This is a study of the principal negotiating processes and law-making tools through which contemporary international law is made. It does not seek to give an account of the traditional - and untraditional - sources and theories of international law, but rather to identify the processes, participants and instruments employed in the making of international law. It accordingly examines some of the mechanisms and procedures whereby new rules of law are created or old rules are amended or abrogated. It concentrates on the UN, other international organisations, diplomatic conferences, codification bodies, NGOs, and courts. Every society perceives the need to differentiate between its legal norms and other norms controlling social, economic and political behaviour. But unlike domestic legal systems where this distinction is typically determined by constitutional provisions, the decentralised nature of the international legal system makes this a complex and contested issue. Moreover, contemporary international law is often the product of a subtle and evolving interplay of law-making instruments, both binding and non-binding, and of customary law and general principles. Only in this broader context can the significance of so-called 'soft law' and multilateral treaties be fully appreciated. An important question posed by any examination of international law-making structures is the extent to which we can or should make judgments about their legitimacy and coherence, and if so in what terms. Put simply, a law-making process perceived to be illegitimate or incoherent is more likely to be an ineffective process. From this perspective, the assumption of law-making power by the UN Security Council offers unique advantages of speed and universality, but it also poses a particular challenge to the development of a more open and participatory process observable in other international law-making bodies.

Customary International Humanitarian Law, Volume I: Rules is a comprehensive analysis of the customary rules of international humanitarian law applicable in international and non-international armed conflicts. In the absence of ratifications of important treaties in this area, this is clearly a publication of major importance, carried out at the express request of the international community. In so doing, this study identifies the common core of international humanitarian law binding on all parties to all armed conflicts. Comment Don:RWI.

The International Law Commission was established in 1947 with a view to carrying out the responsibility of the General Assembly, under article 13(1)(a) of the Charter of the United Nations, to "initiate studies and make recommendations for the purpose of ... encouraging the progressive development of international law and its codification." Since its first session in 1949, the Commission has considered a wide-range of topics of international law and made a number of proposals for its codification and progressive development, some of which have served as the basis for the subsequent adoption of major multilateral treaties. The Yearbook of the International Law Commission contains the official records of the Commission and is an indispensable tool for the preservation of the legislative history of the documents emanating from the Commission, as well as for the teaching, study, dissemination and wider appreciation of the efforts undertaken by the Commission in the progressive development of international law and its codification. Volume I reproduces the summary records of the Commission's annual sessions.

This book reviews the responsibility of states for acts contrary to international law and examines the connections between institutions, rules and practice.

EtYIL 2019 comes out while the world is in the midst of a new coronavirus pandemic that has infected millions and killed thousands of people without distinction as to age, race, colour, or creed. As an attack on all humanity, Covid-19, the disease caused by the coronavirus, has challenged the fitness of the global order as never before, and its institutional and normative frameworks have been found wanting. As is often the case in such circumstances, when the WHO is denied resources to assist those countries or the WTO is unable to guarantee access to Covid-19 medical supplies and protective equipment, it is the poorest nations that suffer the most. EtYIL’s mission is to provide a platform for purpose-oriented scholarly analysis and debate on issues of particular significance for African countries such as Covid-19, disputes over Nile water resources, and Ethiopia-Eritrea relations. Although the pandemic came too late for this issue of EtYIL, we have managed to include two important articles that examine the subject from geostrategic and legal perspectives. EtYIL 2019 also addresses a number of other topical issues, including the responsibility of the UN Security Council (UNSC) in climate-related risks to least developed countries, the Global South’s approach to environmental protection, the challenges of international regulation of arms brokering, and the contributions of Martin Luther King, Jr. to Pan-Africanism and international human rights law. Finally, the Yearbook also continues its coverage of regional issues such as the evolving Ethiopia-Eritrea relations, Djibouti’s accession to the ICSID Convention; the trilateral negotiations between Ethiopia, Sudan and Egypt over the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam and the U.S. meddling and the role of the UNSC on the issue have also been covered. As before, our contributors come from all over the world, to all of whom we extend our sincere appreciations.

Actio Popularis before International Courts and Tribunals examines actio popularis in the context of the symbiotic relationship between procedural and substantive normativity in international law. Actio popularis is an important procedural tool devised to address the challenges posed by the relativization of substantive normativity and recognition of norms established to protect collective interests in international law. Farid Ahmadov’s analysis underlines the ineffectiveness of bipolar litigation in enforcement of collective obligations in international law and the importance of introducing new procedural mechanisms to address the challenges posed by the transition from bilateralist to multilateralist normativity. The volume highlights the subtle link between interpretation of standing rules and the ways in which judicial policy concerns inform decisions of international courts and tribunals on admissibility of actio popularis.

"Formerly known as the International Citation Manual"--p. xv.

International law holds a paradoxical position with territory. Most rules of international law are traditionally based on the notion of State territory, and territoriality still significantly shapes our contemporary legal system. At the same time, new developments have challenged territory as the main organising principle in international relations. Three trends in particular have affected the role of territoriality in international law: the move towards functional regimes, the rise of cosmopolitan projects claiming to transgress state boundaries, and the development of technologies resulting in the need to address intangible, non-territorial, phenomena. Yet, notwithstanding some profound changes, it remains impossible to think of international law without a territorial locus. If international law is undergoing changes, this implies a reconfiguration of territory, but not a move beyond it. The Netherlands Yearbook of International Law was first published in 1970. It offers a forum for the publication of scholarly articles of a conceptual nature in a varying thematic area of public international law.