Isn’t it Ironic?

Since we do believe in the power of sharing personal experiences and in solidarity, we decided to share ours through this symposium as they highlight the different shapes and forms that silencing attempts and chilling effects can take, as well as the salience of solidarity in academia. They further unearth the hidden costs associated with pursuing publication projects that resist topical normalization and try instead to re-open space for important – yet often uncomfortable – conversations in a highly polarized political environment.

Volkswagen, Oxen, Timber, and Slave Labour in Brazil

Last week, a Brazilian Court ordered Volkswagen to pay the historic sum of US$ 30 million for collective moral damages for slave labour in the Amazon during Brazil’s military dictatorship (1964-1985). The judgment contains numerous significant findings that will serve as important references for future cases involving serious corporate human rights violations. In this piece, however, we focus on its reliance on the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, which not only impose due diligence obligations on Volkswagen but also play a key role in strengthening collective memory.

Rainbow in the Dark

On 16 July, the Hong Kong government introduced the Registration of Same-sex Partnerships Bill in the Hong Kong Legislative Council. This move was mandated by two decisions of Hong Kong’s apex court in a 2023 case. The Bill grants same-sex couples who have already registered overseas the rights to have their relationships legally recognised. The decisions came as a beam of light at the grim time of Hong Kong’s authoritarian turn. They can inspire judicial strategies to navigate a liberal enclave within the authoritarian regime, and demonstrate the correlation between gender backlash and constitutional degradation.

Epistemic Authority and the Right to Science in AO-32/25

Traditionally, the right to science as occupied a marginal place within the contentious and advisory architecture of the Inter-American system. However, in its Advisory Opinion–AO-32/25, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights changes this framework by shifting the right to science from a peripheral tool of knowledge dissemination to a central axis of disputes over epistemic authority in public policy formation. This repositioning is not merely about expanding the scope of an undervalued right but about redefining its legal status based on the structural transformations imposed by the climate crisis on the normative production forms and institutional recognition of knowledge.

The School Bell That Rings for War

On 1 September, known in Russia as Knowledge Day, thousands of schoolchildren were once again welcomed back with the ringing of the symbolic first bell, marking the beginning of new school year. However, this school bell does not toll for knowledge or peace. Instead, it symbolizes how Russia has transformed schools into factories for transmitting state-sponsored propaganda to younger generations. In this blog, I explain how Russia is strategically weaponizing the educational system to raise a militarized generation of subjects that accepts and embraces the normalcy of war. It seeks to achieve this goal, inter alia, through military training and involvement of children in the production of combat equipment; obligating teachers to teach state-mandated falsification of history; and forcing cultural assimilation of Ukrainians living in occupied territories.  

Reproduktive Ungerechtigkeit

Reproduktive Rechte befinden sich weltweit in einer Krise. Der aktuelle Weltbevölkerungsbericht der Vereinten Nationen zeigt, dass Familienplanung und Fortpflanzung unter erheblichem (bevölkerungs-)politischen Druck stehen, auch in Deutschland. Schwarze Aktivistinnen fordern seit langem, diese Entwicklung nicht nur als Einschränkung persönlicher Freiheit zu sehen, sondern die strukturellen Ursachen als Teil der reproduktiven Gerechtigkeit („Reproductive Justice“) zu betrachten. Das erfordert ein Umdenken.

Hanan Ashrawi

Few advocates of Palestinian liberation have become as familiar a name as Dr. Hanan Ashrawi. A principled activist and gifted speaker with a formidable academic background, she rose to international prominence during the First Intifada in 1988. Later, with the start of the Madrid Conference in 1991, she caught the world’s attention as the official representative of the Palestinian delegation.

The Next Episode On Gender-Based Asylum

One of the CJEU’s most talked-about recent cases asks a simple question: when does someone belong to a “particular social group” under EU refugee law? On 11 June 2024 in K, L v Staatssecretaris van Justitie en Veiligheid (K, L), the CJEU found that, women who genuinely came to identify themselves with the fundamental value of equality between women and men during their stay in the host country can be regarded as belonging to a particular social group. However, the implementation of the K, L judgment has led to a divergence between national policy and national courts over the meaning of “identification with the fundamental value of equality between women and men.”

“Occupation” as Euphemism

On 10 August, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu gathered a press conference to explain an earlier cabinet decision “to occupy” Gaza. What he introduced, to the dismay of allied governments in Europe, was a military incursion on Gaza City and “the central camps and Mawasi.” Netanyahu promised a “non-Israeli civilian administration” and, in English, adjusted the earlier framing of the operation, which had by then been embraced and echoed in Israeli media: that plan is “not to occupy Gaza, but to free it.” Such rhetoric invites scrutiny – not only for the legal ramifications of the acts announced, but it also calls into attention the shifting uses of the word occupation in Israeli political discourse.

A Panoply of Consequences?

Among the most significant – but underexplored – aspects of the ICJ’s climate advisory opinion is its treatment of reparations and remedies. This blog post unpacks the legal consequences outlined by the ICJ, examining what the opinion says – and does not say – about how climate-related harm should be remedied. At the heart of this analysis lies a central question: can the affirmation of legal responsibility, without clear guidance on the design of reparations, meaningfully advance climate justice?