Ethnicity Clothing

The International Legal Order and the Global Pandemic

However, before states and commentators can propose meaningful reforms to the international system, it is important to first assess the magnitude of the issues raised by the pandemic. That`s what this series wants to do. the relationship between climate change and pandemics; Your email address will be used to notify you when your comment has been reviewed by the moderator and if the author or moderator of the article needs to contact you directly. Even countries that have managed COVID-19 more effectively have faced new episodes of infection. Hong Kong experienced a second wave of COVID-19 in March after foreign students and residents returned to the region, and then a third wave in July. In Canada, where various provincial governments brought the pandemic under control over the summer, the number of cases nationwide is rising again. The France, Spain and even Germany – hailed over the summer as a model of effective lockdown – have seen dramatic increases in their case numbers and positivity rates in recent weeks. As the seasons change and various countries face new episodes of COVID-19 infection, it is clear that the international community`s fight against the pandemic is far from over. Future articles will focus on the intersection of COVID-19 and international human rights law. We first look at how the pandemic is affecting states` obligations to protect the right to life. Next, we turn to the right to health, the scope of its application and its application in the pandemic context. Finally, we document how different states have respected or violated various civil and political rights in response to COVID-19, with a focus on speech and assembly, privacy, voter participation, fair trials, and protection from deprivation of liberty.

In response to the COVID-19 crisis, the American Journal of International Law (AJIL) is launching a global call for papers for an Agora symposium to be published in the October 2020 issue of the journal. The theme – “The International Legal Order and the Global Pandemic” – recognizes that the current crisis raises fundamental questions for the international legal order that go beyond the immediate challenges to public health and economic stability. Contributions may address any aspect of this topic from a historical, institutional, doctrinal, normative, critical or geopolitical perspective, or a combination of approaches, including, but not limited to: Martha Bradley focuses on the scope of the non-international law of armed conflict contained in Additional Protocol II to the Geneva Conventions. In the context of the conflicts in the Central African Republic, Mali, South Sudan and the Democratic Republic of Congo, it calls into question the requirement of territorial control laid down in Article 1(1) of the Protocol. controversies over innovations in medical treatments and vaccines and the cross-border distribution of goods, services and knowledge; Finagle`s law of dynamic negatives (a slightly lesser-known derivative of Murphy`s Law) postulates that “anything that can go wrong will go wrong at the most inopportune time.” This seems to have been true with regard to the Covid-19 outbreak from a global perspective. The pandemic has come at a time of growing skepticism in academia, the decline of democracy and authoritarianism, a flare-up of great power rivalry and the decline of multilateralism. As a result, the Covid-19 response has become a political plaything both nationally and internationally, straining the existing framework of global governance. We begin with three articles on the intersection of COVID-19 and international humanitarian law – the law that applies during armed conflict. First, we deal with the rules and norms governing the conduct of hostilities during a pandemic; secondly, how the pandemic affects States` obligations to provide humanitarian access; and third, the treatment of prisoners during armed conflict during a pandemic.

The series then looks at refugee law issues and identifies states` obligations to asylum seekers in the context of COVID-19. We are looking at the non-refoulement obligation, which prevents states from returning asylum seekers to dangerous foreign territories, even during a pandemic. We also examine States` obligations towards asylum seekers, refugees and other immigrants detained in state-run facilities or locked up in camps and facilities. In their article, Barrie Sander and Nicholas Tsagourias look at the role played by a particularly influential category of private actors, namely online platforms. Sander and Tsagourias suggest that by interfering in the context of Covid-19 between states and the global community on the one hand and individuals on the other, online platforms become intermediary custodians of the international public good of health. They argue that this requires legislation to ensure, among other things, that online platforms respect the human dignity of individuals as well as the legitimate interests of states. UN officials have called on world leaders and non-state actors to renew their commitment to international law at this time. Filippo Grandi, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, warned states against closing “asylum pathways” or “forcing people to return to dangerous situations,” arguing that “all of us. Solidarity and compassion today more than ever.

UN Secretary-General António Guterres has called on fighters to respect international humanitarian law and even called for a global ceasefire. In this multi-part series, we will examine how COVID-19 is affecting the rules and norms of international law. We will focus on five key legal issues affected by the pandemic and states` response to it: (1) international humanitarian law, (2) international human rights law, (3) international refugee law, (4) international cyber law, and (5) World Health Organization rules and regulations. Our goal is to highlight the most important issues COVID-19 raises for each individual. As editors, we have decided to devote an important part of this issue to the international legal implications of Covid-19. But we probably underestimated the range of legal problems the pandemic would bring. Originally, we had a specific section of the journal in mind, with 3 or 4 short articles dealing with things like the role of WHO and the human rights implications of travel restrictions. In the end, we received ten different articles, which led to the largest issue of the journal to date. the different consequences of pandemics for minorities, economic inequalities or intergenerational justice; President-elect Joe Biden has made the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic a centerpiece of his presidential campaign. He stressed that if elected president, he would take steps to “lead the response to this global crisis.” As he and his team begin to work to deliver on that promise, they can begin to ensure that the United States and other countries around the world commit to fighting the pandemic within the framework of international law.

This series is the starting point for these efforts. Several commentators have focused on how different countries have responded to the COVID-19 pandemic or how it has exacerbated current national challenges (see, for example, articles on Ecuador, Nigeria, China, Italy, Russia, South Korea and the United Kingdom). But beyond the consequences of the pandemic on individual countries, there is a broader concern about its consequences for international law. In his recent remarks to the United Nations General Assembly, French President Emmanuel Macron warned that the United Nations. “risks fading” and that “this crisis, probably more than any other, requires cooperation, requires the invention of new international solutions”. A webinar accompanying this series of articles examines the impact of the coronavirus pandemic on the world order and whether its impact will continue long after the pandemic is over. This series focuses on a related topic: the international legal consequences of the current pandemic. Martins Paparinskis discusses the role of the law of international responsibility in disputes arising from how states and/or international organizations have managed or failed to manage the pandemic. This raises the question of whether rules on international responsibility – such as the rather narrow interpretation of the exception of necessity currently recognised by international law – will survive unscathed by state practice related to Covid-19. To date, the global COVID-19 pandemic has infected more than 50 million people and killed more than 1.2 million, including more than 238,000 in the United States alone.

In the United States, pundits and journalists have focused on the inadequacy of the Trump administration`s response, the development of potential COVID-19 vaccines, and the different approaches of the two presidential campaigns to combat the pandemic. Fewer authors have looked outward to examine the impact of COVID-19 on the international legal order. While Covid-19 dominated the airwaves for most of 2020, we must not forget other crises, some of which have undoubtedly been exacerbated by the pandemic.

Scroll to Top