the other hand, also be understood as a legal institution. Neutrality as a legal  institution  was  born  as a  synonym  for  emancipation  from  a  rigorous moral  top-down  juridical-moral  framework  inherited  from  theology. Its theoretical  blossoming  went  in  parallel  with  the  consolidation  of  the principle  of  sovereign  equality  of  nations  and  the  principle  of  non-intervention in domestic affairs during the transition of the classical law of nations to modern international law. Since the establishment of the first international  institutions  with  universal  and  permanent  character, neutrality  as  a  legal  institution  has  continued  to  evolve  against  the background  provided  by  the  ever-shifting  chessboard  of  international relations  and  proliferating  international  institutions. 

Finally,  the relationship of neutrality and the history of international law can be also examined  through  the  lenses  of  the  neutrality  (or  lack  of)  of  history writing itself. If all history is, as B. Croce noted, contemporary history (by which it is generally meant that all history writing is, in one degree or other, done from the perspective of the present and also that all history writing  constitutes  an  intervention  in  the  present)  could  any  historical account  possibly  aspire  to  be  considered  a  'neutral'  history  of international law? And, if so, under what criteria? 

    

The  Interest  Group  of  the  History  of  International  Law  welcomes  abstracts that  engage  critically  with  any  of  these  dimensions  of  neutrality  in  the history  of  international  law  or  a  combination  thereof  in  historical perspective  by  reference  to  relevant  episodes  in  the  history  of international law and/or different historiographical schools.   

  

Each submission should include: 

– An abstract of no more than 400 words, the intended language of presentation, 

– A short curriculum vitae containing the author’s  name,  institutional  affiliation,  contact  information  and  e-mail address. 

Applications should be submitted to both Ignacio de la Rasilla del Moral (ignacio.delarasillaydelmoral@graduateinstitute.ch);  and Frederik  Dhondt (frederik.dhondt@vub.ac.be)   by  15th December  2016.  All  applicants  will  be notified of the outcome of the selection process by 15th January 2017.  

Selection will be based on scholarly merit and with regard to producing an engaging  workshop,  without  prejudice  to  gender,  seniority,  language  or geographical  location.  Please  note  that  the  ESIL  Interest  Group  on  the History  of  International  Law  is  unable  to  provide  funds  to  cover  the conference registration fee or related transport and accommodation costs.  

More information on the Research Forum (30-31 March 2017) can be found on the website of the European Society of International Law or on the Granada Law School website.

CALL FOR ABSTRACTS: ESIL RESEARCH FORUM, Granada: Workshop "Neutrality in the History of International Law - Myths and Evolving Realities"; DEADLINE 15 DEC 2016

(image source: Wikimedia Commons)

No law is neutral. Law is always a mirror of the value-system and the power structure  underlying  any  given  society  at  any  point  in  time and international law has never been an exception to this rule. A different, and yet related matter, is the extent to which the law applies equally (or not) to all members of any given society, the extent to which these members participate as equals (or not) in the formation of international law and the extent to which the law is effectively (or not) applied in an objective and un-biased manner (what is, commonly known, as 'neutrally') by international bodies and adjudicators charged with applying it to international situations or with settling disputes between any given parties. The aspiration towards 'neutrality'  (as  such  conceived)  of  international  law  in  its  quest  for  an ever-greater  legitimacy,  has, undoubtedly, evolved  throughout  different historical  periods.  

Neutrality  in  the  history  of  international  law can,  on the other hand, also be understood as a legal institution. Neutrality as a legal  institution  was  born  as a  synonym  for  emancipation  from  a  rigorous moral  top-down  juridical-moral  framework  inherited  from  theology. Its theoretical  blossoming  went  in  parallel  with  the  consolidation  of  the principle  of  sovereign  equality  of  nations  and  the  principle  of  non-intervention in domestic affairs during the transition of the classical law of nations to modern international law. Since the establishment of the first international  institutions  with  universal  and  permanent  character, neutrality  as  a  legal  institution  has  continued  to  evolve  against  the background  provided  by  the  ever-shifting  chessboard  of  international relations  and  proliferating  international  institutions. 

Finally,  the relationship of neutrality and the history of international law can be also examined  through  the  lenses  of  the  neutrality  (or  lack  of)  of  history writing itself. If all history is, as B. Croce noted, contemporary history (by which it is generally meant that all history writing is, in one degree or other, done from the perspective of the present and also that all history writing  constitutes  an  intervention  in  the  present)  could  any  historical account  possibly  aspire  to  be  considered  a  'neutral'  history  of international law? And, if so, under what criteria?

   

The  Interest  Group  of  the  History  of  International  Law  welcomes  abstracts that  engage  critically  with  any  of  these  dimensions  of  neutrality  in  the history  of  international  law  or  a  combination  thereof  in  historical perspective  by  reference  to  relevant  episodes  in  the  history  of international law and/or different historiographical schools.   

 

Each submission should include:

– An abstract of no more than 400 words, the intended language of presentation,

– A short curriculum vitae containing the author’s  name,  institutional  affiliation,  contact  information  and  e-mail address.

Applications should be submitted to both Ignacio de la Rasilla del Moral (ignacio.delarasillaydelmoral@graduateinstitute.ch);  and Frederik  Dhondt (frederik.dhondt@vub.ac.be)   by  15th December  2016.  All  applicants  will  be notified of the outcome of the selection process by 15th January 2017. 

Selection will be based on scholarly merit and with regard to producing an engaging  workshop,  without  prejudice  to  gender,  seniority,  language  or geographical  location.  Please  note  that  the  ESIL  Interest  Group  on  the History  of  International  Law  is  unable  to  provide  funds  to  cover  the conference registration fee or related transport and accommodation costs.  

More information on the Research Forum (30-31 March 2017) can be found on the website of the European Society of International Law or on the Granada Law School website.

CALL FOR ABSTRACTS: (Dis)continuities in the Legal Protection of Refugees: comparing refuge for religious minorities in the 17th and 18th century with the Common European Asylum System (Amsterdam, 30 Sep 2016); DEADLINE 30 APR 2016

(image source: Wikimedia Commons)

VENUE: Paul Scholten Centre for Jurisprudence, University of Amsterdam, NL
DATE: Friday 30 September 2016
DEADLINE: Submission proposal 30 April 2016
ORGANIZERS:
- Maarten den Heijer (Amsterdam Center for International Law, University of Amsterdam)
- Geert Janssen (Amsterdam School of Historical Studies, University of Amsterdam)
- Gregor Noll (International Law, Lund University)
- Thomas Spijkerboer (Migration Law, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam)
- Bas Schotel (Paul Scholten Centre for Jurisprudence, University of Amsterdam)

Theme
This workshop explores historical legal arrangements providing protection to refugees in order to better understand the structure of legal protection of refugees in Europe today. The workshop concentrates on how the protection of religious refugees in 17th and 18th century was legally structured. The historical legal mechanisms will be contrasted with the current European refugee regime, in particular the Common European Asylum System (CEAS).

Target audience and aim of the workshop
The workshop is aimed at scholars of early modern history, legal history and refugee law, with an interest in identifying (dis)continuities between historical and current legal mechanisms offering protection to refugees. Contributors are asked to consider afresh their existing research and knowledge of the sources with a view to identifying relevant (dis)continuities. The aim is to produce an edited volume or special issue with an expert journal of refugee law or refugee policy. This workshop is a first step in this process as the first draft papers should identify the (dis)continuities that can be fruitfully pursued.

Novelty
The novelty of the workshop is threefold. Firstly, while there is extensive scholarship on religious refugees in 17th and 18th century, it does not focus explicitly on the legal mechanisms offering protection to refugees directly or obliquely. Secondly, (dis)continuities between the historical and current refugee regimes will help legal experts of the CEAS better understand the conditions that foster or hamper legal protection of refugees today. Thirdly, the historical legal regimes may inspire legal experts to explore alternative routes for structuring and conceptualizing legal protection of refugees under the CEAS.

Relevance
The institutional framework that is supposed to deal with the current refugee crisis facing Europe is the CEAS. The central logic of the CEAS is one of unity: it aims to be a homogenous system that presents itself vis-à-vis refugees as a single jurisdiction. Furthermore, the official ideology underlying the current protective mechanism relies on human rights and equality. Yet, when it comes to refugees precisely in times of crises when protection is most needed unity, human rights and equality often fail to deliver. This workshop may help explore alternative routes of legal protection of refugees.

Deadlines
Paper proposals of no more than 500 words can be sent to Bas Schotel (b.schotel1@uva.nl) by 30 April. Decisions will be communicated by 15 May. First draft paper should be submitted by 16 September to be circulated in advance among participants.

Fees and catering
There will be no participation fee charged for the workshop. One lunch and one dinner will be offered to presenters and discussants. Participants should make their own travel and accommodation arrangements.

(source: Dutch-Flemish Association for Early Modern Historyà)