What International Law Is - Essay Example

? International Law Number: What International Law Is International law refers to a body of legal rules that govern interactions between the rights and obligations of citizens of sovereign states in relation to their counterparts in other sovereign states, on the one hand, and to sovereign states, on the other. These two cardinal points make up the public and private international law. Particularly, while the regulating of interaction among sovereign states relates to public international law, the governing of the freedoms, rights, and obligations of citizens of sovereign states in relation to their counterparts in other sovereign states directly relates to private international law. How International Law Has Developed Over Time In an interesting twist of paradox, despite the pervasive and dynamic nature of international law, there has never been any lawmaking organ for the same. On the contrary, international law is a culmination of international accords, compromises, charters, conventions, agreements, protocols, memoranda, tribunals, and treaties. The history of international law can be traced as far back as 1815 when Austria’s prince Klemens W. von Metternich led other leading diplomats such as France’s Prince Talleyrand, Britain’s Duke of Wellington, Russia’s Tsar Alexander I, and Prussia’s King Frederick William into the Metternich System. This congressional approach to diplomacy is alternatively known as the Concert of Europe or the Congress System. From this development, international relations is seen to have developed, as Britain, Russia, Prussia, France and other players met in succeeding convents in the Congress of Vienna and Aix la Chappelle (1818). Imperialism and the quest to garner as many colonies as possible created the need to meet and draw out laws that would regulate how states related, even as they clamored for colonies. It is at this point that colonies’ and protectorates’ geopolitical boundaries were mapped out during the 1884-5 Berlin Conference to stave off the possibility of war in Europe over colonies. In this conference, the frameworks for public international law were laid, albeit in a remote sense. The League of Nations also served as a rallying point for international law, as states came together under its auspices to prevent a repeat of World War I. Of particular importance is Woodrow Wilson’s Fourteen Points, which strongly laid foundation for international trade, diplomacy, territorial integrity (in relation to the sea, land, and air), and human rights and freedoms among other principles. Although Wilson’s proposals were not adopted fully, one can see that they greatly upheld public and private international law. As time proved the goals of the League of Nations untenable, the United Nations came up on June 26th, 1945, to facilitate international law, security, and socio-economic development. Over time, the United Nations has come to be the key platform upon which international law and diplomacy are deliberated, entrenched, and ratified. The UN has mechanisms that deal with thematic issues such as treaties, the law of seas, progressive development, and codification of international law and the internal justice system of the UN. Likewise, the UN has international courts and tribunals, legal training, resources, centers, and UN bodies to preside over international legal matters. Some of these bodies include the International Law Commission, the General Assembly Sixth Committee, and the UN Commission on International Trade Law (Rabkin, 2005). Together with sovereign states, all these organs play a crucial role in the generation of international law. How International Law Differs From Municipal Law Substantive differences between municipal (domestic) and international law abound. While municipal law governs intra-state relations, international law does inter-state relations. Secondly, the principal goal of municipal law is to ensure the existence of judicial and legislative systems that can enforce laws and settle disputes effectively, on the one hand. On the other hand, international law relies on interstate treaties to make and enforce laws, since it has no legislature to execute this mandate. This means that while international law takes a horizontal mien due to the sovereignty and equality of all states, municipal law is vertical, since the legislature and the judiciary are in supreme positions to enact or execute binding legislation. According to Hathaway and Shapiro (2011), it is also notable that municipal law inextricably relies on the executive for its execution. Particularly, it is the policing and correctional systems that execute court and legislative rulings. On the contrary, court systems in international law primarily rely on acquiescence by the states involved for the execution of rulings or decisions. No state can be compelled to appear before an international court. Politics and interests heavily affect the character and course of international law and may reflect the political and socio-economic interests of other countries, as opposed to municipal law. How International Law Depends on Municipal Law By all means, international law depends on municipal law. First and foremost, international treaties must first be incorporated into a state’s municipal law. Without the incorporation of an international law or treaty into the municipal law, there can be no implementation of the same into the state’s legal system. According to Ku and Diehl (2009), generatively, international law borrows heavily from municipal law. Treaties and agreements that are being mooted have to incorporate the fundamentals of municipal law such as human rights and freedoms and checks and balance. This means that for instance, an international treaty that violates the Bill of Rights of a sovereign country’s municipal laws cannot be effected by the same state. Likewise, the provisions for checks and balance in a country’s municipal law will affect international law. If a country follows a monist system, then it will be mandatory to have the legislature approve the treaty. Dualist states such as Britain may leave treaty-making at the discretion of the head of the executive power. The seriousness of this political system as is enshrined in the municipal system is seen to have troubled America at a given point. While America is a hybrid of the monist and dualist system, Hillary Clinton signed the ASEAN treaty on May 5th 2009 without consulting the Senate, as is stipulated in articles II, § 2, and article VI, § 2, of the US Constitution. This caused friction in the Senate, since Clinton had disregarded the provisions of checks and balance. Thus, municipal laws do not only generate principles of international law but also dictate how such international treaties or laws are to be ratified. How International Law Competes With Municipal Law One can readily agree with Dunoff and Wippman (2006) that the competition between international and municipal law is readily perceived in the difficulty in bringing the two together in an attempt to reconcile state sovereignty, international human rights, state interests, and in dealings among states in economics, politics, and war. This is seen in instances where international actors seek to have domestic agencies to enter international treaties with little control. Particularly, this competition is seen in an instance where the types of institutions (state and non-state) are brought into consideration. Since it has been held that international law, unlike municipal law, lacks the executive arm that is to execute its legal rulings, it is obvious that international law has to compete with municipal law to achieve this end. For instance, international law through the International Court of Justice (ICJ) will pile pressure on the international community concerning the need to apprehend a crimes-against-humanity suspect. Nevertheless, the suspect’s municipal law will cite matters such as sovereignty when gainsaying the ruling by international law. International law also competes with the interests of the state in order to be effective, though the interests of the state are well enshrined in the state’s municipal law. For instance, while municipal law may legitimatize international private businesses, international law will seek to influence municipal law to criminalize that trade, if the trade is being done by the a crimes-against-humanity suspect or if the trade is a direct affront to human rights and freedom. Attestable Evidence That International Law Works There can be no repudiation that international law works. The extent to which states attach great importance to international law serves as an example that international law works. States expensively employ highly qualified barristers to analyze foreign policy and to ensure that their foreign policies are concomitant to international law. For instance, before invading Kosovo, North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) had to ensure that its resolve was in harmony with international law, given that it was upholding the UN Security Council’s resolution. Conversely, international law has been seen to have the power to develop and secure international trust and prestige. For example, Iraq did not only breach international sovereignty by invading Kuwait in 1990 but also lost the support of Russia. References Dunoff, J., Ratner, S. R., & Wippman, D. (2006). International Law: Norms, Actors and Process. New York: Wolters Kluwer Law & Business. Hathaway, O., & Shapiro, S. J. (2011). Out-casting: Enforcement in Domestic and International Law. Yale Law Journal, 121(2), 252-349. Ku, C., & Diehl, P.F. (2009). International Law: Classic and Contemporary Readings. London: Lynne Rienner Publishers. Rabkin, J. A. (2005). Law without Nations? Why Constitutional Government Requires Sovereign States. New Jersey: Princeton University Press. Read More