In 1964, the United States Congress passed a law providing that a United States district court "'may order' a person residing or found in the district to give testimony or produce documents 'for use in a proceeding in a foreign or international tribunal . . .
Since 2015, Brazil has concluded more than a dozen Cooperation and Facilitation Investment Agreements (CFIAs), in a radical departure from Brazil's earlier policy to remain out of the network of investment treaties.[1] These CFIAs include a novel system, encompassing mechanisms for preventing and settling disputes, which differs strikingly from traditional investor-state arbitration available under most bilateral investment treaties.
Preventing or managing a global pandemic such as COVID-19 requires states to strictly comply with the World Health Organization's International Health Regulations 2005 (IHRs). However, like many multilateral environment agreements, the IHRs lack a strong dispute resolution mechanism to enhance state compliance. To bridge that gap, states have incorporated several environmental conventions into free trade agreements (FTAs) over the past fifteen years.
After the first cases of what would later be named "COVID-19" were notified by China on December 31, 2019, the European Union (EU) reported its three first detected cases on January 24, 2020. As of April 18, 785,229 detected cases and 78,576 deaths had been reported by the 27 EU member states, while the total number of detected cases and deaths reported worldwide were 2,197,593 and 153,090 respectively.
As of April 18, 2020, Covid-19, designated as a pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO), infected more than 2 million persons.[1] This dramatic increase in the number of cases since the first reported case on December 31, 2019, sparked a range of responses from various public and private actors.
Over time, natural calamities and armed conflicts have demonstrated that human rights are often the first casualties of a crisis.
The Spitsbergen (Svalbard) archipelago, located over 400 miles East of northern Greenland in the Arctic Ocean, was terra nullius until a 1920 treaty (Svalbard Treaty) recognized the "full and absolute sovereignty of Norway" over this territory.[1] Snow crabs settled in the region some two decades ago and have since become abundant in these waters.
COVID-19 has disrupted the world as we know it with the declaration of national disaster, imposition of strict quarantines, and economic disruptions. In order to provide some context for the role of international law in public health emergencies, this Insight provides brief history of how the international community has created institutional governance to respond to global health pandemics.
Introduction
On Thursday, January 23, 2020, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) issued its decision on the request for provisional measures in the case of The Gambia v. Myanmar.
Accusations of foreign interference in domestic affairs was a dominant theme throughout the 2010s. This was no less true in the Persian Gulf. Beginning in 2013, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt, and Bahrain charged neighboring Qatar with meddling in their internal affairs and other infractions to their sovereignty. But what began as a quiet disagreement among allies burst onto global headlines when in 2017 the four countries abruptly terminated their diplomatic and economic relations with Qatar.
