English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

On 12 March 1996 President Clinton signed into law the latest anti-Cuba sanctions bill, the 'Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity (LIBERTAD) Act of 1996',' also widely known after its sponsors in Congress, Senator Jesse A. Helms (RepublicanNorth Carolina) and Representative Dan Burton (Republican-Indiana), as the HelmsBurton Act (the 'Act'). Predictably, this immediately caused an uproar in the Westem hemisphere. It led America's closest allies to condemn in diplomatic notes the legislation as a violation of international law, and to threaten to invoke dispute settlement procedures under NAFTA and WTO provisions. The Act raises a number of interesting 'conflict of laws' and 'jurisdiction of courts' questions which cannot be addressed in an exhaustive fashion in this short comment. What should be addressed in a more detailed manner, however, is the intriguing aspect, inherent in this latest piece of extraterritorial US legislation, of the broader 'public order' considerations lying behind such unilateral international law

european journal of international law

Widening the US Embargo Against Cuba Extraterritorially: A Few Public International Law Comments on the 'Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity (LIBERTAD) Act of 1996'