ARTICLE: INTERNATIONAL STATE RESPONSIBILITY FOR ACTS OF NON-STATE ACTORS: THE RECENT STANDARDS SET BY THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE IN GENOCIDE AND WHY THE WTO APPELLATE BODY SHOULD NOT EMBRACE THEM Skip over navigation
LexisNexis® Browse Law Reviews and Treatises
Skip over navigation
Sign in with your lexis.com® ID to access the full text of this article.
-OR-
Order the full text of this article if you do not have a lexis.com® ID.
 
Price: 
US $22.00 (+ tax)
 
 

Copyright (c) 2007 Syracuse Journal of International Law and Commerce
Syracuse Journal of International Law and Commerce

ARTICLE: INTERNATIONAL STATE RESPONSIBILITY FOR ACTS OF NON-STATE ACTORS: THE RECENT STANDARDS SET BY THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE IN GENOCIDE AND WHY THE WTO APPELLATE BODY SHOULD NOT EMBRACE THEM

Fall, 2007

35 Syracuse J. Int'l L. & Com. 1

Author

Alberto Alvarez-Jimenez*

Excerpt



Introduction
 
The recent International Court of Justice's (ICJ) judgment in Case Concerning the Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Genocide) dealt with international State responsibility for acts of non-State actors. Specifically, it set high standards of relationship between the two in order to hold the State responsible for acts of non-State entities or groups. 1 In the few cases in which the panels created under the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade and World Trade Organization (GATT/WTO) have evaluated non-State actors' actions as trade measures subject to the WTO Dispute Settlement System, such panels have established a considerably less strict standard than the one set by the ICJ in the said judgment. The WTO standard, although not identical, shares some features of the one adopted by the Appeals Chamber of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (AC.ICTY) in its judgment in Prosecutor v. Du[Ko Tadi], 2 which was explicitly rejected by the ICJ in Genocide. 3 Given that the WTO Appellate Body (AB) has recognized that WTO law cannot be interpreted in clinical isolation from public international law, 4 the question this difference raises is whether it would be appropriate for the AB to move in the direction set by Genocide or Tadic regarding this subject matter.

This paper attempts to present this difference and to justify a negative response to this question. For reasons that will be detailed below, it would ...
 
 
If you are interested in obtaining a lexis.com® ID and Password, please contact us at 1-(800)-227-4908 or visit us at http://www.lexisnexis.com/.
Search Documents
 
eg., Environmental Insurance Coverage Under the Comprehensive General Liability Policy
 
 
 
 

Lexis® Web - The only search engine that delivers free web content specifically from legal sites validated by LexisNexis® attorney editors and includes tools for faster research and more relevant results.

 
LexisNexis Store
Research Now - Go to lexis.com
Connect the Dots - Free 1 hour webcast
Share. Network. Discover. - Go to LexisNexis Communities