Test: Introduction to International Law - CLAT PG MCQ

Customary practices among European nations during the sixteenth to eighteenth centuries played a crucial role in shaping the norms and rules of International Law. These practices were often codified and elaborated upon by later legal scholars, contributing significantly to the formal development of a structured legal framework governing international relations. This codification process helped clarify legal norms and enhance the predictability of state interactions.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted in 1948, established a comprehensive set of rights for individuals at the international level. It marked a pivotal moment in international law, emphasizing that individuals are entitled to fundamental rights and freedoms, which states are obligated to respect and protect. This document has influenced many national constitutions and international human rights treaties, underscoring the importance of individual rights in the global legal framework.

Self-executing treaties are those that can be enforced in domestic courts immediately upon ratification, meaning they do not require further legislative action to take effect. In contrast, non-self-executing treaties require specific legislation or actions by the state to be enforceable, making the distinction crucial for their practical application in domestic law.

The establishment of numerous permanent international institutions has been a significant factor in the emergence of new definitions of International Law. These institutions facilitate cooperation among states and address issues such as human rights, environmental protection, and international crime, thereby expanding the scope of International Law to include a wider range of entities and responsibilities beyond state-to-state interactions.

The orthodox positivist doctrine asserts that states are the only primary subjects of international law. This perspective emphasizes that international law primarily governs the conduct of states rather than individuals, who are seen as objects of international law rather than subjects. This view has been foundational in understanding the relationship between law and state sovereignty.

In a Dualist Legal System, if an international law obligation has not been incorporated into domestic law—either explicitly or through self-executing provisions—domestic law prevails. This means that the courts cannot enforce international treaty obligations unless they have been formally incorporated into the local legal framework.

The Delegation Theory posits that it is the responsibility of each state to determine how international treaties are incorporated into domestic law, suggesting that the state's constitutional framework allows for this incorporation without requiring a distinct transformation of the law. This view emphasizes the continuity of legal authority from international agreements to domestic legislation.

The principle "pacta sunt servanda," which translates to "agreements must be kept," is fundamental to International Law. It asserts that states are legally bound to adhere to the agreements and treaties they enter into. This principle is essential for maintaining order and predictability in international relations, as it ensures that states fulfill their obligations under international agreements.

National constitutions are not typically considered a source of international law. Instead, the primary sources recognized include treaties, customary practices, and general principles of law. While national laws may influence a state's obligations under international law, they do not constitute a direct source of international legal norms.

International organizations, such as the United Nations, are recognized as significant subjects of international law, particularly from the 20th century onwards. Their legal personality allows them to engage in international treaties and claims, which reflects the evolution of international law to include a wider range of entities beyond just states.

The Roman era introduced a crucial distinction between legal rules and religious practices, which greatly influenced the evolution of legal thought in Europe. This differentiation laid the groundwork for secular legal systems and contributed to the formalization of legal principles that would later be integral to the development of International Law, separating them from moral and religious dictates.

In a monistic legal system, international law is viewed as superior to domestic law, meaning that if there is a conflict, the state is obligated to comply with international law. This system emphasizes the integration of international norms into domestic legal frameworks, ensuring that states uphold their international obligations even when these may contradict local laws.

The primary source of international law, as articulated by Lawrence and Oppenheim, is the consent of nations. This implies that international law derives its authority and legitimacy from the agreement and acceptance of sovereign states. In essence, the collective agreement among nations forms the foundation upon which international legal norms are built.

In England, international treaties do not automatically become part of domestic law; instead, Parliament must enact specific legislation to incorporate treaty provisions. This reflects a dualist approach, ensuring that parliamentary oversight is maintained over international agreements, contrasting with systems where treaties are considered part of the law upon ratification.

Judicial decisions are regarded as subsidiary sources of international law, meaning they do not automatically create binding legal rules applicable to all states. Instead, they provide guidance and can influence the development of international law, particularly through their persuasive value in similar future cases.

The functional theory offers a moderate perspective, asserting that states, individuals, and certain non-state entities are all subjects of international law. This theory acknowledges that individuals can assert rights against states, particularly highlighted by developments such as the European Convention on Human Rights, which emphasizes the growing recognition of individual rights within the international legal framework.

The principle of equity in international law emphasizes fairness, reasonableness, and policy considerations when applying established legal rules. It addresses situations where clear legal provisions may not exist, providing a framework for just outcomes based on the principles of fairness and natural law. The subjective nature of equity often reflects the cultural and contextual nuances of the states involved.

John Austin's view on International Law suggests that it is not true law but a collection of moral guidelines, as he argued that genuine law requires a sovereign authority that International Law lacks. This perspective emphasizes the notion that without a central authority to enforce laws, International Law is more about ethical standards than binding legal rules.

Modern state practices have recognized that individuals possess a limited form of legal personality under international law. Although they do not hold the same status as states, individuals are granted various rights that enable them to participate in the international legal system, reflecting a significant shift towards acknowledging individual rights on the global stage.

The Dualistic Theory argues that international law and municipal law are separate systems with different sources and functions. According to this perspective, for international law to have effect within a country, it must be explicitly incorporated into domestic law. This contrasts with Monist Theory, which views both laws as part of a single legal system, where international law is superior.

A key criticism of the realist theory is that it remains silent on the rights of individuals and does not account for the international offenses for which individuals may be held accountable. This critique highlights a gap in the theory, emphasizing the need for a framework that considers the legal standing and rights of individuals alongside state sovereignty.

In the United States, treaties require the approval of a two-thirds majority of the Senate for ratification as outlined in Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution. This process ensures that international agreements undergo significant scrutiny before becoming binding domestic law, distinguishing it from practices in other countries where legislative incorporation may not be required.

Customary international laws develop through the spontaneous practice of states, where certain practices become recognized as legal obligations over time. This evolution reflects a general acceptance among nations and is considered a vital source of international law, complementing treaties and other formal agreements.

The traditional view of International Law posits that it governs the relationships between states, which are considered the primary subjects of law. This definition emphasizes that the rules are derived from customs and treaties that states regard as legally binding. While later definitions expanded the scope to include international organizations and individuals, the traditional perspective is focused solely on state interactions.

Law-making treaties are characterized by being agreements entered into by a large number of states, thus serving as direct sources of international law. These treaties are binding on the parties involved and can establish rules of universal applicability, significantly influencing international relations and legal frameworks.