The last account of developments in the external relations of the European Union, described how the Treaty of Amsterdam, which had just entered into force, had reformed the Common Foreign and Security Policy. Three years on one can begin to assess the impact of these changes.

In March 2001 the Assembly of Heads of State and Government of the Organisation of African Unity (OAU), meeting in extraordinary session in Sirte, Libya declared the establishment of a new pan-African body, the African Union (Union).1 The Constitutive Act (Act) of the Union entered into force on 26 May 20012 and in due course this new institution will replace the OAU.3 The Union, the brainchild of Libyan President Qaddafi, and modeled on the European Union, is the culmination of the OAU's piecemeal process of political cooperation and economic integration. It is designed to provide Africa with the legal and institutional framework to confront the twin challenges of the post-Cold War age and globalisation.

The previous contribution on the current developments in Transport focused on problems of financing new infrastructure and on the allocation of the true costs of transport among those who generated them.1 In 1999 a directive on charging heavy vehicles for the use of certain infrastructures was finally adopted.2 During the period under review, infrastructure matters and safety and environmental concerns remained high on the agenda of the Common Transport Policy. As far as individual modes of transport are concerned the most significant developments have been in rail transport where a package of measure to open up this market has finally been adopted. The required legislation to liberalise all modes of transport has also now been adopted.

Although a few States ratified the Rome Statute for the International Criminal Court1 soon after it was promulgated, the UK decided to prepare and pass implementing legislation prior to submitting its ratification. In England and Wales (and Northern Ireland),2 the ICC Statute is implemented by the International Criminal Court Act 2001,3 which came fully into force on 1 September 2001.4 The UK ratified the ICC Statute on 4 October 2001, fulfilling its aim of being amongst the first sixty States to do so.5 The Act has two major purposes, to ensure that the UK is able to co-operate fully with the International Criminal Court (ICC), and to enact into domestic law the substantive offences the ICC may assert jurisdiction over when it comes into being.6 It is the purpose of this note to introduce the Act and point to some interesting issues that may arise in the future.

The jurisdiction of England and Wales is vastly experienced in application of the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction1 (the Convention). The UK2 was the fifth3 Contracting State to the Convention, which now boasts 70 State Parties,4 and England and Wales consistently handles a significant proportion of annual Convention applications. In terms of applications, which were processed by Central Authorities, England and Wales was the second busiest Convention jurisdiction in 1999.5 The USA handled 466 applications, England and Wales 329, and Germany 210. Indeed the Central Authority for England and Wales handled more applications than any other, the USA having split incoming and outgoing applications between two separate bodies.6

In December 1999, in Helsinki, the European Council requested the Commission ‘to prepare a proposal for a long-term strategy dovetailing policies for economically, socially and ecologically sustainable development’. The Commission presented this proposal to the Gothenburg European Council in June 2001,1 resulting in the launch of the European Union's strategy for sustainable development.2 In keeping with the resolution that the annual spring European Council take on board responsibility for reviewing progress in developing and implementing the sustainable development strategy, and for offering further policy guidance to promote sustainable development, the Barcelona Presidency conclusions place emphasis upon the internal and external aspects of sustainable development, including the environmental dimension thereof.3 Looking at these documents,4 it is readily apparent that the political profile of sustainable development has been raised over the last year, with the European Council coming to play an important leadership function. Looking more closely at these, and other core documents, it is clear that the theme of environmental governance is very much to the fore, and that a number of strands emerge as crucial to European Union thinking in this respect. This short survey note will highlight a number of these strands, examining them within the framework of more general developments concerning ‘governance’ in the EU, and in particular in the light of the Commission's White Paper on governance issued in the summer of 2001.5 Four broad, and often overlapping, dimensions will be discussed in turn: integration, monitoring/evaluation, participation, and instruments for environmental protection.

In recent times the European Court of Human Rights has been very active in developing a number of duties of investigation, under various substantive Articles of the Convention,1 which member States are obliged to comply with. Therefore, this paper seeks to analyse the nature and scope of these important duties, together with the interrelationships between them.2

In the LaGrand case, the United States found themselves for the second time within three years before the International Court of Justice dealing with the death penalty imposed on foreign nationals in the United States.1 In contrast to the earlier case filed by Paraguay, the German-sponsored LaGrand case survived the provisional measures phase and went on to the merits stage. In its judgment of 27 June 2001, the Court largely affirmed all four German submissions and ruled that the United States had violated international law.

There continues to be a steady stream of cases, particularly those raising questions of interpretation of international instruments. Many nevertheless involve the application of those instruments to particular facts, rather than fundamental points of principle. The following are among the more significant.