Explains that international law is not a monolith but can encompass on-going contestation, in which states set forth competing interpretations Maps and explains the cross-country differences in international legal norms in various fields of international law and their application and interpretation in different geographic regions Organized into three broad thematic sections of conceptual matters, domestic institutions and comparative international law, and comparing approaches across issue-areas Chapters authored by contributors who include top international law and comparative law scholars all from diverse backgrounds, experience, and perspectives.
This book challenges the idea that international law looks the same from anywhere in the world. Instead, how international lawyers understand and approach their field is often deeply influenced by the national contexts in which they lived, studied, and worked. International law in the United States and in the United Kingdom looks different compared to international law in China and Russia, though some approaches (particularly Western, Anglo-American ones) are more influential outside their borders than others. Given shifts in geopolitical power and the rise of non-Western powers like China, it is increasingly important for international lawyers to understand how others coming from diverse backgrounds approach the field. By examining the international law academies and textbooks of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council, Roberts provides a window into these different communities of international lawyers, and she uncovers some of the similarities and differences in how they understand and approach international law.
The bills of rights adopted in the Commonwealth countries of Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and, at the subnational level, Australia in recent decades, have prompted scholars and institutional actors involved in the process of constitutional design and reform to rethink how to evaluate and compare the different approaches to human rights protection. They have challenged a number of assumptions in the field, for example, that courts must have the power to invalidate laws that are found to violate rights (ie courts can now be given non-binding powers), that courts must have the 'final word' on rights issues (ie legislatures can now be given the power to override judicial decisions) and that bills of rights are enforced exclusively by courts (ie legislators can now be given new responsibilities to ensure that the laws they enact are compatible with rights).This book addresses three questions arising from these developments. How do these new bills of rights differ from the traditional approaches to rights protection? Why, if at all, should we consider the Commonwealth's approach over the traditional approaches? What compromises must be struck in the course of adopting a bill of rights of this variety? In answering these questions, the book sets out a new framework for comparison that focuses on the types of inter-institutional disagreement facilitated by and found in the different approaches to rights protection. It also identifies a previously unrecognised element of the Commonwealth's approach - the normative trade-offs with other constitutional principles and values - that is pivotal to understanding its operation. Finally, it seeks to contribute to future debates about rights reform in Australia and elsewhere by setting out a number of lessons that emerge from the answers to these three questions.**Dr Scott Stephenson, From Dialogue to Disagreement in Comparative Rights Constitutionalism, was joint winner of the inaugural Holt Prize 2015.
It has never been more important to understand how international law enables and constrains international politics. By drawing together the legal theory of Lon Fuller and the insights of constructivist international relations scholars, this book articulates a pragmatic view of how international obligation is created and maintained. First, legal norms can only arise in the context of social norms based on shared understandings. Second, internal features of law, or 'criteria of legality', are crucial to law's ability to promote adherence, to inspire 'fidelity'. Third, legal norms are built, maintained or destroyed through a continuing practice of legality. Through case studies of the climate change regime, the anti-torture norm, and the prohibition on the use of force, it is shown that these three elements produce a distinctive legal legitimacy and a sense of commitment among those to whom law is addressed.
This interdisciplinary exploration of the modern historiography of international law invites a diverse assessment of the indissoluble unity of the old and the new in the most global of all legal disciplines. The study of the history of international law does not only serve a better understanding of how international law has evolved to become what it is and what it is not. Its histories, which rethink the past in the present, also influence our perception of contemporary matters in international law and our understandings of how they may potentially unfold. This multi-perspectival enquiry into the dominant modes of international legal history and its fundamental debates may also help students of both international law and history to identify the historical approaches that best suit their international legal-historical perspectives and best address their historical and legal research questions.
Domestic law has long been recognised as a source of international law, an inspiration for legal developments, or the benchmark against which a legal system is to be assessed. Academic commentary normally re-traces these well-trodden paths, leaving one with the impression that the interaction between domestic and international law is unworthy of further enquiry. However, a different - and surprisingly pervasive - nexus between the two spheres has been largely overlooked: the use of domestic law in the interpretation of international law. This book examines the practice of five international courts and tribunals to demonstrate that domestic law is invoked to interpret international law, often outside the framework of Articles 31 to 33 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. It assesses the appropriateness of such recourse to domestic law as well as situating the practice within broader debates regarding interpretation and the interaction between domestic and international legal systems.
This is the first comprehensive book that explores the subject of federalism from the perspective of comparative constitutional law, whilst simultaneously placing a strong emphasis on how federal systems work in practice. This focus is reflected in the book's two most innovative elements. First, it analyses from a comparative point of view how government levels exercise their powers and interact in several highly topical policy areas like social welfare, environmental protection or migrant integration. Second, the book incorporates case law boxes discussing seminal judgments from federal systems worldwide and thus demonstrates the practical impact of constitutional jurisprudence on policymakers and citizens alike. “This is simply the best analysis of contemporary federalism currently available. It is comprehensive in its coverage, thorough in its analysis, and persuasive in its conclusions. Every student of federalism, from novice to expert, will find benefit from this volume.” Professor G Alan Tarr, Rutgers University “Wading through the thicket of the multiple forms that the federal idea has taken in the contemporary world, this remarkably comprehensive treatise backed by case law fills a long-awaited gap in the literature on comparative federalism. It combines a mastery of the literature on federal theory with a critical understanding of how it plays out in practice. Outstanding in the breadth of its scope, this magisterial survey will serve as a work of reference for generations of scholars who seek to understand how federalism works in developed as well as developing countries.” Professor Balveer Arora, Jawaharlal Nehru University New Delhi “This book is an extraordinarily handy work of reference on the diverse federal-type systems of the world. It handles both shared principles and differences of perspective, structure or practice with confidence and ease. It will become a standard work for scholars and practitioners working in the field.” Professor Cheryl Saunders, The University of Melbourne “This is a remarkable book – for its sheer breadth of scope, combining detail of practice with analysis of federal principles, and for its fresh look at federalism. With great erudition, drawing on world scholarship and the practice of federalism across the globe, Palermo and Kössler magnificently traverse from the ancient roots of federalism to the contemporary debates on ethno-cultural dimensions and participatory democracy. The book sets a new benchmark for the study of comparative federalism, providing new insights that are bound to influence practice in an era where federal arrangements are expected to deliver answers to key governance and societal challenges.” Professor Nico Steytler, University of the Western Cape
This short book on comparative law theory and method is designed primarily for postgraduate research students whose work involves comparison between legal systems. It is, accordingly, a book on research methods, although it will also be of relevance to all students (undergraduate and postgraduate) taking courses in comparative law and to academics entering the field of comparison. The substance of the book has been developed over many years of teaching general theory of comparative law, primarily on the European Academy of Legal Theory programme in Brussels but also on other programmes in French, Belgian and English universities. It is arguable that there has been to date no single introductory work exclusively devoted to comparative law methodology and thus this present book aims to fill this gap.
