International Law
By definition, international law is “a body of rules which binds states and other agents in world politics in their relations with one another and is considered to have the status of law.”
International law is developed through cooperation and discussion between states. While international law seeks to govern all states, it must at the same time recognize the sovereign power that each state has over its property and possessions. To that end, law is created through discussion, and then must be ratified is sixty countries to be considered viable. There are two separate processes that can create an international law. Customary international law is slowly recognized in states as appropriate and correct. Because it was beneficial
…show more content…
The first area concerns the obligation of the law, or the amount to which states are bound to obey the law. High-obligation rules “must be performed in good faith regardless of inconsistent provisions of domestic law.” Examples of high-obligation rules are crimes against crimes humanity, or the Geneva convention, and if a state were to breach the agreement with these laws, they are liable to give reparations to the injured party. Low-obligation rules are simply a suggestion to a state, or something they can aspire too, but will not receive any sort of penalty for not complying with the rule. Secondly, law differs in precision, or exact wording, that can allow or prevent loopholes for actors to get through. Some international law is extremely precise, to the point of a dozen subsections to explain the one law, while other law is extremely vague (“favorable conditions”). The final are is how the law varies in its degree of delegation for enforcement. Generally, enforcement falls to the International Criminal Court, in the decision of cases brought against a state by another, however, laws can be enforced by threat of lower rights in international institutions, or extremely specific international institutions may have the ability to heavily regulate states according to their area of
Therefore, for the development of the society, a legal, formal and universal system has to be established, that can deal with subjects, that cannot be resolved or addressed through natural, customary or religious law. Thus over time, the law scholars and sociologists started to understand the complexity and interrelationship between law and society.
According to Article 38 of the 1946 Statute of the International Court of Justice, the Court shall apply “international custom, as evidence of a general practice accepted as law” in its decisions (Kritsiotis 123). In other words, the International Court of Justice cites customs as a formal source of law. According to Roberto Unger, author of Law in a Modern Society, customary international law is best defined as “any recurring mode of interaction among individuals and groups, together with the more or less explicit acknowledgement of these groups and individuals that such patterns of interaction produce reciprocal expectations of conduct that out to be satisfied (Shaw 72-73). In other words, customary international laws are primarily concerned with how and why sates behave in a particular manner. Customs derive from the behavior of states (state practice) and the subconscious belief that a behavior is inherently legal (opinio juris). Evidence of state behavior is documented in the decisions of domestic courts, international courts, and international organizations. Unlike treaty law, customary laws are binding on all states. Additionally, if a treaty derives from a custom it is also binding on all states. Some of the international court cases that have been instrumental in the development of customary international law include the Nicaragua v. United States case, the Anglo-Norwegian Fisheries case, the Scotia case, the Asylum case, the Paquete Habana case, and the Lotus case.
Treaties are the highest source of international law besides jus cogens norms that have binding effect on the parties that ratify them.2 International human rights treaties rely on the “name and shame” mechanisms to pressure states to improve practices.3 However with “toothless” international human rights norms, moral coercion is not always effective. An empirical study conducted by Professor Oona Hathaway assessing the effect of human rights treaty ratification on human rights compliance, maintains in its findings that ratification of human rights treaties has little effect on state practices.4 States do not feel pressured to comply and change their practices, rather, signing treaties is “more likely to offset the pressure rather than augment it.”5 So, is it time to abandon human rights treaties and remit protection of human right to domestic institutions. Hathaway posits elsewhere that despite this treaties “remain an indispensable tool for the promotion of human rights.”6 Instead of getting rid of the treaty system, it is necessary to enhance the monitoring and enforcements mechanism to strengthen the human rights regime to ensure compliance.7 This article evaluates the extent to which international law serves as a useful tool for protection of human rights.
...th 2001). Roth argues that the concept of international jurisdiction is not a new idea but was exercised by the US government in the 1970 after an aircraft hijacking. Also the war crime courts established after the end of World War II exercised international jurisdiction. In fact the Geneva Convention states that is a person regardless of their nationality should be brought before the court of any state in which that person has committed grave breaches of law and convention. Roth states that the concept of international jurisdiction is not a new one but that only in recent years have states been willing to act on universal jurisdiction and go after criminals of the international community regardless of their stating or power within the international community. Roth believes in the ability and authority of international organizations and institutions (Roth 2001).
Members of The United Nations have a duty “to maintain international peace…in conformity with the principles of justice and international law.”[1] China, a core member of the United Nations since its formation in 1945, fails to comply with international human rights’ norms set forth by The United Nations Charter. This failure is noticeably prevalent in the practices of the Chinese Legal System. Its judicial proceedings in handling peaceful, political dissenters fail to provide the minimum protection of human rights guaranteed to all through international law. By examining accounts of Tibetans detained for such peaceful protests, this paper will set out to highlight the discrepancies between Chinese enforcement of international law in theory and in practice. Before this paper goes any further, the notion of international law must be explained. Providing a better understanding of international law will make easier the task of highlighting China’s struggles with enforcing such standards.
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) is an important organ of the United Nations. Actually it is the UN's principal judicial arm used to foster international peace. It was established after the League of the Nation and its judicial organ the Permanent Court of International Justice (PCIJ) were dissolved after the Second World War, in 1946. Its main purpose is to support the UN (which was formed in 1945) in its endeavour in promoting international peace and law . Important to note is the fact that this court, although referred to in a non-technical context as the world court, does not automatically possess compulsory international jurisdiction. The treaty creating this court, referred to as the stature of international court of justice, provides an option for member states to chose whether to be subjected to the court international compulsory jurisdiction or not. A state once it decides to be subjected to this compulsory jurisdiction is still at liberty of setting condition that will shield it against adverse implication of the subjection. This provision gives mainly powerful states undue advantage over less powerful ones when it comes to international matters. For instance they can easily decide not to attend the court proceeding, and if they attend they refuse to abide to the court ruling without facing serious implications .
What is international law and is international law really considered to be law; the answer to these questions can be found in the examples of different international resolutions. Some of these examples of when the law has been followed and upheld can be called law can be found in the examples of New Zealand v. France with the bombing and sinking of the Greenpeace vessel. Another example can be seen in the case of the Islamic Republic of Iran v. Untied States of America in regards to the United States shooting down an Iranian commercial aircraft. There also is an example in the case of New Zealand v. France where the law was not followed so could this still be considered law.
Every nation has their own set of legal strategies they use to guide them in making important decisions. Each nation has its traditions and policies they follow. Through the world, there are two main types of legal systems that are used; most nations follow either common or civil law. Both the common law system and the civil law system share similarities in having courts, judges, and comparing cases to laws. While both systems share similarities, they also contain many differences, making them two very divergent legal systems.
Public International law International law contains of rules and principles, which preside over the relations and communication of nations with each other. International Law that is in most other countries referred to as Public International Law concerns itself only with questions of rights among more than a few nations or nations and the citizens or subjects of other nations. In dissimilarity, Private International Law deals with controversies among confidential persons, natural or juridical, arising out of situations having important association to further than one nation. In current years the line up connecting public and private international law have became more and more doubtful. Issues of private international law may also associate issues of public international law and numerous matters of private international law nave considerable meaning for the international group of people of nations. International Law consists of the basic, classic concepts of law in nationwide legal systems, status, property, responsibility, and tort. It also includes substantive law, procedure, process and remedies. International Law is rooted in receipt by the nation states, which comprise the system. Customary law and conventional law are primary sources of international law. Customary international law results when states trail convinced practices usually and time after time out of an intelligence of legal responsibility. Lately the customary law was codified in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. Conventional international law derives from international agreements and may obtain any appearance that the constricting parties have the same opinion upon. Agreements may be complete in admiration to any substance except for to the leve...
States are left with a wide discretion, limited only by prohibitive rules and wherein no such prohibitive rules exist, States have the freedom to adopt the principles that it regards as best and most suitable. The ICJ effectively held that acts or omissions that are not prohibited under international law are
Von Galhn and Taulbee. 2013. Law Among Nations. An Introduction to Public International Law. Pearson Education.
According to Reference.com (2007), law is defined as: "rules of conduct of any organized society, however simple or small, that are enforced by threat of punishment if they are violated. Modern law has a wide sweep and regulates many branches of conduct." Essentially law is the rules and regulations that aid in governing conduct, handling disputes, and dealing with criminal actions.
In any kind of legal relations, subject always play an important role, and it is one of the signals to determine the relation that pertaining the adjustment of any legislation system. International law is a legislation system that is a set of thousands of documents from various sources. The research about the subjects is necessary since it helps to find out the source of law, which relation pertains the adjustment of law. The subjects of international law include sovereign states and analogous entities, intergovernmental organizations, the individuals, and multinational corporations.
The Rule of Law means that the state should govern its citizens, in a way which works with the rules that have been agreed on. The Rule of Law is simply a fundamental principle of our constitution. Britain and other Western democracies are different in that Britain has an unwritten constitution, meaning that our constitution is not found in a certain document but that we actually have a constitution from the rules about who governs it, and about the powers they entail and how that power can be passed or even transferred. The Constitution includes; Acts of Parliament, Judicial decisions and Conventions.There are three main principles around the Rule of Law being the separation of powers, the supremacy of Parliament and the Rule of Law. The
The rule of law requires compliance by the state with its obligations in International law.