The exploitation of natural resources in times of conflict has been the object of a prolific literature due to the extremely laconic character of the standards of conduct prescribed by the Hague and Geneva Conventions. Such laconicism has led scholars to be creative in ensuring that this central aspect of modern conflicts falls within the scope of existing legal instruments. This article starts by depicting the rich argumentative creativity developed by scholars and experts to ensure a more comprehensive regulation of what has often been perceived as a form of international brigandage. Subsequently it reflects on the biases of the professional community that has dedicated its efforts to the elaboration of a fairer framework of natural resources exploitation in times of conflict. In particular, it formulates some critical remark on the “just world business” that has dictated the methodology behind most of the interpretative engineering to be found.

The principle of non-intervention remains a significant legal issue, particularly in Asia, for regional efforts to address a wide range of transnational security issues in the absence of a regional collective security mechanism. This article revisits the principle of non-intervention with a particular focus on the application and interpretation of the principle by Asian states for the purpose of identifying whether and in what respect an Asian approach or approaches can be found, and considering its implications for regional efforts to address transnational security issues. This article finds that the emerging regional norm of comprehensive security requires clear demarcation between the principle of non-intervention and the norm of comprehensive security, as well as an institutionalized mechanism to ensure that regional efforts to address transnational security issues are not used as a disguised form of intervention and that the fear of intervention does not impede those regional efforts.

The International Law Commission recently completed its work on the controversial issue of the effects of armed conflicts on treaties, culminating in the adoption of a set of eighteen draft articles and an annex. The Commission's efforts are nothing short of commendable, but this article argues that insufficient attention has been paid to the role of supervening impossibility of performance and fundamental change of circumstances in determining the effects of armed conflicts on treaties. Although both doctrines may in fact appropriately apply in the context of armed conflicts, the mere referencing of them in the adopted draft articles gives rise to several problems. In particular, the two doctrines were codified by the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties without their application to armed conflicts in mind. Some changes to the draft articles are proposed to address these difficulties.

Ever since the beginning of the “Asian Values” debate in the early 1990s, there have been efforts on the part of many societal actors to establish distinctively Asian human rights norms that integrate local customary values and international human rights norms. This article presents the claim that National Human Rights Commissions in Asia are well placed to play an important role in this effort to develop localized human rights norms because of their close links with local civil actors, along with their independence from government control, pluralistic make-up, and ability to address complex rights issues in detail. The article also presents a study of how the National Human Rights Commission of Korea has used its powers to prioritize and promote a particularly Korean version of the human rights of the elderly.

Several proposals for global legal governance of environmental migration have recently been published, almost exclusively by Western scholars. The present article denounces the geographical and intellectual disconnect between descriptive works on environmental migration as a phenomenon and the normative studies on the developments in law and governance. It suggests that this disconnect has resulted in a post-colonial approach towards tackling environmental migration, which could impede the protection of environmental migrants. While recalling that governance of environmental migration is most likely to succeed within a regional framework, this article pleads for a home-grown legal approach of environmental migration in the Asia-Pacific. Participating in a multilateral discussion is a unique opportunity for the rising countries of Asia and the Pacific to strengthen their growing diplomatic roles and to demonstrate their capacity in the development of liberal forms of transnational governance.

Despite the existence of almost eighty international agreements and legal instruments, there has not been a marked development in the transfer of climate change technologies to poor and the least developing countries. This article investigates the role of intellectual property rights (IPDs) and scrutinizes the effects of the WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) on the transfer of these technologies. It explores the TRIPS patent protection provisions and examines the associated flexibilities like compulsory licensing and parallel import options in the context of the transfer of climate change technologies. It finally concludes that the TRIPS patent protection rules, including the existing flexibilities, are one of the biggest impediments to the transfer of these technologies to poor and least developed countries. New agreements or promises on the transfer of green technologies would be fruitless if these TRIPS rules are not amended.

The issue of carbon emissions in international aviation has proven difficult to deal with from a regulatory standpoint. Issues of a transnational character are regulated through co-operation and compromise, but there has been a lack of political will to achieve the necessary co-operation and compromise to deal effectively with carbon emissions in international aviation. The European Union is now trying to push for development in the regulatory sphere through the unilateral extension of its Emissions Trading Scheme to international aviation. This unilateral extension conflicts with international air law, but has recently been declared valid by the Court of Justice of the European Union in Case C-366/10. This article focuses on the legal arguments raised in that case, concluding that the judgment delivered by the Court is legally questionable, but may nonetheless prove constructive, as a political instrument, in the delivery of an international solution to the regulation of aviation emissions.