Chapter 3 moves to the global level, exploring the history of technology control and its historical links to geopolitics. It begins by considering control of technology in the context of the Cold War and technology as being explicitly considered a security issue in terms of the conflict between the US and the Soviet Union. It covers the CoCom technology restrictions imposed by the US, and Soviet Union attempts to gain access to critical technologies through Comecon, before considering how the approach to technology changed substantially with the end of the Cold War, the collapse of the Soviet Union, and the belief in the triumph of the liberal international order and globalism as reflected by the World Trade Organization and ‘free trade’. It then explores the multifaceted crises impacting upon this conviction in the benefits and resilience of the global trade system, the increased economic conflict between the US and China as a rising technological power, and a move from multilateralism in a ‘unipolar’ system to increased nationalism and protectionism in a ‘multipolar’ system, and what this meant for the EU’s sense of insecurity and vulnerability in the context of geopolitical reordering.

This chapter focuses on the shift from ad hoc measures to an institutionalised transitional justice project. A technical committee composed of representatives of civil society and the Ministry for Human Rights and Transitional Justice led a participatory consultation process and drafted a transitional justice law. Which transitional justice measures were introduced was co-determined by the international transitional justice professionals. The broad mandate that emerged from this process mirrored the dominant dogma in transitional justice research and scholarship as well as the political interests of both international and domestic actors. In this stage, the transitional justice process interplayed with unplanned, spontaneous political and social dynamics. The struggles over the constitution-writing process and at times violent protests pushed the topic back on to the political agenda. The National Dialogue then opened the way for the primacy of acute conflict-resolution and elite deal-making over further dismantling the old regime and seeking justice and accountability. The parliament’s decision to retain its prerogative of nominating truth commissioners paved the way for a perception of the Truth and Dignity Commission as a political and partisan body.

Analysis of China’s governing ideology, concept of law as defined in China, the rule of law from the Chinese perspective, and China’s pursuit of social harmony and underlying core socialist values.

This chapter argues that International Relations has overlooked the seas as a changing global space, and encourages adopting a terraqueous understanding of world politics. Invoking materialist conceptions of geography and history, it explores the ordering of oceans, the international relations of lives spent at or close to the sea, and the international implications of warmer, acidified and expanding seas. It looks at maritime trade and labour, piracy and shipping as global phenomena. The chapter considers these broad issues with a historical-sociological lens, and in conversation with reference to both classical and more contemporary theorists of the relationship between land and sea.

This chapter formulates the research question and clarifies the critical methodological issues pertaining to the analysis. This is important because the book aims to bring together science and technology studies, sociological systems theory and jurisprudence The topic of the book is then introduced by giving an overview of all the chapters, making clear that a common thread runs throughout the book and that the argument addresses all of the theoretical, empirical and practical aspects of the research question posed at the beginning.

This chapter introduces readers to the main questions, arguments, and debates contained in this book.

Chapter 4 builds on the findings of Chapter 3 by analysing the remaining requirements for the passing of penal sentences, including institutional requirements such as independence and impartiality, as well as more specific due process guarantees prescribed by CA 3, AP II and customary law. The chapter argues that despite the contested direct application of IHRL to non-state actors, IHL incorporates customary human rights law principles and standards of due process developed for states and indirectly provides for their application to armed groups. It explains that while these standards might not have the same potential to ‘outlaw’ armed group trials as the requirement of a ‘regularly constituted’ court, they are nevertheless difficult to meet by non-state actors in practice. This conclusion notwithstanding, the chapter also argues that proposals to downgrade the fair trial standards expected from armed groups should be rejected, as they might equally water down fair trial guarantees expected from states and undermine the principle of belligerent equality.

This volume challenges conventional interpretations by demonstrating that Hans Kelsen was far from being a purely formalist thinker. Instead, it highlights his profound and enduring engagement with the threats facing constitutional democracies. The political and institutional upheavals of interwar Europe significantly influenced Kelsen’s evolving vision of democracy, as this volume shows. His contributions to twentieth-century democratic theory include groundbreaking insights into multiparty systems, mechanisms of moderation, minority protections, and judicial review. Furthermore, Kelsen’s reflections on the crises and collapses of democracies during the 1930s remain strikingly relevant, offering valuable perspectives on contemporary challenges such as polarisation and populism. This title is also available as Open Access on Cambridge Core.

Despite sustained efforts to privatize state-owned enterprises (SOEs) across various sectors in China, they continue to play a significant role in certain industries. Existing scholarship has yet to provide a fully satisfactory explanation for the historical development and sectoral distribution of SOEs. Economists frequently argue that SOEs serve as tools for addressing market failures, while others interpret them as outcomes of political decisions shaped by ideology and interest group dynamics.

This book advances a legal theory of SOEs, asserting that prevailing accounts are incomplete. Market failures, after all, can also be addressed through regulatory measures. The more pertinent comparison, therefore, is between the use of SOEs and the use of regulation. When regulatory costs are high, SOEs are more likely to arise, endure, and resist privatization.

Overview of the rights of personality under the Civil Code, and discussion and analysis of the major issues pertaining to rights to life, corporeal integrity and health, right to name, right to likeness, right to reputation and honor, right to privacy, and protection of personal information.

The notion of political compromise in party democracy is a cornerstone of Kelsen’s democratic theory. In the legislative, he argued, one party (or several parties) constituting a majority need(s) to somehow get along with a party (or several parties) in the minority if democratic government is to work and last. However, this vision goes against common sense understandings of what it means to have a democratically elected majority; it is also likely to raise some eyebrows among majoritarian theorists of democracy. This chapter explores whether Kelsen’s central idea can possibly be redeemed. Unlike Kelsen’s multiple critics in contemporary democratic theory, it argues that his account of compromise rests on numerous ambiguities that leave it underdetermined on both normative and institutional levels. It also argues and demonstrates that the most plausible understanding of Kelsen’s imperative to compromise rests on the notion of respecting the members of parties in the minority as co-rulers – an intuition derived from a Rousseauian conception of democracy as collective self-rule and adapted to societies characterised by persistent conflicts of interest and moral disagreements. It concludes that, despite its shortcomings, Kelsen’s valorisation of political pluralism, in the legislative and in the public arena, remains an important source of arguments for a time often characterised as a ‘crisis of democracy’ and in the face of rampant anti-partyism.

This chapter presents case studies of Indigenous peace agreements in the Andes region. It begins with an introduction that highlights the significance of understanding legal geography and its relevance to Indigenous peoples. It then explores the legal frameworks that protect Indigenous rights, focusing on international instruments such as declarations and conventions. It then examines specific agreements in the Andes that enact these legal frameworks, with a spotlight on the National Agreement for Development and Peace in La Araucanía, 2018, in Chile, and the Agreement Between the Bolivian Government and the Confederation of Indigenous peoples from the East, Chaco, and Amazonia in 2010. These case studies showcase the intersection of legal, social, and political dynamics in promoting Indigenous rights and fostering peace. By analysing the legal geographies of these agreements, the chapter contributes to a deeper understanding of the complex challenges and opportunities Indigenous communities face in achieving sustainable development and peace in the Andes region.