In its 75th ordinary session, the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR, or Commission), the human rights organ of the African Union, with a mandate to promote and protect human and peoples’ rights and interpret the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, unanimously adopted the African Guiding Principles on the Human Rights of Migrants, Refugees and Asylum Seekers (Guiding Principles). They were publicly launched by the Commission at its 77th ordinary session on October 21, 2023. The drafting was led by the Commission's Special Rapporteur on Refugees, Asylum Seekers, Internally Displaced Persons, and Migrants in Africa. The thirty-eight Guiding Principles are based largely on African regional treaty law, case law, standards, and resolutions of the Commission and also draw from complementary international law. In addition, the Guiding Principles draw from the experience of other world regions, including adoption by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (the human rights organ of the Organization for American States) of the 2019 Inter-American Principles on the Human Rights of All Migrants, Refugees, Stateless Persons, and Victims of Human Trafficking.

The Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) was signed in Kigali, Rwanda on April 13, 2022 by the United Kingdom's Secretary of State for the Home Department, Priti Patel, and the Rwandan Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Co-operation, Vincent Biruta. It is part of the UK Government's strategy to deal with asylum seekers, particularly those deemed to arrive “irregularly,” under which Rwanda will take responsibility for those deported in return for payments from the United Kingdom, including an upfront payment of £120 million. The United Kingdom will also pay the processing and integration costs for each relocated person.

On June 19, 2023, the Intergovernmental Conference on an international legally binding instrument under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea on the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction (BBNJ Intergovernmental Conference) adopted, by consensus, the Agreement under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine BioLogical Diversity of Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ Agreement or Agreement). The Agreement, which is grounded in and builds on the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), specifically addresses issues relating to the conservation and sustainable use of the marine biodiversity of the high seas. The adoption of the Agreement was the culmination of nearly two decades of work under the auspices of the UN General Assembly.

On January 27, 2021, the United Nations Human Rights Committee (HRC or Committee) published two separate decisions in response to communications brought against Malta and Italy. Both decisions concerned the same incident, which occurred on October 11, 2013, where over 200 migrants drowned in a shipwreck in the Mediterranean. The first complaint brought against Malta was dismissed by the Committee on procedural grounds. In the second case, A.S., D.I., O.I. and G.D. v. Italy, the HRC found that Italy had failed to protect the right to life of the migrants under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). This introductory note discusses the significance of the Committee's findings in this decision and its ramifications with respect to the protection of human rights at sea.

On June 6, 2018, the International Court of Justice (Court) rendered a judgment on preliminary objections in the case of Immunities and Criminal Proceedings (Equatorial Guinea v. France). France had made three preliminary objections: two related to the Court's jurisdiction on the basis of, respectively, United Nations Convention Against Transnational Organized Crime (Palermo Convention) and the Optional Protocol to the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Protection (VCDR) concerning the Compulsory Settlement of Disputes (Optional Protocol), and the third challenged admissibility for abuse of process and abuse of rights. The Court accepted the first objection regarding jurisdiction on the basis of the Palermo Convention and rejected the other two. This judgment is an important contribution to the development of international law, both regarding the particular instruments at issue and broader questions of law of treaties and international dispute settlement.

Delgamuukw v. B.C. is a pivotal decision in the evolution of Canadian law on Aboriginal rights.Numerous meetings, round-tables, workshops and conferences have been held to discuss its potential impact on litigation and negotiation.1 Delgamuukw has also served as a vehicle for discussion of more fundamental issues such as the appropriateness of selecting the judicial forum to resolve Aboriginal title claims and the role of legal reasoning in furthering the process of colonization.2 Given the influence of British colonial law on the development of Aboriginal rights jurisprudence in former British colonies and the restrictions placed by evidentiary presumptions originating in English courts, Delgamuukw may also have persuasive precedential value outside of Canada. In particular, the Supreme Court's elaboration of the concept of Aboriginal rights and its discussion of the weight to be given to oral histories may influence other commonwealth courts which face the demanding task of accommodating the rights of colonized peoples within a contemporary political and legal rights regime.3

On October 22, 2015, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) rendered its judgment in the case of Skatteverket v. Hedqvist. In this important decision the CJEU sheds light on the value added tax (VAT) aspects of the use of bitcoins. Supplying bitcoins (or better, paying with bitcoins) does not constitute a VAT taxable service, so paying with bitcoins is not a barter transaction. The mere exchange of bitcoins into traditional currency (or vice versa) also remains outside the scope of VAT. The exchange service is VAT exempt.