International Legal News - 26 January 2026

The following media round up on international and foreign policy issues from around the world for the period of 19 January to 23 January 2026. Guernica 37 will provide weekly media updates from the International Criminal Court, European Court of Human Rights, United Nations, European Union and other sources. Should you wish to contribute or submit a media summary, opinion piece or blog, please send to Ned Vucijak at nenadv@guernica37.com for consideration.

Guernica 37 International Legal News

23 January 2026

INTERPOL: 198 arrested in cross-border crackdown on illegal gold mining in Amazon region

It has been reported that police and prosecutors from Brazil, French Guiana, Guyana, and Suriname have arrested nearly 200 individuals in a transnational operation led by INTERPOL to stop illegal gold mining in the Amazon.

Operation Guyana Shield involved a reported 24,500 checks on peoples and vehicles in remote border areas leading in the arrests. Large quantities of cash, unprocessed gold, mercury, as well as firearms, and drugs have been seized.

The reported increase in interest in gold amongst organised crime groups (“OCGs”) is thought to be linked to “The surge in international gold prices […] [resulting] in increased gold mining…” according to INTERPOL Secretary General Valdecy Urquiza.

For more on this story, see here.

22 January 2026

Criminal Law (UK): Sentencing Act gets Royal Assent

New legislation to amend criminal sentencing has received Royal Assent.

The new laws are expected to introduce a series of new reforms. These include an end to automatic release for badly behaved offenders, reforms to plans to rebuild the probation service with an increase of £700 million GBP in investment over the next few years, as well as a new ‘earned progression model’ for prisoners serving standard determinate sentences.

The announcement also claims that there will be an end what has been described as “the cycle of less serious offenders going in and out of prison”.

It has been further stated that the “most serious offenders – those on life sentences, extended determinate sentences, and IPPs (“Imprisonment for Public Protection”) – will not be released any earlier than they are now.”

In June 2025, an expert working group led by a former Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales published proposals to address the status of IPPs which, although abolished in 2012, were not ended retrospectively, resulting in thousands of prisoners serving indefinite sentences.

For more on this story, see here.

For more on the expert working group’s work on IPPs, see here.

21 January 2026

Strasbourg: Grant Chamber hears submissions on role of reserve judges in Dutch Supreme Court

The judicial decision-making process in the apex court of a Council of Europe Member State is set to be scrutinised under the European Convention on Human Rights (“ECHR”). The Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg held a hearing concerning the practice of the Dutch Supreme Court in using reserve judges to assist in the deliberation of cases. It is asked to consider to what extent such a practice concurs with the Article 6 right to a fair trial.

A Dutch national, Johanna Kuijt, was convicted in 2015 for disrupting a municipal council meeting and for failing to comply with an order from an official to leave the council chamber. This resulted in a two-week prison sentence being issued by the Court of Appeal in 2016. She appealed. The applicant’s lawyer asked the names of the judges appointed to hear her case, and further, whether reservisten (“reserve judges”) would participate in the deliberation of her case. The court registry directed her legal representative to the “protocol on participation” of the court, which states that reservisten may participate in the deliberation of cases.

The applicant challenged the judges appointed and the other judges of the Supreme Court’s criminal law division, arguing that her right to an independent and impartial tribunal under Article 6 §1 would be violated. Her appeal was dismissed in December 2018.

An appeal with the Strasbourg Court was lodged in April 2019 relying on Article 6. In July 2025, the Chamber relinquished the case. In August 2025, the case was allocated instead to the Grand Chamber. Leave to intervene has now been granted to the French Government, the Consultative Council of European Judges (“CCJE”) and the European Commission for Democracy through Law (“the Venice Commission”) all as third parties.

The Grand Chamber’s judgment is now pending.

For more on this story, see here.

20 January 2026

Blog Corner: “The ICC’s Residual Jurisdiction & the Situation in the Philippines”

A recent post by Dr Gemmo Bautista Fernandez will be of particular interest to academics and practitioners with expertise in the law and practice of the International Criminal Court (“ICC”) and particularly, those following the ongoing trial of the Philippines’ former president, Rodrigo Duterte.

Duterte has previously and unsuccessfully issued a jurisdictional challenge that the ICC does not have jurisdiction to hear his case, notwithstanding the fact that The Philippines has withdrawn from the Rome Statute, and further, that the ICC does not retain an interest under Article 127(2) for matters which were already under its consideration after the effectivity of a withdrawal. The Author of this article examines this challenge and offers an analysis as to why the Court has correctly dismissed it.

To read this article, see here.

19 January 2026

ISDS: The UK faces its first ISDS Arbitration

It has been reported that the United Kingdom is to face its first ever ISDS claim.

In August 2025, the Singapore-based Woodhouse Investment Pte Ltd and its UK subsidiary, West Cumbria Mining (Holdings) Ltd filed an ICSID claim against the UK based on the UK-Singapore BIT (1975).

The claimants maintain that the UK unlawfully deprived them of their coal mine investment after the High Court in September 2024, quashed approval for a new coal mine in Cumbria.

The filing demonstrates how policies that seek to promote climate action may nonetheless have a knock-on effect in creating legal proceedings under investment treaties that require further contesting.

For more on this story, see here.

To read the High Court’s 2024 Judgment, see here.