On 20 June 2025 at the Blavatnik School of Government (and livestreamed online), scholars, practitioners, and students gathered for the launch of the second edition of International Law Stories. Over 90 minutes, the editors and chapter authors brought seventeen landmark cases to life—revealing the social, political, and moral contexts that underpin familiar judgments.

Origins and Aims of the Series

Nearly twenty years ago, Foundation Press invited proposals for an “Stories” series in constitutional, property, and tax law. John Noyes, Mark Janis, and Laura Dickinson seized that opportunity to pioneer International Law Stories, aiming to make international law accessible to non-specialists—“New York Times readers,” as Janis quipped. Its surprising longevity in politics and international relations curricula prompted a second edition, now co-edited by Georgetown’s Carlos Vázquez alongside Janis and Dickinson and featuring both returning and new contributors.

Nuremberg’s Thin Due-Process and Lasting Legacy

Former UN tribunal President Theodor Meron opened the case studies with Nuremberg (1945–46). He contrasted the Tribunal’s groundbreaking creation of individual crimes against peace, war crimes, and crimes against humanity with its procedural shortcomings—no right to silence, no prohibition on rape, and no double jeopardy protection. Meron praised the subsequent Control Council prosecutions (Law No. 10) for filling these gaps and solidifying state-and-individual responsibility in international criminal law.

Filártiga v. Peña-Irala: Torture’s Transnational Remedy

Harold Hongju Koh (Yale) recounted Filártiga (1980), where Paraguayan survivors used the U.S. Alien Tort Statute to hold a former police official civilly liable for torture. Koh called Filártiga the “Brown v. Board for human rights,” showing how U.S. courts can internalize customary norms and inspiring legislation like the Torture Victim Protection Act. He emphasized the case’s demonstration of a pluralistic transnational legal process.

Pinochet No. 3: Heads of State and Universal Jurisdiction

Yasmin Liberman (Sullivan & Cromwell) charted the three-phase Pinochet litigation (1998–2000) in London. Spain’s universal-jurisdiction warrants collided with UK state-immunity law, and the House of Lords ultimately held that former heads of state enjoy no immunity for torture committed after 8 December 1988 (UK ratification of the UN Convention against Torture). Liberman traced the saga’s ripple effects—inspiring Chilean truth commissions and prosecutions of Milosevic, Habré, and others.

Mellet v. Ireland: Abortion, Cruel Treatment, and Constitutional Change

Yuval Shany (Hebrew University) examined Mellet (2016), where the UN Human Rights Committee found Ireland’s refusal to permit abortion for a non-viable fetus amounted to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment (Article 7) and a privacy violation (Article 17). Despite constitutional entrenchment of the Eighth Amendment and a margin-of-appreciation ruling by the European Court of Human Rights, a 2018 referendum repealed the amendment—and liberalised Irish law—underscoring how international pronouncements can energise domestic reform.

Hassan v. UK: Wartime Internment as “Limitation”

Natasha Holcroft-Emmess (Oxford) delved into Hassan (2014), where the European Court’s Grand Chamber interpretively accommodated indefinite internment in Iraq under Article 5 (liberty) rather than treating it as a derogation in armed conflict. She questioned whether this “limitation” approach—and the broader backlash against international courts—risks diluting human rights protections in future emergencies.

Foster to Medellín: U.S. Treaties and the Non-Self-Executing Doctrine

Carlos Vázquez (Georgetown) closed with three U.S. cases on treaty enforcement. He recounted Chief Justice Marshall’s Foster v. Nielsen (1829), inventing “non-self-executing” treaties; the corrective Per Treatman (1836), which presumes treaties self-executing unless they expressly demand legislation; and the Supreme Court’s Medellín v. Texas (2008), which muddled these doctrines. Vázquez argued that Perrin offers the sound test—a clear textual stipulation for non-self-execution—while Medellín’s sweeping approach illustrates the enduring power of these legal stories.

Key Themes and Takeaways

• Narrative Power: Storytelling deepens engagement with complex legal issues.
• Law in Context: Judgments reflect their era’s politics, culture, and moral compass.
• Transnational Dynamics: International norms travel through courts, advocates, and civil society to spur domestic change.
• Institutional Evolution: Doctrines often emerge from chance judicial remarks—re-examination can refine or overturn them.

Reception and Looking Ahead

A lively Q&A touched on due process, digital archives, and interdisciplinary collaborations. Over drinks in the Blavatnik foyer, attendees reflected on how these human-centered narratives challenge doctrinal abstractions and chart new research horizons. International Law Stories invites readers—lawyers and laypersons alike—to see towering cases through fresh eyes and appreciate the human dramas that shape our legal landscape.

---

The Blavatnik School of Government at the University of Oxford is dedicated to improving public policy and governance globally. Established in 2010 with a significant donation from Sir Leonard Blavatnik, the School offers interdisciplinary research and education, focusing on complex global challenges. Its programs equip students with the tools to drive effective governance and policy solutions worldwide.

The Conf is a platform that reports on scholarly conferences, symposia, roundtables, book talks, and other academic events. It is managed by a group of students from leading American and European universities and is published by Alma Mater Europaea University, Location Vienna.