Philip Burton (Univ. of Manchester - Manchester International Law Centre) has posted an ESIL Reflection on Searching for the Eastern Carelia Principle.

The International Courts and Tribunals Interest Group of the American Society of International Law has issued a call for papers for a works-in-progress workshop, to take place January 25, 2019, at the John Marshall Law School in Chicago. The call is here.

Niccolò Ridi (King’s College London - Law) has posted 'Mirages of an intellectual dreamland’? Ratio, obiter, and the textualization of international precedent (Journal of International Dispute Settlement, forthcoming). Here's the abstract:

In recent years, various actors—states, judges, and commentators alike—have taken issue with the way international adjudicators have approached precedent. Criticism has been levelled, in particular, to the phenomenon of ‘obiter dicta’ (observations that, though not necessary for the decision, are nonetheless included in it), which have been found to amount to a symptom of bad decision-making or, from the perspective of the adjudicator using them, bad precedent-following. This article addresses this debate by resituating the issue within a more grounded discussion of the theory of precedent in international adjudication, providing an in-depth theoretical and empirical analysis of the practice, and seeks to frame it within in the broader phenomenon of ‘textualization’. By doing so, it strives to clarify the use, authority, and ultimate function of obiter dicta, as well as of precedent in general, in international adjudication.

Adamantia Rachovitsa (Univ. of Groningen - Law) has posted On New “Judicial Animals”: The Curious Case of an African Court with Material Jurisdiction of a Global Scope (Human Rights Law Review, forthcoming). Here's the abstract:

The paper aims to think anew about the jurisdiction ratione materiae of the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights (‘Court’). The Court, based in Arusha, enjoys a distinctive contentious jurisdiction which extends to the interpretation and application of any other relevant human rights instrument ratified by the States concerned. The Court’s striking features set it apart from human rights bodies and most international courts. The Court’s jurisdiction has been received with scepticism and fear arguing that, if the Court extends its jurisdiction over treaties other than the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, this will lead to jurisprudential chaos and will undermine the formation of the African corpus juris. The article discusses the case law of the Court since 2013, when the Court started functioning, and it argues that these concerns are over-emphasised. The analysis underlines the shifting authority of specialised and/or regional courts; the need not to overstress but to appreciate positively instances of divergence; and the consideration of new conceptual and geographical topoi, in which international law is to be found and produced.