The Structural Crack of the International Legal System

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-29
Keyword(s):  
Legal System ◽  
International Legal System

The Spanish Translation of Les Leçons de chimie élémentaire: On the Legal Status of Translation and its Various Values

2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 201-215
Author(s):  
Tania P. Hernández-Hernández
Keyword(s):  
Complex Network ◽  
Latin American ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Spanish Translation ◽  
Cultural Economic ◽  
Translation Rights ◽  
International Legal System ◽  
Latin American Countries ◽  
Legal Battle

Throughout the nineteenth century, European booksellers and publishers, mostly from France, England, Germany and Spain, produced textual materials in Europe and introduced them into Mexico and other Latin American countries. These transatlantic interchanges unfolded against the backdrop of the emergence of the international legal system to protect translation rights and required the involvement of a complex network of agents who carried with them publishing, translating and negotiating practices, in addition to books, pamphlets, prints and other goods. Tracing the trajectories of translated books and the socio-cultural, economic and legal forces shaping them, this article examines the legal battle over the translation and publishing rights of Les Leçons de chimie élémentaire, a chemistry book authored by Jean Girardin and translated and published in Spanish by Jean-Frédéric Rosa. Drawing on a socio-historical approach to translation, I argue that the arguments presented by both parties are indicative of the uncertainty surrounding the legal status of translated texts and of the different values then attributed to translation.

(Dis)solving the Chronological Paradox in Customary International Law: A Hartian Approach

2008 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 129-148 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Lefkowitz
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Resolution Function ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
International Legal System ◽  
The Creation ◽  
The Law ◽  
Normative Standard

As traditionally conceived, the creation of a new rule of customary international law requires that states believe the law to already require the conduct specified in the rule. Distinguishing the process whereby a customary rule comes to exist from the process whereby that customary rule becomes law dissolves this chronological paradox. Creation of a customary rule requires only that states come to believe that there exists a normative standard to which they ought to adhere, not that this standard is law. What makes the customary rule law is adherence by officials in the international legal system to a rule of recognition that treats custom as a source of valid law. Confusion over this distinction arises because in the international legal system the same agents whose beliefs give rise to a customary rule are the legal officials whose adherence to the rule of recognition leads them to deem that rule legally valid. The proposed solution to the chronological paradox employs H.L.A. Hart’s analysis of the concepts of law and a legal system, and in particular, the idea of a rule of recognition. Yet Hart famously denies the existence of a rule of recognition for international law. Hart’s denial rests on a failure to distinguish between the ontological and authoritative resolution functions of a rule of recognition, however. Once such a distinction is drawn, it can be argued that customary international law rests on a rule of recognition that serves the ontological function of making customary norms legal, though not the authoritative resolution function of settling disputes over the alleged legality of particular norms.

China’s Fairness Discourses and Allocation of Climate Responsibility

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 63-95
Author(s):  
Feiyue Li
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Fair Allocation ◽  
Active Engagement ◽  
Global Response ◽  
Climate Change Negotiations ◽  
The World ◽  
International Climate ◽  
International Legal System ◽  
Per Capita

Abstract The idea of ‘fairness’ may be viewed as fundamental to a nation’s participation in the development of the international legal system governing climate change. As the second-largest economy and the largest Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emitter in the world, China’s actions on climate change are critical to the global response. Indeed, international cooperation on climate change is unlikely to succeed without China’s active engagement. Therefore, China’s perception of the fairness of responsibility allocation will significantly influence its attitudes toward its international climate responsibilities. However, limited work has been done to date to concretely examine China’s perspective of the fairness of responsibility allocation and to understand its fairness discourses and practices of climate responsibility in a dynamically evolved process. This article aims to fill that gap in the literature by elucidating how China perceives the fair allocation of climate responsibility and how its fairness discourses and practices have evolved over the course of the three phases of international climate change negotiations. It will be shown that China has perceived the factors of historically accumulated emissions, per capita emissions and capability to lie at the very core of its understanding of fairness.

scholarly journals СТАНОВЛЕННЯ ПАРАДИГМИ МІЖНАРОДНОГО ПРОЦЕСУАЛЬНОГО ПРАВА У ПОСТРАДЯНСЬКІЙ ПРАВОВІЙ НАУЦІ

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 ◽  
pp. 159-165
Author(s):  
Т. О. Анцупова
Keyword(s):  
Legal System ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Legal Science ◽  
International Legal System ◽  
Philosophical Understanding

Домінуючою в сучасній науці міжнародного права пострадянського простору є нау­кова позиція, відповідно до якої ототожнюються «міжнародний судовий (юрисдикційний) процес» і «міжнародне процесуальне право». Автор статті зазначає безперспективність такої позиції для розвитку міжнародної правової системи, схиляючись до загальнофіло-софського уявлення про процес як про комплекс послідовних дій або послідовних, змінюючих один одного, органічно взаємопов'язаних явищ.   The scientific position, according to which «International Legal (Jurisdictional) Process» and «International Procedural Law» are identified is dominated in the modern international legal science on post-Soviet area. The author points out the futility of such a position for the development of the International Legal System, tending to the philosophical understanding of the process as complex sequential, successive, organically interrelated phenomena.

An International Rule of Law

2021 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Rule Based ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Globalizing World ◽  
International Legal System ◽  
Elusive Concept ◽  
International Rule ◽  
Selection Of

The “international rule of law” is an elusive concept. Under this heading, mainly two variations are being discussed: The international rule of law “proper” and an “internationalized” or even “globalized” rule of law. The first usage relates to the rule of law as applied to the international legal system, that is the application of the rule of law to those legal relations and contexts that are governed by international law. In this context, the term international rule of law is often mentioned as a catchphrase which merely embellishes a discussion of international law tout court. The international rule of law is here mainly or exclusively used as shorthand for compliance with international law, a synonym for a “rule based international order,” or a signifier for the question whether international law is “real” law. This extremely loose usage of the term testifies its normative and symbolic appeal although it does not convey any additional analytic value. The second usage of the rule of law in international contexts covers all other aspects of the rule of law in a globalizing world, notably rule of law promotion in its widest sense. The increasing interaction between national and international law and between the diverse domestic legal orders (through law diffusion and reception, often again mediated by international law) is a manifestation of the second form of the rule of law. The structure of this bibliography roughly follows this bifurcation of the Rule of Law Applied to the International Legal System and the Rule of Law in a Globalizing World. Next to these two main parts, three further, separate sections discuss questions that arise at the intersection of the two variants or are of crosscutting importance to the rule of law as a whole. This includes sections on the Rule of Law as a UN Project: A Selection of UN Documents on the Rule of Law, the Interaction between the International and Domestic Rule(s) of Law, and the (International) Rule of Law: A Tool of Hegemony?.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document