International Law in Brief


International Law in Brief (ILIB) is a forum that provides updates on current developments in international law from the editors of ASIL's International Legal Materials.
| By: Marina Barakatt : November 07, 2014 |

On October 30, 2014, the European Court of Human Rights (the Court), ruled in Shvydka v. Ukraine that Ukraine violated the European Convention of Human Rights (the Convention) by detaining Ms. Shvydka for ten days for protesting against former Ukrainian President Yakunovich.  According to the press release, the Court found that Ukraine had violated Article 10 (freedom of expression) and article 2 of Protocol 7 (right of appeal in criminal matters) after Ms. Shvydka “was arrested and convicted of petty hooliganism and sentenced to ten days’ administrative detention” for removing a...


| By: Marina Barakatt : November 07, 2014 |

On October 30, 2014, a Tribunal at the Permanent Court of Arbitration (the Tribunal) ruled that the joint Singapore-Malaysia venture M-S Pte Ltd owed no development charges to Singapore related to three parcels of land in Singapore.  According to the press release, the Tribunal determined that “M-S Pte Ltd, would [not] have been liable to pay development charges in the amount of S$1.47 billion on three parcels of former railway land . . . if the said parcels had been vested in M-S Pte Ltd and if M-S Pte Ltd had actually developed the lands in accordance with the proposed land uses set out...


| By: Marina Barakatt : October 31, 2014 |

On October 23, 2014, the European Court of Human Rights (the Court) ruled in Mamazhonov v. Russia that Russia had violated the European Convention of Human Rights (the Convention) by failing to properly examine Mr. Mamazhonov’s claims that he would be at risk of inhumane treatment and torture if extradited to Uzbekistan and failing to put in place protective measures upon his release from detention in Russia.  According to the press release, the Court ruled that Russia had violated Article 3 (prohibition of inhumane or degrading treatment), as the Russian authorities “failed to...


| By: Marina Barakatt : October 31, 2014 |

On October 23, 2014, the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) ruled that the Prosecution may re-open its case in chief in Prosecutor v. Mladic to present new evidence gathered from a newly discovered mass grave in Bosnia and Herzegovina.  According to the press release, “the Judges also found that the fresh evidence was relevant to the case, and had probative value, noting especially the Prosecution submission ‘that the Material clarifies the organised and large-scale nature of killings in Prijedor, and the VRS’s [Army of Republika Srpska] role therein...


| By: Marina Barakatt : October 31, 2014 |

On October 23, 2014, the International Criminal Court (ICC) granted interim release to three suspects, who have been in custody since November 2013, in Prosecutor v. Bemba and Others. The court granted the relase in order to ensure that they were not detained for an unreasonable period prior to trial, as enshrined in Article 60(4) of the Rome Statute.  According to the press release, “[t]he suspects shall appear before the Court when requested by the Judges.”  The three “are suspected of offences against the administration of justice allegedly committed in connection with [...


| By: Marina Barakatt : October 31, 2014 |

On October 22, 2014, the Italian Constitutional Court (the Court) ruled that several international laws on foreign state immunity were incompatible with the Italian legal order in regard to war crimes and crimes against humanity.  According to the unofficial English translation, the Court declared unlawful certain legislation that Italy had enacted in order to put into effect the International Court of Justice’s 2012 judgment on Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v. Italy).  The Court found constitutionally unlawful Article 3 of Italian law 5/2013, which ratified...


| By: Marina Barakatt : October 31, 2014 |

On October 29, 2014, the European Court of Human Rights (the Court) ruled in Gough v. the United Kingdom that Scotland had not violated the European Convention of Human Rights (the Convention) by repeatedly arresting and imprisoning Mr. Gough for appearing naked in public.  According to the press release, Mr. Gough “was arrested over thirty times in Scotland for being naked in public . . . [and] convicted on a number of occasions of breach of the peace . . . [as well as] contempt of court for refusing to dress for his court appearances.”  The Court ruled that these arrests did not...


| By: Marina Barakatt : October 24, 2014 |

On October 21, 2014, the European Court of Human Rights (the Court) ruled (French only) in Sharifi and Others v. Italy and Greece that Italy and Greece violated the European Convention of Human Rights (the Convention) by indiscriminately expelling foreign nationals from Italy and returning them to Greece, with the fear of subsequent deportation to their countries of origin, without providing them access to asylum procedures.  According to the press release, in regard to four of the applicants, the Court held that Greece violated Article 13 (right to an effective remedy) and...


| By: Marina Barakatt : October 24, 2014 |

On October 20, 2014, a World Trade Organization (WTO) Panel issued two reports ruling against the U.S. in a dispute with Canada and Mexico, finding that the United States’ amended country-of-origin meat-labeling regulations are discriminatory and in violation of international fair trade rules.  In their conclusions, the Panel recommended “that the Dispute Settlement Body request the United States to bring the inconsistent measure into conformity with its obligations under the [Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade] and the [General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade] 1994.”  According to a...


| By: Nicole R. Tuttle : October 24, 2014 |

On October 18, 2014, at the conclusion of the sixth session of the Conference of the parties to the World Health Organization’s Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC), several decisions were adopted. According to a news article, the decisions adopted include, inter alia, tax regulations, which “provide for tax rates to be monitored, increased and adjusted annually, taking into account inflation and income growth,” and  measures “aimed at restricting tobacco industry interference.” Parties also adopted a decision acknowledging the need for regulation regarding “electronic...