The word “utopia” is a pun on eu topos (a good place) and ou topos (no place). While utopia in the sense of eu topos refers to an ideal society and its realization, utopia in the sense of ou topos emphasizes a mode of narrative rather than a political goal. Traditionally, the utopian form is a traveller’s account of a visit to an imaginary country where the journey is either to a far-off land or to the distant future. This article offers an appreciation of Ronald St. John Macdonald as a practitioner, presenter, and promoter of the utopian form in international law. Beyond the ability of a particular eu-topia to confront us with a complete package of ideas for international law that would otherwise remain unimagined, ou-topia generally encourages comprehensive and radical thinking about international law’s future and perhaps even jolts us into a heightened consciousness of our creativity and potential for change. The article also touches on the corresponding disadvantages of utopias and speculates that Macdonald reconciles the advantages and disadvantages partly through the fact that the power of the utopian form is available even to those who have been historically and unjustly excluded from international law.

La Relation Geographique entre le Canada et les Etats-Unis est unique. Ensemble, ils occupent la majeure partie du continent nord-américain tout en s’individualisant l’un de l’autre par une frontière politique est-ouest (de l’Atlantique au Pacifique) et nord-sud (entre l’Alaska et le Yukon) qui totalise plus de 6,500 kilomètres de longueur. Les côtes canadiennes et américaines sont baignées par trois océans et les plateaux continentaux adjacents à ces côtes occupent respectivement, selon la classification mondiale, le deuxième et le troisième rang quant à leur superficie.

This article examines whether the characterization of a regulatory measure as expropriatory depends upon the objective intent of the state in enacting that measure. The issue of regulatory expropriation is of particular importance, given the fact that a number of recent multilateral investment treaties, including the North American Free Trade Agreement, grant investors a right of direct action against a foreign state for losses arising out of measures that are “tantamount” to expropriation.

This article will first consider the respective approaches of the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal and the United States to regulatory expropriation. These approaches will be then briefly contrasted with the unique jurisprudence of the European Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights. Next, the role of intent in municipal law as a means of categorization will be addressed and a case made as to why this approach is equally viable on the international plane. In conclusion, reasons will be given as to why a test based on intent is to be preferred over other theories.

In light of the increased risks nowadays faced by much greaternumbers of peacekeepers in hostile environments, the author surveysthe legal sources for their safety and protection. The article firstdescribes the kinds of personnel that may be engaged in peacekeepingoperations before exploring the legal rights of protection thatattach to each of them. It shows that many conventions, especiallythose relating to immunities of United Nations personnel as well ashumanitarian and human rights treaties, contain general provisionsthat may be interpreted to include peacekeepers, but that none areaimed directly at thdr problems and protection. None, that is, untilthe United Nations adopted the Convention on the Safety of UnitedNations and Associated Personnel in the fall of 1994. When thatConvention comes into force, it will impose affirmative duties onstates to ensure the safety and security of peacekeepers and willapply criminal sanctions against individuals who attack them ortheir property. The article concludes that the new convention castsa wide net of protection over peacekeepers but suffers from twosignificant lacunae. It will not cover peacekeepers who arecombatants (and the criteria for that characterization are unclear)or personnel engaged in non-United Nations peacekeepingoperations.

The second session of the Diplomatic Conference on the Reaffirmation and Development of International Humanitarian Law applicable to Armed Conflicts met in Geneva from February 3 until April 18, 1975. The purpose of this session of the Conference was the adoption — or perhaps more correctly the successful drafting — of two Protocols to be added to the Geneva Red Cross Conventions of 1949, in order to protect further the victims of international and non-international conflicts respectively; it was also to consider proposals directed to the humanization of methods of warfare, including the prohibition or restriction of conventional weapons considered to be purely indiscriminate or likely to cause an amount of suffering disproportionate to the purpose of the armed conflict.

Le recours aux mesures conservatoires devant la Cour international de Justice (CIJ) a sensiblement augmenté mais une évolution significative a été notée dernièrement. Ces développements mettent en exergue la montée en puissance des juridictions internationals soit du fait de l’immobilisme du Conseil de sécurité, soit en raison d’un effet boule de neige de la multiplication en un temps record des juridictions pénales internationales après la chute du mur de Berlin et de l’effondrement de l’URSS. Destinées à l’origine à preserver les droits des parties et à conserver les preuves lors d’une procédure principale devant la CIJ, les mesures conservatoires sont devenues un véritable instrument au service de la paix et la sécurité internationales. Elles ont, en effet, la priorité sur toutes autres questions portées devant la CIJ et permettent ainsi de réagir rapidement dans les situations d’urgence. Les deux ordonnances en indication de mesures conservatoires prononcées en 2011 consolident d’une part la jurisprudence de la CIJ. Mais elles contribuent d’autre part à l’extension du champ d’application des mesures édictées, mettant ainsi la CIJ sur un pied d’égalité avec le Conseil de sécurité dans son rôle d’organe des Nations Unies (ONU) participant à la réalisation des objectifs de la Charte de l’ONU. Cette concurrence se manifeste au niveau du litige dont le Conseil ou la CIJ peuvent être saisis, mais elle peut se manifester également dans la nature des mesures que la CIJ va édicter et qui ont été dernièrement de nature militaire notamment à travers la création d’une zone démilitarisée, chose qui était traditionnellement du resort du Conseil de sécurité. Ce qui pose la question de la force obligatoire de ces ordonnances et de leur exécution mais aussi un risqué de détournement de procédure qui pourrait paradoxalement refroidir le désir des États de recourir à la Cour mondiale.

For our present purpose it is useful to divide the Commonwealth countries into two categories according to the circumstances under which they achieved international recognition as subjects of international law: first, the older Dominions of Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Irish Free State and South Africa which acquired international identity through a gradual process of constitutional transition from Crown colony systems to responsible governments; and, second, the colonial territories that have become independent states since 1945.

This article addresses the unresolved question of the international legal status, and resulting rights, of Omar Khadr — a Canadian national detained by the United States on the battlefield in Afghanistan at the age of fifteen and subsequently incarcerated at Guantanamo Bay. The article focuses primarily on Khadr’s potential status as an “unlawful combatant” and as a child soldier. Acknowledging that there has been a great deal of scholarly debate surrounding these issues, it provides an overview of this debate through the lens of Khadr’s particular case. As the author observes, international law surrounding each aspect of Khadr’s status is far from clear. However, even accepting the existence of controversy and ambiguity surrounding Khadr’s status, the author argues that the United States and Canada have, seemingly, sought to exploit this ambiguity in order to justify disregard for his rights. The article concludes by observing that this approach is, in itself, contrary to the foundational principles of international humanitarian law.

For anyone who is interested in the methodology of choice of law, no field is more rewarding than that of contracts. As domestic laws of contracts develop a progressively more intricate relationship between the principles of social regulation and private autonomy, private international law is led to develop choice of law techniques that will keep an appropriate balance between these principles in interjurisdictional cases. Choice of law rules that underemphasize the interests of the parties, and rely instead on the regulatory concerns of states that are affected by the transaction, may place too many obstacles in the way of persons who should be left to arrange their transaction in the way they think best. At the same time, choice of law rules that give too much weight to the parties’ wishes may interfere unduly with a state’s ability to regulate a transtaction with which it has a legitimate concern. In this respect, balance is more difficult to achieve in contracts than it is elsewhere.

On Sait Que l’élection québécoise du 15 novembre 1976 a porté au pouvoir un parti politique, le Parti québécois (P.Q.), dont le programme de gouvernement prévoit l’accession du Québec à la pleine souveraineté étatique assortie d’une libre association de nature économique (et plus ou moins confédérale) avec le reste du Canada. On sait aussi que l’Etat québécois constitue pour l’instant l’un des dix Etats membres de la fédération canadienne et jouit par conséquent, en qualité d’Etat fédéré, de certaines compétences autonomes: celles que prévoit la “constitution canadienne” — c’est-à-dire, plus précisément, le British North America Act de 1867 (loi du Parlement britannique) tel qu’interprété par la jurisprudence.

Lors de sa dernière réunion, qui cut lieu en septembre 1970, le Comité des utilisations pacifiques de l’espace extra-atmosphérique a noté que “le Groupe de travail (des satellites de radiodiffusion directe) avait estimé qu’au moins dans un avenir prévisible, la coopération internationale dans ce domaine devrait s’exercer à un niveau régional, trouvant son expression dans la participation à la creation et à l’exploitation de systèmes régionaux de radiodiffusion par satellites et/ou à la préparation et à la production de programmes pour ces systèmes et que les Etats membres et les organisations régionales et internationales devraient en conséquence favoriser la coopération régionale, tant au niveau gouvernemental que non gouvernemental, en particulier parmi les organismes de radiodiffusion et leurs associations.”

Nineteen ninety-seven was marked by several important developments at the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. A series of arrests and voluntary surrenders have increased the Tribunal's workload and credibility. The landmark Tadic judgment has clarified international humanitarian law, particularly with respect to crimes against humanity. The Erdemovic decision considered the defence of duress with respect to the murder of civilians and the use ofguilty pleas in international criminal law. Finally, the Blaskic decision has considered the use of subpoenas in international law.