Law Commons^™

In The Name Of Sovereignty? The Battle Over In Dubio Mitius Inside And Outside The Courts, Christophe J. Larouer

Cornell Law School Inter-University Graduate Student Conference Papers

Contrary to some prominent legal scholars’ predictions, the principle of in dubio mitius, that is, the principle of restrictive interpretation of treaty obligations in deference to the sovereignty of states, has not disappeared. Worse, the Appellate Body (AB) of the World Trade Organization (WTO) has carried it into the 21st Century, reigniting the ideological debate dividing the legal doctrine over the conception of what the relationship between domestic and international law should be. Therefore, after retracing the history of this principle during which key legal figures opposed one another, this article examines the divergent positions defended by the proponents and …

Multilateralism Or Regionalism; What Can Be Done About The Proliferation Of Regional Trading Agreements?, Luwam G. Dirar

Cornell Law School Inter-University Graduate Student Conference Papers

Regional trading agreements are treaties entered into by states. States enter into regional trading agreements for different reasons some of which are economic, political and security reasons. Regional trading agreements (herein after RTAs) have been successful in achieving trade liberalization at a much faster speed than the World Trade Organization (herein after WTO). The most notable example of RTAs is the European Communities that has been successful to liberalize both trade in goods and services.

Members of those Regional Trading Agreements create rules of origin. Rules of origin are important in allocating the appropriate duty for imported goods. They tell …

Protecting Against Plunder: The United States And The International Efforts Against Looting Of Antiquities, Asif Efrat

Cornell Law Faculty Working Papers

In 1970 UNESCO adopted a convention intended to stem the flow of looted antiquities from developing countries to collections in art-importing countries. The majority of art-importing countries, including Britain, Germany, and Japan, refused to join the Convention. Contrary to other art-importing countries, and reversing its own traditionally-liberal policy, the United States accepted the international regulation of antiquities and joined the UNESCO Convention. The article seeks to explain why the United States chose to establish controls on antiquities, to the benefit of foreign countries facing archaeological plunder and to the detriment of the US art market. I argue that the concern …