Anne van Aaken

Carole Helbling

On-going controversy about Iran's nuclear program, North Korea's repeated threat to deploy its nuclear capabilities, the United States' and the Russian Federation's decades-old reluctance to nuclear disarmament - the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) seems to be helpless in preventing the dissemination and maintenance of the most devastating weapon. Nevertheless, it succeeded in putting paid to the nuclear proliferation ambitions of the early 1960s and in completely altering the public perception of nuclear weapons, from being a state's prestigious asset to a despicable means to aggression. The main purpose of this thesis is to assess the NPT's overall effectiveness, understood as the Treaty's ability to induce change in a state's behaviour. On the basis of the theories Rational Choice and Constructivism, the states' underlying motivations, the influence of domestic constituencies and other crucial factors for their decision whether or not to comply with their treaty obligations are being analysed. The NPT's inherent double standard, its lack of legitimacy and dwindling credibility are regarded as decreasing the Treaty's effectiveness from within. Moreover, the nuclear-weapon states' lack of disarmament efforts, the absence of India, Israel and Pakistan, as well as the withdrawal of North Korea are further conducive to this impairment. Due to the limited competencies of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) as the monitoring body, and the institutional deadlock of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) as the enforcing institution, the effective implementation of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty is severely restricted and is in urgent need of modification.

An Interdisciplinary Approach to Nuclear Arms Control

Effectiveness of the NPT and Its Monitoring

Iulia Motoc

The European Court of Human Rights is one of the main players in interpreting international human rights law where issues of general international law arise. While developing its own jurisprudence for the protection of human rights in the European context, it remains embedded in the developments of general international law. However, because the Court does not always follow general international law closely and develops its own doctrines, which are, in turn, influential for national courts as well as other international courts and tribunals, a feedback loop of influence occurs. This book explores the interaction, including the problems arising in the context of human rights, between the European Convention on Human Rights and general international law. It contributes to ongoing debates on the fragmentation and convergence of international law from the perspective of international judges as well as academics. Some of the chapters suggest reconciling methods and convergence while others stress the danger of fragmentation. The focus is on specific topics which have posed special problems, namely sources, interpretation, jurisdiction, state responsibility and immunity.

The European Convention on Human Rights and General International Law

Nudges with paternalistic aims pose special legal problems in liberal States. Surprisingly, the discussion on regulation-by-nudging has not focused on the constitutional limits to nudging. Although the property rights of firms potentially infringed by nudging measures are dealt with in the literature and by (international) courts (eg the tobacco cases), the potential infringement of the rights of those being nudged is neglected. But judges may at one point be confronted with a nudge regulation challenged by the individuals being nudged; and even before reaching a court, the legality of nudging should be scrutinised by legislators. I explore the legal limits of paternalistic nudging under the German Constitution, especially the right to freedom of action and self-determination under Art. 2 (1) German Basic Law, judging different types of nudges by the proportionality principle. The analysis can be extended to other constitutions as well. At issue is the question of how much paternalistic nudging and what types of paternalistic nudges the fundamental rights protection in Germany permits. The proportionality analysis can be applied, mutatis mutandis, to non-paternalistic nudges (targeting externalities and public goods/bads).

Anne van Aaken

About

Books

Join the club