The rule of law is a central feature of a modern democratic society. It is a precondition for a flourishing civil society for people to be able to plan and live their lives as they choose. The rule of law is the fundamental protection that gives people and organisations confidence that the society’s rules (laws) will be respected and upheld. This underpins economic and social cooperation. A strong rule of law means that a country has less corruption, protected and enforceable legal rights, due process, good governance and accountable government.
Hull posits at the end of her book, A Scrap of Paper: Breaking and Making International Law During the Great War, that Germany did not “speak the same legal language” as Great Britain and France. In order to understand Germany’s legal language, Hull attempts to re-center international law as a fundamental element in the structuring of the belligerents’ legal principles that later influenced internalized mores and external conduct. Hull, a historian of modern Germany, pays special attention to the sociopolitical sources of tension between ‘traditional’ international law and the evolving military needs. Indeed, she argues that “the arguments and justifications used to explain or defend policy are potentially as important as the acts themselves.”
These are some examples of the power States governments
No, The United States Should Not Join the International Criminal Court, because the International Criminal Court (ICC) is an inter-governmental tribunal and an organization with headquarters located in Hague in Netherlands. It has the duty to prosecute individuals who have carried out genocide, atrocities, and crimes against humanity (Schabas 2). The court was formed in July 2002. It was the year when the Rome Statute was enforced. This document represented a multilateral treaty that serves as the governing document for the ICC.
To govern oneself as one wished is an attribute of independence. A sovereign state may not be disturbed by another state unless it has given the right to intervene. When a state attaches legal consequences to conduct in another state, it exercises control over that conduct, and when such control affects essential interests in the foreign state, it may constitute an interference with the sovereign rights of that foreign
He says the existence of a dominant power always exercise hegemonial authority thereby creating a norms under which independent states interact with each other. This conceptual framework of states existing under certain prescribes norms finds relevant in the contemporary IR more likely after the Treaty of Westphalia. This hegemonic world order needs to be explained from an approach which best predicts events and affairs in the international system. Looking at the larger factors concerning
It is heavily influenced from the Groation tradition. According to this perspective, regimes are much more pervasive and exist in all areas of international relations. Contrary to the conventional structure and modified structural, this viewpoint moves away from realist thinking as it is “too limited to explain an increasingly complex, interdependent, and complex world.” This approach rejects the assumption that the international system is comprised of states and the balance of power is solely due to force. Rather, it argues that elites are the principal actors and that they have national and transnational ties.
The laws are meant to govern each of the countries with the intention of maintaining order. Under the said constitution, each of the countries operate under a common law. There is that law which cuts across all arms of governments in both cases. Aside from that, each country has a supreme court, which is the main body in enforcing law.
In International Relations, various theoretical perspectives are employed to provide a clear framework for the analysis of complex international relationships. One key concept that scholars have strived to fully analyze is “anarchy” and its significance within the International System. Anarchy, as defined by many IR scholars, is the lack of an overarching authority that helps govern the international system. (Class Notes, January 29). Its importance and power to dictate actions between states is often debated and various theories have been used to describe its significance.
It believes that all individuals are born with an increasing desire to own power hardwired inside them. In these circumstances dominant states should do direct high power over their rivals. In the other hand, structural realism does not define the quest for power, instead it is focused on the structure of the international
Introduction In this article, Eric Poser has elaborated several reasons which made human rights a failure in international legal regime. The most highlighted issues are hypocrite policies of US and EU which has directly questioned credibility and integrity of their law and justice. The second reason is role played by Russia and China, the two major economic powers who in order to sustain their power, are involved in human rights violations. The third most important reason is standardized model of Universal Declaration of Human Rights which is ideal but not practical in various countries.
The question is whether a matter is essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of a state or not has to be decided by the Security Council which is controlled by the five permanent members of the United Nations. The availability of the veto power in the hands of the permanent members of the Security Council is a major obstacle in solving international problems. There is no certainty for international law. The international law has failed to maintain order and peace in the world for many
International laws are, by definition “A body of rules established by custom or treaty and recognized by nations as binding in their relations with one another” (www.oxforddictionaries.com). International law is a very significant topic because it affects everyone globally. In this research report, I would like to explore the advantages and disadvantages of international laws and consider if they should be enforced in all countries. The modern system we use today was developed in the 17th century in Europe and is still used worldwide (Stratton, 2009). After the Second World War, international unity became very popular (Neff).
Focus can also be drawn towards the growing advocacy of courts in handling political conflicts and restructuring economies. In recent years, legal scholars, political scientists and social scientists in Western countries have explored the trend of ‘judicial internationalization’, meaning the increased interaction between judges from different jurisdictions around the world . It has been suggested that courts, in particular the
Globalization has indeed impacted human rights worldwide; however as to whether the impact is negative or positive depends on which part of the world one finds him/herself. “Human Right” by definition “is the right which is believed to belong to every person”. The central idea of globalization is for businesses to develop international influence and operate on an international scale. Globalization has given people the right to information. Thanks to globalization technology has travelled all over the world to help people have easy access to information.
