- Kommentator er professor Antonios Tzanakopoulos
- Midtveisevalueringen ledes av førsteamanuensis Synnøve Ugelvik
- Veileder er professorer Ivar Alvik
- Biveileder er professor Christian Tams
For tekstutkast, kontakt Jørgen Sørgard Skjold
Om avhandlingen
The PhD project is concerned with the function and form of countermeasures as a means of redress in international law.
The right of states to take countermeasures in response to a prior violation of international law by the target state is an enforcement mechanism provided for under international customary law. With scholarly treatment of the concept stretching back to the 14th century, the use of countermeasures is one of the classic subjects in the field of international law. Owing to the decentralized structure of international law, it is among the primary means for states to enforce international obligations.
Specifically, the task for this thesis will be to clarify the circumstances for the application of countermeasures and assess questions as to their form and limits. The purpose of this examination is to offer an analysis of the concept that is capable of clarifying and testing established presumptions, that does not treat the concept in isolation from its historical development, and that offers fresh perspective on what has developed as a fairly compartmentalized debate. It is believed that a contribution of this kind is essential on account of the present state of international law, in which the appetite for unilateral coercive measures has increased amongst states and long-established presumptions as to the limits to such measures find themselves in a state of flux.
The thesis will be a monograph consisting of two main parts. Part I will focus on identifying the circumstances for the use of countermeasures, going beyond the observation of countermeasures as a sanction applicable, in principle, against any infraction, in order to focus on clarifying the legal interests it is applied to protect in the practice of states, from the protection of individuals through to questions of its relevance for the enforcement of obligations erga omnes. Part II will focus on the form of countermeasures, seeking to assess the limits relative to the permissibility of measures involving forcible activities, which has re-emerged as an active debate, and economic coercion, which remains clouded by uncertainty. On the back of this endeavor, the opportunity opens for reflections on the function of countermeasures as a remedy of international law and the future normative development in the field, which will be the focus of concluding remarks in Part III.