Vahid Bazzar, PhD graduate in international law from Allameh Tabataba’i University, Iran, writes on the ICC's extension of the jurisdiction in Palestine and specifically explores the role of IHRL and the implications concerning the same.

This episode has been featured as an article on the JFIEL platform and can be read here.

Anshita Sethi and Ishika Mittal from Jindal Global Law School, explore the UK Overseas Operations Bill and the implicit license it confers to commit torture – given that the Bill confers protection for UK soldiers from being prosecuted and effectively acts as a statute of limitations. They analyse the duty to prosecute and the UK's obligations thereunder, along with the wider implications associated with the Bill (including the several potential violations of human rights treaties).

This episode has been featured as an article on the JFIEL platform and can be read here.

In 'No Country for Climate Migrants', Subodh Singh, a fourth-year law student from ILS Law College explores the vacuum in international law concerning the protective framework for ‘climate migrants' and analyses the limits surrounding the existing discourse. Subodh also explores how such protection may be envisioned under existing instruments (such as the UNFCCC), or even by adopting a more inclusive definition and glossary for climate migrants.

This episode has been featured as an article on the JFIEL platform and can be read here.

In Part II of ‘Defining ‘Attacks’: Some Reflections on the Ntaganda Case’, Abhijeet Shrivastava analyses the teleological reading employed by Judge Eboe-Osuji, Judge Bossa, and Judge Carranza concerning whether the facts of pillaging and ransacking amount to an "attack" under Article 8(2)(e)(iv) of the Rome Statute. He presents his conclusions and also looks into the potential scrutiny surrounding Judge Eboe-Osuji’s decision which seemingly broadens Article 8(2)(e)(iv).

This episode has been featured as an article on the JFIEL platform and can be read here.

In this two-part editorial feature, Abhijeet Shrivastava, Associate Editor at The Jindal Forum for International and Economic Laws, dissects the decision rendered by the Appeals Chamber in the case of Prosecutor vs. Bosco Ntaganda before the ICC. Specifically, he unpacks the term “attack” under Article 8(2)(e)(iv) of the Rome Statute and views this against the various opinions delivered by the five judges in the case. At present, in Part I, Abhijeet explores the meaning of the term ‘attack’ from the textual and intent-based schools of treaty interpretation.

This episode has been featured as an article on the JFIEL platform and can be read here.

In this post, Yagnesh Sharma and Utsav Saxena from Maharashtra National Law University Mumbai, explore one of the primary critiques of the International Criminal Court concerning its preoccupation with Africa. They analyse certain administrative challenges, legal impediments associated with the Rome statute, as well as the pressure of the permanent five at the UN Security Council that has led to the conception of the ICC targeting Africa disproportionately.

This episode has been featured as an article on the JFIEL platform and can be read here.

Since the Vietnam war and the use of Agent Orange, there have been several alarming ecological crimes that began probing discourse surrounding the intersections between 'ecocide' and the international legal framework. In this context, Mehreen Garg, a third-year student at Jindal Global Law School, explores the relevance of the International Criminal Court and the Rome Statute in addressing the same. She argues for the inclusion of the crime of 'ecocide' within the fold of Article 5, which presently only extends to crimes against humanity, genocide, war crimes, and aggression.

This episode has been featured as an article on the JFIEL platform and can be read here.

In this editorial feature, Mahima Balaji explores the issues surrounding the Foreign Contributions Regulation Act and the governmental witch-hunt of human rights organisations under the guise of tackling ‘unregulated’ foreign funding. She specifically analyses India’s ICCPR obligations in light of the overbroad framework of the FCRA which effectively can be interpreted to be a muzzle on any sort of human rights advocacy that opposes the Indian government’s treatment of ethnoreligious minorities in the country.

This episode has been featured as an article on the JFIEL platform and can be read here.

In our latest feature, Jibraan Mansoor and Aritro B. prompt us to think about the complex legacy of self-determination, its colonial yoke, and what it means to think about emancipatory struggles within its framework. More specifically, by problematising and exploring the affinity between self-determination movements and the eventual creation of a nation-state, Jibraan and Aritro encourage us to imagine a future beyond colonial borders.

This episode has been featured as an article on the JFIEL platform and can be read here.

In this feature, Surya Rajkumar from Jindal Global Law School attempts to theoretically conceptualise the difference between Articles III:4 and III:5 of GATT. The piece engages in a nuanced reading of the two provisions and argues for why one should perhaps prefer the application of Article III:5 to prevent the ill-treatment of foreign goods when being subject to domestic input requirements

This episode has been featured as an article on the JFIEL platform and can be read here.