ABOUT THIS COLLECTION

The Arizona Journal of International and Comparative Law is published three times annually by the students of the James E. Rogers College of Law at the University of Arizona. The Journal publishes articles on a wide variety of international and comparative law topics in order to provide a forum for debate on current issues affecting international legal development including international and comparative law issues and tribal/indigenous peoples law.

The Journal has three major goals: to provide an opportunity for all members to publish articles on international and comparative law topics, to serve the publication needs of the Arizona Bar Association with respect to international law, and to provide practitioners, judges, and governmental bodies with a central source of information on international topics that increasingly arise in practice.

QUESTIONS?

Visit the Arizona Journal of International and Comparative Law website for more information.

Recent Submissions

  • Violent Crime and the Travel Bans: What is the True Relationship? [Note]

    Aguallo, Shelby (The University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law (Tucson, AZ), 2022)
  • Reverberating Effects in Armed Conflict: An Environmental Analysis [Article]

    Costi, Alberto (The University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law (Tucson, AZ), 2022)
    Since the 1991 Gulf War there has been considerable discussion regarding the proper scope of collateral damage in the proportionality principle. Most of this discussion has concerned cyber-attacks and the use of explosive weapons in urban areas. Consequently, other areas, like the environment, have largely been left from the discussion. This paper evaluates whether conflict parties are legally obliged to consider environmental reverberations in their proportionality assessment. First, it finds that the proportionality principle still plays a crucial role in protecting the natural environment from collateral damage. Second, it explores arguments for the inclusion of reverberating effects generally and then for environmental reverberations in particular. Third, it critiques these theories and suggests against including environmental reverberations. It finds that the law is unclear how the foreseeability and causation requirements should be applied. This is particularly difficult for environmental reverberations as they are often scientifically uncertain. Including reverberating effects also attributes sole responsibility to the attacking party, even where the victim has control over impacting factors. Reverberating effects further require considerable information and expertise resources, which militaries may not be able to provide.
  • The Psagot Case: An Innovative CJEU Approach Towards the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict [Article]

    Munin, Nellie; Sitbon, Ofer (The University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law (Tucson, AZ), 2022)
    This article analyzes the latest Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) case on EU's approach towards imported products from the territories Israel captured in 1967, Psagot (C-363/18), illustrating the gradual development of EU's policy towards this issue during the years, in three dimensions: reinforcing the legal status of UN and ICJ non-mandatory decisions as alleged mandatory references (implying new customary law); fine-tuning the labeling requirement, commonly interpreted to include the country and place of origin, to indicate further “Israeli settlements”; and adding a contemporary line of reasoning, relying on consumer preferences and corporate responsibility. In the latter respect, the article suggests that despite their different political agendas, the EU and the BDS movement seem to share some strategies and argumentations.
  • "Revisiting Ramseyer: The Chicago School of Law and Economics Comes to Japan" [Article]

    Freedman, Craig; Nottage, Luke (The University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law (Tucson, AZ), 2022)
    Mark Ramseyer has been a leading force in bringing to bear the methods of Law and Economics to an increasingly ambitious analysis of the Japanese legal and economic systems. He has deliberately assumed an iconoclastic position in debunking a number of widely held beliefs about Japan. More recently he has engendered a bitter degree of controversy by idiosyncratically analysing Korean “comfort women” and residents in Tokyo before and during World War II. In this paper we examine Ramseyer’s long contribution to Japanese studies and conclude that he has too frequently let ideological objectives, paralleling three key tenets of the Chicago School of economics, interfere with what should be cool-headed analysis. While asking many of the right questions, prompting often helpful responses and further research, he unfortunately has let a priori assumptions determine his answers. Ramseyer has proven reluctant to review his assessments or implications, largely dismissing contrary evidence.