This article examines the Advisory Opinion on climate change put forth by the International Tribunal for the law of the sea and its implications for the future integration of ocean and climate governances at both international and national levels. Although the Climate Change Advisory Opinion cannot definitively resolve all questions regarding the relationship between the law of the sea and climate change, it establishes a flexible and scalable framework for clarifying the application and interpretation of the law of the sea, particularly the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea in the context of climate change. The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea recognizes the role of ocean carbon protection as a means of addressing climate change through both adaptation and mitigation. This recognition can enhance legal and financial certainties regarding blue carbon in international cooperation and domestic policy.
The maritime regions of Northeast Asia are repositories of rich yet vulnerable underwater cultural heritage (UCH). This shared legacy transcends national boundaries, presenting a complex governance challenge. A comparative analysis of the three states reveals significant divergence in their domestic legal regimes concerning key issues: the definition and scope of protected heritage, the assertion of ownership and jurisdictional rights, approaches to management in disputed maritime zones, and the sensitive status of sunken state vessels. These policy disparities, set against a backdrop of geopolitical tension and an ineffective international legal framework, critically undermine coordinated protection efforts. This article systematically maps these policy differences to argue that the very necessity of trilateral cooperation stems directly from this comparative landscape of divergence. It concludes that establishing a collaborative governance framework is not merely a diplomatic aspiration but a pragmatic imperative for the effective safeguarding of this common regional heritage.
With the surge in trade and investment between China and ASEAN nations, the need for international dispute resolution involving these parties is bound to grow. This research analyses the legal principles, institutional setups, and regulatory environments that impact the efficiency of commercial arbitration between China and ASEAN. It examines key factors that influence the cross-border enforcement of arbitral awards under the New York Convention, such as differences in arbitrability, procedures, ad hoc arbitration, and digital practices. The article highlights that the enforcement and execution of arbitral awards in the Asia-Pacific region stem from a lack of coordination among national courts, leading to varying enforcement standards and inconsistent outcomes. The analysis suggests that regional forums can help reduce fragmentation. Proposing to promote cooperation between institutions, develop model arbitration rules, and establish common digital standards. This approach would ultimately enhance legal certainty and increase the effectiveness of international arbitration in China and ASEAN countries.
The escalation of missile warfare between Iran and Israel has intensified legal debates concerning the regulation of armed conflict under international law. This article examines these challenges through the Iran–Israel confrontation, with a particular focus on the large-scale missile exchanges in June 2025 and the renewed escalation in February 2026. The study demonstrates how contemporary warfare methods, including ballistic and cruise missiles, armed drones, and cyber operations, strain existing legal frameworks. It evaluates the legality of these developments under the United Nations Charter, particularly the prohibition on the use of force under Article 2(4) and the right of self-defense under Article 51, alongside the application of international humanitarian law principles of distinction, proportionality, and precautions in attack. By analyzing these developments, the article identifies doctrinal and operational gaps in current legal regimes and argues for adaptive legal mechanisms to address the challenges of modern missile warfare.
This article examines three recent Korean Supreme Court decisions—Texsus (2023), Weihai Jinnuo (2024), and Injection-Moulding (2025)—that mark an inflection point in Korea’s application of the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG). Earlier Korean cases often bypassed the Convention’s analytical framework in favor of familiar domestic law, particularly when filling ‘gaps’ not expressly resolved by the Convention. Such practices, known as the ‘homeward trend,’ threatened the treaty’s core purpose of providing uniformity and certainty in international sales law. The recent trilogy course-corrects this trend by formally establishing a two-step gap-filling framework within the CISG’s own analytical architecture, while largely sustaining lower-court outcomes and replacing domestic doctrine-laden reasoning with one grounded in the Convention itself. With the rise in CISG cases in Korea since 2022, these decisions reflect growing judicial commitment to the Convention’s autonomous nature and demonstrate how a domestic court can evolve into a more faithful enforcer of an international treaty.
Despite the growing number of international publications by Chinese scholars in the field of international law, there has been limited attention given to the distinctive characteristics of their contributions. This study examines the features and trends of international publications by Chinese international law scholars, using data from international law journals from 2005 to 2025. The results reveal a steady increase in the number of articles published by Chinese scholars, with a sharp rise since 2020. University rankings reveal geographical imbalances and a two-track pattern of internationalization. While scholars from mainland institutions have made rapid progress, their presence in international legal discussions is still heavily dependent on being at universities in Hong Kong and Macau. Collaboration remains the most common publication model taking the form of both domestic and international partnerships. This research provides an empirical baseline for understanding China’s contributions and offers insights into the shifting power dynamics in global legal discourse.
Middle-income states like Thailand face a structural dilemma: EU-style AI regulation exceeds administrative capacity, while voluntary models fail to protect fundamental rights. Leveraging Thailand’s 2025 BRICS Partner status, this study proposes a Thai–BRICS Hybrid Governance Model based on functional modularity. This approach avoids wholesale transplantation, instead selectively adapting regulatory mechanisms from BRICS nations to fit Thailand’s specific legal and fiscal constraints. The model addresses five critical gaps: infrastructure dependency, algorithmic opacity, accountability deficits, institutional fragmentation, and labor displacement. The study’s central thesis is that rights remain symbolic without developmental sovereignty, the material control over digital infrastructure. By prioritizing sovereign capacity, Thailand can ensure that algorithmic accountability is enforceable rather than aspirational. This framework reconciles human rights with developmental goals, avoiding the prohibitive compliance burdens seen in previous GDPR-inspired legislation and positioning infrastructure as a prerequisite for genuine rights protection.
Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly reshaping legal practice by assisting with statutory interpretation, precedent retrieval, document analysis, and prediction of litigation outcomes. Yet the rise of AI in adjudication and legal services also raises deeper questions about the nature of legal reasoning itself. This article examines three core issues: first, the extent to which AI can replicate traditional legal reasoning methods, especially statutory interpretation, case-based reasoning, and value balancing; second, the principal risks associated with AI-assisted legal reasoning, including opacity, bias, accountability gaps, liability problems, ethical limits, and contextual misunderstanding; and third, the legal, technological, and socio-ethical orientations required to ensure that AI remains subject to human oversight. Drawing on domestic and international materials, including the EU AI Act, UNESCO and OECD principles, and comparative legal scholarship, the article argues that AI may strengthen legal decision-making only if it operates as a supportive instrument within a human-centered rule-of-law framework.
Critical minerals play a central role in the global energy transition. This article argues that their regulation is significantly shaped by domestic constitutional doctrines alongside geopolitical and industrial considerations. This article emphasizes the role of constitutional sovereignty over natural resources in shaping regulatory autonomy in resource-rich states, by placing the management of critical minerals at the intersection of constitutional law and international natural resource management. This article advances three claims: First, critical minerals constitute a regulatory category determined by global demand and by constitutional constraints embedded within national legal systems. Second, the constitutional framework of Mongolia, particularly Article 6 of the Constitution, uses principles of intergenerational justice, public ownership, and long‑term stewardship to structure the permissible scope of future legislative and regulatory measures. Third, orthodox interpretations of Permanent Sovereignty over Natural Resources (PSNR) do not fully reflect the constitutional dimension of contemporary resource governance.
The complexity of the Philippines’ South China Sea policy necessitates a multi-level analysis of the key tenets of the Marcos Jr. administration’s approach. From the perspective of neoclassical realism, the structural factor, primarily shaped by the trilateral dynamics among China, the United States, and the Philippines, remains a key determinant influencing Manila’s policy formulation. Nevertheless, the mediating function of intervening variables, including President Marcos Jr.’s personal perception and the stances of Manila’s domestic actors, substantially shapes how the structural factor is transformed into concrete policy. As a result, the Marcos Jr. administration insists on not abandoning its maritime claims, strengthens its control over the occupied islands and reefs, employs diplomatic channels to maximize strategic gains, closely aligns with the US, and expands its network of security partnerships. To promote regional peace and stability, the relevant stakeholders ought to finalize the Code of Conduct in the South China Sea in the near future.
This essay discusses centuries of resistance of the Kingdom of Kedah against foreign intervention, surviving regional and global powers. Drawing from historical practice, the article argues that Kedah traditionally fulfilled the core requirements for recognition as a sovereign state under international law, including defined territory, permanent population, effective governance and the capacity to conduct external relations. This article concludes that Kedah was in fact a sovereign nation before it was occupied following military aggression by Siam in 1821 and later placed under British protection in 1909. Departing from conventional colonial historiography, the article re-examines Kedah’s past through the perspectives and political experiences of the indigenous polity rather than through British imperial narratives. Kedah’s ability, over several centuries, to avoid permanent annexation despite sustained pressure from neighbouring powers constitutes a notable case of small-polity survival and sovereign agency that warrants re-examination within the framework of international legal history.
The United States faces a staggering bill: more than $200 billion in tariffs that the Supreme Court has ruled were illegally collected. The legal battle over tariff refunds is intensifying. States and private firms have filed a stream of suits demanding that the government comply with court orders requiring the return of unlawfully collected tariffs, immediately. An entire legal and financial ecosystem is emerging around this tariff chaos. If trade policy becomes an instrument of improvisation rather than law, the consequences will extend far beyond tariffs—to diplomacy, investment, and global economic leadership. Rebuilding confidence in the international trading system will require rejecting unilateralism and protectionism and recommitting to the international legal and trading systems the US helped construct and led in the aftermath of the last century’s economic and political crises of the Great Depression, World War II and the Cold War. Trade policy and foreign policy cannot be based on threats and personal grievances.