No Clear Standards for Commissions of Inquiry
- 12 years ago
No Clear Standards for Commissions of Inquiry
American Society of International Law - The Ritz-Carlton
Commissions of Inquiry into Armed Conflict, Breaches of the Laws of War and Human Rights Abuses: Process, Standards, and Lessons LearnedOver the last decade, international commissions of inquiry have increasingly been used to conduct fact-finding investigations and report on alleged international law violations by states or other parties to conflicts. Recent examples include the UN expert panel to investigate alleged human rights abuses in the Sri Lankan civil war, and the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on the Conflict in Georgia. There have also been domestic commissions of inquiry into the Iraq war. Speakers will consider: When should such commissions be established? What should their guiding purpose be? What should be the structures of accountability and independence? What lessons have been learned about process? How does politicization occur and why? And, are these commissions effective?Moderator:PHILIP G. ALSTONNew York University School of LawSpeakers:AGNIESZKA JACHE NEALEUniversity of EssexHEIDI TAGLIAVINIMinistry of Foreign Affairs, Government of SwitzerlandInternational law, and the world in which it operates, are increasingly both harmonious and dissonant. The Society’s Annual Meeting in 2011 will focus on the evolution of international law in the context of this paradox.The paradox of simultaneous segmentation and seamlessness raises important questions. Most broadly, when should international law be segmented, and when should it be seamless? What are the mechanisms for deciding this question, and what are the values that inform those decisions? What do these trends say about international law as a coherent system? To what extent are certain groups and their viewpoints excluded or ignored? What does this say about who the influential players within the international legal system are, and how that influence is exercised? What does the existence of competing conceptions of international law itself mean for ASIL's constituents, including judges deciding international issues, practitioners seeking to persuade courts and craft international policy, and scholars seeking to understand and propose solutions to global problems?Society members are uniquely positioned to tackle these questions with their diverse perspectives, experiences, and areas of expertise, and their unifying commitment to investigating the limits and possibilities of international law. We look forward to an exciting and dynamic meeting that will examine such trends, and their implications for international law and legal institutions in the 21st century.
American Society of International Law - The Ritz-Carlton
Commissions of Inquiry into Armed Conflict, Breaches of the Laws of War and Human Rights Abuses: Process, Standards, and Lessons LearnedOver the last decade, international commissions of inquiry have increasingly been used to conduct fact-finding investigations and report on alleged international law violations by states or other parties to conflicts. Recent examples include the UN expert panel to investigate alleged human rights abuses in the Sri Lankan civil war, and the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on the Conflict in Georgia. There have also been domestic commissions of inquiry into the Iraq war. Speakers will consider: When should such commissions be established? What should their guiding purpose be? What should be the structures of accountability and independence? What lessons have been learned about process? How does politicization occur and why? And, are these commissions effective?Moderator:PHILIP G. ALSTONNew York University School of LawSpeakers:AGNIESZKA JACHE NEALEUniversity of EssexHEIDI TAGLIAVINIMinistry of Foreign Affairs, Government of SwitzerlandInternational law, and the world in which it operates, are increasingly both harmonious and dissonant. The Society’s Annual Meeting in 2011 will focus on the evolution of international law in the context of this paradox.The paradox of simultaneous segmentation and seamlessness raises important questions. Most broadly, when should international law be segmented, and when should it be seamless? What are the mechanisms for deciding this question, and what are the values that inform those decisions? What do these trends say about international law as a coherent system? To what extent are certain groups and their viewpoints excluded or ignored? What does this say about who the influential players within the international legal system are, and how that influence is exercised? What does the existence of competing conceptions of international law itself mean for ASIL's constituents, including judges deciding international issues, practitioners seeking to persuade courts and craft international policy, and scholars seeking to understand and propose solutions to global problems?Society members are uniquely positioned to tackle these questions with their diverse perspectives, experiences, and areas of expertise, and their unifying commitment to investigating the limits and possibilities of international law. We look forward to an exciting and dynamic meeting that will examine such trends, and their implications for international law and legal institutions in the 21st century.