Sovereignty

2019 ◽  
pp. 103-132
Author(s):  
Gina Heathcote
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Global Governance ◽  
Responsibility To Protect ◽  
State Sovereignty ◽  
Legal Knowledge ◽  
Relational Understanding ◽  
Legal Subjectivity ◽  
Regional State ◽  
Legal Subjects ◽  
State Relations

Chapter 4 analyses the gendering of state sovereignty, via a focus on legal subjectivity articulated without assertion of traditional male models of personhood. Building on intersectionality and the articulation of plural subjectivities in the previous chapters, chapter 4 contemplates a model of split subjectivity as a useful redescription of how state sovereignty functions within global governance. The chapter considers the importance of gendered experiences and histories of law as informing legal knowledge while rejecting a feminist message centred on woman as subject. The chapter develops the split subject as a relational understanding of legal subjects that incorporates the temporal and territorial implications of inter-, cross-, and regional-state relations and analyses the responsibility to protect and secession via the split subject. The split subject is intended to engage international law at its foundations and to displace the masculine subjects implied in mainstream conceptions of state sovereignty.

Global Justice, Global Governance, and International Law

2019 ◽  
pp. 364-370
Author(s):  
Maurice Kamto
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
International Law ◽  
Global Governance ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Global Justice ◽  
Responsibility To Protect ◽  
International Level ◽  
Global Level ◽  
New Era ◽  
Conflicting Interests

The chapter comments on Eyal Benvenisti’s discussion of international law’s contribution to global justice. It puts forward that global justice at the international level can only be the result of a permanent bargain and a compromise between the multiple and conflicting interests among states. It emphasizes that better governance at the global level involving the sharing of the policy-making and decision-making, accountability, the rule of law, and sanctions can help improve global justice. It concludes by suggesting that if international law could contribute to the advent of global justice in a move from ‘Responsibility to protect’ to ‘Responsibility to develop’, it would open a new era for its rise amongst nations and peoples.

scholarly journals International Law, Sovereignty and the Responsibility to Protect: An Overview

2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 40
Author(s):  
Thomas Prehi Botchway
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International System ◽  
Responsibility To Protect ◽  
State Sovereignty ◽  
International Commission ◽  
Major Powers ◽  
Sovereign Equality ◽  
International Regulations ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Style Of Writing

This paper is an attempt at analysing the intricacies between international law, the concept of Responsibility to Protect and its implications for the sovereignty of modern states. The paper examines how the concept of responsibility to protect (as stipulated by the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS)) impacts on the sovereignty of states. It adopts the essay style of writing and reviews a number of documents on the subject of international law, sovereignty and the responsibility to protect. The paper consequently argues that though the ICISS claims that its “purpose is not to license aggression with fine words, or to provide strong states with new rationales for doubtful strategic designs” (ICISS, 2001, p. 35), the Commission’s very attempt to exempt the permanent five and other so-called major powers from intervention does just that whether intentionally or unintentionally. It consequently recommends that much effort should be made to address the inequalities within the international system through the formulation of appropriate policies and international regulations that address the sovereign equality of states in the international system, especially on the question of intervention.

Enhancing the Globe’s Governance, Struggling with Research and Politics

2019 ◽  
pp. 959-972
Author(s):  
Thomas G. Weiss
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Global Governance ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
Responsibility To Protect ◽  
State Sovereignty ◽  
Multilateral Cooperation ◽  
Humanitarian Action ◽  
The World ◽  
Principles And Standards ◽  
Contemporary Reality

This article for the annual exploration of “Recent Lines of Internationalist Thought” concerns the contemporary reality of international organizations and multilateral cooperation. More especially, the article explores the author’s analytical pursuit of global governance, both as a scholar and practitioner. Three specific focuses are the United Nations; the world organization’s under-appreciated contribution to key ideas, norms, principles, and standards; and the concept of sacrosanct state sovereignty, especially humanitarian action and the “responsibility to protect.”

Kurić and Others v. Slovenia & Kurić and Others v. Slovenia (Just Satisfaction) (Eur. Ct. H.R.)

2014 ◽  
Vol 53 (6) ◽  
pp. 1073-1160 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven M. Schneebaum
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Federal Republic ◽  
International Law ◽  
Field Tests ◽  
Second World War ◽  
Responsibility To Protect ◽  
State Sovereignty ◽  
World War ◽  
European Continent ◽  
Second World

The dissolution of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (SFRY) brought in its wake massive bloodshed, as well as human rights violations not seen on the European continent since the end of the Second World War. It probed the boundaries of contemporary international law in numerous ways, including providing the first “field tests” of the doctrine of “responsibility to protect,” which may turn out to be the biggest challenge to the notion of state sovereignty posed in centuries.

scholarly journals Should the Responsibility to Protect be Enshrined in International Law?

2012 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Amanda Lo
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Moral Responsibility ◽  
International Law ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International System ◽  
Responsibility To Protect ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
State Sovereignty ◽  
The Stability

While states admit a moral responsibility to take action against states that violate human rights and international criminal law, international law does not create any legally binding obligations on states to prevent or punish violators of human rights. Yet, enshrining the “responsibility to protect” in international law will only threaten the stability of the international system that has long operated based on the norm of state sovereignty and the principle of non-interference.

scholarly journals Defining the Rights of Sovereignty

AJIL Unbound ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 115 ◽  
pp. 322-327
Author(s):  
Daniel Lee
Keyword(s):  
Early Modern ◽  
International Law ◽  
Global Governance ◽  
Legal History ◽  
International Institutions ◽  
State Sovereignty ◽  
Public International Law ◽  
Jean Bodin ◽  
Growing Body ◽  
Private Actors

In the recent theoretical scholarship on sovereignty, it has become commonplace to encounter the numerous ways in which state sovereignty has been quietly “outsourced” and “pooled” with other agents and institutions, especially international institutions aimed at promoting global governance and commerce. Frédéric Mégret's fascinating article, which contributes to this growing body of scholarship, adds an important twist to this literature, by focusing specifically on the privatization of state sovereignty—that is, how various sovereign functions, once thought to be essential or “inherent” to statehood, have now been outsourced and handed over to private actors. While Mégret's analysis concerns the consequences of privatized sovereignty on modern public international law, there is a rich pre-modern legal history anticipating the conceptual and normative problems explored in this piece. This essay focuses on some of those early modern sources, especially the theory of Jean Bodin (c.1530–1596), which bear a striking resemblance to Mégret's analysis. Like Mégret, Bodin, the preeminent theorist of state sovereignty, approached the concept of sovereignty by focusing on those qualities that were regarded to be exclusive.

scholarly journals KEDAULATAN NEGARA DALAM KERANGKA HUKUM INTERNASIONAL KONTEMPORER

2012 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sigit Riyanto
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Society ◽  
Responsibility To Protect ◽  
State Sovereignty ◽  
International Treaties ◽  
National Authority ◽  
Primary Responsibility ◽  
Academic Publications ◽  
General Principles Of Law ◽  
Legal Frameworks

<p align="center"><strong><em>A</em></strong><strong><em>b</em></strong><strong><em>s</em></strong><strong><em>t</em></strong><strong><em>r</em></strong><strong><em>a</em></strong><strong><em>c</em></strong><strong><em>t</em></strong></p><p><em>T</em><em>his research aimed at comprehensively analize the concept of State sovereignty and its application in the contemporary international law. In this research the concept of State sovereignty and relevant rules of international law have been analysed accordingly. Legal materials that thoroughly considered and studied in the context of this research were relevant international rules and facts embodied in international cus- toms, general principles of law, international treaties, conventions, declarations and decisions of interna- tional organisation, recommendations, guiding principles, plan of actions, executive committee decisions, reports, academic publications, proceedings and working papers. Legal materials obtained were classified systematically and interptreted and evaluated thouroughly. The formulation concerning the the relevant facts and international legal frameworks pertainingto the concept of sovereignty based upon interpretation and evaluation of the existing legal materials. Eventually, the concept of sovereignty in the contemporary international society could be revealed accordingly. The State sovereignty is relational and open concept; not an insular or narrow and closed concept. A visionary discourse is needed to reinvent the valid interpre- tation of sovereignty in the framework of interdependence among States in the present international sys- tem. Sovereignty shall be interpreted as responsibility of the national authority. In this context State as an agent and manifestation of people sovereignty has the primary responsibility to protect, respect and fulfill the citizen rights accordingly and accountable to the international society.</em></p><p><strong><em>Key Words: </em></strong><em>S</em><em>o</em><em>v</em><em>e</em><em>r</em><em>e</em><em>i</em><em>g</em><em>nty, International </em><em>L</em><em>aw, Responsibility.</em></p><p align="center"><strong>A</strong><strong>b</strong><strong>s</strong><strong>t</strong><strong>ra</strong><strong>k</strong></p><p>Penelitian ini dilakukan untuk melakukan kajian mendalam dan akurat tentang konsep kedaulatan negara dan penerapannya dalam kerangka hukum internasional kontemporer. Bahan kajian utama penelitian ini adalah keputusan dan fakta-fakta hukum internasional yang relevan,  yang tertuang dalam hukum internasional kebiasaan, prinsip-prinsip umum hukum, perjanjian internasional, konvensi, deklarasi dan keputusan-keputusan organisasi internasional, rekomendasi organisasi internasional, prinsip-prinsip panduan, buku panduan, rencana aksi, keputusan komite eksekutif, laporan, publikasi ilmiah, <em>proceedings </em>seminar, dan kertas kerja. Setelah dilakukan klasifikasi dan sistematisasi bahan penelitian, berikutnya dilakukan interpretasi dan evaluasi. Berdasarkan interpretasi dan evaluasi tersebut, dilanjutkan dengan preskripsi untuk merumuskan kejelasan tentang konteks situasi faktual dan kerangka hukum  internasional yang relevan. Pada akhirnya dapat diketahui konsep kedaulatan negara dalam masyarakat internasional terkini. Kedaulatan bersifat relasional dan terbuka; bukan suatu konsep yang “<em>insular</em>” atau sempit dan tertutup. Suatu wacana visioner diperlukan untuk merekonstruksi kedaulatan negara dalam kerangka interdependensi antar negara dalam sistem internasional terkini. Kedaulatan negara harus dimaknai sebagai tanggung jawab otoritas nasional. Dalam konteks ini negara sebagai agen dan manifestasi dari kedaulatan rakyat, bertanggungjawab untuk melindungi, menghormati dan memenuhi hak-hak warganya serta harus mempertanggungjawabkan mandatnya kepada masyarakat internasional.</p><p><strong>K</strong><strong>ata Kunci: </strong>Kedaulatan Negara, Hukum Internasional, Tanggungjawab.</p>

Catholicism and Cosmopolitanism: the Confluence of Three Catholic Scholars and the Cosmopolitan Democrats on State Sovereignty and the Future of Global Governance

2016 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 37-51
Author(s):  
Matthew Bagot
Keyword(s):  
Global Governance ◽  
State Sovereignty ◽  
Current Debate ◽  
Past Century ◽  
Jacques Maritain ◽  
The Past ◽  
Technological Advances ◽  
The Future ◽  
Cosmopolitan Democracy ◽  
Catholic Tradition

One of the central questions in international relations today is how we should conceive of state sovereignty. The notion of sovereignty—’supreme authority within a territory’, as Daniel Philpott defines it—emerged after the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648 as a result of which the late medieval crisis of pluralism was settled. But recent changes in the international order, such as technological advances that have spurred globalization and the emerging norm of the Responsibility to Protect, have cast the notion of sovereignty into an unclear light. The purpose of this paper is to contribute to the current debate regarding sovereignty by exploring two schools of thought on the matter: first, three Catholic scholars from the past century—Luigi Sturzo, Jacques Maritain, and John Courtney Murray, S.J.—taken as representative of Catholic tradition; second, a number of contemporary political theorists of cosmopolitan democracy. The paper argues that there is a confluence between the Catholic thinkers and the cosmopolitan democrats regarding their understanding of state sovereignty and that, taken together, the two schools have much to contribute not only to our current understanding of sovereignty, but also to the future of global governance.

Historical Development

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kubo Mačák
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Historical Development ◽  
General Trend ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Fundamental Transformation ◽  
State Actors ◽  
The Law ◽  
State Relations ◽  
Inter State ◽  
State Territory

This chapter traces the development of the law of belligerent occupation in order to identify trends relevant to the regulation of internationalized armed conflicts. It observes that despite the general grounding of this body of law in a state-centric paradigm, several isolated developments have contemplated the possibility of non-state actors becoming belligerent occupants of a portion of state territory. Moreover, the chapter highlights that the law of belligerent occupation has undergone a fundamental transformation as part of a general trend of individualization and humanization of international law. Therefore, it is no longer simply a brake on inter-state relations and a protector of states’ interests and institutions. Instead, the law has gradually brought individuals’ interests to the fore, putting persons before institutions and individuals before states. Overall, the chapter uncovers the historical reasons that support an extensive view of the applicability of the law of occupation to modern internationalized armed conflicts.

Legitimacy

2019 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
The State ◽  
State Sovereignty ◽  
International Courts ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
State Legitimacy ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Supranational Institutions

This collection brings together scholars of jurisprudence and political theory to probe the question of ‘legitimacy’. It offers discussions that interrogate the nature of legitimacy, how legitimacy is intertwined with notions of statehood, and how legitimacy reaches beyond the state into supranational institutions and international law. Chapter I considers benefit-based, merit-based, and will-based theories of state legitimacy. Chapter II examines the relationship between expertise and legitimate political authority. Chapter III attempts to make sense of John Rawls’s account of legitimacy in his later work. Chapter IV observes that state sovereignty persists, since no alternative is available, and that the success of the assortment of international organizations that challenge state sovereignty depends on their ability to attract loyalty. Chapter V argues that, to be complete, an account of a state’s legitimacy must evaluate not only its powers and its institutions, but also its officials. Chapter VI covers the rule of law and state legitimacy. Chapter VII considers the legitimation of the nation state in a post-national world. Chapter VIII contends that legitimacy beyond the state should be understood as a subject-conferred attribute of specific norms that generates no more than a duty to respect those norms. Chapter IX is a reply to critics of attempts to ground the legitimacy of suprastate institutions in constitutionalism. Chapter X examines Joseph Raz’s perfectionist liberalism. Chapter XI attempts to bring some order to debates about the legitimacy of international courts.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document