Governments — Recognition — Rival governments — Venezuela — Disputed 2018 Venezuelan presidential election — Whether Mr Maduro or Mr Guaidó President of Venezuela — Whether Maduro Board or Guaidó Board entitled to give instructions on behalf of Central Bank of Venezuela concerning its assets in England

Recognition — Whom United Kingdom Government recognizing as Head of State and Head of Government of Venezuela — Whether United Kingdom Foreign Secretary’s statement constituting unequivocal recognition of Mr Guaidó as Interim President — Whether United Kingdom Government’s recognition of Mr Guaidó de facto or de jure — “One voice” doctrine — Whether English courts obliged to accept United Kingdom Government’s recognition of Mr Guaidó as conclusive — Foreign act of State doctrine — Whether challenges to validity, under Venezuelan law, of the Transition Statute 2019 and Mr Guaidó’s appointments justiciable in English courts — Whether English courts should recognize judgments of the Supreme Tribunal of Justice of Venezuela nullifying the Transition Statute 2019 — Whether such recognition contravening UK public policy

Diplomatic relations — Whether United Kingdom Government’s continued diplomatic relations with Mr Maduro’s representatives in England constituting implied recognition of Mr Maduro as de facto President — Whether Court of Appeal erred in introducing concept of implied de facto recognition — Whether scope for application of any notion of implied recognition by English courts — The law of England

Governments — Status of government — Recognition — Whether particular entity to be treated as the government of a State — Role of national courts — Recognition a matter for the executive — Whether national court entitled to entertain challenge to the constitutional validity of foreign government’s acts — Nature of challenge — Whether upholding challenge would require court to inquire into status of foreign government — Libya — Revolution in 2011 — Existence of competing regimes — Whether United Kingdom Government had recognized one entity as the Government of Libya

Recognition — Governments — United Kingdom policy — April 1980 Statement that United Kingdom Government would no longer make formal statements regarding recognition of foreign governments — Whether precluding statement of recognition in all circumstances — Evidence of recognition — Letters from Foreign and Commonwealth Office — Whether indicating unequivocal recognition — Libya — Competing regimes

Relationship of international law and municipal law — Whether entity the government of a foreign State — Whether determination of that issue a matter for courts or government — Effect of unequivocal recognition by government of forum State — Whether courts entitled to call such recognition into question — Separation of powers — Difference from doctrines of act of State, sovereign immunity and non-justiciability — The law of England

Governments — Recognition — Rival governments — Venezuela — Disputed 2018 Venezuelan presidential election — Whether Mr Maduro or Mr Guaidó President of Venezuela — Whether Maduro Board or Guaidó Board entitled to give instructions on behalf of Central Bank of Venezuela concerning its assets in England

Recognition — Whom United Kingdom Government recognizing as Head of State and Head of Government of Venezuela — Whether United Kingdom Foreign Secretary’s statement constituting recognition of Mr Guaidó as Interim President — Whether United Kingdom Government’s recognition of Mr Guaidó de facto or de jure — Whether United Kingdom Foreign Secretary’s statement of recognition leaving open possibility of continuing implied recognition of Mr Maduro as de facto President — Whether a de facto recognition of Mr Guaidó would violate rule against intervention in internal affairs of a foreign State — “One voice” doctrine — Whether English courts obliged to accept United Kingdom Government’s recognition of Mr Guaidó as conclusive — Foreign act of State doctrine — Whether challenges to validity, under Venezuelan law, of Mr Guaidó’s legislative and executive acts justiciable in English courts

Diplomatic relations — Whether United Kingdom Government’s continued diplomatic relations with Mr Maduro’s representatives in England constituting implied recognition of Mr Maduro as de facto President — The law of England

This study examines whether the sex of the selector matters for advancing women's inclusion in politics and how the political context shapes selectors’ preferences and behaviour. It focuses on an under-researched area – the political appointments ministers make in their ministerial departments – and thus sheds light on the conditions under which women access appointed office. It analyses six governments in Spain between 1996 and 2018, using a mixed methods approach that includes statistical analyses of political appointments and interviews with former ministers. It finds that women ministers, as individuals, did not appoint more women than men ministers did at any time. However, women's presence is highly relevant. In more gender-balanced political contexts, men and women ministers appointed more women. Moreover, the context changed, in part because critical political actors pushed for it. This imbued a new political sphere, subcabinet-appointed offices, with representational significance.

Jurisdiction — Justiciability — Agency of United Kingdom providing locational intelligence to United States authorities for use in drone strikes — UK Agency under responsibility of Secretary of State — Claimant seeking declaration that UK Agency employees might be guilty of assisting or encouraging crime under English law or ancillary to war crime and/or crime against humanity — Whether claimant effectively seeking advisory opinion — Whether issues justiciable — Whether declaratory relief entailing condemnation of United States activities — Whether United Kingdom sitting in judgment on acts of a foreign State — Whether any exceptional circumstances

Governments — United Kingdom Government — United States Government — Conduct and responsibilities of United Kingdom Agency, General Communications Headquarters — United States Central Intelligence Agency — UK Agency under responsibility of Secretary of State — Claimant requesting clarification of UK policies and practices concerning provision of locational intelligence to US agents for potential use in drone attacks — UK policy to “neither confirm nor deny” matters where disclosure could compromise national interests — Claimant seeking permission to apply for judicial review of Secretary of State’s “decision” to provide intelligence for use in drone strikes

International criminal law — Terrorism — Counter-terrorism measures — Drone strikes — Locational intelligence sharing — Defence of combatant immunity — Relevance — Principal and secondary criminal liability — Whether UK Agency employees might be guilty of assisting or encouraging crime under English law or ancillary to war crime and/or crime against humanity — Serious Crime Act 2007 — International Criminal Court Act 2001

War and armed conflict — Drone strikes in Pakistan killing civilians — United Kingdom providing locational intelligence to United States for potential use in drone strikes — Claimant seeking judicial review of decision to provide intelligence — National security concerns — The law of England

Governments — Separation of executive and courts — Independent prosecutors — Exercise of statutory powers and discretion — Independent decision-making — Taking relevant considerations into account — Effect of opinions and advice of others on independence of decisions — Shawcross exercises — Threats — Impact of threats on independent decision-making — The rule of law — Whether decision of Director of Serious Fraud Office to discontinue investigation lawful — Criminal Justice Act 1987

Relationship of international law and municipal law — Treaties — Interpretation and application — Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions, 1997 — Article 5 — Relevance — Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development — OECD Working Group on Bribery in International Business Transactions — Whether municipal courts to desist from interpretation of unincorporated international instruments — Value of uniform interpretation of international instruments — Whether municipal courts can consider unincorporated international instruments considered by decision-makers when assessing legality of decisions — Criminal Justice Act 1987 — Serious Fraud Office — Investigations and prosecutions — Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001

Treaties — Interpretation — Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions, 1997 — Article 5 — Relevance — Investigation and prosecution of bribery of foreign public officials — Applicable rules and principles of Contracting Parties — Parties not to be influenced by considerations of national economic interest, potential effect on relations with other States or identity of natural or legal persons involved — National security — Intersection of national security and relations with other States — European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Article 2 — Right to life — Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1969 — Article 31 — Interpretation of treaties in good faith in light of object and purpose — The law of England

Governments — Separation of powers — Roles and responsibilities of executive, legislative and judicial branches of government — Rule of law — Policy — “The chameleon doctrine”

Jurisdiction — Original jurisdiction of High Court — Issuing courts — Chapter III courts — Validity of federal legislative provisions — Australian Constitution — Defence power — Whether defence power purposive — Whether “defence” limited to defence against external threats or threats from foreign nations — Whether “defence” limited to defence of community and several states as bodies politic — External affairs power — Relevance of combating terrorism to comity between nations — Referral power — Implied power to protect nation — Presumption against alteration of common law rights — Constitutional facts — Consideration of policy in judicial determinations — Exercise of judicial power — Judicial controversy — Determination of rights or obligations — Requirement of discernible standards and norms — Non-justiciability — Burden of proof — Balancing exercises — Ex parte proceedings

Relationship of international law and municipal law — Criminal Code (Cth) — Part 5.3 — Division 104 — Section 104 — Section 105 — Section 51(xxix) of Australian Constitution — Interpretation of Australian law — International law ratified by and binding on Australia — International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966 — United Nations Security Council Resolution 1373 (2001) — Extent to which Security Council Resolutions binding on Australia — Whether Division 104 of Criminal Code validly enacted under external affairs power — Promotion of comity with foreign governments — Preservation of integrity of foreign States

Terrorism — Criminal Code (Cth) — Interpretation and application — Part 5.3 — Division 104 — Section 104 — Section 105 — Definition of “terrorist act” — Interim control orders — Obligations, prohibitions and restrictions upon an individual to protect public from a terrorist act — Public interest — Whether obligations, prohibitions and restrictions “reasonably necessary” and “reasonably appropriate and adapted” to protect public — Section 51(vi) of Australian Constitution — Whether Division 104 of Criminal Code validly enacted under defence power

War and armed conflict — Armed conflict — Terrorism — Applicability of defence powers to threat posed by terrorism — The law of Australia