International Public Law & politics

General information : International Public Law & politics

Highlights

BookCover

The World’s Stateless
Institute on Statelessness and Inclusion


To end statelessness worldwide by 2024. That is the ambition of the #ibelong campaign, spearheaded by UNHCR, which aims to galvanise governments, civil society, UN agencies and others into action. It is a bold but appropriate objective. Statelessness has been a cause of human suffering for too long, and unnecessarily so: it is a man-made phenomenon and bringing it to an end is – at least in theory – entirely feasible. The Institute on Statelessness and Inclusion is committed to helping to inform and catalyse solutions for statelessness. In the hope of contributing to a better sense of the task ahead, this inaugural World’s Stateless report explores currently available statistical data and discusses the challenges involved in accurately mapping or quantifying statelessness. From this analysis, the report distils recommendations to states, UNHCR and civil society on how to improve data collection and reporting on statelessness. The Institute on Statelessness and Inclusion is an independent, non-profit organisation dedicated to leading an integrated, inter-disciplinary response to the injustice of statelessness and exclusion. Established in August 2014, it is the first global centre of expertise and action committed to promoting the rights of stateless persons and reducing statelessness worldwide. We believe in the value of research, education, partnership and advocacy. We aim to develop and share our skills and expertise with partners in civil society, academia, the UN and governments, and to serve as a catalyst for change.

Recent Publications

image1

Footprints of the 20th Century - Third Edition
F.A.M. Alting von Geusau

Since 1989, we refer to the whole post-war period as the “Cold War Era”. Such was not the case in 1968. At the time, the Cold War – in our perception – was behind us. We no longer felt to be in the midst of it. Europeans on the Western side of the Iron Curtain0 felt relatively at ease with Europe’s division. The era of Détente as we called it, was0 considered to be a fairly stable and long-lasting political condition, even after Soviet tanks crushed Dubcek’s socialism with a human face in Prague.
A strange year it was… 1968. Academic interest was focused on the war in Vietnam, non-proliferation of nuclear weapons, the French Gaullist challenge to the European Communities and the student revolt in Paris. The Western democracies promoted the process of détente on the basis of three political illusions. They assumed that common institutions between East and West would generate a sense of common interest in European security, facilitating negotiated solutions of outstanding problems. They expected East-West economic cooperation to promote reform from above in the East, towards more open societies. They hoped to foster democracy and respect for human
rights through cooperation in the cultural and human dimension. By 1989 all three of them had proven to be illusions. The end of the Soviet system came as a complete surprise to most politicians and to all Western advocates of détente in the Nineteen Eighties. The so-called dissidents won a peaceful victory over the one-party, repressive regimes in the East and helped to end the post-war division of Europe. Obviously, neither the (now former) communists nor the advocates of détente ever admitted their wrong. So they went all into the business of proclaiming a new era as a continuation of the old one. The greatest catastrophe of the Twentieth Century was Lenin`s creation of totalitarian Soviet Russia at the end of the Great War and not its collapse at the end0 of the Cold War, as president Putin said in 2005. This volume particularly challenges the past illusions of détente and the present approach of organized forgetting the past.
Since the successful and peaceful revolution in 1989 ended the division of Europe and the bipolar nuclear stalemate, we collectively entered the brave new world of organised forgetting. Nevertheless, the footprints of that past century are still all around. This0 series is intended to identify, to explain and to remember, because the more things are0 said to change, the more things appear to remain the same. We must therefore learn from history if only to avoid repeating a few of the blunders of the past century.
Prof. Jhr.Dr. Frans A.M.Alting von Geusau (1933) is professor (em.) of International Law and Western Cooperation at Tilburg University and Leiden University.  

image1

Footprints of the 20th Century - Third Edition
F.A.M. Alting von Geusau

For the study of international relations, knowledge of the history of Western Cooperation in the Twentieth Century is essential. The third volume reviews the broader history from America’s entry in the First World War in 1917 and the start of the American Era in international relations one hundred years ago, to the inauguration of President Trump in 2017.
The American Era in world politics may well have come to its final end, when US President Donald Trump and British Prime Minister Theresa May agreed to build a new special, bilateral relationship on “America First” and “Global Britain”. The Atlantic Charter (1941) founded the special relationship between the United States and Great Britain, for that purpose. In reality, the special relationship was instrumental in creating the system of successful Western cooperation, characterized by new multilateral institutions – exactly the opposite of what President Trump and Prime Minister May had in mind for their special bilateral relationship, when they met in January 2017.
This volume on “Western Cooperation” deals with the American era in world politics, characterised by the creation of such international institutions as the League of Nations, the United Nations, ILO, IBRD, IMF and UNESCO. NATO, the principal subject of Part II in this volume, was considered to be the cornerstone of the Alliance of democracies since the onset of the Cold War.
In Part II, developments are examined in a circumscribed period – from the outbreak of the First World War in July 1914 to the celebration of NATO’s Sixtieth Anniversary on 4 April 2009, and the New Epilogue covers until the inauguration of Donald Trump as President of the United States in January 2017.
Since the successful and peaceful revolution in 1989 ended the division of Europe and the bipolar nuclear stalemate, we collectively entered the brave new world of organised forgetting. Nevertheless, the footprints of that past century are still all around. This series is intended to identify, to explain and to remember, because the more things are said to change, the more things appear to remain the same. We must therefore learn from history if only to avoid repeating a few of the blunders of the past century.
Prof. Jhr.Dr. Frans A.M. Alting von Geusau (1933) is professor (em.) of International Law and Western Cooperation at Tilburg University and Leiden University.

image1

Footprints of the 20th Century - Third Edition
F.A.M. Alting von Geusau

The story of European Unification is fascinating. In 1950, two sworn enemies – France and Germany – decide to seek reconciliation and European federal unity. As a first step, they created the European Coal and Steel Community together with Italy and the Benelux countries. The fathers of this new Europe were visionary persons. Does today`s student or scholar still know who Robert Schuman, Konrad Adenauer, Alcide de Gasperi or Willem Beyen were and what they stood for? At the time, the United Kingdom refused the invitation to join such a federal project. Under American pressure they asked for admission in 1961, entered in 1973 without ever accepting the federal project and decided to leave in March 2017 after a small majority voted for Brexit in June 2016. What began as a process of reconciliation between two enemies – France and Germany – became a peaceful enlargement of the European Union to twenty-eight Member States. The division of Europe between a Soviet dominated East and a Euro-Atlantic West is no more. This volume not only tells a success story. It also makes us understand why after more than sixty years the Germans lack the solidarity and the French the political vision to turn the Euro-crisis into true progress towards unity. Against the background of Europe`s long and turbulent history, this book may also help to understand why it is so difficult to overcome nationalism and to practice the virtue of solidarity so central to the Christian source of Europe as a civilization. Since the successful and peaceful revolution in 1989 ended the division of Europe and the bipolar nuclear stalemate, we collectively entered the brave new world of organised forgetting. Nevertheless, the footprints of that past century are still all around. This series is intended to identify, to explain and to remember, because the more things are said to change, the more things appear to remain the same. We must therefore learn from history if only to avoid repeating a few of the blunders of the past century. Prof. Jhr.Dr. Frans A.M.Alting von Geusau (1933) is professor (em.) of International Law and Western Cooperation at Tilburg University and Leiden University.

image1

Footprints of the 20th Century - Third Edition
F.A.M. Alting von Geusau

This fifth and final volume offers a critical assessment of the state of the law of nations. In the twenty first century the world needs true global law anchored in the dignity of the human person rather than weak international law built on the interests of major sovereign states. One hundred years after the outbreak of the Great or First World War in 1914 and twenty-five years after the peaceful end of the Cold War in 1989, little appears to have been learnt from the scale of disasters that befell the world between the assassination in Sarajevo in 1914 and the annexation of Sebastopol in 2014. The failure to learn from history largely comes from unconverted political leaders and ideologies of progress. The birth of modern international law, assumed to have taken place in 1648, was no moment of progress, nor was the Congress of Vienna in 1815. The peace of Westphalia reduced the law of nations to interstate law. Moreover, today’s dismal record of major sovereign powers, nicknamed the ‘international community’, with such issues as human rights, the use of force, the abolition of nuclear weapons and peace in the Middle-East proofs that for justice and order a transition from international law to global law needs to be realized. Throughout the book one finds lightening examples of persons who, by their courage and dedication, could make the difference. Among them are Henri Dunant, Ruth Klüger, Andrei Sacharov, Nelson Mandela and Pope John-Paul II. Since the successful and peaceful revolution in 1989 ended the division of Europe and the bipolar nuclear stalemate, we collectively entered the brave new world of organised forgetting. Nevertheless, the footprints of that past century are still all around. This series is intended to identify, to explain and to remember, because the more things are said to change, the more things appear to remain the same. We must therefore learn from history if only to avoid repeating a few of the blunders of the past century. Prof. Jhr.Dr. Frans A.M.Alting von Geusau (1933) is professor (em.) of International Law and Western Cooperation at Tilburg University and Leiden University.

image1

Volume I - Cultural Diplomacy: Waging War by other Means
F.A.M. Alting von Geusau

The peaceful collapse of the Soviet totalitarian, communist system has been a watershed of historic proportions in Europe and the world. In 1989, unexpectedly, Communism and the Cold War were behind us, they were bad and should be forgotten. The immediate post-1989 world presented itself as a new era of organised forgetting, as neither East nor West were interested in examining the prolonged period of acquiescence in absurdities. The Berlin Wall, paramount symbol of absurdity, had to be erased from the face of the earth and the memory of the people. Only much later have we become aware how much the heritage of repression and division still dominates our thinking. The principal organisations of Western and European cooperation have been enlarged Eastward, but the fruits of peaceful, spiritual revolution have turned sour. Far too little has changed for the better and far too many old habits have survived. For the question asked in this volume: Is bilateral cultural diplomacy waging war with other means? There still is no good answer. The surprise of 1989 has apparently paralyzed policies thereafter. Despite resounding declarations and non-binding resolutions on a new order, there was no vision, no strategy and no clear purpose. The basic approach was “more of the same”. Cultural diplomacy had no priority and budgets were cut in Germany, the United Kingdom and the United States. Since the successful and peaceful revolution in 1989 ended the division of Europe and the bipolar nuclear stalemate, we collectively entered the brave new world of organised forgetting. Nevertheless, the footprints of that past century are still all around. This series is intended to identify, to explain and to remember, because the more things are said to change, the more things appear to remain the same. We must therefore learn from history if only to avoid repeating a few of the blunders of the past century. Prof. Jhr.Dr. Frans A.M.Alting von Geusau (1933) is professor (em.) of International Law and Western Cooperation at Tilburg University and Leiden University.

image1

Onderwijs in Nederlands-Indië
N.S. Efthymiou

Dit boek is een studie over een aspect van het constitutionele recht voor Nederlands-Indië, en wel over het onderwijs in Nederlands-Indië in de periode 1602-1942. Het boek geeft een beschrijving van dit aspect en beoogt het aspect te typeren. Om de beschrijving en de typering begrijpelijk te maken gaat aan de studie over onderwijs in Nederlands-Indië een korte behandeling vooraf van algemene kenmerken van constitutioneel recht voor Nederlands-Indië. N.S. Efthymiou is universitair docent staatsrecht aan de Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam.

image1

A Comparative Study of Cybercrime in Criminal Law
Q. Wang

The development of information technology provides new opportunities for crimes. Firstly, it facilitates traditional crimes such as fraud, and secondly, it breeds new crimes such as hacking. The traditional crimes facilitated by information technology and the new crimes bred by it are the so-called cybercrime in this book. To regulate cybercrime, legal regimes have developed countermeasures in the field of criminal law at different levels. At the national level, China, the United States, England and Singapore have all undergone reforms to adapt their criminal law. At the international level, the Council of Europe has drafted the Convention on Cybercrime and opened it for signatures. However, the still commonly committed cybercrime, such as DDoS attacks and online fraud, indicates the insufficiency of these countermeasures. In this background, this book intends to answer the research question: how can the criminal law be adapted to regulate cybercrime? By using doctrinal research and comparative study as the main methods, this book firstly explores and analyses the approaches of cybercrime legislations in the selected five legal regimes both in the past and in the present, and secondly, compares the different approaches and concludes with respect to the following aspects:   Aspect 1: Do we need a cyber-specific legislation to regulate cybercrime?   Aspect 2: If we do need a specific legislation, what approaches are more systematic for it?   Aspect 3: What principles are sufficient and appropriate to determine jurisdiction over cybercrime?   Aspect 4: What is the function of the Convention on Cybercrime in shaping appropriate legislation against cybercrime?

image1

The Doctrine of Command Responsibility and the Need to Avoid Arbitrary Punishments
D. Civico

When should a superior be held responsible for the crimes of his subordinates? Power and Responsibility are to be seen as a continuum, with one flowing along the other. What often emerges is the idea of a power which, pretending to do well, has in it the seeds of “evil”. An “evil” restrained, but always ready to manifest in exceptional moments, as a surplus of sovereignty. Thus, having power can compel a person to abridge the limits of morality and infringe upon the rights of others. Therefore, a leader, under the “intoxication” of power, could refuse to respect the rights of others, and become irresponsible and unaccountable. Moving along the same idea, responsibility without power becomes meaningless. Unless a person has been entrusted an adequate amount of power, the responsibility entrusted cannot be performed. Thus, power and responsibility require the support of each other in every walk of life. Power and Responsibility: that is where Command Responsibility comes from.

Other interesting publications: