In April 2016, in the aftermath of the 2015 terrorist attacks, a more severe criminal prosecution policy was implemented, and terrorism cases involving individuals returning from the Iraqi-Syrian front were systematically transferred to the Special Assize Court. Previously heard at the 16th Chamber of the lower court, the Assize Court now had the authority to impose much longer prison sentences for these cases. These are the ’second generation’ trials. Most of these cases involved ’returnees,’ often without victims or civil parties, and sometimes even without the defendants themselves, who were presumed dead. These cases also included a second type of trial in which terror acts were committed.

The Assize Court has the authority to impose the most severe punishments. However, appearing before the Assize Court entails a prolonged judicial process that is unique to this jurisdiction. This chapter examines the tensions and dynamics that arose following the 2016 change in prosecution policy and the transfer of cases to the Assize Court. Beyond judicial disagreements, unexpected outcomes emerged as the court came to know the accused more closely, revealing a more complex reality.

Protecting human rights and safeguarding the environment, along with maintaining peace and security, are fundamental values of modern international society. The first two topics emerged as matters of international concern several decades apart, and the earlier development of human rights law encouraged international lawyers and activists as early as the 1972 Stockholm Conference to explore and attempt to understand the interrelationship between human rights and environmental protection. As this understanding has grown, the two fields have increasingly interacted. Since the Stockholm Conference, constitutional provisions and related litigation on environmental rights have spread around the globe. At the same time, differences in goals and priorities have demonstrated the obstacles to merging them or integrating either subject entirely into the framework of the other. The current focus on climate change has been accompanied by new efforts to enforce environmental goals that impact the enjoyment of human rights.

This chapter takes stock of the evolution of the trade-environment nexus, focusing on the legal protection of the atmosphere. It offers a brief historical overview of the trade-environment debate, zooming in on the 1972 Stockholm Conference on the Human Environment. It then discusses the rationale, functioning, and legality of (1) multilateral trade measures incorporated in the 1987 Montreal Protocol and (2) unilateral trade measures adopted with a view to protecting the climate. The main conclusion is that, while much has changed since the Stockholm Conference – with new international legal regimes coming into being and many more trade-related environmental measures being adopted – some things have stayed the same, with North-South tensions continuing to form the main backdrop for trade-environment interactions and continuing uncertainty about the forum in which these interactions should be addressed.

An organic linkage exists between the international environmental law-making process and the design of the architecture of international environmental governance (IEG). The prognosis of the global environmental problematique from the 1972 Stockholm Conference to the 2022 Stockholm+50 Meeting and beyond shows the workings of a marathon global environmental regulatory enterprise. Still, after more than 50 years, the nature, content, quality, and actual workings of the legal instruments are worrisome. In a state-centric global order, we need an honest introspection on the architecture of IEG. What will it take to overhaul the existing structures to secure our planetary future? Is it possible without a de novo entity? Can we revive and repurpose the UN Trusteeship Council with a new mandate for the environment and global commons? Within the limits of time and space, this chapter looks back in order to ideate and look ahead to secure a robust IEG architecture for our common planetary environmental future.

Emerging from early calls for more rational management of resources and development planning in the 1972 Stockholm Declaration, the concept of sustainable consumption and production (SCP) has developed into an essential requirement for sustainable development and, as expressed at the UN International Meeting Stockholm+50, a key tool for achieving the system-wide change to our current economic system required for a healthy planet. SCP is, first and foremost, about ‘doing more with less’ by decoupling human well-being and economic growth, on the one hand, and resource use and environmental degradation, on the other hand. Yet, notwithstanding its prominence in policy, there exists little in terms of international law to support these required changes in global production and consumption, which instead focuses more on end-of-pipe solutions (pollution control, waste management, and so on). The analysis of multilateral environmental agreements on atmospheric pollution, chemicals, and hazardous wastes highlights the limited international legal tools that have been developed over the years that support SCP.

The Stockholm Conference is remembered for sparking the development of modern international environmental law. It would have been fortunate if it were also remembered for sparking the reform of international economic law. This chapter illustrates that, on account of the international economic system, which is engrained in international economic law, developing states continue to face many of the challenges they brought to the table in 1972.

This chapter presents the actors involved in terror criminal trials in France. Through a detailed exploration of each actor, the chapter highlights not only their roles but also the criminal procedure and their interactions within the courtroom setting. Aiming to explore civil law criminal systems in depth, it examines the roles of trial judges, investigating judges, prosecutors, civil parties and their lawyers, defense lawyers, and defendants, considering both their professional and social contexts. By situating these actors not only within the courtroom but also within the broader framework of France’s counter-terrorism judicial system, the chapter introduces the reader to the structure, procedures, and key players involved in counter-terrorism trials in France.

The ‘first generation’ of jihadist trials took place before the 16th Chamber in the Lower Criminal Court in Paris, which centralised all terrorism offences with sentences of up to ten years imprisonment.This Chamber operated as a judicial laboratory, modulating the judicial response to jihadism, while experimenting the application of vague notions such as “dangerousness” and “radicalization”. This was developed during the ‘State of Emergency’ in close collaboration between investigating judges and the prosecution, who were given increased authority and resources, alongside the specialisation of the judges. The Chamber developed significant expertise in handling such cases and established a repeated ritual, designing the boundaries of the law and the narratives, setting the level of punishment. Various actors contributed to the co-construction of the first generation of jihadist trials, including the defendants and their lawyers. This chapter examines these structures and practices from the inner perspective of the courtroom, highlighting the role of this first generation of trials in shaping the contours of the judicial respond to the war on terror in France.

Although only two of the 26 principles enshrined in the 1972 Stockholm Declaration are devoted specifically to the protection of nature, they have encouraged a large number of states to conclude various international agreements of a sectoral nature, which were supplemented in 1992 by a global agreement on biodiversity. In addition to tracing the influence of the Stockholm Declaration on international nature protection law, this chapter discusses the European Union’s (EU) role in the development of international law in this field. Conversely, the chapter also looks at how EU internal rules on nature protection have been influenced by the obligations stemming from multilateral environment agreements and illustrates the cross-fertilisation that has occurred between EU and international law.

In the last decade, the number of youths engaged in transnational jihadism has been increasing, with many of them joining armed forces in the Iraqi–Syrian conflict zone and committing acts of violence in France or abroad. The terrorist attacks on the headquarters of the satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo and the Bataclan concert hall and surrounding cafés in 2015 can be seen as France’s 9/11 and a turning point in its counter-terrorism policy: the war on terror had reached French soil. Against this socio-political setting, French legal institutions have been extensively mobilised. A two-year state of emergency was introduced between 2015 and 2017, gradually becoming part of common criminal law. The number of trials against individuals involved in armed groups on the Iraqi–Syrian front has reached a level unprecedented in the history of French criminal justice: terrorism has become a phenomenon of mass prosecution.

This chapter explores the progressive integration of environmental law and human rights considerations in international law, with a specific focus on the development of environmental access rights and the acceptance of the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment from the early1970s to the 2020s. Concepts such as sustainable development and environmental rule of law, are an essential part of this evolutionary journey. A specific example of the integration of these concepts is the increasing recognition of environmental human rights defenders (EHRDs). It is argued that EHRDs play an essential role in enabling states’ realisation of environmental rule of law, the achievement of sustainable development, and the promotion of a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment. The chapter notes that EHRDs face escalating physical threats and legal risks by both government and private sector interests in many regions of the world, often entailing violations of environmental access rights. Such risks detract from the otherwise significant progress that has been made. The chapter concludes that there is an urgent need for greater recognition and protection of EHRDs through stronger legal and policy mechanisms as part of enhancing environmental access rights globally.