The International Legal Order

2005 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benedict Kingsbury
Keyword(s):  
Problem Solving ◽  
International Law ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Third Party ◽  
International Governance ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
The Us ◽  
International Legal Order ◽  
Legal Concepts

This article assesses major themes and approaches in the recent scholarship of international law, and to identify likely future directions and problems. It proceeds from the starting-point that the Anglo-French focus on dispute settlement and litigation, and the US focus on managerial problem-solving, are manifestations of a recurrent feature of international law writing since two of its founding scholar-practitioners, Alberico Gentili (1552–1608) and Grotius (1583–1645). It is argued that the specific focus on disputes and on third-party settlement, with its associated positivist theory, has dovetailed with broader problem-solving approaches in encouraging the development of several useful legal concepts, but that the dominant positivist theoretical structure that has held international legal practice together now encounters so many internal critiques and external challenges that its viability is seriously in question, unless it can be deepened and renovated. A proposal for rethinking the concept of international law is outlined in summary fashion. It is argued that the Grotian integration of theory and practice is a valuable and distinctive feature of international law; that there are ethical arguments for the predominant positivist positions which this problem-solving engagement with practice has fostered; that problems such as moral injustice and lack of legitimacy now require a richer approach to international law rules and process in an era of deepening international governance; and that a Grotian conception of international law which integrates sources-based and content-based criteria provides a promising way forward.

scholarly journals International Law and dispute settlement mechanism

2016 ◽  
Vol 17 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carlos Ricardo Caichiolo
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
21St Century ◽  
International Conflict ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Dispute Settlement Mechanism ◽  
Peaceful Settlement ◽  
Feasible Solutions ◽  
Settlement Of Disputes ◽  
Settlement Mechanism

The DSM, or Dispute Settlement Mechanism, in the absence of a judicial body, is the closest representation of a supreme court or judicial institution in a regional bloc or other international organisation. The search for a peaceful settlement of disputes in the international arena had led to the development of the DSM during the 20th and into the 21st century. The DSM acts as an impartial third party, wherein it intervenes in any international conflict to offer feasible solutions for both sides.O MSC, ou Mecanismo de Solução de Controvérsias, na ausência de um órgão judicial, é a representação mais próxima de uma Corte Suprema ou de instituição judiciária em um bloco regionl ou em organização internacional diversa. A busca por um meio pacífico de solução de disputas no meio internacional levou à criação do MSC ao longo dos séculos XX e XXI. O MSC age como um terceiro imparcial, na medida em que ele intervém em conflitos internacionais com o intuito de ofertar soluções possíveis para as partes envolvidas.

scholarly journals The new international legal order and new states in the Balkans

2006 ◽  
Vol 58 (3) ◽  
pp. 272-293 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dusko Dimitrijevic
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Essential Role ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
State Behavior ◽  
The Balkans ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
New States ◽  
International Legal Order ◽  
The One ◽  
Further Development

In this study the author attaches a great importance to the theoretical examination of the concept of the New International Legal Order that was embodied in the last decades of the 20th century. The starting point for that reflection is the dissolution of the SFR Yugoslavia that illustrates one of the fundamental legal precedents. Reminding that the basic principle for the post-modern State behavior must be the one that includes minimal disturbance of the existing international legal relations, the author stresses that "the Yugoslav case" was customized in the way to respond to the new reality where the principle of effectiveness played an essential role in valuation of the statehood. It could also be one of the greatest catalysts for all further 'development rules' of international law.

Perfect War: Alberico Gentili on the Use of Force and the Early Modern Law of Nations

Grotiana ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 263-281
Author(s):  
Valentina Vadi
Keyword(s):  
Early Modern ◽  
International Law ◽  
Civil Wars ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Dark Side ◽  
Dispute Settlement Mechanism ◽  
Law Of Nations ◽  
Imperial Expansion ◽  
Settlement Mechanism

Abstract Gentili’s conceptualization of war as a conflict between states attempted to limit the legitimacy of war to external wars only, thus precluding the legitimacy of civil wars. It reflected both the emergence of sovereign states and the vision of international law as a law among polities rather than individuals. The conceptualization of war as a dispute settlement mechanism among polities rather than a punishment for breach of the law of nations and the idea of the bilateral justice of war humanized the conduct of warfare and the content of peace treaties. The idea of perfect war excluded brigandage, piracy, and civil wars from its purview. Some scholars have suggested that perfect war had a dark side, legitimizing imperial expansion. Others have cautioned that Gentili explicitly opposed imperial expansion rather adopting anti-imperialist stances. This article suggests that these ambivalent readings of the Gentilian oeuvre reflect the ambivalence of the early modern law of nations. Under the early modern law of nations, aggression for the sake of empire was clearly unjust; nonetheless, imperial expansion took place. Whereas ‘a law which many transgress[ed] [wa]s nonetheless a law’, there was a wide divide between theory and practice.1

Domestic Jurisdiction over International Financial Institutions for Injuries to Project-Affected Individuals

2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 105-136
Author(s):  
Clemens Treichl ◽  
August Reinisch
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Financial Institutions ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Project Finance ◽  
International Financial Institutions ◽  
International Dispute ◽  
The Us ◽  
Us Supreme Court ◽  
Domestic Courts ◽  
Domestic Jurisdiction

Project-affected individuals are increasingly bringing tort claims against international financial institutions in domestic courts. In the US, such plaintiffs such plaintiffs have regularly failed to overcome the obstacle of the defendant institutions’ jurisdictional immunity under the International Organizations Immunities Act. In pending litigation, the US Supreme Court has resolved a long-standing debate as to its scope. This paper examines the issue of jurisdictional immunity in the context of international project finance. It focuses on the specific frameworks established in treaties, analyses the interplay between international and domestic US norms and looks at possible implications of the exercise of domestic jurisdiction. A key finding is that US courts, at least previously, used to grant more extensive immunities than international law required. While doubts persist as to whether domestic courts are a suitable venue for claims brought by project-affected people, existing means of international dispute settlement should be strengthened.

scholarly journals Ingredients of Sustainable CEO Behaviour: Theory and Practice

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (7) ◽  
pp. 1950 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gianpaolo Abatecola ◽  
Matteo Cristofaro
Keyword(s):  
Corporate Sustainability ◽  
Research Area ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Personality Profiles ◽  
Body Of Knowledge ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
The Us ◽  
Bill Gates ◽  
Superstar Ceos ◽  
Ceo Attributes

What CEO attributes can improve corporate sustainability? In this regard, what do superstar CEOs, e.g., Mark Zuckerberg, Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk, and Bill Gates, have in common? Also, did the personalities of Jeffrey Skilling and Kenneth Lay contribute to the crack in the US Enron Corporation early in this century? Why, as far as presidential elections are concerned, are some countries, more than others, more likely to vote for seemingly narcissistic politicians? In our practice-oriented review article, we aim to contribute to shedding new light on the challenging evidence continuously evolving around CEOs, in general, and around their effect on corporate sustainability, in particular. Two distinctive features represent the main “so-what” value of our work. First, each of the CEO attributes which we sequentially focus on (i.e., power, personality, profiles, and effect) is, at the beginning, not only separately considered but also associated with many recent examples from business life and from the “CEO world” at an international level. Second, from our analysis, we then derive a conceptual framework which, combining all these attributes into a unique body of knowledge, could be used as a potential starting point for future investigations in this challenging research area regarding the CEO/sustainability relationship. In this regard, we believe understanding how all the analysed attributes coevolve will represent a pivotal question to address if we want to enhance the scientific and practical understanding of CEO (sustainable) behaviour.

scholarly journals PERAN WTO DALAM MEMBANGUN PENEGAKAN HUKUM INTERNASIONAL TERHADAP PROTEKSIONISME (STUDI KASUS: SENGKETA DAGANG ROKOK KRETEK INDONESIA)

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Farahdiba Rahma Bachtiar
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
The United States ◽  
Mutual Understanding ◽  
Trade Policies ◽  
Trade Dispute ◽  
Domestic Trade ◽  
The Us ◽  
The World

Indonesia’s objection to the United States (US) over a clove ban in 2010 was one of the most difficult trade dispute cases that Indonesia has ever submitted. The dispute between both countries in the clove cigarettes negotiations was actually completed in 2014 after the two countries agreed on mutual understanding (MoU) related to cigarettes. Indonesia's victory over the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) by the World Trade Organization (WTO) shows the enforcement of international law in intervening in a country's domestic policies.Although it took great deal of time, Indonesia's victory over US becomes a lesson learned. This victory proves the role of the WTO in resolving trade dispute cases and refutes the notion of a superpower in particular the US being immune to the international law. US domestic trade policies that impose a ban on clove cigarettes have deviated from WTO rules and have harmed Indonesia as a producer

Dispute Settlement in International Law

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Loris Marotti ◽  
Paolo Palchetti
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Basic Principles ◽  
Interstate Disputes ◽  
International Dispute ◽  
Legal Duty ◽  
Recent Trends

The basic principles and methods governing the settlement of international disputes today—particularly interstate disputes—are substantially the same as those that were identified and enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations in 1945. Parties to a dispute are under a duty to settle it in a peaceful way (Article 2, paragraph 3 of the UN Charter). While barred from resorting to armed force, the parties remain however, at least in principle, “masters” of the procedure for dispute settlement, and of the outcome. In the absence of a precise treaty obligation, they are free to decide the particular means of dispute settlement they prefer (Article 33 of the UN Charter). More broadly, any settlement will inevitably depend, directly or indirectly, on the agreement of the parties. Thus, the whole edifice of dispute settlement at the international level is characterized by an inherent tension between a legal duty to settle disputes in a peaceful way and the absence of any real compulsory mechanism that may render such obligation effective. Against this legal background, the notion of dispute settlement covers a great variety of different settlement devices. Such procedures can be distinguished one from the other on the basis of different criteria, such as whether they contemplate the intervention of a third party, whether the settlement is based on the application of rules of international law, or whether the final outcome of the procedure has a binding or nonbinding character. The classification of these different procedures; the identification of their respective merits and shortcomings, in absolute or comparative terms; their suitability in relation to different categories of disputes—these are all issues that have been traditionally the object of a vast body of literature. On a broader perspective, recent trends, which have brought some changes in the field of the international dispute settlement, have also attracted the attention of doctrine. These trends include the progressive institutionalization of the procedures, thanks also to the growing role of international organizations in this area, the multiplication of settlement mechanisms and the ensuing problem of the possible interaction or conflict between them, the creation of new courts and tribunals, and the rise of adjudication as a means of dispute settlement.

The Rise of China and International Law

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Congyan Cai
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
National Level ◽  
International Dispute ◽  
International Legal Order ◽  
Rise Of China ◽  
Rising China ◽  
Legal Policies ◽  
Identity Changes ◽  
The Rise Of China

The rise of China represents a far-reaching process of international relations in the twentieth century, which should bring about extensive but uncertain ramifications. How China interacts with international legal order—namely, how China takes advantage of international law to facilitate and justify its rise and whether and how international law is relied upon to engage a rising China—has been inviting growing debates among academics and policy circles. A couple of recently eye-catching events, for instance, China-Philippines South China Sea (SCS) arbitration and the China-U.S. trade war, have intensified unease in international society. This book for the first time provides a systematic and critical elaboration on interplay between a rising China and international law. It focuses on several crucial issues, including: Is international law relevant to the rise of China? How has China adjusted its international legal policies as China’s state identity changes over time, especially as it rises as a new great power? What methodologies does China adopt to comply with international law, in particular, to achieve its new legal strategy of norm entrepreneurship? What is the typology of China’s engagement with international organizations? How does China organize its domestic institutions to engage international law to enhance its rise? How does China use international law at the national level (Chinese courts) and the international level (lawfare in international dispute settlement)? And finally, how should “Chinese exceptionalism” be understood? This book adds important literature on emerging comparative international law.

Watershed or Phoenix From the Ashes? – Speculations on the Future of International Law After the September 11 Attacks

2001 ◽  
Vol 2 (16) ◽  
Author(s):  
Florian Hoffmann
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
September 11 ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
James Bond ◽  
Law Of Nations ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Future ◽  
September 11 Attacks ◽  
The Moment

In the first place, I should like to stress that the emphasis of my rather ambitious-sounding subtitle is on ‘speculation’, and not on ‘the future of international law’; for one, it is, at least at the time of writing, entirely speculative to think about the mid- and long-term consequences of the September 11 attacks, since, so far, the announced response to the attacks by the United States, the ‘West’ and the ‘civilised world’, has not yet happened. We are in a strange state of limbo, where everything seems possible, from secret James Bond-type operations to outright military attack of Afghanistan by the US and NATO troops, from civil war in Pakistan to biological —or even nuclear-counterattacks by the terrorist fold, from ‘business as (almost) usual’ to ‘the world is out of joint’. At such times, to speculate is not only all one can do, but it is, I believe, positively encouraged for those who professionally and/or passionately deal with the structure and meaning of social reality, as, inter alia, international legal academics do. Secondly, the emphasis is also on speculation because, evidently, it would be quite preposterous to pretend to set out, in a very brief comment written ‘out of the moment’, what all this will come to mean for so richly textured an academic discourse as international law. Yet international law and international lawyers are in everyone's mouth at this moment, and so it seems precisely apt to ‘speculate’ —and no more—, in rough sketch, about the consequences the events of September 11 and their political-military aftermath could have on the theory and practice of the ‘law of nations’.

Progress in International Maritime Boundary Delimitation Law

1994 ◽  
Vol 88 (2) ◽  
pp. 227-256 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan I. Charney
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
Third Party ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Boundary Disputes ◽  
International Court ◽  
Maritime Boundary ◽  
Maritime Boundary Delimitation

Judgments of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and awards of ad hoc arbitration tribunals carry special weight in international maritime boundary law. On its face, the international maritime boundary law codified in the 1982 Convention on the Law of the Sea is indeterminate. For the continental shelf and the exclusive economic zone, the legal obligation of coastal states is to delimit the boundary “by agreement on the basis of international law, as referred to in Article 38 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice, in order to achieve an equitable solution.” The article on the delimitation of maritime boundaries in the territorial sea is no more determinative despite the fact that it makes direct references to the equidistant line, special circumstances and historic title. In spite of this indeterminacy, if not because of it, coastal states have found that third-party dispute settlement procedures can effectively resolve maritime boundary delimitation disputes. As a consequence, there are more judgments and awards on maritime boundary disputes than on any other subject of international law, and this trend is continuing.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document