Institutional Problem in Modern International Law

Modern international law is seen as an autonomous system of binding legal rules, but this claim is controversial due to the absence of centralised organs of legislation, adjudication, and enforcement. This has led to disciplinary angst and a need to seek out functional analogues or substitutes for institutional roles, but this strategy fails to grasp the importance of international laws decentralised institutional form in securing accountability. There are enough conceptual weaknesses and blindspots in the legal-theoretical models against which international law is challenged to show that the perceived problem arises more in theory than in practice.

Format: Paperback / softback
Length: 304 pages
Publication date: 18 April 2019
Publisher: Bloomsbury Publishing PLC

Modern international law is widely recognized as an independent system of binding legal norms. However, this assertion of autonomy is far from uncontroversial. International lawyers have consistently faced skepticism regarding the reality and effectiveness of the object of their study and practice. For the most part, this skepticism has centered on international law's peculiar institutional structure, characterized by the absence of centralized organs of legislation, adjudication, and enforcement. This lack of centralization has led to the perception that international legal rules are indeterminate in the conduct of international politics. Consequently, there has been a sense of disciplinary angst or self-defensiveness among international lawyers, driven by a need to seek functional analogues or substitutes for the institutional roles traditionally associated with a functioning legal system.

The author of this book argues that this strategy of accommodation is deeply problematic. It fails to fully appreciate the significance of international law's decentralized institutional form in ensuring some measure of accountability in international relations. By resorting to functional analogy, the book misleadingly suggests that international law can be replaced or replicated by other legal frameworks, thereby exacerbating legitimacy deficits. It is important to note that there are sufficient conceptual weaknesses and blindspots in the legal-theoretical models against which international law is frequently challenged to demonstrate that the perceived problem arises more in theory than in practice.

In conclusion, while modern international law is widely regarded as an autonomous system of binding legal rules, its claim to autonomy is far from uncontroversial. International lawyers have faced persistent skepticism regarding the reality and efficacy of the object of their study and practice. The perceived institutional problem has led to a search for functional analogues or substitutes for the institutional roles deemed intrinsic to a functioning legal system. However, this strategy of accommodation is deeply problematic and fails to fully grasp the importance of international law's decentralized institutional form in securing accountability in international relations. It is essential to approach international law with a nuanced understanding of its unique characteristics and to recognize the theoretical and practical limitations of any attempts to replace or replicate it.

Weight: 474g
Dimension: 156 x 233 x 21 (mm)
ISBN-13: 9781509927920