Non-Discrimination in International Law and Sovereign Equality of States: An Historical Perspective

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michail Risvas
2020 ◽  
Vol 71 (2) ◽  
pp. 135-155
Author(s):  
Courtney Grafton

The judicial restraint limb of the foreign act of state doctrine is presented as a time-worn doctrine dating back to the seventeenth century. Its legitimacy is indelibly wedded to its historical roots. This article demonstrates that this view is misguided. It shows that the cases which are said to form the foundation of the judicial restraint limb primarily concern the Crown in the context of the British Empire and are of dubious legal reasoning, resulting in a concept trammelled by the irrelevant and the obfuscating. It has also unnecessarily complicated important questions relating to the relationship between English law and public international law. This article suggests that the judicial restraint limb of the foreign act of state doctrine ought to be understood on the basis of the principle of the sovereign equality of states and conceptualised accordingly.


Author(s):  
Ilias Bantekas ◽  
Efthymios Papastavridis

This chapter briefly discusses the nature of the international legal system. The premise is that the structure of the international legal system is fundamentally different from that of national legal order: contrary to the vertical structure encountered in domestic settings, in international law the structure is horizontal. States enjoy sovereign equality, while both international law-making and international adjudication are based on the consent of the States. There are various theories that have attempted to describe the nature of the international law, including naturalism, positivism, formalism, and realism. Also significant is the existence of a certain hierarchy in the international legal system, in the sense that there are some peremptory norms of international law, such as the prohibition of torture and genocide, to which there is no derogation.


Author(s):  
Ilias Bantekas ◽  
Efthymios Papastavridis

This chapter briefly discusses the nature of the international legal system. The premise is that the structure of the international legal system is fundamentally different from that of national legal order: contrary to the vertical structure encountered in domestic settings, in international law the structure is horizontal. States enjoy sovereign equality, while both international law-making and international adjudication are based on the consent of the States. There are various theories that have attempted to describe the nature of the international law, including naturalism, positivism, formalism, and realism. Significant is also the existence of a certain hierarchy in the international legal system, in the sense that there are some peremptory norms of international law, such as the prohibition of torture and genocide, to which there is no derogation.


2005 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 679-684
Author(s):  
ROLAND PIERIK ◽  
WOUTER WERNER

Along with the exploding attention to globalization, issues of global justice have become central elements in political philosophy. After decades in which debates were dominated by a state-centric paradigm, current debates in political philosophy also address issues of global inequality, global poverty, and the moral foundations of international law. As recent events have demonstrated, these issues also play an important role in the practice of international law. In fields such as peace and security, economic integration, environmental law, and human rights, international lawyers are constantly confronted with questions of global justice and international legitimacy. This special issue contains four papers which address an important element of this emerging debate on cosmopolitan global justice, with much relevance for international law: the principle of sovereign equality, global economic inequality, and environmental law.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document