In September 2013, officials of the Russian Federation boarded the vessel Arctic Sunrise, an icebreaker flying the flag of the Netherlands. The vessel, operated by Greenpeace International, was present in the Russian Federation’s Exclusive Economic Zone in order to protest against the operation of the offshore fixed oil platform Prirazlomnaya. Russian authorities detained the Arctic Sunrise itself and all persons on board the vessel, initially based on an accusation of piracy.

The Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights, in X and Others v. Austria, held by a majority of ten to seven that Austria violated Article 14 (prohibition on discrimination) taken in conjunction with Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life) of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (the Convention) when it denied an unmarried same-sex couple the right to a second-parent adoption when second-parent adoptions are available to unmarried opposite-sex couples. This is the first time the European Court of Human Rights (the Court) has recognized a right to second-parent adoption by same-sex couples.

How far can a country go in recruiting workers from neighboring countries to do the menial labor the country’s citizens are no longer willing to do and then–when they overstay their welcome, have children, and establish families over a period of decades—continue to deny them nationality and civil rights? Can these Gastarbeiter be turned into perpetual foreigners or must they be granted citizenship? How much has international human rights law impacted international law in restricting the freedom of sovereign states in this traditionally most discretionary domain? Are questions of nationality still within the exclusive domain of domestic jurisdiction?

Although it provides limited normative guidance, the General Assembly’s recent resolution, “The right to privacy in the digital age,” signals both renewed international interest in the human right to privacy as well as a commitment by United Nations (UN) institutions to explore the meaning of this right in the digital age.

On November 24, 2013, the Islamic Republic of Iran, together with the E3/EU–comprised of France, Germany, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (UK)–as well as the People’s Republic of China (China), the Russian Federation (Russia), and the United States of America (US) agreed to the Joint Plan of Action on Iran’s nuclear program (Joint Plan of Action). The Joint Plan of Action aims at ensuring the Islamic Republic of Iran’s exclusive peaceful nuclear program through mutually-agreed steps between the so-called E3/EU+3 and the Islamic Republic of Iran. Though much has been said about the Joint Plan of Action since its adoption, not enough attention has been paid to its historical context; such neglect risks the Joint Plan of Action being, at best, viewed in isolation. This note bridges that gap by providing an overview of the events that led the Islamic Republic of Iran, the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), and Germany (P5+1) to agree on the Joint Plan of Action.

From August 25 to 27, 2013, the Seventh Annual International Humanitarian Law Dialogs were held at the Chautauqua Institution in Lake Chautauqua, New York. Primarily organized by the Robert H. Jackson Center and cosponsored by other institutions and organizations including the American Society of International Law, the Dialogs bring together international criminal prosecutors, practitioners of international justice, scholars, NGO leaders, human rights activists, students, and members of the public to discuss pressing issues of international peace and justice.