International law

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to navigationJump to search
"Law of Nations" redirects here. For the 18th-century political treatise, see The Law of Nations.

Illustrated title page "Hugo the Great of the Truth of the Christian Worship." Along with the earlier work
of Francisco de Vitoria and Alberico Gentili, Hugo Grotius laid the foundations for international law.

International law, also known as public international law and law of nations,[1] is the set of rules,
norms, and standards generally accepted in relations between nations.[2][3] It establishes normative
guidelines and a common conceptual framework to guide states across a broad range of domains,
including war, diplomacy, trade, and human rights. International law thus provides a means for
states to practice more stable, consistent, and organized international relations.[4]
The sources of international law include international custom (general state practice accepted as
law), treaties, and general principles of law recognized by most national legal systems. International
law may also be reflected in international comity, the practices and customs adopted by states to
maintain good relations and mutual recognition, such as saluting the flag of a foreign ship
or enforcing a foreign judgment.
International law differs from state-based legal systems in that it is primarily—though not
exclusively—applicable to countries, rather than to individuals, and operates largely through
consent, since there is no universally accepted authority to enforce it upon sovereign states.
Consequently, states may choose to not abide by international law, and even to break a
treaty.[5] However, such violations, particularly of customary international law and peremptory norms
(jus cogens), can be met with coercive action, ranging from military intervention to diplomatic and
economic pressure.
The relationship and interaction between a national legal system (municipal law) and international
law is complex and variable. National law may become international law when treaties permit
national jurisdiction to supranational tribunals such as the European Court of Human Rights or
the International Criminal Court. Treaties such as the Geneva Conventions may require national law
to conform to treaty provisions. National laws or constitutions may also provide for the
implementation or integration of international legal obligations into domestic law.

Contents

 1Terminology
 2History
o 2.1Emergence of modern international law
 2.1.1Establishment of "Westphalian system"
 3International relations
o 3.1Treaties
o 3.2International custom
o 3.3Statehood and responsibility
o 3.4Territory and the sea
o 3.5International organizations
 4Social and economic policy
o 4.1Human rights
o 4.2Labor law
 o 4.3Development and finance
o 4.4Environmental law
o 4.5Trade
 5Conflict and force
o 5.1War and armed conflict
o 5.2Humanitarian law
o 5.3International criminal law
 6Courts and enforcement
o 6.1Domestic enforcement
o 6.2International bodies
o 6.3International courts
o 6.4East African Community
o 6.5Union of South American Nations
o 6.6Andean Community of Nations
 7International legal theory
 8Criticisms
 9See also
 10References
o 10.1Citations
o 10.2Sources
 11External links

Terminology[edit]
The term "international law" is sometimes divided into "public" and "private" international law,
particularly by civil law scholars, who seek to follow a Roman tradition.[6] Roman lawyers would have
further distinguished jus gentium, the law of nations, and jus inter gentes, agreements between
nations. On this view, "public" international law is said to cover relations between nation-states and
includes fields such as treaty law, law of sea, international criminal law, the laws of
war or international humanitarian law, international human rights law, and refugee law. By contrast
"private" international law, which is more commonly termed "conflict of laws", concerns whether
courts within countries claim jurisdiction over cases with a foreign element, and which country's law
applies.[7]
A more recent concept is "supranational law", which concerns regional agreements where the laws
of nation states may be held inapplicable when conflicting with a supranational legal system to which
the nation has a treaty obligation.[8] Systems of supranational law arise when nations explicitly cede
their right to make certain judicial decisions to a common tribunal.[9] The decisions of the common
tribunal are directly effective in each party nation, and have priority over decisions taken by national
courts.[10] The European Union is most prominent example of an international treaty organization that
implements a supranational legal framework, with the European Court of Justice having supremacy
over all member-nation courts in matter of European Union law.
The term "transnational law" is sometimes used to a body of rules that transcend the nation state.[11]

History[edit]
Main article: History of international law
The Hittite version of the Treaty of Kadesh, among the earliest extant examples of an international agreement.

The origins of international law can be traced back to ancient times. Among the earliest examples
are peace treaties between the Mesopotamian city-states of Lagash and Umma (approximately 2100
BCE), and an agreement between the Egyptian pharaoh Ramses II and the Hittite king, Hattusilis III,
concluded in 1258 BCE. Interstate pacts and agreements of various kinds were also negotiated and
concluded by polities across the world, from the eastern Mediterranean to East Asia.
Ancient Greece, which developed basic notions of governance and international relations,
contributed to the formation of the international legal system; many of the earliest peace treaties on
record were concluded among the Greek city-states or with neighboring states. The Roman
Empire established an early conceptual framework for international law, jus gentium ("law of
nations"), which governed both the status of foreigners living in Rome and relations between
foreigners and Roman citizens. Adopting the Greek concept of natural law—the idea that certain
rights are inherent to all humans—the Romans conceived of jus gentiumas as being universal.
However, in contrast to modern international law, the Roman law of nations applied to relations with
and between foreign individuals rather than among political units such as states.
Beginning with the Spring and Autumn period of the eighth century BCE, China was divided into
numerous ethnic Han states that were often at war with each other. Subsequently, there emerged
rules for diplomacy and treaty-making, including notions regarding the just grounds for war, the
rights of neutral parties, and the consolidation and partition of states; these concepts were
sometimes applied to relations with non-Han "barbarians" along China's western periphery.[12] The
subsequent Warring States period saw the development of two major schools of
thought, Confucianism and Legalism, both of which held that the domestic and international legal
spheres were closely interlinked, and sought to establish competing normative principles to guide
foreign relations. Similarly, the Indian subcontinent was characterized by an ever-changing panoply
of states, which over time developed rules of neutrality, treaty law, and international conduct.
Embassies both temporary and permanent were established between states to maintain diplomatic
relations, and relations were conducted with distant states in Europe and East Asia.[13]
Following the collapse of the western Roman Empire in the fifth century CE, Europe fragmented into
numerous often-warring states for much of the next five centuries. Political power was dispersed
across a range of entities, including the Church, mercantile city-states, and kingdoms, most of which
had overlapping and ever-changing jurisdictions. As in China and India, these divisions prompted the
development of rules aimed at providing stable and predictable relations. Early examples
include canon law, which governed ecclesiastical institutions and clergy throughout Europe; the lex
mercatoria ("merchant law"), which concerned trade and commerce; and various codes of maritime
law, such as the Rolls of Oléron—which drew from the ancient Roman Lex Rhodia—and the Laws of
Wisby (Visby), enacted among the commercial Hanseatic League of northern Europe and the Baltic
region.[14]
Concurrently, in the Islamic world, foreign relations were guided based on the division of the world
into three categories: The dar al-Islam (territory of Islam), where Islamic law prevailed; dar al-
sulh (territory of treaty), non-Islamic realms that have concluded an armistice with a Muslim
government; and dar al-harb (territory of war), non-Islamic lands whose rulers are called upon to
accept Islam.[15][16] Under the early Caliphate of the seventh century C.E., Islamic legal
principles concerning military conduct and the treatment of prisoners of war served as precursors to
modern international humanitarian law. Islamic law in this period institutionalised humanitarian
limitations on military conduct, including attempts to limit the severity of war, guidelines for ceasing
hostilities, distinguishing between civilians and combatants, preventing unnecessary destruction, and
caring for the sick and wounded.[17] The many requirements on how prisoners of war should be
treated included providing shelter, food and clothing, respecting their cultures, and preventing any
acts of execution, rape, or revenge. Some of these principles were not codified
in Western international law until modern times.[18]
During the European Middle Ages, international law was concerned primarily with the purpose and
legitimacy of war, seeking to determine what constituted a "just war". For example, the theory of
armistice held the nation that caused unwarranted war could not enjoy the right to obtain or conquer
trophies that were legitimate at the time.[19] The Greco-Roman concept of natural law was combined
with religious principles by Jewish philosopher Moses Maimonides (1135–1204) and Christian
theologian Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274) to create the new discipline of the "law of nations", which
unlike its eponymous Roman predecessor applied natural law to relations between states. In Islam,
a similar framework was developed wherein the law of nations was derived, in part, from the
principles and rules set forth in treaties with non-Muslims.[20]
Emergence of modern international law [edit]
The 15th century witnessed a confluence of factors that contributed to an accelerated development
of international law into its current framework. The influx of Greek scholars from the collapsing
Byzantine Empire, along with the introduction of the printing press, spurred the development of
science, humanism, and notions of individual rights. Increased navigation and exploration by
Europeans challenged scholars to devise a conceptual framework for relations with different peoples
and cultures. The formation of centralized states such as Spain and France brought more wealth,
ambition, and trade, which in turn required increasingly more sophisticated rules and regulations.
The Italian peninsula, divided among various city-states with complex and often fractious
relationships, was subsequently an early incubator of international law theory. Jurist and law
professor Bartolus da Saxoferrato (1313–1357), who was well versed in Roman and Byzantine law,
contributed to the increasingly relevant area of "conflicts of law", which concerns disputes between
private individuals and entities in different sovereign jurisdictions; he is thus considered the founder
of private international law. Another Italian jurist and law professor, Baldus de Ubaldis (1327–1400),
provided voluminous commentaries and compilations of Roman, ecclesiastical, and feudal law, thus
creating an organized source of law that could be referenced by different nations. The most famous
contributor from the region, Alberico Gentili (1552–1608), is considered a founder of international
law, authoring one of the earliest works on the subject, De Legationibus Libri Tres, in 1585. He wrote
several more books on various issues in international law, notably De jure belli libri tres (Three
Books on the Law of War), which provided comprehensive commentary on the laws of war and
treaties,
Spain, whose global empire spurred a golden age of economic and intellectual development in the
16th and 17th centuries, produced major contributors to international law. Francisco de
Vitoria (1486–1546), who was concerned with the treatment of the indigenous peoples by Spain,
invoked the law of nations as a basis for their innate dignity and rights, articulating an early version
of sovereign equality between peoples. Francisco Suárez (1548–1617) emphasized that
international law was founded upon the law of nature.

Hugo Grotius' De jure belli ac pacis, is considered one of the foundational texts of international law. (Pictured is
the title page from the second edition of 1631).

The Dutch jurist Hugo Grotius (1583–1645) is widely regarded as the most seminal figure in
international law, being one of the first scholars to articulate an international order that consists of a
"society of states" governed not by force or warfare but by actual laws, mutual agreements, and
customs.[21] Grotius secularized international law and organized it into a comprehensive system; his
1625 work, De Jure Belli ac Pacis (On the Law of War and Peace), laid down a system of principles
of natural law that bind all nations regardless of local custom or law. He also emphasized
the freedom of the high seas, which was not only relevant to the growing number of European states
exploring and colonising the world, but remains a cornerstone of international law today. Although
the modern study of international law would not begin until the early 19th century, the 16th-century
scholars Gentili, Vitoria and Grotius laid the foundations and are widely regarded as the "fathers of
international law."[22]
Grotius inspired two nascent schools of international law, the naturalists and the positivists. In the
former camp was German jurist Samuel von Pufendorf (1632–94), who stressed the supremacy of
the law of nature over states. His 1672 work, De iure naturae et gentium, expanded on the theories
of Grotius and grounded natural law to reason and the secular world, asserting that it regulates only
the external acts of states. Pufendorf challenged the Hobbesian notion that the state of nature was
one of war and conflict, arguing that the natural state of the world is actually peaceful but weak and
uncertain without adherence to the law of nations. The actions of a state consist of nothing more
than the sum of the individuals within that state, thereby requiring the state to apply a fundamental
law of reason, which is the basis of natural law. He was among the earliest scholars to expand
international law beyond European Christian nations, advocating for its application and recognition
among all peoples on the basis of shared humanity.
In contrast, positivist writers, such as Richard Zouche (1590–1661) in England and Cornelis van
Bynkershoek (1673–1743) in the Netherlands, argued that international law should derive from the
actual practice of states rather than Christian or Greco-Roman sources. The study of international
law shifted away from its core concern on the law of war and towards the domains such as the law of
the sea and commercial treaties. The positivist school made use of the new scientific method and
was in that respect consistent with the empiricist and inductive approach to philosophy that was then
gaining acceptance in Europe.
Establishment of "Westphalian system"[edit]

Sir Alberico Gentili is regarded as the Father of international law.[23]

The developments of the 16th century came to a head at the conclusion of the "Peace of
Westphalia" in 1648, which is considered to be the seminal event in international law. The resulting
"Westphalian sovereignty" established the current international legal order characterized by
independent sovereign entities known as "nation states", which have equality of sovereignty
regardless of size and power, defined primarily by the inviolability of borders and non-interference in
the domestic affairs of sovereign states. From this period onward, the concept of the sovereign
nation-state evolved rapidly, and with it the development of complex relations that required
predictable, widely accepted rules and guidelines. The idea of nationalism, in which people began to
see themselves as citizens of a particular group with a distinct national identity, further solidified the
concept and formation of nation-states.
Elements of the naturalist and positivist schools became synthesised, most notably by German
philosopher Christian Wolff (1679–1754) and Swiss jurist Emerich de Vattel (1714–67), both of
whom sought a middle-ground approach in international law. During the 18th century, the positivist
tradition gained broader acceptance, although the concept of natural rights remained influential in
international politics, particularly through the republican revolutions of the United States and France.
Not until the 20th century would natural rights gain further salience in international law.
Several legal systems developed in Europe, including the codified systems of continental European
states known as civil law, and English common law, which is based on decisions by judges and not
by written codes. Other areas around the world developed differing legal systems, with the Chinese
legal tradition dating back more than four thousand years, although at the end of the 19th century,
there was still no written code for civil proceedings in China.[24]
Until the mid-19th century, relations between states were dictated mostly by treaties, agreements
between states to behave in a certain way, unenforceable except by force, and nonbinding except as
matters of honor and faithfulness. One of the first instruments of modern international law was
the Lieber Code of 1863, which governed the conduct of U.S. forces during the U.S. Civil War, and is
considered to be the first written recitation of the rules and articles of war adhered to by all civilized
nations. This led to the first prosecution for war crimes, in which a Confederate commandant was
tried and hanged for holding prisoners of war in cruel and depraved conditions at Andersonville,
Georgia. In the years that followed, other states subscribed to limitations of their conduct, and
numerous other treaties and bodies were created to regulate the conduct of states towards one
another, including the Permanent Court of Arbitration in 1899, and the Hague and Geneva
Conventions, the first of which was passed in 1864.

The First Geneva Convention (1864) is one of the earliest formulations of international law

The concept of sovereignty was spread throughout the world by European powers, which had
established colonies and spheres of influences over virtually every society. Positivism reached its
peak in the late 19th century and its influence began to wane following the unprecedented
bloodshed of the First World War, which spurred the creation of international organisations such as
the League of Nations, founded in 1919 to safeguard peace and security. International law began to
incorporate more naturalist notions such as self determination and human rights. The Second World
War accelerated this development, leading to the establishment of the United Nations,
whose Charter enshrined principles such as nonaggression, nonintervention, and collective security.
A more robust international legal order followed, which was buttressed by institutions such as
the International Court of Justice and the United Nations Security Council, and by multilateral
agreements such as the Genocide Convention. The International Law Commission (ILC) was
established in 1947 to help develop, codify, and strengthen international law
Having become geographically international through the colonial expansion of the European powers,
international law became truly international in the 1960s and 1970s, when
rapid decolonisation across the world resulted in the establishment of scores of newly independent
states. The varying political and economic interests and needs of these states, along with their
diverse cultural backgrounds, infused the hitherto European-dominated principles and practices of
international law with new influences. A flurry of institutions, ranging from the World Health
Organisation to the World Trade Organisation, furthered the development of a stable, predictable
legal order with rules governing virtually every domain. The phenomenon of globalisation, which has
led to the rapid integration of the world in economic, political, and even cultural terms, presents one
of the greatest challenges to devising a truly international legal system.

International relations[edit]
Main articles: Sources of international law and List of ICJ cases
Sources of international law have been influenced by a range of political and legal theories. During
the 20th century, it was recognized by legal positivists that a sovereign state could limit its authority
to act by consenting to an agreement according to the contract principle pacta sunt servanda. This
consensual view of international law was reflected in the 1920 Statute of the Permanent Court of
International Justice, and remains preserved in Article 7 of the ICJ Statute.[25] The sources of
international law applied by the community of nations are listed under Article 38 of the Statute of the
International Court of Justice, which is considered authoritative in this regard:

1. International treaties and conventions;

2. International custom as derived from the "general practice" of
states; and
3. General legal principles "recognized by civilized nations".
Additionally, judicial decisions and the teachings of prominent international law scholars may be
applied as "subsidiary means for the determination of rules of law".
Many scholars agree that the fact that the sources are arranged sequentially suggests an implicit
hierarchy of sources.[26] However, the language of Article 38 does not explicitly hold such a hierarchy,
and the decisions of the international courts and tribunals do not support such a strict hierarchy. By
contrast, Article 21 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court clearly defines a
hierarchy of applicable law (or sources of international law).
Treaties[edit]
International treaty law comprises obligations expressly and voluntarily accepted by states between
themselves in treaties. The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties defines a treaty as follows
“treaty” means an international agreement concluded between States in written form and governed
by international law, whether embodied in a single instrument or in two or more related instruments
and whatever its particular designation”[27]
This definition has led case-law to define a treaty as an international agreement that meets the
following criteria:

1. Criterion 1: Requirement of an agreement, meetings of wills

(concours de volonté)
2. Criterion 2: Requirement of being concluded between subjects
of international law: this criterion excludes agreements signed
between States and private corporations, such as Production
Sharing Agreements. In the 1952 United Kingdom v Iran case,
the ICJ did not have jurisdiction for a dispute over the Anglo-
Iranian Oil Company being nationalized as the dispute emerged
from an alleged breach of contract between a private company
and a State.
3. Criterion 3: Requirement to be governed by international law:
any agreement governed by any domestic law will not be
considered a treaty.
4. Criterion 4: No requirement of instrument: A treaty can be
embodied in a single instrument or in two or more related
instruments. This is best exemplified in exchange of letters -
(échange de lettres). Per exemple, if France sends a letter to
the United States to say, increase their contribution in the
budget of the North Atlantic Alliance, and the US accepts the
commitment, a treaty can be said to have emerged out of the
exchange.
5. Criteron 5: No requirement of designation: the designation of
the treaty, whether it is a "convention", "pact" or "agreement"
 has no impact on the qualification of said agreement as being a
treaty.
6. Unwritten Criterion: requirement for the agreement to produce
legal effects: this unwritten criterion is meant to exclude
agreements which fulfill the above-listed conditions, but are not
meant to produce legal effets, such as Memoranda of
Understanding.
Where there are disputes about the exact meaning and application of national laws, it is the
responsibility of the courts to decide what the law means. In international law, interpretation is within
the domain of the states concerned, but may also be conferred on judicial bodies such as the
International Court of Justice, by the terms of the treaties or by consent of the parties. Thus, while it
is generally the responsibility of states to interpret the law for themselves, the processes of
diplomacy and availability of supra-national judicial organs routinely provide assistance to that end.
The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, which codifies several bedrock principles of treaty
interpretation, holds that a treaty "shall be interpreted in good faith in accordance with the ordinary
meaning to be given to the terms of the treaty in their context and in the light of its object and
purpose." This represents a compromise between three different theories of interpretation:

 The textual approach, a restrictive interpretation that looks to the

"ordinary meaning" of the text, assigning considerable weight to the
actual text.
 The subjective approach, which takes into consideration factors
such as the ideas behind the treaty, the context of the treaty's
creation, and what the drafters intended.
 The effective approach, which interprets a treaty "in the light of its
object and purpose", i.e. based on what best suits the goal of the
treaty.
The foregoing are general rules of interpretation, and do no preclude the application of specific rules
for particular areas of international law.

 Greece v United Kingdom [1952] ICJ 1, ICJ had no jurisdiction to

hear a dispute between the UK government and a private Greek
businessman under the terms of a treaty.
 United Kingdom v Iran [1952] ICJ 2, the ICJ did not have jurisdiction
for a dispute over the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company being
nationalized.
 Oil Platforms case (Islamic Republic of Iran v United States of
America) [2003] ICJ 4, rejected dispute over damage to ships which
hit a mine.
International custom[edit]
Customary international law is derived from the consistent practice of States accompanied by opinio
juris, i.e. the conviction of states that the consistent practice is required by a legal obligation.
Judgments of international tribunals as well as scholarly works have traditionally been looked to as
persuasive sources for custom in addition to direct evidence of state behavior. Attempts to codify
customary international law picked up momentum after the Second World War with the formation of
the International Law Commission (ILC) under the aegis of the UN. Codified customary law is made
the binding interpretation of the underlying custom by agreement through treaty. For states not party
to such treaties, the work of the ILC may still be accepted as custom applying to those states.
General principles of law are those commonly recognized by the major legal systems of the world.
Certain norms of international law achieve the binding force of peremptory norms (jus cogens) as to
include all states with no permissible derogations.[28]

 Colombia v Perú (1950), recognizing custom as a source of

international law, but a practice of giving asylum was not part of it.[29]
 Belgium v Spain (1970), finding that only the state where a
corporation is incorporated (not where its major shareholders
reside) has standing to bring an action for damages for economic
loss.
Statehood and responsibility[edit]
See also: Monism and dualism in international law
International law establishes the framework and the criteria for identifying states as the principal
actors in the international legal system. As the existence of a state presupposes control
and jurisdiction over territory, international law deals with the acquisition of territory, state
immunity and the legal responsibility of states in their conduct with each other. International law is
similarly concerned with the treatment of individuals within state boundaries. There is thus a
comprehensive regime dealing with group rights, the treatment of aliens, the rights
of refugees, international crimes, nationality problems, and human rights generally. It further includes
the important functions of the maintenance of international peace and security, arms control, the
pacific settlement of disputes and the regulation of the use of force in international relations. Even
when the law is not able to stop the outbreak of war, it has developed principles to govern the
conduct of hostilities and the treatment of prisoners. International law is also used to govern issues
relating to the global environment, the global commons such as international waters and outer
space, global communications, and world trade.
In theory all states are sovereign and equal. As a result of the notion of sovereignty, the value and
authority of international law is dependent upon the voluntary participation of states in its formulation,
observance, and enforcement. Although there may be exceptions, it is thought by many international
academics that most states enter into legal commitments with other states out of enlightened self-
interest rather than adherence to a body of law that is higher than their own. As D. W. Greig notes,
"international law cannot exist in isolation from the political factors operating in the sphere
of international relations".[30]
Traditionally, sovereign states and the Holy See were the sole subjects of international law. With the
proliferation of international organizations over the last century, they have in some cases been
recognized as relevant parties as well. Recent interpretations of international human rights
law, international humanitarian law, and international trade law (e.g., North American Free Trade
Agreement (NAFTA) Chapter 11 actions) have been inclusive of corporations, and even of certain
individuals.
The conflict between international law and national sovereignty is subject to vigorous debate and
dispute in academia, diplomacy, and politics. Certainly, there is a growing trend toward judging a
state's domestic actions in the light of international law and standards. Numerous people now view
the nation-state as the primary unit of international affairs, and believe that only states may choose
to voluntarily enter into commitments under international law, and that they have the right to follow
their own counsel when it comes to interpretation of their commitments. Certain scholars[who?] and
political leaders feel that these modern developments endanger nation states by taking power away
from state governments and ceding it to international bodies such as the U.N. and the World Bank,
argue that international law has evolved to a point where it exists separately from the mere consent
of states, and discern a legislative and judicial process to international law that parallels such
processes within domestic law. This especially occurs when states violate or deviate from the
expected standards of conduct adhered to by all civilized nations.
A number of states place emphasis on the principle of territorial sovereignty, thus seeing states as
having free rein over their internal affairs. Other states oppose this view. One group of opponents of
this point of view, including many European nations, maintain that all civilized nations have certain
norms of conduct expected of them, including the prohibition of genocide, slavery and the slave
trade, wars of aggression, torture, and piracy, and that violation of these universal norms represents
a crime, not only against the individual victims, but against humanity as a whole. States and
individuals who subscribe to this view opine that, in the case of the individual responsible for
violation of international law, he "is become, like the pirate and the slave trader before him, hostis
humani generis, an enemy of all mankind",[31] and thus subject to prosecution in a fair trial before any
fundamentally just tribunal, through the exercise of universal jurisdiction.
Though the European democracies tend to support broad, universalistic interpretations of
international law, many other democracies have differing views on international law. Several
democracies, including India, Israel and the United States, take a flexible, eclectic approach,
recognizing aspects of international law such as territorial rights as universal, regarding other
aspects as arising from treaty or custom, and viewing certain aspects as not being subjects of
international law at all. Democracies in the developing world, due to their past colonial histories,
often insist on non-interference in their internal affairs, particularly regarding human rights standards
or their peculiar institutions, but often strongly support international law at the bilateral and
multilateral levels, such as in the United Nations, and especially regarding the use of force,
disarmament obligations, and the terms of the UN Charter.

 Case Concerning United States Diplomatic and Consular Staff in

Tehran [1980] ICJ 1
 Democratic Republic of the Congo v Belgium [2002] ICJ 1
Territory and the sea[edit]
Main article: Law of the Sea
The law of the sea is the area of international law concerning the principles and rules by which
states and other entities interact in maritime matters.[32] It encompasses areas and issues such as
navigational rights, sea mineral rights, and coastal waters jurisdiction. The law of the sea is distinct
from admiralty law (also known as maritime law), which concerns relations and conduct at sea by
private entities.
The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), concluded in 1982 and coming
into force in 1994, is generally accepted as a codification of customary international law of the sea.

 Territorial dispute
 Libya v Chad [1994] ICJ 1
 United Kingdom v Norway [1951] ICJ 3, the Fisheries case,
concerning the limits of Norway's jurisdiction over neighboring
waters
 Peru v Chile (2014) dispute over international waters.
 Bakassi case [2002] ICJ 2, between Nigeria and Cameroon
 Burkina Faso-Niger frontier dispute case (2013)
 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea
 Corfu Channel Case [1949] ICJ 1, UK sues Albania for damage to
ships in international waters. First ICJ decision.
 France v United Kingdom [1953] ICJ 3
 Germany v Denmark and the Netherlands [1969] ICJ 1, successful
claim for a greater share of the North Sea continental shelf by
Germany. The ICJ held that the matter ought to be settled, not
 according to strict legal rules, but through applying equitable
principles.
 Case concerning maritime delimitation in the Black Sea (Romania v
Ukraine) [2009] ICJ 3
International organizations[edit]
Main articles: Intergovernmental organization and Global administrative law

 United Nations
 World Trade Organization
 International Labour Organization
 NATO
 European Union
 G7 and G20
 OPEC
 Organisation of Islamic Conference
 Food and Agriculture Organization
 World Health Organization

Social and economic policy[edit]

See also: Conflicts of laws

 Netherlands v Sweden [1958] ICJ 8, Sweden had jurisdiction over

its guardianship policy, meaning that its laws overrode a conflicting
guardianship order of the Netherlands.
 Liechtenstein v Guatemala [1955] ICJ 1, the recognition of Mr
Nottebohm's nationality, connected to diplomatic protection.
 Italy v France, United Kingdom and United States [1954] ICJ 2
Human rights[edit]
Main articles: International human rights law and Human rights

 Universal Declaration of Human Rights

 Croatia–Serbia genocide case (2014) ongoing claims over
genocide.
 Bosnia and Herzegovina v Serbia and Montenegro [2007] ICJ 2
 Case Concerning Barcelona Traction, Light, and Power Company,
Ltd [1970] ICJ 1
Labor law[edit]
show

 v

 t

 e

International labour sources

Main articles: International labour law and Labour law

 International Labor Organization

  ILO Conventions
 Declaration of Philadelphia of 1944
 Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work of 1998
 United Nations Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All
Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families
 the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial
Discrimination 1965[33]
 Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination
Against Women 1981);[34]
 the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities 2008[35]
Development and finance[edit]
Main articles: International development, World Bank, and International Monetary Fund

 Bretton Woods Conference

 World Bank
 International Monetary Fund
Environmental law[edit]
Main articles: International environmental law and Environmental law

 Kyoto Protocol
Trade[edit]
Main article: World Trade Organization

 World Trade Organization

Conflict and force[edit]

War and armed conflict[edit]
Main article: Law of war

 Nicaragua v. United States [1986] ICJ 1

 International Court of Justice advisory opinion on the Legality of the
Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons
Humanitarian law[edit]
Main articles: International humanitarian law and Geneva conventions

 First Geneva Convention of 1949, Amelioration of the Condition of

the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field, (first adopted
in 1864)
 Second Geneva Convention of 1949, Amelioration of the Condition
of Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces at
Sea (first adopted in 1906)
 Third Geneva Convention of 1949, Treatment of Prisoners of War,
adopted in 1929, following from the Hague Conventions of 1899
and 1907.
 Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949, Protection of Civilian Persons
in Time of War.
International criminal law [edit]
Main articles: International criminal law and International Criminal Court

 International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda

 International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

This section needs expansion. You

can help by adding to it. (October
2012)

Courts and enforcement[edit]

Main article: International Court of Justice
It is probably the case that almost all nations observe almost all principles of international law and
almost all of their obligations almost all the time.

— Louis Henkin[36]
Since international law has no established compulsory judicial system for the settlement of disputes
or a coercive penal system, it is not as straightforward as managing breaches within a domestic
legal system. However, there are means by which breaches are brought to the attention of the
international community and some means for resolution. For example, there are judicial or quasi-
judicial tribunals in international law in certain areas such as trade and human rights. The formation
of the United Nations, for example, created a means for the world community to enforce international
law upon members that violate its charter through the Security Council.
Since international law exists in a legal environment without an overarching "sovereign" (i.e., an
external power able and willing to compel compliance with international norms), "enforcement" of
international law is very different from in the domestic context. In many cases, enforcement takes
on Coasian characteristics, where the norm is self-enforcing. In other cases, defection from the norm
can pose a real risk, particularly if the international environment is changing. When this happens,
and if enough states (or enough powerful states) continually ignore a particular aspect of
international law, the norm may actually change according to concepts of customary international
law. For example, prior to World War I, unrestricted submarine warfare was considered a violation of
international law and ostensibly the casus belli for the United States' declaration of war against
Germany. By World War II, however, the practice was so widespread that during the Nuremberg
trials, the charges against German Admiral Karl Dönitz for ordering unrestricted submarine warfare
were dropped, notwithstanding that the activity constituted a clear violation of the Second London
Naval Treaty of 1936.
Domestic enforcement[edit]
Apart from a state's natural inclination to uphold certain norms, the force of international law comes
from the pressure that states put upon one another to behave consistently and to honor their
obligations. As with any system of law, many violations of international law obligations are
overlooked. If addressed, it may be through diplomacy and the consequences upon an offending
state's reputation, submission to international judicial determination,[37][38] arbitration,[39] sanctions[40] or
force including war.[41] Though violations may be common in fact, states try to avoid the appearance
of having disregarded international obligations. States may also unilaterally adopt sanctions against
one another such as the severance of economic or diplomatic ties, or through reciprocal action. In
some cases, domestic courts may render judgment against a foreign state (the realm of private
international law) for an injury, though this is a complicated area of law where international law
intersects with domestic law.
It is implicit in the Westphalian system of nation-states, and explicitly recognized under Article 51 of
the Charter of the United Nations, that all states have the inherent right to individual and collective
self-defense if an armed attack occurs against them. Article 51 of the UN Charter guarantees the
right of states to defend themselves until (and unless) the Security Council takes measures to keep
the peace.
International bodies[edit]
Main articles: International legal system and United Nations General Assembly Resolution 377
As a "deliberative, policymaking and representative organ", the United Nations General Assembly "is
empowered to make recommendations"; it can neither codify international law nor make binding
resolutions.[42][43] Merely internal resolutions, such as budgetary matters, may be binding on the
operation of the General Assembly itself. Violations of the UN Charter by members of the United
Nations may be raised by the aggrieved state in the General Assembly for debate.
General Assembly resolutions are generally non-binding towards member states, but through its
adoption of the "Uniting for Peace" resolution (A/RES/377 A), of 3 November 1950, the Assembly
declared that it had the power to authorize the use of force, under the terms of the UN Charter, in
cases of breaches of the peace or acts of aggression, provided that the Security Council, owing to
the negative vote of a permanent member, fails to act to address the situation. The Assembly also
declared, by its adoption of resolution 377 A, that it could call for other collective measures—such as
economic and diplomatic sanctions—in situations constituting the milder "threat to the Peace".
The Uniting for Peace resolution was initiated by the United States in 1950, shortly after the outbreak
of the Korean War, as a means of circumventing possible future Soviet vetoes in the Security
Council. The legal role of the resolution is clear, given that the General Assembly can neither issue
binding resolutions nor codify law. It was never argued by the "Joint Seven-Powers" that put forward
the draft resolution,[44] during the corresponding discussions, that it in any way afforded the Assembly
new powers. Instead, they argued that the resolution simply declared what the Assembly's powers
already were, according to the UN Charter, in the case of a dead-locked Security
Council.[45][46][47][48] The Soviet Union was the only permanent member of the Security Council to vote
against the Charter interpretations that were made recommendation by the Assembly's adoption of
resolution 377 A.
Alleged violations of the Charter can also be raised by states in the Security Council. The Security
Council could subsequently pass resolutions under Chapter VI of the UN Charter to recommend the
"Pacific Resolution of Disputes." Such resolutions are not binding under international law, though
they usually are expressive of the Council's convictions. In rare cases, the Security Council can
adopt resolutions under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, related to "threats to Peace, Breaches of the
Peace and Acts of Aggression," which are legally binding under international law, and can be
followed up with economic sanctions, military action, and similar uses of force through the auspices
of the United Nations.
It has been argued that resolutions passed outside of Chapter VII can also be binding; the legal
basis for that is the Council's broad powers under Article 24(2), which states that "in discharging
these duties (exercise of primary responsibility in international peace and security), it shall act in
accordance with the Purposes and Principles of the United Nations". The mandatory nature of such
resolutions was upheld by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in its advisory opinion on Namibia.
The binding nature of such resolutions can be deduced from an interpretation of their language and
intent.
States can also, upon mutual consent, submit disputes for arbitration by the International Court of
Justice, located in The Hague, Netherlands. The judgments given by the Court in these cases are
binding, although it possesses no means to enforce its rulings. The Court may give an advisory
opinion on any legal question at the request of whatever body may be authorized by or in
accordance with the Charter of the United Nations to make such a request. Some of the advisory
cases brought before the court have been controversial with respect to the court's competence and
jurisdiction.
Often enormously complicated matters, ICJ cases (of which there have been less than 150 since the
court was created from the Permanent Court of International Justice in 1945) can stretch on for
years and generally involve thousands of pages of pleadings, evidence, and the world's leading
specialist international lawyers. As of November 2019, there are 16 cases pending at the ICJ.
Decisions made through other means of arbitration may be binding or non-binding depending on the
nature of the arbitration agreement, whereas decisions resulting from contentious cases argued
before the ICJ are always binding on the involved states.
Though states (or increasingly, international organizations) are usually the only ones with standing to
address a violation of international law, some treaties, such as the International Covenant on Civil
and Political Rights have an optional protocol that allows individuals who have had their rights
violated by member states to petition the international Human Rights Committee. Investment treaties
commonly and routinely provide for enforcement by individuals or investing entities.[49] and
commercial agreements of foreigners with sovereign governments may be enforced on the
international plane.[50]
International courts[edit]
There are numerous international bodies created by treaties adjudicating on legal issues where they
may have jurisdiction. The only one claiming universal jurisdiction is the United Nations Security
Council. Others are: the United Nations International Court of Justice, and the International Criminal
Court (when national systems have totally failed and the Treaty of Rome is applicable) and the Court
of Arbitration for Sport.
East African Community[edit]
Main article: East African Community
There were ambitions to make the East African Community, consisting
of Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda, Burundi and Rwanda, a political federation with its own form of binding
supranational law, but this effort has not materialized.
Union of South American Nations[edit]
Main article: Union of South American Nations
The Union of South American Nations serves the South American continent. It intends to establish a
framework akin to the European Union by the end of 2019. It is envisaged to have its own passport
and currency, and limit barriers to trade.
Andean Community of Nations[edit]
Main article: Andean Community of Nations
The Andean Community of Nations is the first attempt to integrate the countries of the Andes
Mountains in South America. It started with the Cartagena Agreement of 26 May 1969, and consists
of four countries: Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador and Peru. The Andean Community follows
supranational laws, called Agreements, which are mandatory for these countries.

International legal theory[edit]

Main article: International legal theories
International legal theory comprises a variety of theoretical and methodological approaches used to
explain and analyse the content, formation and effectiveness of international law and institutions and
to suggest improvements. Some approaches center on the question of compliance: why states
follow international norms in the absence of a coercive power that ensures compliance. Other
approaches focus on the problem of the formation of international rules: why states voluntarily adopt
international law norms, that limit their freedom of action, in the absence of a world legislature; while
other perspectives are policy oriented: they elaborate theoretical frameworks and instruments to
criticize the existing norms and to make suggestions on how to improve them. Some of these
approaches are based on domestic legal theory, some are interdisciplinary, and others have been
developed expressly to analyse international law. Classical approaches to International legal theory
are the Natural law, the Eclectic and the Legal positivism schools of thought.
The natural law approach argues that international norms should be based on axiomatic truths. 16th-
century natural law writer, Francisco de Vitoria, a professor of theology at the University of
Salamanca, examined the questions of the just war, the Spanish authority in the Americas, and the
rights of the Native American peoples.
In 1625 Hugo Grotius argued that nations as well as persons ought to be governed by universal
principle based on morality and divine justice while the relations among polities ought to be
governed by the law of peoples, the jus gentium, established by the consent of the community of
nations on the basis of the principle of pacta sunt servanda, that is, on the basis of the observance
of commitments. On his part, Emmerich de Vattel argued instead for the equality of states as
articulated by 18th-century natural law and suggested that the law of nations was composed of
custom and law on the one hand, and natural law on the other. During the 17th century, the basic
tenets of the Grotian or eclectic school, especially the doctrines of legal equality, territorial
sovereignty, and independence of states, became the fundamental principles of the European
political and legal system and were enshrined in the 1648 Peace of Westphalia.
The early positivist school emphasized the importance of custom and treaties as sources of
international law. 16th-century Alberico Gentili used historical examples to posit that positive law (jus
voluntarium) was determined by general consent. Cornelius van Bynkershoek asserted that the
bases of international law were customs and treaties commonly consented to by various states,
while John Jacob Moser emphasized the importance of state practice in international law. The
positivism school narrowed the range of international practice that might qualify as law,
favouring rationality over morality and ethics. The 1815 Congress of Vienna marked the formal
recognition of the political and international legal system based on the conditions of Europe.
Modern legal positivists consider international law as a unified system of rules that emanates from
the states' will. International law, as it is, is an "objective" reality that needs to be distinguished from
law "as it should be." Classic positivism demands rigorous tests for legal validity and it deems
irrelevant all extralegal arguments.[51]

Criticisms[edit]
Nation-states observe the principle of par in parem non habet imperium, 'Between equals there is no
sovereign power'. John Austin therefore asserted that 'so-called' international law, lacking a
sovereign power and so unenforceable, was not really law at all, but 'positive morality', consisting of
'opinions and sentiments...more ethical than legal in nature.'[52]
Article 2 (1) of the UN Charter confirms this Sovereignty of Nations; no state is in subjection to any
other state.
Also, since the bulk of international law is treaty law, binding only on signatories, then;
'If legislation is the making of laws by a person or assembly binding on the whole community, there
is no such thing as international law. For treaties bind only those who sign them.'
Since states are few in number, diverse and atypical in character, unindictable, lacking a centralised
sovereign power, and their agreements unpoliced and decentralised,[53] then, says Wight,
'international society is not a society at all. The condition of international relations is best described
as international anarchy;
'While in domestic politics the struggle for power is governed and circumscribed by law, in
international politics, law is governed and circumscribed by the struggle for power. (This is why)
international politics is called power politics... War is the only means by which states can in the last
resort defend vital interests...the causes of war are inherent in power politics.'
On the subject of treaty law, Charles de Gaulle said this; 'Treaties are like pretty girls, or roses; they
last only as long as they last.'[54]
For Hans Morgenthau, international law is the weakest and most primitive system of law
enforcement. Its decentralised nature makes it similar to the law that prevails in preliterate tribal
societies.[55] A monopoly on violence is what makes domestic law enforceable; but between nations,
there are multiple competing sources of force.[56] The confusion created by treaty laws, which
resemble private contracts between persons, is mitigated only by the relatively small number of
states.[57] On the vital subject of war, it is unclear whether the Nuremberg trials created new law, or
applied the existing law of the Kellogg-Briand pact.
Morgenthau asserts that no state may be compelled to submit a dispute to an international tribunal,
making laws unenforceable and voluntary.[58] International law is also unpoliced, lacking agencies for
enforcement.[59] He cites a 1947 US opinion poll in which 75% of respondents wanted 'an
international police to maintain world peace'; but only 13% wanted that force to exceed the US
armed forces. Later surveys have produced similar contradictory results.[60]

See also[edit]
 List of International Court of Justice cases
 List of international public law topics
 List of treaties
 Consular law
 Arbitration
 Anarchy (international relations)
 Aviation law and Space law
 Chapeau
 Centre for International Law (CIL)
 Commissions of the Danube River
 Comparative law
 Conference of the parties
 Diplomatic law and Diplomatic recognition
 Environmental agreements
 Global administrative law
 Global policeman
 Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies
 International Law Commission
 International litigation
 International community
 International constitutional law
 International Law Commission
 Internationalization of the Danube River
 INTERPOL
 Martens Clause
 Prize law
 Speaking truth to power
  Third World Approaches to International Law (TWAIL)
 UNIDROIT
 United Nations General Assembly Sixth Committee (Legal)
 University for Peace
 The European Institute for International Law and International
Relations
 Pacta sunt servanda (agreements are to be kept)
 Roerich Pact
 Rule of Law in Armed Conflicts Project (RULAC)

References[edit]
Citations[edit]

1. ^ "International law". Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved 2019-04-26.

2. ^ "international law". Houghton Mifflin Company. Retrieved 13
September 2011.
3. ^ The term was first used by Jeremy Bentham in his "Introduction to
the Principles of Morals and Legislation" in 1780. See Bentham,
Jeremy (1789), An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and
Legislation, London: T. Payne, p. 6, retrieved 2012-12-05
4. ^ Slomanson, William (2011). Fundamental Perspectives on
International Law. Boston, USA: Wadsworth. pp. 4–5.
5. ^ Slomanson, William (2011). Fundamental Perspectives on
International Law. Boston, USA: Wadsworth. p. 4.
6. ^ There is an ongoing debate on the relationship between different
branches of international law. Koskenniemi, Marti (September 2002).
"Fragmentation of International Law? Postmodern Anxieties". Leiden
Journal of International Law. 15 (3): 553–
579. doi:10.1017/S0922156502000262. Yun, Seira (2014). "Breaking
Imaginary Barriers: Obligations of Armed Non-State Actors Under
General Human Rights Law – The Case of the Optional Protocol to the
Convention on the Rights of the Child". Journal of International
Humanitarian Legal Studies. 5 (1–2): 213–257. doi:10.1163/18781527-
00501008. SSRN 2556825.
7. ^ "Private International Law". Oas.org. August 2009. Retrieved 27
December 2017.
8. ^ Kolcak, Hakan. "The Sovereignty of the European Court of Justice
and the EU's Supranational Legal System". Inquiriesjournal.com.
Retrieved 27 December 2017.
9. ^ Degan, Vladimir Đuro (1997-05-21). Sources of International Law.
Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. p. 126. ISBN 9789041104212. Retrieved 5
December 2015.
10. ^ Blanpain, Roger (2010). Comparative Labour Law and Industrial
Relations in Industrialized Market Economies. Kluwer Law
International. pp. 410 n.61. ISBN 9789041133489. Retrieved 5
December 2015.
11. ^ Cotterrell, Roger (2012-03-01). "What Is Transnational Law?". Law &
Social Inquiry. 37(2): 500–524. doi:10.1111/j.1747-
4469.2012.01306.x. ISSN 1747-4469.
12. ^ deLisle, Jacques (2000). "China's Approach to International Law: A
Historical Perspective". Proceedings of the Annual Meeting (American
Society of International Law). 94: 267–
275. doi:10.1017/S0272503700055956. ISSN 0272-
5037. JSTOR 25659409.
13. ^ Alexander, C. H. (1952). "International Law in India". The
International and Comparative Law Quarterly. 1 (3): 289–
300. doi:10.1093/iclqaj/1.Pt3.289. ISSN 0020-5893. JSTOR 755410.
14. ^ Bouvier, John (1864). A Law Dictionary: Adapted to the Constitution
and Laws of the United States of America, and of the Several States of
the American Union : with References to the Civil and Other Systems
of Foreign Law : to which is Added Kelham's Dictionary of the Norman
and Old French Lanuage. G.W. Childs.
15. ^ Dar al-Islam The Oxford Dictionary of Islam[verification needed]
16. ^ Dar al-Sulh The Oxford Dictionary of Islam[verification needed]
17. ^ Saeed, Abdullah (2018). Human Rights and Islam: An Introduction to
Key Debates between Islamic Law and International Human Rights
Law. Edward Elgar Publishing. p. 299. ISBN 9781784716585.
18. ^ Malekian, Farhad (2011). Principles of Islamic International Criminal
Law: A Comparative Search. BRILL. p. 335. ISBN 9789004203969.
19. ^ Randall Lesaffer, “Too Much History: from War as Sanction to the
Sanctioning of War”, in Marc Weller (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of the
Use of Force in International Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press,
2015), p.37-38
20. ^ Khadduri, Majid (1956). "Islam and the Modern Law of Nations". The
American Journal of International Law. 50 (2): 358–
372. doi:10.2307/2194954. ISSN 0002-9300. JSTOR 2194954.
21. ^ Hedley Bull; Adam Roberts; Benedict Kingsbury) (eds.). Hugo
Grotius and International Relations. Oxford: Oxford UP. ISBN 978-0-
19-825569-7.
22. ^ Thomas Woods Jr. (18 September 2012). How the Catholic Church
Built Western Civilization. Regnery Publishing, Incorporated, An Eagle
Publishing Company. pp. 5, 141–142. ISBN 978-1-59698-328-1.
23. ^ Woods, Thomas E. (Jr.) (2005). How The Catholic Church Built
Western Civilization. Washington, DC: Regnery Publishing. ISBN 978-
0-89526-038-3.
24. ^ China and Her People, Charles Denby, L. C. Page, Boston 1906
page 203
25. ^ Charter of the United Nations, United Nations, 24 October 1945, 1
UNTS, XVI
26. ^ Slomanson, William (2011). Fundamental Perspectives on
International Law. Boston, USA: Wadsworth. pp. 26–27.
27. ^ Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1969, Article 2, 1(a)
28. ^ "Non-derogable norm of international law | Irwin
Law". www.irwinlaw.com. Retrieved 2019-04-22.
29. ^ "Colombia/Peru - Asylum - Judgment of 20 November 1950 -
(including the declaration of Judge Zoricic) - Judgments [1950] ICJ 6;
ICJ Reports 1950, p 266; [1950] ICJ Rep 266 (20 November
1950)". www.worldlii.org. Retrieved 2019-04-22.
30. ^ Greig, D. W., International Law, 2nd edn (Butterworths: London,
1976)
31. ^ Janis, M. and Noyes, J. International Law": Cases and Commentary
(3rd ed.), Prosecutor v. Furundžija, Page 148 (2006)
32. ^ James Harrison, Making the Law of the Sea: A Study in the
Development of International Law (2011), p. 1.[verification needed]
33. ^ "OHCHR". 30 May 2008. Archived from the original on May 30,
2008. Retrieved 9 October 2011.
34. ^ "Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against
Women". United Nations. Retrieved 9 October 2011.
35. ^ "Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities". United
Nations. 30 March 2007. Retrieved 9 October 2011.
 36. ^ Henkin, Louis (1968). How Nations Behave. p. 47.
37. ^ "Home – International Court of Justice". Archived from the
original on 27 June 2013. Retrieved 17 August 2015.
38. ^ "Contentious Cases – International Court of Justice". Retrieved 17
August 2015.
39. ^ "Arbitral Opinion Relative to the Gold of the National Bank of
Albania". The American Journal of International Law. 49 (3): 403–405.
1 January 1955. doi:10.2307/2194880. JSTOR 2194880.
40. ^ "Syria Sanctions". Treasury.gov. Retrieved 17 August 2015.
41. ^ "The Falklands Conflict". Falkslandswar.org.uk. Retrieved 17
August 2015.
42. ^ "Functions and powers of the General Assembly". un.org. United
Nations. Retrieved 5 October 2018.
43. ^ "International Law and Justice". un.org. United Nations. 2016-08-30.
Retrieved 5 October 2018.
44. ^ United States, United Kingdom, France, Canada, Turkey, Philippines
and Uruguay
45. ^ United Nations General Assembly Session 5 Proces
Verbal A/PV.299 1 November 1950. Retrieved 2008-04-13.
46. ^ United Nations General Assembly Session 5 Proces
Verbal A/PV.300 2 November 1950. Retrieved 2008-04-13.
47. ^ United Nations General Assembly Session 5 Proces
Verbal A/PV.301 2 November 1950. Retrieved 2008-04-13.
48. ^ United Nations General Assembly Session 5 Proces
Verbal A/PV.302 3 November 1950. Retrieved 2008-04-13.
49. ^ "Australia Indonesia Treaties".
50. ^ "The Sandline Affair Illegality And International Law* - International
Law – Australia". Mondaq.com. Retrieved 27 December 2017.
51. ^ Bruno Simma and Andreas L.Paulus "Symposium on method in
International Law: The Responsibility of Individuals for Human Rights
Abuses in Internal Conflicts: A Positivist View" 93 American Journal of
International Law 302 (April, 1999)
52. ^ James B Scott, "The legal nature of international law", Columbia Law
Review, vol 5 no 2, Feb 1905, p 128-30
53. ^ Wight, power politics, p 109
54. ^ speech, 2/7/1963; Oxford Dictionary of Quotations, OUP 1999, p.
255
55. ^ Morgenthau, Politics among nations, fifth edition, Knopf, 1976, p273
56. ^ ibid, p273-4
57. ^ ibid, p 275
58. ^ ibid, p281
59. ^ ibid, p 289
60. ^ ibid, p 324

Constructs such as ibid., loc. cit. and idem are discouraged by Wikipedia's
style guide for footnotes, as they are easily broken. Please improve this
article by replacing them with named references (quick guide), or an
abbreviated title. (May 2018) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

Sources[edit]

 I Brownlie, Principles of Public International Law (7th edn, Oxford

University Press, 2008) ISBN 0-19-926071-0
 Dominique Carreau, Droit international, Pedone, 10e édition,
2009 ISBN 9782233005618.
  P.-M. Dupuy & Y. Kerbrat, "Droit international public" (10th ed., Paris,
Dalloz, 2010) ISBN 9782247088935
 E. Lawson, and ML Bertucci, Encyclopedia of human rights (2nd
edn Taylor & Francis 1996)
 E. Osmanczyk, The encyclopedia of the United Nations and international
relations (Taylor & Francis 1990)
 M. N. Shaw, International Law (5th edn Cambridge University Press 2003)
 Rafael Domingo Osle, The New Global Law (Cambridge University Press
2010)
Giuliana Ziccardi Capaldo, “The Pillars of Global Law” (Ashgate 2008)

 World Encyclopedia of Law, with International Legal Research and a Law

dictionary
 David L. Sloss, Michael D. Ramsey, William S. Dodge, International Law in
the U.S. Supreme Court, 0521119561, 978-0-521-11956-6 Cambridge
University Press 2011
 Anaya, S.J. (2004). Indigenous Peoples in International Law. Oxford
University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-517350-5.
 Klabbers, J. (2013). International Law. Cambridge University
Press. ISBN 978-0-521-19487-7.
 Shaw, M.N. (2014). International Law. Cambridge University
Press. ISBN 978-1-316-06127-5.

External links[edit]
Wikiversity has learning
resources
about International law

hide
International lawat Wikipedia's sister projects

 Definitions from Wiktionary

 Media from Wikimedia Commons

 News from Wikinews

 Quotations from Wikiquote

 Texts from Wikisource

 Textbooks from Wikibooks

 Data from Wikidata

Library resources about

International law
 Resources in your library
 Resources in other libraries

 United Nations Rule of Law, the United Nations' centralised website

on the rule of law
 UNOG Library Legal Research Guide
 Centre for International Law (CIL), Singapore
 International law overview
 Department of International Law, Graduate Institute of International
and Development Studies, Geneva
 Primary Legal Documents Critical to an Understanding of the
Development of Public International Law
 Public International Law as a Form of Private Ordering
 The European Institute for International Law and International
Relations
 Public International Law – Resources
 A Brief Primer on International Law With cases and commentary.
Nathaniel Burney, 2007.
 American Society of International Law – 100 Ways International
Law Shapes Our Lives
 Department of Public International Law, Graduate Institute of
International and Development Studies, Geneva
 American Society of International Law – Resource Guide
(Introduction)
 International Law Details
 International Law Observer – Blog dedicated to reports and
commentary on International Law
 Official United Nations website
 Official UN website on International Law
 Official website of the International Court of Justice
 Opinio Juris – Blog on International Law and International Relations
 United Nations Treaty Collection
 UN – Audiovisual Library of International Law
 The European Institute for International Law and International
Relations
 Public International Law as a Form of Private Ordering
 Public International Law, Research Guide, Peace Palace Library
 UNOG Library – Legal Research Guide

show

Law

show
 International criminal law

show

Western world and culture

show

International human rights instruments

show

International human rights organisations and institutions

show

Human rights

 Politics portal

 Law portal

 Switzerland portal

: 4063693-8

A: 10640336

00566399
Categories:
 International trade law
  Public law
 International law
 International relations
 Cultural globalization
Navigation menu
 Not logged in
 Talk
 Contributions
 Create account
 Log in
 Article
 Talk
 Read
 Edit
 View history
Search

 Main page
 Contents
 Featured content
 Current events
 Random article
 Donate to Wikipedia
 Wikipedia store
Interaction
 Help
 About Wikipedia
 Community portal
 Recent changes
 Contact page
Tools
 What links here
 Related changes
 Upload file
 Special pages
 Permanent link
 Page information
 Wikidata item
 Cite this page
In other projects
 Wikimedia Commons
 Wikiquote
Print/export
 Download as PDF
 Printable version
Languages
 ‫العربية‬
 Español
 हिन्दी
 Bahasa Indonesia
 Latina
 Bahasa Melayu
 Русский
 Winaray
 中文
66 more
Edit links
 This page was last edited on 8 February 2020, at 17:33 (UTC).
 Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional
terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit
organization.
 Privacy policy

 About Wikipedia

 Disclaimers

 Contact Wikipedia

 Developers

 Statistics

 Cookie statement

 Mobile view