van der Heijden, Jeroen
RegNet Research Paper No. 2016/103
Scholarship as Dialogue? ICL, Twail and the Politics of Methodology Michelle Burgis-Kasthala, Regulatory Institutions Network (RegNet), Australian National University (ANU)
Scholars of International Criminal Law (ICL) and Third World Approaches to International Law (TWAIL) rarely speak to each other and part of the reason for this is often divergent approaches to methodology. Thus this article begins with an exploration of the ways in which international lawyers (mis)conceive methodology in their work so as to account for patterns of scholarly dialogue as well as silence. I argue in this article that ICL scholars can learn from TWAIL experiences with methodology, especially as the ICL field leaves the ‘honeymoon’ phase and enters a more ‘mature’ period that calls for greater reflexivity by practitioners and scholars alike. Understanding methodology with and against TWAIL is one way of contributing to ICL’s scholarly evolution.
RegNet Research Paper No. 2016/104
Emma Larking, Regulatory Institutions Network (RegNet), Australian National University (ANU)
The report of the Australian Human Rights Commission’s (AHRC) most recent national inquiry into the impact of immigration detention on children, ‘The Forgotten Children’, was publicly released in February 2015 and immediately dismissed by then Prime Minister, Tony Abbott, as ‘a political stitch-up’. This article considers what the inquiry found concerning the impact of detention on children and its legality under international law. It also reflects on whether the recent release of some children from detention constitutes a victory for human rights.
RegNet Research Paper No. 2016/105
Christoph Sperfeldt, Regulatory Institutions Network (RegNet), Australian National University (ANU)
The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) is currently undergoing a process of political and economic integration unprecedented in Southeast Asia. What began in earnest in 2007, with the adoption of the ASEAN Charter has further developed through the implementation of the economic, political-security, and socio-cultural community blueprints. As ASEAN moves forward with its agenda for the establishment of an Economic Community by 2015, the judiciaries of the ten member states face considerable challenges with adapting to the new legal environment required of a single market. The proliferation of cross-border trade as well as ASEAN’s goals for economic integration are factors that push member states towards further legalisation including the harmonisation of laws and dispute resolution. However, institutional development and domestic judicial capacities have not kept pace with the rapidly expanding normative output at the ASEAN level. Against this background, this paper draws attention to the role the national judiciaries of the ten ASEAN member states play in the regional integration process. The absence of more institutionalised regular judicial collaboration among the national courts of ASEAN member states and associated capacity-building efforts leads, in practice, to varying degrees of implementation of legal obligations at the national level. Building upon the findings of two comparative studies implemented by the Human Rights Resource Centre for ASEAN, this paper (i) outlines the rationale for a role of ASEAN judiciaries in regional integration; (ii) provides a brief comparative overview of the state of judicial collaboration among ASEAN member states and the extent to which ASEAN integration is considered in judicial training; and (iii) discusses some challenges and opportunities for the regional integration process.
RegNet Research Paper No. 2016/106
Jeroen van der Heijden, Regulatory Institutions Network (RegNet), Australian National University (ANU)
Acknowledging the limitations of traditional, mandatory governance instruments (building codes, planning legislation) to achieve low-carbon buildings, governments, firms and other organisations have been experimenting with alternatives. This trend has become known as the ‘new governance’. This article brings together 50 new governance instruments to better understand what this new governance for low-carbon buildings looks like, and what may be expected from it. It finds that new governance instruments fall short in exactly the same areas as do traditional instruments. It argues for a change in application of new governance instruments along three paths to improve their performance.
All previous papers published in the RegNet Research Paper Series are available for download on the RegNet SSRN page.
RegNet Research Paper Series Vol. 4, No. 2, 2016. Regulatory Institutions Network.