Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 3 of 3 items for

  • Author or Editor: Pietro Franzina x
  • Search level: All x
Clear All
Author: Pietro Franzina


The tensions surrounding the regulation of adjudicatory jurisdiction, including as regards the admissibility of, and the conditions for, the exercise of universal civil jurisdiction, are premised on the understanding that jurisdiction, as a legal notion, is concerned essentially with power. The practice of States, however, is evolving. Jurisdiction can no longer be described as being solely about power, nor chiefly about States. A different conception of jurisdiction is emerging which involves responsibility alongside power, and is concerned with the efficiency, not just the legitimacy, of States’ action. The contention is made that a renewed understanding of jurisdiction, one acknowledging the role that cooperation and dialogue between courts play in the management of cross-border disputes, would help shape workable responses to the challenges posed by the recourse to civil litigation in connection with international wrongs.

In: Universal Civil Jurisdiction
In: Universal Civil Jurisdiction
Enabling the victims of international crimes to obtain reparation is crucial to fighting impunity. In Universal Civil Jurisdiction – Which Way Forward? experts of public and private international law discuss one of the key challenges that victims face, namely access to justice. Civil courts in the country where the crime was committed may be biased, or otherwise unwilling or unable to hear the case. Are the courts of other countries permitted, or required, to rule on the victim’s claim? Trends at the international and the domestic level after the Naït-Liman judgment of the European Court of Human Rights offer a nuanced answer, suggesting that civil jurisdiction is not only concerned with sovereignty, but is also a tool for the governance of global problems.