TY - BOOK ID - 86132849 TI - State responsibility and rebels : the history and legacy of protecting investment against revolution PY - 2021 SN - 1009043773 1316517292 1009050524 100905032X PB - Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, DB - UniCat KW - Investments, Foreign (International law) KW - Revolutions KW - Arbitration (International law) KW - International commercial arbitration. KW - Government liability (International law) KW - History KW - International claims KW - International law KW - Sovereignty KW - Claims KW - Arbitration and award, International KW - Commercial arbitration, International KW - International arbitration and award KW - International commercial arbitration KW - Arbitration and award KW - Conflict of laws KW - Arbitration, International KW - International arbitration KW - International political arbitration KW - Pacific settlement of international disputes KW - International commissions of inquiry KW - Jurisdiction (International law) KW - Mediation, International KW - Insurrections KW - Rebellions KW - Revolts KW - Revolutionary wars KW - Political science KW - Political violence KW - War KW - Government, Resistance to KW - International investment law KW - Investment law, International KW - Law and legislation UR - https://www.unicat.be/uniCat?func=search&query=sysid:86132849 AB - This book traces the emergence and contestation of State responsibility for rebels during the nineteenth and early-twentieth centuries. In the context of decolonisation and capitalist expansion in Latin America, it argues that the mixed claims commissions-and the practices of intervention associated with them-served to insulate economic order against revolution, by taking the question of who assumed the risk of harm by rebels out of the scope of national authority. The jurisprudence of the commissions was contradictory and ambiguous. It took a lot of interpretive work by later scholars and codifiers to rationalise rules of responsibility out of these shaky foundations, as they battled for the meaning and authority of the arbitral practice. The legal debates were structured around whether the standard of protection against rebels owed to aliens was nationally or internationally determined and whether it was domestic or international authority that adjudicated such standard-a struggle over the internationalisation of protection against rebels. ER -