With Milošević on trial, the work of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (hereinafter: ICTY) continues as does the need to solve insufficiently answered questions of international law. As most of the accused used to hold positions of high authority in the military or in the civil sphere, the doctrine of superior responsibility has been considered in several of the cases decided by the Tribunal. These cases, together with cases decided by the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (hereinafter: ICTR), have led to a discussion of whether also civilian superiors can incur responsibility under the doctrine of superior responsibility. Namely, the doctrine used to be applied more in the military sphere to commanders that were part of the hierarchical command structure, and was as such of less importance to considerations of responsibility of non-military leaders.

The doctrine of immunity of States has always had the interest of Bert Voskuil. The question whether a foreign State may be summoned before a national court has been raised and answered by him in numerous essays. Therefore, a study of the question how to summon a foreign State before the national judiciary is not out of place in a collection of essays on international procedural law, dedicated to Bert Voskuil.

Supreme Court, 13 April 2012, Mothers of Srebrenica Foundation v. the State of the Netherlands and the United Nations

Multinational Enterprises (MNE's) are confronted with a growing number of Codes of Conduct. So far these Codes are all of a so-called voluntary character and not legally binding. Nevertheless the MNE's – also referred to as transnational corporations (TNC's) – are increasingly confronted with the rules of conduct expressed in these Codes. It is a subject area which is still in its early stage and developing constantly.

Most textbooks on private international law, when dealing with public policy, refer to its relativity. “Public policy is not absolute but relative”. This relativity rule appears to have three different functions. The first is merely to stress that it is always the result in the concrete case that counts. Here “relativity” is a misleading description.

The impact of armed conflict on women is the subject of three recent international studies, two under the auspices of the United Nations and one undertaken by the International Committee of the Red Cross. These studies make a significant contribution to increasing knowledge of the ways in which women experience armed conflict and, moreover, propose strategies to address the problems they identify. There is virtual consensus, however, that the existing legal regime protecting women in times of armed conflict is adequate and that there is no place for progressive development of the law. This article challenges this conclusion. After examining the approach of the studies to the regime protecting women in times of armed conflict, the author argues that there is a need for a comprehensive initiative to consider whether in fact the law is adequate to deal with their situation of women in armed conflict.

There are two ways to study positivism in international law. Firstly, one may describe doctrinal utterances and judicial pronouncements in which a positivist attitude towards international law is revealed. Secondly, one may offer one's own view of law generally, and of international law in particular, and, on that basis, try to define to what extent, if any, international law appears to be founded in man's sovereign will.

It was understood from the outset that the trials would be limited, in accordance with the Moscow Declaration, to a number of the highest-ranking Nazi leaders and their principal accomplices. It was proposed by the United States in the draft of April 30, 1945, presented to the Foreign Ministers of France, Great Britain and the Soviet Union, that the trial comprise also “the principal Nazi organizations and their members, through whom the most bestial of the Nazi cruelties have been put into effect”. According to this draft, the defense of superior orders shall not absolve the accused from responsibility but may be considered, if justice so requires, in mitigation of punishment. Nor shall an accused be able to escape the trial on the ground that he was the head or principal officer of a state. Offenses against the armies of the United Nations would be punished by the appropriate national tribunals. Perpetrators of atrocities in territories occupied by Germany during the war as well as traitors such as Quisling, Laval, “Lord Haw-Haw”, would be dealt with in a similar manner.

The Rock of Gibraltar has long been a bone of contention between Spain and the United Kingdom. Talks undertaken in Lisbon in April 1980 between the two countries on the problem of Gibraltar had however, given rise to hopes that normal relations would soon be restored between Gibraltar and Spain, that is, until the Falklands Conflict led to the indefinite postponement of negotiations in June 1982. Matters have progressed only imperceptibly since.

Bellekom: The speaker referred to the two pillars of the conception of Meuwissen: 1. fundamental freedoms contain a constitutive element; they do not say only what is, but also what ought to be: 2. fundamental freedoms are an expression of values. The latter element can also be found in German literature, where the Constitution (containing within it fundamental freedoms and human rights) is referred to as a “Wertordnung” (order of values). Fundamental freedoms are, according to that theory, values, along with others, that can be brought to bear in a concrete case. The danger of this idea is that this “Wertordnung” will amount to an order of vested interests, one that preserves existing social-economic structures and limits the possibilities for minorities. In order to show that this danger is not an imaginary one, he referred to matters such as the “Berufsverbot” (exclusion from public service) and the exclusion of lawyers from- the defence in Germany. In those very cases an appeal was made, by way of justifying those practices, to the “freiheitlich-demokratische” (liberal-democratic) value of the Constitution, a value that is assumed to be a basic element of the Constitution, a value that outweighs even fundamental rights such as equal eligibility for the public service and the right to defend oneself through legal assistance of one's own choice.

Sedert het arrest van de Hoge Raad in de zaak Solbandera is het niet meer twijfelachtig dat de Hoge Raad het recht van partijen erkent om bij internationale overeenkomsten zelf het toepasselijke recht aan te wijzen. Naar mijn mening had de Hoge Raad de autonomie van partijen ook reeds erkend bij zijn arrest inzake de treuer Nicolaas, maar Hijmans, van Brakel, Schölten en A. van Oven hebben dit betwist. Geheel onbegrijpelijk was deze mening niet, daar de overwegingen van de Hoge Raad in dit arrest wel ruimte laten voor enige twijfel.

It often happens in the history of law, that a certain event gives the impulse to a new direction of legal thinking. Though the technical developments of our age continually confront us with new problems, which demand special provisions also in the legal field, the urgency of such provisions is often felt only after some dramatic accident, which arouses public alarm in wide circles.

In Sweden, private international law started to develop as an area of law in the late nineteenth century. The Hague Conference on Private International Law played a decisive role in this development. As late as in the 1960s, most Swedish private international law legislation, with the exception of rules originating in the inter-Nordic co-operation in this field, was based on Hague Conventions ratified by Sweden.

Modern communications and transportation have brought about not only interdependency between all regions of the world but also an increase in offences committed by or against foreigners or their States. Different States handle this problem in different ways. Among other means, one might mention in this context the enactment of rules of municipal and international law which regulate substantive as well as procedural relationships between authorities of a given State and the perpetrator of an offence with a foreign element'. Such an element exists, for example, if an offence has been committed by a foreigner; if an offence has been committed against a foreigner; if a particular State is to pass judgment on an offence committed abroad; if an offence has been committed in a place where no legal system claims jurisdiction; if a judgment is to be rendered on an offence which has already been the subject of a foreign judgment; if a person is sought for extradition; or if judicial authorities have to take measures in the course of criminal proceedings in the territory of a foreign State, and so on.