Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T23:12:37.356Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Universalising International Law. By C. G. Weeramantry. Leiden, Boston: Martinus Nijhoff, 2004. Pp. xii, 538. Index. $181, €145.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2017

Roger S. Clark
Roger S. Clark*
Affiliation:
Rutgers School of Law—Camden
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Recent Books on International Law
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 99 , Issue 1 , January 2005 , pp. 298 - 302
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 2005

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 For more on the enormous breadth of his interests, see generally, Legal Visions of the 21st Century: Essays in Honour of Judge Christopher Weeramantry (Anghie, Antony & Garry, Sturgess eds., 1998)Google Scholar.

2 See, e.g., Zelter, Angie, Trident on Trial: the Case for People’s Disarmament (2001)Google Scholar. On citizen antinuclear actions in general, including citizen weapons inspections and more direct action, see Ware, Alyn, Rule of Force or Rule of Law? Legal Responses to Nuclear Threats from Terrorism, Proliferation, and War, 2 Seattle J. Soc. JUST. 243, 269–70 (2003)Google Scholar.

3 In his dissent in the Court’s advisory opinion in legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, 1996 ICJ REP. 226, 438 (July 8)Google Scholar, Judge Weeramantry took note of well over three million signatures on declarations of public conscience concerning nuclear weapons— generated by nongovernmental organizations and either deposited with, or drawn to the attention of, the Court. He described them as “not without legal relevance.” The majority ignored this material. Many citizens taking direct action against nuclear facilities have found inspiration in this dissent.

4 He is not alone. See, e.g., Palmer, Geoffrey, New Ways to Make Environmental Law, 86 AJIL 259(1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Strauss, Andrew & Falk, Richard, On the Creation of a Global pies Assembly: Legitimacy and the Power of Popular Sovereignty, 36 Stan. J. Int’l L. 191 (2000)Google Scholar.

5 In 1991, the New Zealand Legislation Advisory Committee estimated that a quarter of Parliament’s acts had implications for the country’s treaty obligations. Legislation Advisory Committee, Legislative Change: Guidelines on Process and Content, Report No. 6, at 71-75 (2d rev. ed. 1991). Similar considerations must be true for many countries. See generally, Keith, Kenneth, The Impact of International Law on New Zealand Law, 7 Waikato L. Rev. 1 (1998)Google Scholar; Gobbi, Mark, Treaty Action and Implementation, 1 N.Z. Y.B. Int’l L. 223 (2004)Google Scholar.

6 In his dissent in Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, 1996 ICJ Rep. at 488–90 Google Scholar, he gives greater weight to a series of General Assembly resolutions addressing the illegality of nuclear weapons than does the majority, which emphasizes the “substantial numbers of negative votes and abstentions,” id. at 255.

7 Weeramantry provides a useful bibliography (pp. 403-04).

8 The author mentions a number of them (see pp. 391,405-06). A stimulating recent example of a teaching module is the Rwanda Commemoration Project of the Center for Human Rights and Humanitarian Law at American University, Washington College of Law (2004)Google Scholar, at <http://www.wd.american.edu/hurmight/center/rwanda/>. School districts are said to be considering using the comic book series Echoes of the Lost Boys of Sudan to make children aware of ethnic cleansing and refugee issues. See Newsweek, Aug. 23, 2004, at 13 Google Scholar.

9 Weeramantry lists art, economics, environmental studies, geography, history, literature, religious studies, science, and social studies as subjects readily presenting opportunities to discuss issues relating to peace (pp. 396-97). He also provides a list of topics for class discussion: How Do Wars Begin; How Disputes Can Be Resolved; What Each Individual Can Do; The Universal Declaration of Human Rights; Common Elements in World Culture; The History of Peace Movements; The Basis of International Organisations; How Governments Can Be Influenced to Work for the Poor; Economic Irregularity and How It Can Be Addressed; The Role of the Global Citizen of the Future; The Horrors of War; The Arms Trade; Torture; Child Abuse; Slavery; Nuclear Weapons; Land Mines; Profiles of Famous Peace Workers—e.g. Gandhi, Mandela, Wilberforce, Mother Theresa, Henry Dunant, etc.; Racial Intolerance; and Religious Intolerance (p. 407).

10 Dr. Seuss, The Butter Battle Book (1984). Parents will recall that things escalate between the Yooks and the Zooks beginning with a fundamental incompatibility: the Yooks eat their bread butter-side up, whereas the Zooks eat theirs butter-side down, which is deemed to be a reflection of some “kink” in their “souls.”

11 When my children were of an age to have the book read to them, I had a way of explaining the unresolved Suess ending—where the two old warriors face off, each with his Bitsy Big-Boy Boomeroo. The explanation was that the policy of Mutually Assured Destruction (“MAD”—children certainly like that acronym!) carried the day, and neither one would use it (though neither I nor my children found this altogether believable). Now I fear that the Yooks, or perhaps the Zooks, will decide that the rules have changed and that preemption, by one or other of them, is completely in order.

12 A selection of the government’s torture memorandums can be found on the Web site of Human Rights First, <http:www.humanrightsfirst.org>. For recent analysis in this Journal, see Richard, B. Bilder & Detlev, F. Vagts, Speaking Law to Power: Lawyers and Torture, 98 AJIL 689 (2004)Google Scholar; Sean, P. Murphy, Contemporary Practice of the United States, id. at 820 Google Scholar.

13 See Avena (Mex. v. U.S.) (Int’l Ct. Justice Mar. 31, 2004); Dinah, J. Shelton, Case Report: Case Concerning Avena and Other Mexican Nationals (Mexico v. United States), 98 AJIL 559 (2004)Google Scholar. I have in mind what seemed to me the federal government’s singular lack of enthusiasm in insisting that the states enforce the treaty obligations under the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations in an earlier case that went to the ICJ. See Breard v. Greene, 523 U.S. 371 (1998); Agora: Breard, 92 AJIL 666 (1998). More recently, the Department of State’s legal adviser went to some pains to draw the attention of the Oklahoma governor and of the Oklahoma Pardon and Parole Board to the treaty issues concerning one of the Mexicans in Avena. See Sean, D. Murphy, Contemporary Practice of the United States, 98 AJIL 581 (2004)Google Scholar.

14 See Richard Norton, Taylor & Ewen, MacAskill, Spy Case Casts Fresh Doubt on War Legality, Guardian, Feb. 26, 2004, at 1 Google Scholar. For some thoughts about when it is right for a government lawyer to say no, see the comments of a veteran of the legal battle over the Japanese internments, in Silber, Norman & Miller, Geoffrey, Toward “Neutral Principles” in the Law: Selections from the Oral History of Herbert Wechsler, 93 Colum. L. Rev. 854,883–91 (1993)Google Scholar. See also Bilder & Vagts, supra note 12.

15 Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials, GA Res. 34/169, annex (Dec. 17, 1979).

16 Eighth United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders, Guidelines on the Role of Prosecutors, UN Doc.A/CONF. 144/28/Rev.l, at 189(1990).

17 Principles of Medical Ethics Relevant to the Role of Health Personnel, Particularly Physicians, in the Protection of Prisoners Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, GA Res. 37/194, annex (Dec. 18, 1982). (See also the strong provisions on the independent role of medical officers in Rules 22-26 of the Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners, ESC Res. 663, UN ESCOR, 24th Sess., Supp. No. 1, at 11, UN Doc. E/3048 (1957).) Principle 4 of the Medical Ethics provides (footnote omitted):

It is a contravention of medical ethics for health personnel, particularly physicians:

  • a.

    a. To apply their knowledge and skills in order to assist in the interrogation of prisoners and detainees in a manner that may adversely affect the physical or mental health or condition of such prisoners or detainees and which is not in accordance with the relevant international instruments;

  • b.

    b. To certify, or to participate in the certification of, the fitness of prisoners or detainees for any form of treatment or punishment that may affect their physical or mental health and which is not in accordance with the relevant international instruments, or to participate in any way in the infliction of any such treatment or punishment which is not in accordance with the relevant international instruments.

On the role of doctors at Guantánamo Bay and Abu Ghraib, see Robert, Jay Lifton, Doctors and Torture, 351 Neweng. J. Med. 415 (2004)Google Scholar, and M. Gregg, Bloche & Jonathan, H. Marks, When Doctors Go to War, 352 New Eng. J. Med. 3(2005)Google Scholar.