1. International Law
CHEN JIAYAN I43012

2. Contents 1. Introduction 2. Evolution Processes
3. Theoretical Approaches
4. Conclusion & Question

3. 01
Introduction

4. What is the International Law?
Ideas
1. Can be understood as a core international institution;
2. A set of norms, rules, and practices;
3. Created by states and other actors;
Aims
1. Facilitate diverse social goals;
2. From order and coexistence to justice an human development;
Features
An institution with distinctive historical roots;
2. These roots are essential to grasping its unique institutional features.

5. States International Law VS Domestic Law If they have conflicts?
From the perspective of International Law:
1. The principles in international law that require specific provisions of domestic law;
2. The state cannot change the existing principles, norms and rules of international law in accordance
with the provisions of domestic law;
3. International law cannot interfere with domestic laws formulated by states in accordance with the
principle of sovereignty;
From the perspective of Domestic Law:
1. International law is regarded as part of domestic law and thus has legal effect at home;
2. In order to implement domestic law, it is sometimes necessary to stipulate the principles, rules,
rules and regulations of international law in domestic law;
If they have conflicts?
International Law ＞ Domestic Law
International Law ＝ Domestic Law
International Law ＜ Domestic Law
Depends on
the different
States
PPT模板下载： 行业PPT模板：
资料下载： PPT课件下载：
教案下载：
范文下载： 试卷下载：
Word教程： Excel教程：
节日PPT模板： PPT素材下载：
PPT背景图片： PPT图表下载：
优秀PPT下载： PPT教程：
字体下载：

6. International Relations? International Institutions
Birth of the institutions
International Relations?
Realists:
A Struggle For Power
First step
Second step
Third step
Final step
For the states security and interests, the war is  inevitable.
States have to embroiling themselves in violent conflict in order to liberating themselves from the condition of war.
To achieve an abiding common interest of most states in most of the time.
To achieve international order, states have created
International Institutions

7. Image the Relationship Between them:: International Organizations
Institutions VS Organizations
International Institutions:
International Organizations:
Complexes of norms, rules, and practices that “prescribe behavioral roles, constrain activity, and shape expectations.
Can exist without any organizational structure
—— The 1997 Ottawa Convention
Can have the organizational dimensions
—— The World Trade Organization
Physical entities that have staff, head offices, and letterheads.
—— The United Nations
2. Cannot exist without an institutional
framework, as their very existence
presupposes a prior set of norms, rules, and
principles that empower them to act and which
they are charged to uphold.
—— The Charter of the United Nations
Image the Relationship Between them::
International Institutions
International Organizations
PPT模板下载： 行业PPT模板：
资料下载： PPT课件下载：
教案下载：
范文下载： 试卷下载：
Word教程： Excel教程：
节日PPT模板： PPT素材下载：
PPT背景图片： PPT图表下载：
优秀PPT下载： PPT教程：
字体下载：

8. Three Levels of Institutions —— in modern international society
Constitutional Institutions 1
The principle of sovereignty;
Defining the terms of legitimate statehood.
Fundamental Institutions 2
International law and multilateralism;
Shaping how states solve cooperation and
coordination problems.
Issue-Specific Institutions or Regimes 3
The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT);
Enacting fundamental institutional practices in particular realms of inter-state relations.
The most important one —— International Law
Providing the basic framework for international cooperation and the pursuit of order. ( with the multilateralism )

9. 02
Evolution Processes

10. Landmarks in the development of international public law
Historical Roots
1. The contemporary international legal system is a historical artefact.
2. It bears the imprint of the revolutions in social thought and practice that from the
eighteenth century onwards transformed the political landscape of Europe and then
much of the world.
Landmarks in the development of international public law
Treaties of Augsburg ( 1555 ) 1
Treaties of Westphalia ( 1648 ) 2
Treaties of Utrecht ( 1713 ) 3
Hugo Grotius
Emerich de Vattel
“Fathers” of international law

11. 1 3 4 2 International Law in Different Period Now Roots in Europe;
By the second half of the nineteenth century
Before the nineteenth century 1 3
Roots in Europe;
Monarchies;
Fealty to God.
Constitutionalism and sovereignty;
Franchise;
Law as reciprocal accord.
In the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries
Now 2 4
The product of negotiations between sovereign states;
Represents the mutual will of the nations concerned.
The legitimacy of the absolutist state was challenged by the principles of liberalism and nationalism.

12. Four distinctive characteristics —— historical forced
Multilateral Legislation
Consent and Legal Obligation 1 2
Landmark:
Based on reciprocally binding rules of conduct.
Two standards:
Subject to it authored it;
Applied equally to all subjects in all like circumstances.
Legislation takes place both formally and informally:
Informally arguments:
New norms and rules evolved in constantly;
Whether qualify state sovereignty;
Whether permit humanitarian intervention.
Crucially important in informal processed:
Customary norms :special category of international law;
Formal distinctive: the practice of multilateralism
Napoleonic Wars :
Before: relatively marginal institutional practice;
After: the preferred mode of international legislation.
Changed:
Before: fealty to God ＞Consent
Now: Consent is the primary source of obligation.
The two status of consent:
Determining whether a norm constitutes customary law;
Scholars and jurists: norms and opinio juris
Tacit consent ≠ actual consent
So, extrapolating tacit consent from norm-consistent behavior is fraught with difficulties.
The idea that consent is the principal source of international legal obligation is philosophically highly problematic.
Prior rules specified binding need existing;
Consent cannot be the source of that prior rule’s obligatory force.

13. Four distinctive characteristics —— historical forced
Language and Practice of Justification
The discourse of Institutional Autonomy 3 4
Aim:
To distinctive forms of legislation and legal obligation.
The role in global life:
It operates as more than a pristine set of rules calmly and logically applied to clear- cut situation by authoritative juridical interpreters.
Central political debates of international society:
Structures arguments about right and wrong;
About the bounds of legitimate action;
About authority and membership;
About the full spectrum of international issues.
Two distinctive form of the arguments:
Rhetorical: legal argument appears as rhetorical as it is logical. —— acceptable rather than “true”
Analogical: to establish similarities among different cases or objects in the face of dissimilarities. ——three types
Political realm and legal realm:
Recent study: Political actors regularly speak and act as if at some point in a negotiation, at some stage in a crisis, action moved from the political to the legal realm, a realm in which different types of argument and practice prevail.
Political realm: self-interest, barely veiled coercive practices.
Legal realm: legal reasoning and argument become the
legitimate form of action.
Noticed two things:
Separate and distinct is a modern phenomenon.
In the age of absolute monarchies in Europe:
Politics and law were joined in the figure of the sovereign.
Features of modern (particularly liberal):
separation of powers
In international relations contributes to international
order.
——missing in conditions of pure anarchy

14. From international to supranational law
Compared the characteristics has changed through the globalization
Last three decades:
In recent decades:
States were the primary subjects of international law. The international law applies only to states.
States were the primary agents of international law, the only actors empowered to formulate, enact, and enforce international law.
International law was concerned with regulation of inter-state relations. Self-determination and non-intervention.
The scope of international law was confined—or attempted to be confined—to questions of order not justice.
Although states are “still at the heart of the international legal system”, individuals, groups, and organizations are increasingly becoming recognized subjects of international law.
Non-state actors are becoming important agents in the international legal process.
International law is increasingly concerned with global, not merely international, regulation.
The rules, norms, and principles of international order, narrowly defined.
States have sought to move beyond the simple pursuit of international order towards the ambitious yet amorphous objective of global governance, and international law has begun to change in fascinating way.
PPT模板下载： 行业PPT模板：
资料下载： PPT课件下载：
教案下载：
范文下载： 试卷下载：
Word教程： Excel教程：
节日PPT模板： PPT素材下载：
PPT背景图片： PPT图表下载：
优秀PPT下载： PPT教程：
字体下载：

15. The Laws of War The changes in Jus ad bellum
International law governing the use of force is rightly considered the core of the modern international legal system.
Two types: a. Jus ad bellum：the law governing when states may use force or wage war
b. Jus in bello：the law governing the conduct of war once launched.
Two notices: 1. from their earliest articulations, they have always been entwined.
2. the content of them has undergone significant change, and what were once cardinal
norms have, in some cases, been completely reversed.
The changes in Jus ad bellum
The changes in Jus in bellum
Central precepts has changed.
In the early: Just war stressed the importance of “just cause”.
During the nineteenth century: War was justified if it served a state’s vital national interest, interests that the state itself had the sole right to define.
Two situation the legitimate use of force:
Self — defence;
Part of a Security Council-sanctioned peace enforcement action.
The trend has been less one of radical change in core principles than a gradual expansion of the scope of international legal constraint are particularly noteworthy.
Three areas of constraint:
The kind of weaponry that is legally permitted.
How military combatants must be treated.
The treatment of non-combatants,.
—— Geneva Conventions
Since 2001 the laws of war have come under sustained challenge: 911, Bush, Obama.
PPT模板下载： 行业PPT模板：
资料下载： PPT课件下载：
教案下载：
范文下载： 试卷下载：
Word教程： Excel教程：
节日PPT模板： PPT素材下载：
PPT背景图片： PPT图表下载：
优秀PPT下载： PPT教程：
字体下载：

16. 03
Theoretical Approaches

17. Neo-liberal institutionalism
Theoretical Approaches to International Law
Compared
Realism
Neo-liberal institutionalism
Attitude
Great sceptics about international law;
Deeply hostile to the liberal-realist notion of “peace through law”.
Shied away from directly discussing international law;
Even though their concept of “ regimes” bore a close affinity.
Reasons
The absence of a central authority to legislate, adjudicate, and enforce international law leads realists to doubt whether international law is really law at all.
International legal obligation is weak at best.
Inspiration came from economic theory rather than from law;
It was less provocative to speak the language of regimes and institutions than that of international law.
Views
Within the state, citizens are obliged to obey the law because sanctions exist to punish illegal behavior.
Yet sanctions have been few in international relations, and enforcement mechanisms are rudimentary.
Strong international legal obligations is nonsensical for realists.
States are treated as rational egoists;
Law is seen as an intervening variable between the goals of states and political outcomes.
Law is seen as a regulatory institution, not a constitutive one that conditions states’ identities and interests.

18. Theoretical Approaches to International Law
Compared
Constructivism
The new liberalism
Opinions
Normative and ideational structures are as important as, if not more important than, material structures;
How actors’ identities shape their interests and strategies is essential to understanding their behavior;
Social structures are sustained only through routinized human practices.
Seeking to reformulate liberalism as a positive social scientific paradigm.
Three core assumptions:
Individuals are the fundamental actors in IR;
The interests of states are defined by dominant domestic interest group;
In the international arena the “configuration of interdependent state preferences determines state behavior”;
Contributions
① Provide clear openings for study international law:
By broadening our understanding of politics to include issues of identity and purpose as well as strategy;
By treating rules, norms, and ideas as constitutive, not just constraining;
By stressing the importance of discourse, communication, and socialization in framing actor’s behavior.
① Three-tiered conception of international law:
The voluntary law of individuals and groups in transnational society;
The law of transnational governmental institutions;
The law of inter-state relations.
Offer resources for understanding the politics of international
law which is lacking in realist and neo-liberal thought.
Placing human rights law at the “core” of
international law.

19. Critical legal studies
Theoretical Approaches to International Law
Critical legal studies
The practice turn
The most recent theoretical approach:
Emphasizes the nature and importance of knowledgeable social practices.
One of the most vexed questions surrounding international law:
Why under certain circumstances states feel duty-bound to observe international law?
Realists: attributing obligation to fear of coercion;
Liberal-positivists: state consent;
Others: the perceived legitimacy or fairness of legal rules
and procedures.
Brunnee and Toope:
It is an “internalized commitment”, a “feeling” actors have about the legitimacy of a legal order and its attendant rules.
Only when the conditions of legality are met, and embraced by a community of practice, can we imagine agents feeling obliged to shape their behavior in the light of the promulgated rules.
Views:
Challenging the inherent liberalism of modern international
legal thought and practice.
—— “critical legal studies” or the “new stream”
Liberalism is stultifying international legal theory in two
equally barren extremes:
a. “apology”, the rationalization of established sovereign order
b. “utopia”, the naïve imagining that international law can
civilize the world of states.
Four propositions:
The underlying logic of liberalism in international law is incoherent.
Critical legal scholars claim that international legal thought operates within a confined intellectual structure.
Challenge the purported determinacy of international legal rules.
The authority of international law can only ever be self-validating.

20. 04
Conclusion & Question

21. The “paradox” of international law:
Chapter Clue 1 2 3 4
The “paradox” of international law:
Sovereign states devote enormous amount of time and energy to constructing ever more elaborate legal regimes.
The role that institutions play in facilitating coexistence and cooperation among states, and how the modern institution of international law arose historically,
International law was both functional to the needs of an increasingly complex international system, but also deeply grounded in ideas about legitimate rule that accompanied the rise of political liberalism.
Considering trends that may be transforming international law. Through surveying the principal theories about the nature and efficacy of international law, each of which presents a different set of viewpoints on the “paradox” of international law.

22. Conclusion
International law is best understood as a core international institution, a set of norms, rules, and practices created by states and other actors to facilitate diverse social goals, from order and coexistence to justice and human development.
International law and domestic law are different legal systems, but the two systems are interrelated and mutually permeate, complement and promote each other. In formulating national laws, the state cannot ignore its international obligations and, while participating in the formulation of international law, cannot ignore its sovereignty. International law shall not interfere with domestic law, and domestic law shall not change international law, and the relationship between them shall be in harmony.
International institutions were created by the states to achieve an abiding common interest of most states in most of the time. There are three levels of institutions in modern international society, that is constitutional institutions, fundamental institutions, and issue- specific institutions or regimes.
The difference between the international institutions and international organizations is that the international organizations can’t exist without an institutional framework, while the international institutions can exist without any organizational structure.
The contemporary international legal system is a historical artefact. Conditioned by these historical forces, the modern institution of international law has developed four distinctive characteristics: a multilateral form of legislation; a consent-based form of legal obligation; a peculiar language of reasoning and argument; and a strong discourse of institutional autonomy.

23. Conclusion
States have sought to move beyond the simple pursuit of international order towards the ambitious yet amorphous objective of global governance, and international law has begun to change in fascinating way.
International law governing the use of force is rightly considered the core of the modern international legal system. Traditionally, it has divided into two types: Jus ad bellum and Jus in bello. From their earliest articulations, they have always been entwined. However, nowadays the content of them has undergone significant change, and what were once cardinal norms have, in some cases, been completely reversed.
Realism hold the opinions that as the sanctions have been few in international relations, and enforcement mechanisms are rudimentary, so strong international legal obligations is nonsensical. Neo-liberal institutionalism regarded law as a regulatory institution, not a constitutive one that conditions states’ identities and interests.
Constructivism provided clear openings for study international law and offered resources for understanding the politics of international law which is lacking in realist and neo-liberal thought. The new liberalism has proposed a three-tiered conception of international law and placed human rights law at the “core” of international law.
Critical legal studies concentrates on the way in which the inherent liberalism of international law seriously curtails its radical potential. The practice turn emphasizes the nature and importance of knowledgeable social practices and it also is the most recent theoretical approach to international law. The view of them is that only when the conditions of legality are met, and embraced by a community of practice, can we imagine agents feeling obliged to shape their behavior in the light of the promulgated rules.

24. Question
Question:
Can you think of other factors, in addition to those listed in the chapter, that contributed to the rise of modern international law in the last two centuries?
What do you think are the strengths and weaknesses of the international legal system?
Which of the theories of international law surveyed do you find most persuasive, and why?

25. Thank you!