Uber knows. Do you?
Law shapes and is shaped by the contemporary, dominant economic system. This contribution illustrates this finding by the case of Uber.
Articles for category: Focus
The ICJ’s Treatment of Questions of Occupation in Gaza
The ICJ’s treatment of the state of occupation in Gaza is questionable. While it rightly accepted the functional approach to occupation, I doubt whether Israel was indeed capable of exercising its authority in Gaza sufficiently for its occupation to be found as having continued post-2005. The Court should have relied on Israel’s continued exercise of administrative authority vis-a-vis Gaza residents to find the existence of a state of occupation.
The Functional Approach as Lex Lata
The ICJ has de facto adopted the functional approach to occupation with regard to Gaza. The Opinion is thus a critical point in the development of the law of occupation, in that it transcends a binary approach to the question of the existence of occupation, in favour of a more nuanced approach that enables holding that a territory is occupied, but not in an “all or nothing” way. More generally, the Opinion as rejects a more restrictive approach to the question of whether occupation exists in a territory or not in favour of a more flexible approach.
The Advisory Opinion on Israel’s Policies and Practices in the Occupied Palestinian Territory
This post analyses the separation between jus ad bellum / in bello as arising from the Advisory Opinion of the ICJ. This separation was challenged by many States appearing before the Court, some of which implied that Israel’s policies and practices, as violations of jus in bello, rendered the occupation unlawful under jus ad bellum. The Court ultimately reaffirmed the separation with a twofold argument, namely qualifying the ‘legality of the occupation’ as a jus ad bellum question, and framing Israel’s policies and practices (prolonged occupation, annexation, and settlement policy) as violations of jus ad bellum.
From Illegal Annexation to Illegal Occupation: The Missing Link in the Reasoning of the International Court of Justice
The Court’s determination that Israel’s annexation policies render its continued presence in the West Bank unlawful finds no basis in the international prohibition against the use of force. Moreover, the Court’s determination circumvents the Law of State Responsibility that determines the consequences of Israel’s unlawful annexation policies.
Privatisierung für wen?
Nahezu jeder Beitrag zum Symposium zeigt, dass ein Theorie-Import der LPE-Positionen aus Yale nicht bruchlos möglich ist. Zugleich gibt es gerade in Europa Forschungsprojekte zu Recht und politischer Ökonomie gibt, die sowohl theoretisch fundiert als auch eingebettet in eine konkretisierende Praxis arbeiten. Mit ihnen können wichtige gesellschaftliche Infrastrukturen stabil, klimaschonend und innovativ umgestaltet werden.
Privatization for whom?
Almost every contribution to the symposium shows that it is not possible to import LPE positions from the US without friction. At the same time, an LPE Europe research agenda exists that is theoretically sound and embedded in a concretising practice. This could be used to reorganise important social infrastructures in a stable, climate-friendly and innovative way.
The Role of Private Law in Times of Polycrisis
Crises are a good test case, not only to check the practical performance of the law, but also to gain conceptual clarity about the possibilities of (certain areas of) the law. This post compares a German regulatory approach to private law with the US Law and Political Economy movement.
A Seismic Change
It is no understatement to say that the 19 July 2024 ICJ Advisory Opinion constitutes a seismic change in the international law and practice on the question of Palestine. In one fell swoop, the ICJ has shifted what was hitherto an almost exclusive focus of the international community on how Israel has administered its 57-year occupation of the Occupied Palestinian Territory under International Humanitarian Law and International Human Rights Law, to the requirement that Israel end its occupation of that territory as “rapidly as possible”.
The Legality of the Occupation and the Problem of Double Effect
The conflict between Israel and Palestine, or more accurately, between the two Peoples, has persisted for over a century. A tragic reminder of the unbearable costs of this conflict is the deadly October 7 attack by Hamas on Israel, and the ensuing war, which has led to horrific consequences, with thousands of Israelis and Palestinians killed, many severely injured, and extensive damage to the civilian infrastructure in the Gaza Strip. In these circumstances, an important question arises: what role should international law and international tribunals play in mitigating the grave harm to all those involved in the conflict?
