To start with, it is essential to clarify executive and legislative sources of International Law to consolidate this standing. The International Court of Justice lists the sources of International Law as international treaties and conventions, the general practice of states, and commonly and globally accepted legal practices. As it can be inferred from this clause, states play an undeniable role in establishing international law principles through their practices and acknowledgment of widespread legal norms.

Conversely, it is notable that non-state actors have also historically been of utter importance in ratifying treaties and conventions. The Vienna Convention by the United Nations would be an ample example of an intergovernmental organization arranging the ratification of an agreement regulating treaties between the states. Another profound example can be the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union – a framework forming the constitutional basis of the biggest trading block and one of the most influential political unions of the world. Nevertheless, it goes without saying that powers to ratify and enforce such legislation to these organisations are granted by the states themselves. Therefore, the partial success of these legal triumphs undoubtedly belongs to states taking part in their ratification.

When it comes to the enforcement of International Law, states also take a proactive role, while the participation of non-state factors is noteworthy. Common means of International Law enforcement mechanisms are diplomacy, sanctions, and military intervention, depending on the seriousness and the scope of the breach.

Clinton defines diplomacy as ‘the art and practice of conducting negotiations between the representatives of states.’ Although states prima facie can be assumed as exclusive players in diplomacy from this definition, the contributions of non-state factors to diplomacy cannot be disregarded. For example, the International Court of Justice is a consent-based dispute-settling and advisory organ of the UN. It plays a crucial role as a legislative and exclusive power through establishing precedents and issuing binding judgments for the states. However, states arguably establish a significant part of ICJ’s activities by bringing disputes and consenting to the court’s findings.

Furthermore, economic sanctions are also often used to enforce International Law. According to Lin, economic sanctions are financial penalties imposed by one or more states against a specific target, which can be a state or a group of individuals. A historical example would be the total economic embargo on Iran by the USA following Iran’s terrorism-related activities. In terms of opting for military intervention to restore the international legal order, The Bush administration deploying troops in Iraq following the latter breaching the sovereignty of another state would be an applicable example.

Alongside the actions on a governmental level, certain non-state actors also have the authority to undertake military actions in case of a breach of International Law. It has been defended that the collective security system of the UN can be regarded as an enforcement mechanism of International Law. Nevertheless, the actions of this mechanism can be precluded by the veto of one of the 5 permanent members, reflecting the superior influence of states even at the highest organisational level.

Dunoff and Partner claim that non-state actors have even been integrally involved in the creation and enforcement of International law by assisting with framing agendas, attending global conferences to lobby governments, and even sometimes taking a superior action aiming at lawful enforcement. A unique example would be when the French had to discharge the asbestos ship Clemenceau from departing to India following the severe campaigning efforts of Greenpeace through collaboration with other NGOs.

In conclusion, the analysis found that states have immense power to create and enforce International law among themselves and non-state actors. However, it would be rigid to conclude that these powers are exclusive in nature as there are clear evidence of non-governmental and intergovernmental organisations and some other actors contributing to the creation and enforcement of international legal principles. Taking into account states’ primary influence on these organisations’ operations, drawing a concrete boundary appears to be complicated.

To keep up to date with the latest legal news, click on legal to get your daily dose.

The post Executive And Legislative Powers appeared first on Relawding.

Your commercial awareness dose

The Covid-19 pandemic is not only a global health problem but also has severe impacts on human and social life, including employment, education, agriculture and the other spheres of the world economy. Businesses of all different sizes and industries of all different sorts have been significantly impacted. Nearly every aspect of normal life has been affected and the lives of masses of people around the world have radically transformed by the spread of coronavirus. As the situation continues to develop, legislators are taking an active role in addressing both the immediate and long-term challenges related to the outbreak. The outbreak of the coronavirus has become a major disruption to colleges and universities across the country, with most institutions cancelling in-person classes and moving to online-only instruction.

The most effective tool in keeping student retention and maintaining access to learning has been online classes. Schools have been forced to close their campuses, move classes online, and protecting students. Thus, several universities in different countries worldwide have shifted to online learning to limit the spread of the virus, and we can say that Covid-19 has considerably redefined education worldwide.

Some colleges announce plans to help students who might lack access to an internet connection, including opening university libraries on a limited basis and distributing mobile hotspots to students. Many schools also shifted to pass/fail grading system instead of standard letter grades. The move to online-only classes for instruction prompted concerns about the quality of educational instruction provided remotely. Some say that more cheating happens in the virtual model because of anonymity and distance between the students and the teachers.

According to the Institute for International Education, more than 1 million international students were studying in the US in 2019, International students make up about 6% of the total higher education student population and research finds these students bring engagement benefits for domestic students while providing a key source of revenue for institutions. Due to varying time zone differences, many international students may not be able to participate in remotely offered classes in real-time and also, there is a massive economic hit to higher education caused by the coronavirus. Dorm rooms are unoccupied, sports stadiums remain empty, and students push back against paying full tuition fees.

While the majority of colleges and universities around the world have succeeded to integrate a form of online education into their coursework, moving all programs into an online version can be challenging. While some universities may have strong online systems, smaller universities may struggle under the weight of the demand. The pandemic has a devastating impact on global education, too. While higher education institutions in developed countries have managed well to implement digital learning, universities in African and South Asian countries have to overcome many challenges before shifting completely to digital learning. According to the International Association of Universities, developing African universities are still attempting to transform and improve their higher education system and the Covid-19 pandemic. The technology might simply fail due to non-availability of electricity across in all the places at the same time.

Online classes which created the digital divide between rich and poor, require long hours of internet service, peaceful space and one device dedicated to the student, which might not be affordable for everyone.

Students from diverse socio-economic backgrounds have felt discomfort or shame while managing with limited space in the house and a limited budget and poor connectivity in rural areas. The digital divide has not only led to exclusion of students from poor and marginalized backgrounds from digital learning but also pushed many underprivileged students towards depression. For example, a 16-year-old boy, from a very poor family, took his life because he didn’t have a smartphone to attend online classes and examinations in the Chirang district of Assam in India (The Hindustan Times, June 24, 2020).

To keep up to date with the latest commercial news, click on commercial awareness to get your daily dose.

The post The Impact of Covid-19 on Education: the Digital Divide appeared first on Relawding.

Your commercial awareness dose

The Republic of Turkey is a transcontinental country located mainly on the Anatolian Peninsula in Western Asia, with a smaller portion on the Balkan Peninsula in Southeastern Europe. Turkey is a developing country, a regional power, and a newly industrialized country, with a geopolitically strategic location. It is the world’s 19th largest economy and 13th largest by Paycheck Protection Program.

The economy of Turkey is an emerging market economy as defined by the International Monetary Fund. The country is among the world’s leading producers of agricultural products; textiles, motor vehicles, transportation equipment. As of 2016, Turkey is the world’s largest producer of hazelnuts, cherries, figs, apricots, and pomegranates; the second-largest producer of quinces and watermelons; the third-largest producer of cucumbers, green peppers, lentils and pistachios.

But in 2020, a virus called Covid-19 changed the world of economy and business in an unprecedented way, and Turkish Economy, like the rest of the world, had a tough year due to the epidemic disaster that occurs once a century. Covid-19 has begun to affect economic activities with the channels of foreign trade, tourism and domestic demand from mid-March in Turkey and the effects were deepened and reflected to the overall economy.

Since the onset of the crisis was in the middle of March, its impact was limited in the first quarter of 2020, with a growth of 4.5% in the first quarter. The Turkish Economy contracted by 9 percent in the second quarter. After the first shock of the epidemic was over, economic activity gained momentum and national income grew by 6.7 percent in July, August and September. After starting the year at around 5,95, the dollar-lira exchange rate hit a record high in October at above 8,50. In the last two months of the year, the lira stabilized around 7,70.

Alongside the pandemic, some other external events also caused TL depreciation between 2018-2020. Firstly, Negative impact on the economy of the refugee problem created by the Syrian civil war after millions of migrants coming to Turkey. In addition, US-Turkey Relations hampering the development of S-400 crisis and Increasing tension in foreign policy (political conflicts with France and Greece, sanctions rhetoric by the USA and the EU) were the following hits to the nation’s currency. Significant reduction in the Central Bank’s gross reserves confirms how complicated the situation for the country.

With its exotic seaside cities located on the Mediterranean and Aegean and its rich history combining Ottoman and East European cultures, Turkey’s economy largely benefits from tourism. Nevertheless, the contribution from this industry to the country’s GDP narrowed significantly this year as the Covid-19 pandemic led to worldwide travel restrictions, border shutdowns, and an overall drop in consumer demand. The country generated $8.1 billion of tourism income in the first nine months of this year and welcomed more than 11 million visitors.

Beginning of the year, Turkey’s unemployment rate fell from 13.8% to 12.7% in September. In order to cope with the effects of the epidemic all over the world, policy makers are implementing various practices. The measures taken to limit the economic and financial impacts of the coronavirus were respectively announced on 17 March, 31 March and 17 April 2020.

Four main objectives were focused. It includes providing flexibility to banks in Turkish lira and foreign currency liquidity management and ensuring uninterrupted continuation of credit flow to the real sector and to support exporter companies. The remaining objectives are supporting the cash flow of exporter companies with rediscount loan arrangements and strengthening the monetary transmission mechanism by supporting the government securities market liquidity.

However, there are some good news for Turkey as well. As of 29 December 2020, the UK had secured 34 trade agreements with 91 people countries, and Turkey is the one of the countries. With the agreement, Turkey and the UK will be prevented in the possible emergence of financial losses in trade between the two countries. The trade deal covers the goods worth of nearly $16 bn., which might be a good place to boost the Turkish economy.

The post Turkish Economy and Covid-19 appeared first on Relawding.

Your commercial awareness dose

The financial services sector is a significant contributor to the UK income and employment. According to the House of Commons Library in 2018, the financial services sector contributed over £132 billion to the UK economy, which is counted for 6.9% of the total economic output. Moreover, the sector generated over a million jobs all over Britain, with two thirds (66%) of it located outside London. Notwithstanding the importance of the sector, the UK-EU deal doesn’t include an EU-wide arrangement for financial services and hence has done little to maintain stability in the sector.

After Britain has confirmed its intention to leave the European Union, the EU ruled out specific arrangements including the so-called passporting system, operating with the fact that the system is preserved only for member states. Passporting allows the financial businesses authorized in any of the member states to operate at ease across all the European Economic Area. UK now lost its advantage.

A recent report estimated that nearly 5,500 firms in the UK rely on passporting to conduct business with the rest of the EU. Considering that the export of UK financial services was worth of £60 billion in 2017 and 43% of this amount went to the EU, it can have a direct negative impact on the UK economy. Brexit means not only additional trade tariffs, it is about whether UK banks have the legal right to provide services to the EU member state’s businesses and citizens and vice versa.

From the 1st of January, the financial sector firms will have to rely upon regulations of individual member states. However, the exclusion has left a room to “equivalence”, which would allow the UK market access to the EU financial market but only to a limited range of services. Brussels will grant regulatory equivalence, only if Britain shows that its regulatory regime for financial services as effective as that one of the EU.

However, the equivalence agreements depend on continued compatibility between regulatory outcomes, they are subject to continuous revision and can be withdrawn within a month’s notice. And even if Brussels will grant it to the UK it will not maintain pre – Brexit cooperation also because it is very unstable. For instance, the EU recently withdrew the equivalence from Switzerland due to the arrangement delays. The trade deal however outlined plans for negotiations to discuss future financial services arrangements. Both sides confirmed their intentions to reach an agreement with a deadline set in March.

Since the Brexit vote, British financial firms have set up new offices across Europe and have moved assets to avoid disruption. Accounting firm EY estimates that more than £1 trillion of assets have been moved from London to the EU since 2016 as a result of Brexit. Consequently, over 7500 jobs have been lost to the EU member states. And this number could be even higher if only the lockdowns hadn’t forced to relocate many job positions from offices to homes.

Notwithstanding the crucial effect of the pandemic and the EU-UK divorce, London is still the second largest financial center (after New York) according to the Global Financial Centres Index as of March 2020. To help maintain the position Britain allows EU firms to remain for 3 more years on the pre – Brexit basis hoping that they will apply for permanent UK authorization. Being a second financial hub with all the necessary infrastructure and skilled workers, it’s possible to assume that the UK’s hopes will pay off.

The importance of the UK financial sector to the EU is also explicit – the financial sector has been one of the principal benefactors of the single market, the union is strongly based on economic motivations. British banks lend nearly £1.1 trillion to EU companies and governments. Much of the financial activities carried out in Europe are either directly or indirectly performed out of London (87% of US investment banks’ EU staff are employed in London). For the EU the Brexit deal will only be a stimulus to develop its own capital market and cut reliance on Britain’s financial services and the city of London.

The post What does Brexit mean for the second largest financial hub? appeared first on Relawding.

Your commercial awareness dose

In 2016, the then Prime Minister David Cameron announced a national referendum as to whether the United Kingdom should remain a member of the European Union. This, in essence, had been a major fault line down the Conservative party; the referendum was an attempt to heal this rift.

There were many purported benefits of leaving the EU. Many so-called Brexiteers feel that the EU threatens the sovereignty of the UK – on subjects such as agriculture, copyright and patent law, and competition policy, the EU can override national law. Famously in 2016, former foreign secretary and current Prime Minister Boris Johnson advertised – on the side of London buses no less – that “we [the UK] send the EU £350 million – let’s fund our NHS instead”. These figures have now been disputed. It was perceived that the UK would be able to spend more money on internal issues and affairs.

Not only was there strong support for leaving the EU from far-right and conservative backgrounds, but also those from a left-wing perspective. The left-wing critique finds that the EU restricts more radical reforms and entrenches corporate, capitalist interests. Even Jeremy Corbyn, the previous leader of the opposition party Labour, has been known to criticise the EU.

Those who were part of the Remain campaign argued that British access to free movement across Europe, alongside EU trading and investment, were all vital. Further, there were concerns that discourse surrounding the Brexit campaign was fuelled by racism and xenophobia, as many anti-immigrant sentiments spread through the media. Though certainly not from all quarters, it was notable; Jon Burnett, writing on research conducted by the Institute of Race Relations, cites an “explosion of racist violence” that followed the referendum announcement on the 24th June 2016. Indeed, the Metropolitan Police Chief Bernard Howard-Howe noted the 2,300 (plus) racist incidents reported to the police in the thirty-eight days following the announcement as a “horrible spike”.

Clearly, conflicting ideologies and motivations fed into the 2016 Referendum; we are only now beginning to see the impacts of Brexit, as an exit deal was finally brokered between the EU and the UK on the 31st December 2020. The exit deal in itself consists of, according to the BBC, over 1,000 pages of legal text. There are some essential points though, which will affect the ordinary UK and European citizens.

Many people have been concerned about travel; previously, UK nationals could enter other EU countries without a visa, as part of the free movement agreement. Now, citizens wishing to travel to the EU for over more than 90 days in a 180 day period must apply for a visa. UK citizens can still use their EHIC cards until they expire; following this, a new UK Global Health Insurance Card will be issued – although when these will become available has yet to be revealed. Further, there is nothing in the agreement which would hinder telephone companies from charging either UK or EU nationals for using their mobiles abroad.

Another loss for young British people under the new system is that they will no longer be able to participate in the Erasmus Programme, a Europe-wide exchange programme that has been running since 1987. Around 15,000 British University students took part each year. Boris Johnson claims that the UK has lost money through this scheme as more European students come to the UK than vice versa under the scheme, though this doesn’t address the cultural, linguistic and personal benefits that individuals may have gained from the scheme.

The Financial Times reported on the 4th of January that London’s financial sector had begun to “feel the full effects of Brexit” as “nearly €6bn of EU share dealing shifted away from the City”. It will perhaps be difficult to separate the economic ramifications of Brexit from the ravaging we have faced under COVID-19. The drawn-out process that UK nationals have endured in waiting for Brexit to be delivered has now ended: The full impacts of Brexit, however, whether beneficial or detrimental, have yet to be fully realised.

To keep up to date with the latest commercial news, click on commercial awareness to get your daily dose.

The post Brexit: How Did We Get Here And What Comes Next? appeared first on Relawding.