there are number of international conventions that create the international network for protecting Human rights. in this regard, how international aw can possibly bind the IOs.
thanks
In this sense I'm tremendously realist. That will happen in the moment hegemonical powers' interests are accomplished by IOs agency or at least when that agency don't interfere with those interests.
Dear all,
I think law is a powerful tool but it must be enforced fully and corrdectly...
Since international human rights law is im many cases a declaration on how things should be, the reality in many states simply is that these rights are ignored, not enforced or violated... A shame but reality....
Bedt, Carsten
Dear Basil Ali Abbas and Readers;
The issue of obligation in international law has always posed challenges and it will likely continue to do so so long as our understanding of the matter still remains that of a question of state sovereignty and national interest in the international system.
Several arguments for been made for both cases but I will just try to sum up in two paragraphs.
1. On the question on when international law should be obeyed, lets say as far as a sovereign state has appended its signature and in some instances gone the further step in ratifying a binding instrument it must obey the dictates of the convention (Of course this position has been widely criticised).
2. With regards to the why, lets say there is a moral obligation or maybe a sense of duty. There could also be the case of a 'coincidence of interests', the need for avoiding retaliations for non-compliance, the issue of reputational effects, etc.
These readings may be helpful:
1. D'Amato, A. (2010). A Few Steps Toward an Explanatory Theory of International Law.
2. Koh, H. H. (1998). 1998 Frankel Lecture: Bringing International Law Home. Houston Law Review (Faculty Scholarship Series. Paper 2102), 623-681.
3. Koh, H. H. (1997). Why Do Nations Obey International Law? The Yale Law Journal (Faculty Scholarship Series. Paper 2101), 2598-2659.
4. Posner, E. A. (2003). Do States Have a Moral Obligation to Obey International Law? Stanford Law Review , 1901-1920.
I'm sure you may find these quite helpful.
The obligation to act in international law, so as not to damage national sovereignties, must be restricted to the global goods available to humanity. In this sense, a set of laws should protect and contribute to the production (when necessary), distribution and usufruct of these goods: water, land, air and seeds. It would include knowledge as a global good in the form of an education for all.
When we take into account the world's needs for food, health and knowledge, knowing that the suppression of such needs leads us to a world security policy, we must create mechanisms to help us distribute these goods, since, for their need for competition or exclusion of portions of humanity.
If, in any situation, any of these assets are denied under any pretext, a world body
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Social Psychology
- Attitude