This article reviews the emergence of “lawfare” as a term in vogue in recent years. Despite its complexity, lawfare is widely used by scholars and policy-makers in a disparaging and polemical sense. Efforts have been made to attribute a neutral tone to the term with a clearer analytical framework. Taking Viet Nam and the South China Sea disputes as an illustration, the article probes whether and how a small, peripheral country works out a lawfare strategy. It finds that Viet Nam has employed elements of lawfare strategy to counter China’s expansionist claims at sea by recalibrating its national interests and legal positions over time. Lawfare is a long game, yet it holds out hope for Viet Nam, a peripheral country, amidst intense superpower rivalry.

The Taliban’s forceful control of Kabul resulted in severe criticism by the world community and has consequently raised a pertinent question about its recognition in international law. Though a few countries publicly denied recognition to the Taliban government, many countries have (re)-started engaging with it by concluding bilateral treaties and (re)-opening embassies without recognition. Besides, countries have put several “conditions”, such as respect for human rights and a promise to form an “inclusive government”, before they will recognize the Taliban government. This note maps out these “conditions”, along with different proposals states have proposed concerning recognizing the Taliban government. It identifies the possible legal consequences of these “proposals” for the institution of recognition of government in international law. The note finally argues that though a recognition decision is largely political, it should nevertheless be regulated by international law to the extent that it would help avoid adverse international legal consequences.

In the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic, the treatment of cruise ships by coastal states was inconsistent, with some ships being allowed to dock while others were not. To that end, this Note focuses on the obligations that a coastal state owes to the individuals onboard the cruise ships in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, including the rights to life and health. It further considers whether and how such rights are to be balanced with other countervailing considerations of such states, such as the risk of transmission to the local communities. This author concludes with the view that individuals onboard the cruise ships can, and should, consider turning to international human rights law for guidance and recourse. After all, the human rights regime is most suited for and accustomed to governing the relationship between individuals and a state, as compared to between states.

Hong Kong has recently ratified the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (“CISG”). While Article 7(2) of the CISG acknowledges the potential incompleteness of the convention in addressing all issues it aims to govern and emphasizes the preference for seeking general principles within the CISG before resorting to domestic private international law, the extent of this preference remains unclear. This article highlights that while some scholars argue for private international law as a last resort, it is erroneous to suggest that the general principles embodied in the convention also include those exclusively stem from other international conventions. Such an approach would disregard the inherent international nature and proportionality envisioned by Article 7(1) of the CISG.

Communities of international legal discourse have been increasingly favouring tweets and blogs over traditional media of academic expression. Legal practice communities have likewise been abandoning press releases in favour of tweets and digital newsletters. For discourse communities, this trend can broaden the scope of eligible participants, while encouraging progress through contestation and legal pluralism. At the same time, it may encourage over-contentiousness, sensationalism, “celebritism”, and “click-hunting”, at the expense of genuine dialogue and problem-solving. For communities of practice, the spatial particularities of social media platforms prompt rapid exchanges and reposts with minimal prior reflection, while offering no tangible benefits compared to traditional means of law shaping. The trend, in any event, appears irreversible. We should thus shift to capitalizing on this trend’s benefits while mitigating its various side effects through an organic process of increased awareness.

This research explores AI-generated originality's impact on copyright regulations. It meticulously examines legal frameworks such as the Berne Convention, EU Copyright Law, and national legislation. Rigorously analyzing cases, including Infopaq International A/S v Danske Dagblades Forening and Levola Hengelo BV v Smilde Foods BV, illuminates evolving originality and human involvement in AI creativity. The study also contemplates global perspectives, drawing from esteemed organizations such as the World Intellectual Property Organization and the European Court of Justice and exploring diverse approaches adopted by individual nations. The paper emphasizes the imperative need for legislative updates to address the challenges and opportunities of AI-generated works. It highlights the pivotal role of international collaboration and public awareness in shaping copyright policies for the AI-driven creativity era. It also offers insights and recommendations for policymakers and researchers navigating this complex terrain.

This article reconceptualizes norm conflict in international law by uncovering the experiential dimension of its definition and the intentional dimension of its resolution that has been missing from traditional accounts. The article locates the basis of recognizing norm conflict in the experienced sense of incompatibility between norms in view of their contexts rather than in the predesignated constellation of norms with contrary or contradictory functions according to their texts. Concomitantly, it argues that the justification for using certain legal techniques to resolve norm conflicts lies in the intended relationship deducible only between those norms that share the same regulatory purpose rather than between norms merely applying to the same factual situation. This reconceptualization generates a new typology of norm conflicts in light of the norms’ end goals and the means they provide to achieve them: “Ends Conflict”, “Means Conflict”, and “Unexperienced Conflict”, and suggests apposite ways to tackle them.

This article examines the feasibility of enforcing Singapore money judgments in Cambodia, focusing on the “guarantee of reciprocity” – an ambiguous yet critical condition. It is ambiguous because Cambodian courts have not yet interpreted it. It is critical because it is perceived as the main obstacle to enforcing foreign judgments. Without a treaty-based mutual enforcement mechanism between Cambodia and Singapore, it is unclear whether a Singapore money judgment could be enforced in Cambodia or if a judgment creditor’s application would be dismissed in any event citing lack of reciprocity. Following an analysis of the laws of Cambodia, Singapore, and Japan, the article concludes that there is no legal obstacle before the Cambodian courts to enforce a Singapore money judgment. The flexible interpretation of the guarantee of reciprocity outlined in this article would enhance access to justice, eliminate a trade barrier, and make the investment environment more attractive in Cambodia.

Joining the line of free trade agreements involving civil society in climate change-related commitments, the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) installs a public submissions and referral procedure (SRP) under its environmental chapter. China’s application to join the CPTPP and the peripheral role of civil society in its climate decision-making furnish a curious opportunity to contemplate dynamics between the SRP and domestic regimes with historically limited civil society involvement.

The article cites China as an illustrative case to show how a state-centric approach to climate change, lacking civil society engagement, may render mitigation efforts unreliable, unsustainable, and inequitable. It argues that the submissions and referrals procedure (SRP)’s unique procedural features offer potential as a testing ground for building up previously constrained civil society involvement in climate decision-making. It also exposes the design flaws in the SRP that require reform to uphold its identified experimental value, regarding which several proposals are put forward.

The Nottebohm judgment from the International Court of Justice (ICJ) has recently come under attack in the context of the European Commission's position on “golden passports” programmes. The judgment has long received intense criticism from a consensus of scholars. This article challenges the conventional wisdom of Nottebohm. The ICJ did not, as critics argue, depart from international law on nationality, nor did it seek to create an international rule based on a “genuine link” requirement. A closer look at the majority's reasoning reveals that the ICJ's conception of nationality as something more than a mere formal classification was prompted by problems that can arise precisely from the phenomenon of globalization, including the instrumentalization of nationality. It further shows that the “substance-over-form” approach adopted by Nottebohm may, or already does, operate in more contemporary contexts.

In the 2023 judgment of Nicaragua v. Colombia, the International Court of Justice ruled that, under customary international law, a State’s entitlement to a continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles from its baselines is not permitted to extend within 200 nautical miles from the baselines of another State. In identifying this customary rule, the Court did not apply the two-element approach. The state practice relied upon by the Court to identify the general practice is not sufficiently widespread, representative, or consistent. The opinio juris is inferred from such state practice, which is not necessarily driven by a sense of legal obligation. The Court’s assertion of the customary rule constitutes, in effect, a rewriting of the relevant provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, amounting to a legislative exercise.

This article addresses the international legal historian C.H. Alexandrowicz's engagement with Kautilya's Arthashastra as part of his revision of the place of India and Southeast Asia in the development of international law. The article locates Alexandrowicz's writing on the Arthashastra against the backdrop of the debates about the Arthashastra that ensued upon its discovery in 1905, including controversies about its date, authorship, and place in the tradition of Indian political thought. The article reviews the Indian nationalist reading of Kautilya, the various attempts to compare Kautilya to Hobbes and Machiavelli, and the values that were particularly important for Alexandrowicz in telling the narrative of the place of Kautilya's Arthashastra, its rationalism, secularism, and the divisibility of sovereignty.

While sustainable development scholarship has explored ways to tie Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to law, little is known about how they are embedded in domestic legal systems. This article takes a critical look at the legislative implementation of SDGs under the Sustainable Development Act (SDA) in Sri Lanka. The United Nations (UN) Member States have adopted different legal strategies to implement the SDGs. Many countries have utilized institutional mechanisms under existing national laws. Sri Lanka, however, is one of the few nations that has specific legislation for sustainable development but is only partly enforced. This article reveals both promises and limitations of Sri Lanka’s SDA, based on a comparison of Canadian legislation, and suggests some lessons when adopting legislation to implement the SDGs.

As the UNCITRAL Working Group III is deliberating on an appellate mechanism for investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS), this article analyzes the debate surrounding the necessity and feasibility of such an appellate mechanism. It highlights the political and practical issues in establishing such an appellate mechanism, drawing on its comparison with the WTO Appellate Body. Emphasizing the need to balance the interests of developed and developing countries, this article argues that the absence of a structured method in the existing proposals to evaluate equal representation and fairness in the institutional design for the appellate mechanism poses significant challenges. The article makes specific proposals to address such challenges as the financial burden on developing countries, the risk of procedural delays, and the requirement for impartial and diverse tribunal composition. These considerations underscore the critical need to balance party autonomy with centralized oversight and ensure that procedural reforms do not unintentionally disadvantage developing nations.

This article discusses the history and the prospects of the climate change negotiations and seeks to show that they are structurally and systematically disadvantageous to the countries and the peoples of the Third World/Global South. The article uses the TWAIL approach to discuss the North-South divide and the differing approaches to climate justice. The article then discusses the history of climate change negotiations, in particular, climate finance and loss and damage, and shows that modes of these negotiations have been disadvantageous to the Third World and are unlikely to fulfil their aspirations. The article highlights the need for incorporating certain principles of fairness, not just in substantive law, but also in how negotiations are conducted. It concludes with thoughts on what these principles of fairness may look like, and the role international and domestic courts can play in evolving them.

This article examines the legal framework for offshore CO2 sequestration in South Korea, paying particular attention to how to ensure the protection of the marine environment from CO2 sequestration in sub-seabed geological formations. It analyses the relevant international regulatory framework, including the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, the 1972 London Convention and the 1996 London Protocol. It then examines the Korean national legal framework relating to offshore CO2 sequestration. In the absence of detailed regulations on the process of CO2 sequestration in sub-seabed geological formations in South Korea, the article suggests detailed regulations regarding site selection, assessment of potential risks, monitoring and long-term liability to ensure environmental safety and security from offshore CO2 sequestration, which should comply with the 1996 Protocol and relevant guidelines. The development of detailed Korean national regulations ensuring compliance with international rules and standards could serve as best practices driving offshore CCS in the Asia-Pacific region.