To mark the sixtieth birthday of Professor Anne Peters, a colloquium titled Beyond Constitutionalism: Between Multi-Perspectivism and Universalism in International Law was convened on 28 March 2025 at the Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law . While the occasion celebrated her personal milestone—her actual birthday having passed in November—it was also a scholarly tribute to her longstanding influence in the field of international law.
The event opened with an introduction by Christian Marxsen and Isabelle Ley, who reflected on Professor Peters’ distinguished contributions to international law. They highlighted her role as the first female Director in the Institute’s hundred-year history and her enduring influence as both a scholar and mentor. The title of the colloquium, echoing one of her seminal works, framed the day’s discussions and brought together former and current researchers who have worked closely with Professor Peters.
The first panel, Human Rights: Critiques and New Frontiers, chaired by Jannika Jahn, featured Tilman Altwicker, Anna Petrig, Raffaela Kunz, Saskia Stucki, and Valentina Volpe. The panel affirmed the centrality of individual rights at the core of a human-based paradigm of international law, while also dealing with the challenges and criticisms that this faces—especially in light of, amongst other things, environmental pressures, technological developments, and geopolitical shifts. Presentations considered the ‘balanced optimism’ required to conduct empirical research in human rights, the effectiveness of advisory bodies such as the Venice Commission, the extension of rights to animals, the neglected domain of human rights at sea, and the question of who might count as rights holders in a world increasingly shaped by algorithmic systems.
A common concern was the need to recalibrate the human rights paradigm without undermining its normative foundations. The discussion also raised broader questions about the role of legal scholars—whether their engagement should remain primarily analytical or extend more visibly into the public and political realm.
The second panel, Peace and War in a Changing World Order: Toward a New Multipolar Constellation?, chaired by Isabelle Ley, featured Paulina Starski, Carolyn Moser, Angelo Golia, and Robert Stendel. Against a backdrop of trade protectionism, authoritarianism, and the resort to inter-state violence, the panel looked at the implications for international law. It was questioned whether the problems of constitutionalism and state exceptionalism are uniquely contemporary problems. There was recognition of the need for all countries to respect international legal norms and, moreover, a degree of hope—judging by the ongoing centrality of the ICJ in contemporary conflicts—that constitutionalism remains important. It was also noted that European defence mindsets require rethinking, alongside a critique of EU narratives that no longer align with present realities.
In her concluding remarks, Professor Peters said:
I agree that the situation is perhaps less exceptional than we think. However, the three events—Ukraine, Gaza, and Trump’s inauguration—have shed light on troubles that were lingering but also on our limitations, what we did not see from our limited perspective.
Thanking all the organizers, presenters, and those in attendance, she directed a final comment to her research team—expressing her hope that they would ‘continue with our team principles of hope, solidarity, and flexibility’.