Hume’s Dynamic Coordination and International Law

2021 ◽  
pp. 29-57
Author(s):  
Carmen E. Pavel
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Legal System ◽  
David Hume ◽  
International Security ◽  
State Autonomy ◽  
Dynamic Coordination ◽  
Freedom Of Action

At the heart of the tension between state autonomy and international law is the question of whether states should willingly restrict their freedom of action for the sake of international security, human rights, trade, communication, and the environment. David Hume offers surprising insights to answer this question. He argued that the same interests in cooperation arise among individuals and states, and that their interactions should be regulated by the same principles. Drawing on his model of dynamic coordination, the chapter reconstructs the Humean case for developing international law into a more robust legal system, and also highlights the limitation of Hume’s account of justice for such a reconstructive project. Hume’s lessons are enduring: the community of states must strengthen the essential features of international law, such as nonoptional rules that articulate a moral minimum, courts with compulsory jurisdiction, and stronger mechanisms of enforcement.

scholarly journals Hume’s Dynamic Coordination and International Law

2020 ◽  
pp. 009059172092183
Author(s):  
Carmen E. Pavel
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Legal System ◽  
David Hume ◽  
International Security ◽  
State Autonomy ◽  
Dynamic Coordination ◽  
Freedom Of Action

At the heart of the tension between state autonomy and international law is the question of whether states should willingly restrict their freedom of action for the sake of international security, human rights, trade, communication, and the environment. David Hume offers surprising insights to answer this question. He argues that the same interests in cooperation arise among individuals as well as states and that their interactions should be regulated by the same principles. Drawing on his model of dynamic coordination, I will reconstruct the Humean case for developing international law into a more robust legal system and also highlight the limitation of Hume’s account of justice for such a reconstructive project. Hume’s lessons are enduring; we must strengthen the essential features of international law that allow states and individuals to reap the benefits of its protections, such as nonoptional rules that articulate a moral minimum, courts with compulsory jurisdiction, and stronger mechanisms of enforcement.

Do Discrimination and Inequality Exist in the Russian Legal System? International Law, National Legislation and Judicial Practice

2009 ◽  
Vol 34 (3) ◽  
pp. 211-238
Author(s):  
Sergei Iu. Marochkin
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Legal Norms ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Administration Of Justice ◽  
Russian Constitution ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Negative Phenomena ◽  
Law Making

AbstractIn this article, the author discusses the problem of ensuring equality and non-discrimination in a legal system. Equality and non-discrimination constitute universally recognized standards in the protection of human rights. At the same time, one can hardly assert that the universal community has put an end to discrimination. The author considers the problem as applied to the Russian legal system. The standard is incorporated in the Russian Constitution still remains topical in Russia. Based on his analysis of legislation and judicial practice, the author concludes that the problem reveals itself on the levels of both law-making and law application, the latter including administration of justice. As one of the conclusion, the author raises a question: is legal discrimination inherent in a legal system like other negative phenomena, such as delinquency, incoherencies, lacunas, defects, conflicts of legal norms and breaches of law-making procedural rules?

State Immunity and Fundamental Human Rights

1998 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 9-43 ◽  
Author(s):  
Magdalini Karagiannakis
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Legal Systems ◽  
State Immunity ◽  
Analytical Approaches

Should state immunity from jurisdiction be denied to states that violate fundamental human rights in breach of international law? This article critically discusses three analytical approaches which can be used to answer the question at the level of international law. These approaches are derived from a review of principles of state immunity and fundamental human rights, including ius cogens. The article goes on to examine why the results dictated by these approaches at the level ot international law may not be reflected by municipal legal systems, using US domestic statutes and case law as an example of how a domestic legal system has dealt with this question.

The Status of International Treaties in the Legal System of Azerbaijan

2007 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 233-256
Author(s):  
Cavid Abdullahzade
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
International Law ◽  
Legal System ◽  
European Convention ◽  
International Treaties ◽  
Independent State ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
The Status ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights

AbstractAs part of the disintegration of the Soviet Union in 1991, the Azerbaijan Republic ended its protracted existence as one of the fifteen members of the Soviet Union and became an independent state. As a result, on 30 August 1991, she became a full subject of international law. Currently, Azerbaijan is a party to a number of international treaties, virtually all major human rights treaties registered with the UN Secretary-General, the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, as well as a number of related Council of Europe human rights agreements.A tendency towards internationalization and a general 'opening' to international law can also be seen in the Azeri Constitution, which was adopted by public referendum on 12 November 1995. Like many other former Soviet Republics, Azerbaijan, in its 1995 Constitution, has rejected the traditional Soviet dualist approach of the implementation of international law in the domestic legal system and has established a monist system within the context of a relationship between national and international law. This article discusses these changes in the Azeri attitude towards international law, in particular the status of international treaties, with special reference to those problems stemming from the implementation of international treaties in the domestic legal system of Azerbaijan.

Addressing Norm Conflicts in a Fragmented Legal System: The Doctrine of Lex Specialis

2005 ◽  
Vol 74 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-66 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anja Lindroos
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Study Group ◽  
Environmental Regimes ◽  
International Legal System ◽  
Normative Conflicts ◽  
Fragmentation Of International Law ◽  
Institutional Fragmentation

AbstractThe increased fragmentation of international law has been accompanied by a more problematic phenomenon: institutional fragmentation that has strengthened the role of specialised regimes (e. g., WTO, EU, human rights and environmental regimes) within the international legal system. "The emergence of seemingly independent subregimes has given rise to a number of legal concerns – among these is the existence of normative conflicts between regimes." In a recent report by the Chairman of the ILC Study Group on Fragmentation of International Law, Martti Koskenniemi, dealt with the role of the lex specialis maxim as a means of addressing the relation between selfcontained regimes and general international law. This article argues that an application of lex specialis, although widely accepted, is impeded by its conceptual vagueness. Lex specialis may be well-suited to resolve certain types of normative conflicts, such as conflicts within sub-regimes, which may be viewed as a more traditional manifestation of normative conflicts. The fragmentation of international law, however, has also created new types of conflicts, namely those between different, seemingly independent normative orders. The article suggests that the lex specialis maxim is a less-suitable approach to normative conflicts between such unrelated normative orders. In a fragmented legal system such as that of international law, these types of conflicts may, accordingly, prove a particular challenge.

The International Rule of Law

2021 ◽  
pp. 86-110
Author(s):  
Carmen E. Pavel
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Moral Status ◽  
International Institutions ◽  
Intrinsic Value ◽  
State Autonomy ◽  
Fundamental Goal ◽  
Internal Affairs ◽  
International Rule

This chapter argues that one of the main goals of an international rule of law is the protection of state autonomy from arbitrary interference by international institutions and that the best way to codify this protection is through constitutional rules restraining the reach of international law into the internal affairs of a state. State autonomy does not have any intrinsic value or moral status of its own. Its value is derivative, resulting from the role it plays as the most efficient means of protecting autonomy for individuals and groups. Therefore, the goal of protecting state autonomy from the encroachment of international law will have to be constrained by, and balanced against, the more fundamental goal of an international rule of law: the protection of the autonomy of individual persons, best realized through the entrenchment of basic human rights.

Domestic Application of International Human Rights Norms and Universal Jurisdiction

2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ronald C. Slye
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Legal System ◽  
The United States ◽  
Universal Jurisdiction ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
International Human ◽  
Human Rights Norms ◽  
Domestic Law

Domestic courts play an important role in the adjudication of international law, including international human rights law. The relationship between international and domestic law has often been characterized as a continuum between monism and dualism. In a monist system, international law is automatically a part of domestic law, and a conflict between the two is resolved in favor of international law. In a dualist system, domestic law is superior to international law within the domestic legal system, while international law is superior to domestic law within the international legal system. A conflict between domestic law and international law is thus not always resolved in the same way in both systems. In addition, one of the areas with the most active use of international law in a domestic legal system is under a theory of universal jurisdiction. Universal jurisdiction most often involves both the incorporation of international law into a domestic legal system and the assertion outward (extraterritorially) of domestic judicial system. Universal jurisdiction arose initially in the context of criminal prosecutions, but is also found to some extent in civil litigation, particularly in the United States. Under the principle of universal jurisdiction, a state may assert jurisdiction over an offender regardless of the nationality of the offender or victim, the place of commission of the wrongful act, or any other link to the state asserting jurisdiction.

Nepal

2019 ◽  
pp. 628-655
Author(s):  
Pratyush Nath Upreti ◽  
Surya P. Subedi
Keyword(s):  
Economic Development ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Historical Background ◽  
Fair Share ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
China And India ◽  
Liberal Democratic ◽  
Freedom Of Action

This chapter looks at international law in Nepal. Nepal has had more than its fair share of internal political upheavals. In the latter part of the twentieth century, this history was complemented by a diverse set of interactions with the United Nations and the regimes negotiated under its auspices. These interactions with the outside world and international law have tended to pursue three objectives: first, asserting and protecting Nepal’s freedom of action and maintaining its own equilibrium vis-à-vis its two larger neighbours, China and India; second, economic development; and third, promoting liberal democratic values underpinned by human rights and the rule of law. After reviewing this historical background, the chapter then considers the application of international law in the Nepalese legal system as well as the specific ways in which international law has been used in Nepalese politics to bridge normative gaps, in the context of hydro-diplomacy between India and Nepal and in the context of transit and trade rights.

scholarly journals International Obligations of Unrecognized State. The Case of Transdnistrian Moldavian Republic

2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 76-93
Author(s):  
Galina Shinkaretskaia
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Legal System ◽  
International Community ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
International Treaties ◽  
The Status ◽  
International Obligations ◽  
The Republic

Unrecognized states are formations separated themselves from another state and had declared itself a new self-standing state. The inner structure of the formation does not differ from the structure of other states in that it possesses a constitution, legal system and state bodies. But such a formation is not recognized by the international community in the capacity of a subject of international law or is recognized by a minor number of states.Unrecognized states do not have interstate treaties with UN members, yet this does not mean that no international obligations are obligatory for them. General principles of international law and peremptory norms are obligatory notwithstanding recognition. Moreover, unrecognized state sometimes accept voluntarily international obligations of some treaties, still they are not recognized as parties thereof. The status of unrecognized states differ from the status of other actors not states in international relations: sometimes intrastate or even non-governmental organizations, e.g. European union, are accepted as parties to international treaties. Unrecognized states can never become parties to international treaties. Thus a situation of irresponsibility is created, when an unrecognized state has no partners who could question a responsibility in case of a breach of international law; neither the jurisdiction of treaty bodies created to monitor implementation of the treaty obligations.Transdnistrian Moldavian Republic is a good illustration here. Its Constitution contains a rule that the generally recognized principles and norms of international law and international treaties are a part of its legal system. The Republic does not have interstate treaties, but accepted some normative acts on the recognition of the most important human rights treaties. This is in fact a joining of the Republic to the treaties. Yet the Republic is not a party to them because the Vienna Convention on the law of international treaties 1969 allows only the subjects of international law to conclude international treaties which unrecognized Transdnistria is not. Thus the situation is created where the international community cannot submit a claim of failure to fulfill a treaty to Transdnistria.We submit that this is not so with generally recognized norms and principles because an obligation is emerging in the contemporary international law that all actors of international intercourse must fulfill those principles and norms. The events around the indictment of the former President of the Republic are a good example of breach of international law. The Republic broke the European Convention on human rights which diminished the acceptance of international law by the Republic.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document