Humanities and Social Sciences

Polish Yearbook of International Law

Content

Polish Yearbook of International Law | 2024 | No XLIV

Authors and Affiliations

Karolina Wierczyńska
ORCID: ORCID
Łukasz Gruszczyński
ORCID: ORCID
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

This article argues that better engagement between international law and time requires us to unpack the contingent memories and imaginaries that underpin international legal regimes and processes. We as a field need to move away from thinking of time as static and linear. International Cultural Heritage Law (ICHL) is an ideal case study to think through these relationships, given the subfield’s connection to identity and its relative openness to different epistemologies. This article assesses the work that time does in shaping international law, working through the three linear dimensions of time (past, present and future) to highlight the limits of international law, and in shaping the heuristics of these three linear dimensions. ICHL offers a pathway to simultaneously showcase the shortcomings of our international legal understandings of time (which I dub chrononormative), and to imagine different possibilities that better advance the human goals that should be the foundation and the goal of international legal norms and regimes.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Lukas Lixinski
1
ORCID: ORCID

  1. Faculty of Law & Justice, University of New South Wales (Australia)
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The article focusses on a specific aspect of the International Court of Justice’s (ICJ) 2024 Advisory Opinion on the legal consequences arising from the policies and practices of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, namely the statement that the right to self-determination constitutes a peremptory norm of international law. The article submits that the finding of the ICJ can be at variance with the basic criteria set forth by the International Law Commission in the 2022 Conclusions on identification and legal consequences of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens). In particular, limiting the peremptory effect of self-determination to cases of foreign occupation that lead to annexation risks undermining the unitary, universal character of peremptory rules. Overall, the case confirms the divisive potential of the concept of jus cogens in the international legal community.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Maurizio Arcari
1
ORCID: ORCID

  1. School of Law, University of Milano-Bicocca (Italy)

Authors and Affiliations

Markiyan Malskyy
1
ORCID: ORCID

  1. Institute of Law, Psychology and Innovative Education, Lviv Polytechnic University (Ukraine)
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

There are few certainties in the field of migration. From the factors that drive migrants to flee their countries and the conditions they expect to find in the destination country to migrants’ flows, routes and methods, migration policy is constantly functioning within a field of uncertainty. Yet, the importance of better managing migration processes is becoming increasingly relevant due to the multiple factors that stimulate the international movement of people, such as conflict, political or economic instability or climate change. The uncertainty surrounding the European Union’s (EU) ability to manage migration has spurred a twofold approach: the criminalisation of migrant smuggling (in an all-encompassing way) and the externalisation of migration policy through agreements with third countries. However, are these approaches effective, or should the EU consider alternative strategies to address the challenges posed by irregular migration? The purpose of this article is to evaluate the effectiveness of the EU’s policies on irregular migration, by exploring firstly the effectiveness of criminal law in deterring migrant smuggling and secondly the EU’s recent emphasis on externalisation. The consequences of both are examined in an effort to determine their effectiveness towards the objective. The article concludes with some suggestions for the way forward.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Raquel Cardoso
1
ORCID: ORCID
Vasil Pavlov
2
ORCID: ORCID

  1. Faculty of Law, University Lusíada – Porto (Portugal)
  2. Department of National and Regional Security, University of National and World Economy, Sofia (Bulgaria)
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The rapid transformation of the international economic order from a liberal arrangement of economic interdependencies to a geoeconomic competition between states changed attitudes regarding foreign investment. This arguably protectionist turn toward national security is an attempt to safeguard against multidimensional consequences of crises. To protect the EU’s strategic autonomy, Regulation 2019/452 came into force in 2019, laying the foundations for the European Foreign Investment Screening framework. Soon afterwards, FDI screening served as an instrument in the EU’s policy for addressing and mitigating risks rapidly arising from an international crisis: the COVID-19 pandemic. This experience influenced another recent measure – the European Economic Security Strategy (EESS) – together with the proposal for the New FDI Screening Regulation. This article argues that the experience of the COVID-19 crisis inspired dualistic changes in FDI screening, transforming it into a protector of European economic security. The EESS and the proposal for the New FDI Screening Regulation are juxtaposed against the United States’s experience in controlling FDI for the aim of assessing FDI screening as a tool for safeguarding European economic security in light of the EU’s inexperience in the matter.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Ewa Bujak
1
ORCID: ORCID

  1. Doctoral School of Kozminski University (Poland)

Authors and Affiliations

Presiding judge: SAC judge Małgorzata Pocztarek
SAC judge: Olga Żurawska-Matusiak
Judge of the Voivodship Administrative Court in Krakow delegated to adjudicating in the SAC: Kazimierz Bandarzewski

Instructions for authors

Guidelines on the submission of articles to PYIL and the review process

General rules

1. In order to reduce instances of research and publication misconduct, the PYIL staff strictly follows the principles listed below. By submitting an article to PYIL, an author agrees to comply with those principles. The same applies to reviewers upon the acceptance of arequest for review.

2. All submissions should comply with the relevant requirements set outin the document entitled “Information for authors”, which is available on the PYIL’s webpage.

3. Manuscripts need be submitted in Microsoft Word format (any version). Unless specifically indicated otherwise, the deadline for submitting articles is 31 January of each year. The yearly volume of PYIL is normally published between June and July of the same year.

4. Submissions should not exceed 10,000 words (including footnotes), although in exceptional cases PYIL may accept longer works. All submissions should be sufficiently referenced. The Editorial Board assesses manuscripts on a rolling basis. It will consider requests for expedited review in appropriate instances (for example, pending acceptance for publication from another journal).On averageit takes about45 days to complete the evaluation of a text, although in some instances this process may be longer, depending on the availability of reviewers.

5. Manuscripts may besubmitted by e-mail (pyil@inp.pan.pl) or through the ExpressO submission system (https://www.bepress.com/products/expresso/).

6. All reviewed manuscripts are treated confidentially. Members of the Eduitorial Board must not use materials disclosed in a submission for their own research unless the text is published.

7. All submissions are subject to initial verification by the Editorial Board to determine whether they meet basic editorial requirementsand are compatible with the scientific interests of the journal. This assessment also aims at eliminating those papers where research misconduct occurred. If the Editorial Board’s assessmentis positive, submitted articles are sent out to two independent reviewers,who are identified by PYIL’s specialist editors taking into account the rules setout here.

8. The reviewers cannot be affiliated with the institution with which the author is affiliated. The reviewers assess the text based on the double blind-peer review principle, i.e. the name of the author is not revealed to the reviewers nor are the reviewers’ names revealed to the author or the other reviewer. In case of articles submitted by a foreign authorat least one of the reviewers must be affiliated with a foreign institution other than that of the author.

9. Reviews are submitted in written form, which also encompasses electronic and/or e-mail communications. The reviewer must submit his or her review on aReview form provided to the reviewer together with the text for review. A Review form is available on thePYIL’s webpage. The principles governing a review are set forth below.

10. The review should clearly indicate whether, in the reviewer’s opinion, the textshould be published. The reviewer may also indicate changes which should be made to the text prior to its publication. These changes may be noted in the Review form or may be offered in the form of commentaries in the text of the article.

11. The Editorial Board will accept a submitted text if both reviewers recommend publication. In the event the reviewers indicate that changes are necessary, the acceptance of the article is conditional upon the author responding to the suggested changes, either by implementation of the same or offering an explanation why they may be not acceptable to the author, in whole or in part. The Editorial Board may, to the extent it deems necessary and following consultation with the specialist editor(s), send the revised text back to the original reviewers for their further opinion.

12. In the event of receipt of a single negative review, the Editorial Board will decide the issue of publication of the text in consultation with the specialist editor. The Editorial Board may also send the text to a third reviewer. In the event both original reviewers give a negative opinion of asubmitted article, it will be automatically rejected.

13. An author of atext submitted to PYIL is obliged to cooperate with the Editorial Board as well as with reviewers. In particular,an author shall participate in the peer-review process to the extent required to make his/her submission ready for publication. This includes, inter alia, implementation of changes suggested by the reviewers or offering an explanation why such changes, in whole or in part,may be not acceptable toanauthor.

14. Authors are under an obligation to report to the Editorial Board any significant errors in their submissions, whether discovered during the review process or after publication. If significant errors are found after publication, authors agree to either retract the paper or publish a correction/clarification.The detailed procedure for retraction and corrections is included in the document entitled “Information for authors”.

15.Texts already published shall not be accepted,but PYIL does not prohibit parallel submissions. Copyright and licensing information is included in the document entitled “Information for authors”.

Guidelines for reviewers

1. The PYIL Editorial Board requests a professional review of asubmitted article with regard to its scholarly merits.

2. The object of the requested review is todeterminewhether the submitted article meets the scholarly standards for a scientific article of its type. In particular,the reviewer is asked to assess:

a.whether the title of the article is correct and accurately reflects its contents;

b.whether the article is clear and concise (a reviewer may suggest shortening the article or certain parts thereof);

c.whether the conclusions presented by the author are consistent with the data contained in the article;

d.whether the author useda proper methodology;e.whether the article is original and contains new information;

f.whether the article accurately presents the current state of knowledge and research in a given area (including appropriate citations of and referrals to the existing literature).

3. The reviewer is requested to perform his or her review according to the above criteria in an objective and unbiased fashion. In addition,the reviewer is asked to indicate any and all places where, in the reviewer’s opinion, the author violated any norms of fair, diligent, and accurate scientific research (for example, instances of plagiarism). The review should be neutral and objective, internally consistent, and end with a clear conclusion concerning the usefulness of the text for scientific purposes. The reviewer may also suggest amendments to the text, including indicationsof any relevant published work which isnot citedin the text.

4. Although the review process in based on the double blind-peer review principle, reviewers should refuse the review request if they are aware of any conflict of interest that may exist.

5. Reviewers shall notify the Editorial Board if they feel unqualified to conduct a review of a particular submission.

6. Reviewers should complete their reviews within a timeframe specified by the Editorial Board or one of its members.

7. Reviewers must treat the submissions received for review as confidential documents and must not disclose any information about them to anyone other than the Editorial Board.

8. Reviewers must not use materials disclosed in a submission for their own research unless the text is published.

9.The list of the reviewers is published in each volume and on the PYIL’s webpag

Additional info

PYIL indexed in ERIH PLUS

The Polish Yearbook of International Law is pleased to announce that it has been accepted for indexing in the European Reference Index for the Humanities and the Social Sciences (ERIH PLUS). ERIH was initially created by the Science Foundation (ESF), which subsequently transferred the database to the Norwegian Centre for Research Data for the maintenance and operations. The name of the new database is ERIH PLUS.

The inclusion of the Polish Yearbook of International Law in the ERIH PLUS demonstrates our continuous dedication to providing high quality content to our readers.

This page uses 'cookies'. Learn more