UNIVERSITY OF COLOGNE

Hans Kelsen Memorial Lectures

The Law of Belligerent Occupation and the West Bank: A Case Study

On July 3, 2024, the Institute for International Peace and Security Law under the direction of Professor Dr. Dr. h.c. Dr. h.c. Claus Kreß LL.M (Cambridge) hosted the eighth Hans Kelsen Memorial Lecture on International Peace and Security Law.

This year, Prof. Dr. David Kretzmer, former Professor of International Law at Hebrew University of Jerusalem, gave the lecture entitled: “The law of belligerent occupation and the west bank: a case study”. Prof. Dr. Kretzmer was a member of the UN Human Rights Committee and is the founding director of the Minerva Centre for Human Rights.

Prof. Kretzmer began his lecture with a reference to the famous quote by Hersch Lauterpacht (“International law is at the vantage point of law”) by admitting that the lecture was “at the vantage point of law and politics”. He also recalled Hans Kelsen's vision of improving compliance in international law and in particular the law of armed conflict through judicial enforcement.

The core of the lecture revolved around the question of the tense relationship between a constitutional court, the government, and the general public. While the status of the West Bank as an occupied territory was still unsettled in the first years after 1967 and the applicability of the Geneva Conventions was denied, Prof. Kretzmer traced back the developments in the following decades using the position of the Supreme Court of Israel as an example. This court acts under great political pressure from the government of Israel. From an initially pragmatic approach, in which the court left open the applicability of the occupation regime in the Geneva Conventions and only examined the conformity of actual practices in the West Bank, the court finally arrived at its current position: the question of the legality of the settlements in the occupied territory is of political nature and therefore non-justiciable. Kretzmer highlighted that the highest national courts in particular act within an institutional political framework and that the domestic limits of foreign policy set by politicians have an impact on how the court assesses its own limited margin for action.

International law, Prof. Kretzmer concluded, could therefore not be understood separately from politics. International courts must take this into consideration when making decisions in highly politicized situations. Otherwise, the international community might lose trust in international justice and Kelsen's vision would remain a distant idea.

Seventh Hans Kelsen Memorial Lecture on International Peace and Security Law

"Russia's War against Ukraine: What is the Role for International Courts?

On November 24, 2022, the Institute for International Peace and Security Law, led by its Director Professor Dr. Dr. h.c. Dr. h.c. Claus Kreß LL.M (Cambridge), organized the seventh Hans Kelsen Memorial Lecture on International Peace and Security Law.

This year, Dr. Mykola Gnatovskyy, former Professor of International Law at Taras Shevchenko University in Kiev, and new judge for Ukraine at the European Court of Human Rights as of April 26, 2022, gave the lecture on "Russia's War against Ukraine: What is the Role for International Courts?

Dr. Gnatovskyy opened his speech by referencing the first part of Hans Kelsen's work "Peace Through Law". In it, Kelsen explores how peace can be achieved and secured through compulsory, i.e., mandatory, jurisdiction. Against this backdrop, Judge Gnatovskys turned to the current institutionalized architecture of international law, in particular to international courts, in order to shed some light on their achievements, challenges and shortcomings.

Kelsen's idea of international courts exercising compulsory jurisdiction – not subject to the political circumstances in or consent of a state – was expressed by the latter as early as 1944. However, it has not yet been fully implemented, according to Dr. Mykola Gnatovskyy. Before the International Court of Justice as well as the International Criminal Court, the conduct of proceedings still depends on the (politically motivated) consent of certain states. Gnatovskyy pointed out that the involvement of international courts in the Ukraine conflict since 2014 has been limited to a few decisions so far, those being of provisional character in most cases. Departing from this, Dr. Gnatovskyy highlighted that international jurisdiction on the question of the legality of the use of force has not yet developed far, especially when measured against the goal formulated by Kelsen.

In the context of the war in Ukraine, Dr. Gnatovskyy emphasized the potential of the International Criminal Court. However, amendments to the International Criminal Court Statute are necessary in order to activate its potential in providing accountability concerning the crime of aggression. Alternatively – or cumulatively – a special tribunal for the crime of aggression would also be possible, ideally with the support of the United Nations. This possibility and its legal framework were discussed in greater depth in the subsequent round of questions.

Judge Gnatovskyy concluded by calling on international courts to see the war in Ukraine as an opportunity to demonstrate their relevance and fulfill their role in restoring peace.

This would also be a step in the spirit of Hans Kelsen: to create peace through law (and through courts applying this law).

Sixth Hans Kelsen Memorial Lecture on International Peace and Security Law

A Means to an End: How Fritz Bauer used the Courtroom for a Reckoning with the German Past

On November 18, 2021, the Institute for International Peace and Security Law, led by its Director Professor Dr. Dr. h.c. Dr. h.c. Claus Kreß LL.M (Cambridge), hosted its sixth Hans Kelsen Memorial Lecture on International Peace and Security Law.

Dr. Ronen Steinke, editor at the Süddeutsche Zeitung and author of the book "Fritz Bauer: oder Auschwitz vor Gericht", gave this year's keynote lecture entitled "A Means to an End: How Fritz Bauer used the Courtroom for a Reckoning with the German Past." Due to the coronavirus pandemic, the event was held in a hybrid format: The 2G+ rule applied within the hall while the event was simultaneously broadcast via livestream.

Dr. Steinke began his lecture by taking the audience to one day of the Auschwitz trial that occurred in November of 1964, from the perspective of journalist Horst Krüger. A journey through the life and work of Fritz Bauer ensued, who was to become one of the central drivers of the Frankfurt Auschwitz trial. According to Fritz Bauer's understanding of criminal law, who dedicated his life to ensuring the perpetrators of National Socialist crimes were held accountable, punishment could only pursue preventive purposes and is thus future-oriented. Dr. Steinke quoted Bauer's question: does it really make a difference if 40 more men were sent to prison or not? What, if not retribution, should be the aim of this trial, whose defendants seemingly no longer posed a threat to society and fit into post-war society in an almost eerily conformist manner, just as they had acted in conformity under the National Socialist regime? Dr. Steinke succeeded impressively in reconciling Bauer's understanding of criminal law with his practice as a public prosecutor. Contrary to what even admirers and students of Fritz Bauer criticized at the time of the Auschwitz trials, Dr. Steinke showed that there was not necessarily a contradiction between Fritz Bauer's theory and practice. In the Auschwitz trial, Bauer pursued the idea of prevention: not to prevent the commission of further crimes by the 22 defendants in Frankfurt, however, but towards the audience of the trial – the German population, who were able to get an idea of the extent of the horror in Auschwitz for the first time through the trials. Dr. Steinke impressively demonstrated that Bauer's implementation of his theory in practice also had a harsh consequence. Bauer ultimately saw the 22 defendants of the Auschwitz trials in Frankfurt, and he himself admitted this, at least as "scapegoats" who were needed to teach society a lesson and therefore as "A means to an end".

Fifth Hans Kelsen Memorial Lecture on International Peace and Security Law

Iran, Nuclear Weapons and International Law - From a deal to a mess?

On November 26, 2020, the Institute for International Peace and Security Law, led by its Director Professor Dr. Dr. h.c. Dr. h.c. Claus Kreß LL.M (Cambridge), hosted the fifth Hans Kelsen Memorial Lecture on International Peace and Security Law.

Dr. Masahiko Asada, Professor of International Law at Kyoto University and former President of the Japanese Society of International Law, gave this year's keynote lecture entitled "Iran, Nuclear Weapons and International Law - From a deal to a mess?". Due to the coronavirus pandemic, the lecture was held virtually, allowing the Institute to welcome numerous interested viewers from all over the world.

In his lecture, Dr. Masahiko Asada described the course of international tensions due to the Iranian nuclear program. By way of a coming to an agreement laid out in the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPoA), concerns should have been settled – at least in the foreseeable future. However, the withdrawal of the USA and Iran's disregard for certain treaty obligations have caused the conflict to come to a head once again. Dr. Masahiko Asada explained the complex content of the JCPoA and the developments since the USA withdrew from the agreement in detail. He then addressed questions raised by recent events: In August 2020, for example, the USA requested the UN Security Council trigger the "snapback" mechanism regulated in the nuclear agreement.

Dr. Masahiko Asada concluded the fifth Hans Kelsen Memorial Lecture by assessing the future of the nuclear agreement, especially in light of Joe Biden's election as next US President.

The sixth Hans Kelsen Memorial Lecture on International Peace and Security Law is eagerly awaited.

Fourth Hans Kelsen Memorial Lectures on International Peace and Security Law

Silencing Diaspora Dissent: Mapping Responses to Clandestine - or not so Clandestine - Extraterritorial Assassinations

On November 28, 2019, the Institute for International Peace and Security Law hosted the fourth annual Hans Kelsen Memorial Lecture on International Peace and Security Law.

This year, Dr. Larissa van den Herik, Vice-Dean of Leiden Law School of Public International Law at the Grotius Centre for International Legal Studies at Leiden University, was invited to honor the great international law scholar. She gave a lecture entitled: “Silencing Diaspora Dissent: Mapping Responses to Clandestine – or not so clandestine – Extraterritorial Assassinations”.

Dr. Larissa van den Herik began her lecture by listing the cases of Khashoggi, Skripal, Kim Jong-Nam and the Mykonos-assassination as examples to outline the topic in more detail. She argues that these incidents should not be viewed in isolation but rather be placed in a wider context. In doing so, she focused on changes in the way these killings were committed and derived specific legal questions from this.

We would like to thank Dr. Larissa van den Herik for her fascinating insights and the equally inspiring private seminar on the following day. We would also like to thank Prof. Kreß for making this event possible.

The fifth Hans Kelsen Lecture is already eagerly awaited.

Third Hans Kelsen Memorial Lecture on International Peace and Security Law

On 8 November 2018 the Institute for International Peace and Security Law, directed by Professor Dr. Dr. h.c. Dr. h.c. Claus Kreß, held its third Hans Kelsen Memorial Lecture on International Peace and Security Law.

This annual lecture series is organized to honour Hans Kelsen, the renowned expert in legal theory, constitutional law and international law. He had accepted  the University of Cologne's call to join its Law Faculty and served as its dean before being forced to flee from the Nazis in 1933. In his honour, every year the University of Cologne invites an authority in the field of international law to speak. Last year Professor Sarah Cleveland, the Louis Henkin Professor of Human and Constitutional Rights at Columbia Law School in New York accepted the Institute's invitation.

This year the Institute welcomed Ms Dr. Sarah Nouwen as its keynote speaker who spoke on the subject of "Peace Through Law? International Norms, Transitional Justice and the Negotiation of Peace in the Sudans". Ms Nouwen is assistant director of the Lauterpacht Centre for International Law at Cambridge University and a world renowned voice on the topic of transitional justice.

Following the ceremonial greeting by Professor Kreß, Dr. Sarah Nouwen began her lecture by touchingly pointing out that Hans Kelsen had been Sir Hersch Lauterpacht's doctoral superviser - who was the founder and namesake of her Institute - saying the connection of her Institute to this lecture series was only natural.

Starting with Hans Kelsen and his work on the the relationship between law and peace she then linked it to the burning question of today: how to transition from war to peace in post-conflict societies. 

Having raised this question, she presented different conceptions of transitional justice,  ranging from a deontologial approach which considers transitional justice as a possibility to realise human rights in a post-conflict society to a consequential approach, which views transitional justice as a toolbox in achieving various goals in post-conflict societies. She then discussed the International Criminal Court's role in conflicts and named Columbia as a positive example of how the Court helped the peace process by being involved but at the same time showing restraint. 

She stressed the need for legal professionals to examine the specific implementation or non-implementation of individual peace treaties in order to gain the full picture of their normative values. In any case, it would be fatal and could lead to disappointment in societies if political expectations were equated to legal normes.

Besides this very interesting examination of this new legal field of transitional justice, the audience was especially moved by her sharing interviews she had conducted with former parties to the conflicts, political actors and survivors in Uganda and Sudan.

This inspirational lecture by Dr. Nouwen then offered the guests of the Third Hans Kelsen Lecturean opportunity to delve into an indepth discussion at the reception that followed in the University's main building as well as at a private seminar with her and the Institute's team the following day.

The Institute for International Peace and Security team expresses its gratitude to Professor Kreß  for once again making such a successful academic exchange possible and is already looking forward to the fourth Hans Kelsen Memorial Lecture next year!

Second Hans Kelsen Memorial Lectures on International Peace and Security Law

Detailed information will be announced soon.

A report by Ruth Effinowicz, LL.M., M.A. on the event is available here.

Hans Kelsen Memorial Lectures on International Peace and Security Law

Detailed information will be announced soon.