Many cases are controlled by State orders and at the same time by other legal orders or regimes (the Security Council, the ECHR, the WTO, etc.). Often they are conflicting. Normal answers are given through monism or dualism choices. Do you think that judges should still reason from the sheer vantage point of their own legal order, or should they take into account as well the normative strength, and substantive reasons, sourced by the competing legal regime?