On 20-22 September 2017, the Exeter Centre for International Law supported the International Society for Military Law and the Law of War, together with the University of Melbourne, in hosting a conference in the beautiful city of Bruges in Belgium. The conference brought together legal experts and practitioners from around the world to address
I am re-posting a news item from the Exeter Centre for International Law: ‘Law is an asymmetric capability’ was the message that Dr Aurel Sari conveyed at two international conferences last month. Speaking on 13 September 2017 before an audience of military and civilian legal advisors in Stuttgart (Germany), Dr Sari offered an overview
The purpose of this paper is to determine whether a Member State of the EU may revoke its notice to withdraw from the Union under Article 50 TEU. Contrary to the position taken by the English courts in Miller, this paper confirms that a notice to withdraw from the EU is in fact reversible.
Does a notice to withdraw from the EU pursuant to Article 50 TEU have to be in written form? The Treaty of Lisbon has left this question open. In its second paragraph, Article 50 TEU declares that a ‘Member State which decides to withdraw shall notify the European Council of its intention.’ Nothing in this passage dictates that the notice has to be made in writing, yet nothing indicates that it may not be made in writing either. However, three points should be borne in mind in this context.
Trident Juncture 16 was my fifth exercise with the Allied Rapid Reaction Corps (ARRC). This year, the ARRC returned to RAF St Mawgan, just outside of Newquay in Cornwall. The purpose of the exercise was to evaluate NATO Joint Force Command HQ in Naples before it assumes the role of the headquarters for NATO’s Very High Readiness Joint Task Force (VJTF) in 2017. The exercise was also designed to certify that the ARRC is ready to assume the role of the Land Component Command of the VJTF next year.
‘There is no going back.’ These were the words of Lord Pannick, uttered before the High Court in response to the question whether the United Kingdom could rescind its notification to withdraw from the European Union once issued under Article 50 TEU (Santos and M v Secretary of State for Exiting The European Union, uncorrected transcripts, p. 17). The claimants and the Government appear to agree on this point and accept that the UK cannot reverse its notification of withdrawal. This post explains why this position does not reflect the law.
Speaking at the annual conference of the Conservative Party on October 4, U.K. Defence Secretary Michael Fallon sought to reassure Britain’s nervous allies and the general public about the implications of Brexit. Leaving the European Union, he said, “does not mean we are stepping back from our commitment to the security of our continent.” The
Earlier this year, human rights charity Reprieve published a report entitled ‘Britain’s Kill List. In its report, Reprieve claims to reveal shocking proof that exposes the involvement of the British Government in a global assassination project. In particular, Reprieve alleges that the British Government has been complicit in preparing and executing a ‘kill list’ for
On 21-23 June 2016, the International Society for Military Law and the Law of War (ISMLLW) and Exeter Law School convened an international conference in Exeter, United Kingdom, entitled ‘The International Law of Military Operations: Mapping the Field’. The conference brought together more than 130 legal experts from academia and the armed forces to map the current state of operational law from a comparative and practical perspective and to explore some of the most pressing legal challenges facing the conduct of military operations.
At the end of April, I spent a few days time in Warsaw attending the EUCOM/SHAPE international legal conference. The theme this year was 'The Legal Aspects of the National Security Response to Russian Aggression'. My presentation explored the topic of 'Lawfare on the Home Front'.