International Law Research, Issue: Vol.15, No.1

Reconceptualizing the Precautionary Principle in China’s GMO Governance

Fri, 05 Dec 2025 09:19:29 +0000

With the aftermath of COVID-19, China restarted the safety assessment of GM crops. However, the precautionary principle which has guided the environmental legislation in China remains controversy and ambiguous, which has led to the stagnation of GMO industrialization in China. The problem could not be solved without a theoretical and empirical study on the logic operation of the precautionary principle in GMO industrialization. Theoretically, it is found that the precautionary principle, precautionary approach and precautionary measure constitute an organic whole of abstractness and specificness, goal and means; Meanwhile, “Substantial equivalence” should be brought into the system of the precautionary principle Empirically, the rules adopted in GMO industrialization, such as case by case, are exactly the application and expansion of precautionary principle. Based on this, the logic evolution for operation mechanism of precautionary principle can be drawn up: on one side, the precautionary approaches are to be observed by taking advantage of the scientific discovery; on the other side, the technical means shall be adopted as precautionary measures through the legislative proceedings as against scientific uncertainty.

Traces of Jewish Law in Public International Law

Mon, 23 Mar 2026 03:35:23 +0000

This article explores the intersection of halacha and public international law, emphasizing their converging principles and historical contributions. The universalist framework embedded in halacha and Jewish legal literature provides valuable insights into foundational elements of public international law, many of which have attained universal application. Moreover, halacha exhibits a reformist and progressive character, continuously evolving through debate and interpretation. This dynamic approach mirrors the development of public international law, particularly in the fields of international humanitarian law and human rights law. Additionally, halacha has played a pivotal role in shaping the understanding of fundamental human needs. Developed within a historical context where Jewish communities existed as minorities among non-Jewish majorities, Jewish jurisprudence cultivated principles for ensuring human rights long before the emergence of modern nation-states and contemporary human rights frameworks. This article argues that the principles underlying human rights law and public international law share parallels with, and have been influenced by, Jewish legal traditions, with traces of this influence reflected in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Draft of a UK Property and Finance Crimes Act

Tue, 14 Apr 2026 03:32:50 +0000

Draft of a UK Property and Finance Crimes Act.

The Travesty of Article 2(4) as a Binding Norm

Wed, 03 Jun 2026 03:16:30 +0000

The ongoing conflicts in the Middle East and various unrests across the globe have cast doubts on whether states still comply with the provision of Article 2(4) of the UN Charter. This is due to states’ covert and overt involvement in these conflicts and unrests. Hence, the binding force of Article 2(4) appears highly compromised, although opinio juris on this is divided. The divided opinion is natural but most importantly reflects the division often seen in the Security Council and which has rendered the Council inactive over time. The remnant potency of Article 2(4) has been drastically eroded by the inertia of the Council. Consequently, state parties unilaterally intervene in the internal affairs of other states but still claim civil disciples of the norm codified in Article 2(4). This trend is risky and could extinguish the lifeline of the United Nations as it concerns the maintenance of international peace and security. To save the situation, an evolutive interpretation of Article 2(4) appears cogent now than ever. Time has changed unlike 1945 when the Charter was drafted. It is crucially important to re-evaluate the potency of the restrictive interpretation of Article 2(4) of the Charter of the United Nations. This paper does just that; it has analysed the travaux preparatoires of Article 2(4) and come to the conclusion that respect of the inviolability of State Territory was intended by the drafters of the UN Charter.

Draft UK Crimes against the Person Act

Sun, 06 Sep 2026 03:54:07 +0000

Draft UK Crimes against the Person Act.

Overview of Botswana's Data Protection Act 2024

Tue, 08 Sep 2026 07:03:00 +0000

Botswana's Data Protection Act 2024 supersedes the 2018 Act, marking a significant advancement in the country's data governance. Compared with the 2018 Act, the new Act broadens the territorial scope of application, refines the supporting framework for the regulatory authority, introduces mandatory DPO and DPIA requirements, expands the category of sensitive personal data and establishes a three-tier cross-border data transfer regime. It further creates an enforcement and remedial regime composed of administrative fines, criminal sanctions, and multi-tiered remedies, thereby comprehensively addressing the earlier framework's deficiencies. These reforms reflect Botswana's institutional endeavour to promote its digital economy while safeguarding the fundamental rights of its citizens.

Humanitarian Organizations in Occupied Palestine: Israel’s Registration Procedure under the Fourth Geneva Convention

Tue, 13 Oct 2026 15:00:20 +0000

On 9 March 2025, amid the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, Israel issued new registration rules for international humanitarian organizations assisting Palestinians. The rules implemented a December 2024 government decision assigning registration to an interministerial team led by the Ministry of Diaspora Affairs and Combating Antisemitism. They required organizations to disclose personnel information, including details of Palestinian employees, and introduced grounds for refusal concerning organizational conduct, including boycott activity. Registration was also linked to recommendations for foreign employees and access to certain State-controlled facilities, allowing an administrative refusal to interrupt programmes dependent on those arrangements. This article examines the occupation-law obligations engaged by such restrictions through two 2026 judgments of Israel’s High Court of Justice, which upheld the personnel-disclosure requirement and a boycott-based refusal. It reads the judgments against the Fourth Geneva Convention, drawing on the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC)’s 2025 Commentary and the International Court of Justice’s advisory opinion of 22 October 2025 to establish the scope of the relevant protections. The analysis distinguishes interference with a qualifying relief society’s humanitarian activities under Article 63 from the occupying Power’s obligation under Article 59 to agree to and facilitate relief for an inadequately supplied population. It argues that registration controls remain subject to the conditions protecting the organization’s work, while exclusion of a provider leaves the duty to facilitate sufficient relief in place. Where refusal interrupts assistance, compliance must therefore be assessed through evidence of the work affected, the population’s continuing needs, and the practical capacity of other arrangements to meet them.