Skip to main content
×
×
Home
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 1
  • Cited by
    This chapter has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

    Hurd, Ian 2017. Targeted killing in international relations theory: Recursive politics of technology, law, and practice. Contemporary Security Policy, Vol. 38, Issue. 2, p. 307.

    ×
  • Print publication year: 2012
  • Online publication date: July 2015

13 - Legitimating the international rule of law

from Part IV - Projects of international law
Summary

Meaning of the ‘rule of law’

The ‘rule of law’ signifies that all persons (natural or juridical), including organs of the state, should comply with laws adopted through prescribed constitutional procedures. Its essence is the prohibition of the exercise of arbitrary power. The scope of the rule of law includes the procedural guarantees of general laws and an ‘impartial’ due process (Neumann 1985, 265–267; Sypnowich 1990, 55). It has also come to be associated with the protection of core human rights. But despite a certain common understanding, the rule of law ‘is an exceedingly elusive notion’; ‘contrasting meanings are held’ by reasonable people (Tamanaha 2004, 3). There are several reasons for this.

First, the differences can be traced to the use of a positivist as against a deliberative conception of law. The validity of a legal rule is usually traced to adherence to a prescribed procedure, most often laid down in a written constitution. But as Jürgen Habermas points out, rules based only on positive enactment may sometimes lack legitimacy for ‘the belief in legality can produce legitimacy only if we already presuppose the legitimacy of the legal order that lays down what is legal. There is no way out of this circle’ (Habermas 1987, 265). Legitimacy can be secured only if both particular laws and the legal order are justified by good arguments as opposed to drawing strength from compliance with formal processes or being the outcome of the mere exercise of power. Thus if the legal order is based on some originating violence, as it often is, the legitimacy of legal rules tends to be undermined (Derrida 1992, 6). This is of particular relevance when the relationship between colonialism and international law is explored. Habermas’ understanding of the rule of law is however a regulative ideal. The extent to which it is complied with will bestow a greater or lesser degree of legitimacy on the legal order.

Recommend this book

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this book to your organisation's collection.

The Cambridge Companion to International Law
  • Online ISBN: 9781139035651
  • Book DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CCO9781139035651
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to *
×
Bibliography
Alexandrowicz, C. H., 1967. International Law in the East Indies: Sixteenth, Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries, Oxford: Clarendon
Anghie, A, 1999. ‘Finding the Peripheries: Sovereignty and Colonialism in Nineteenth Century International Law’, Harvard International Law Journal, 40, 1–80
Anghie, A., 2006. ‘Of Critique and the Other’, in Orford, A. (ed.), International Law and its Others, Cambridge University Press, 389–401.
Bedjaoui, M. 1979. Towards a New International Economic Order, Paris: Holmes & Meir
Charlesworth, H. and Chinkin, C., 2000. The Boundaries of International Law: A Feminist Analysis, Manchester University Press
Chatterjee, H., 1958. International Law and Inter-state Relations in Ancient India, Calcutta: Mukhopadhyay
Chimni, B. S., 2004. ‘International Institutions Today: A Global Imperial state in the Making’, European Journal of International Law, 15, 1–37
Chimni, B. S., 2010. ‘Prolegomenon to a Class approach to International Law’, European Journal of International Law, 21, 57–82
Derrida, J., 1992. ‘Force of Law: The “Mystical Foundation of Authority”’, in Cornell, D., Rosenfeld, M. and Carlson, D. G. (eds.), Deconstruction and the Possibility of Justice, New York: Routledge, 3–67
Franck, T., 1992. ‘The Emerging Right to Democratic Governance’, American Journal of International Law, 86, 46–91
Franck, T., 2006. ‘The Power of Legitimacy and the Legitimacy of Power: International Law in an Age of Disequilibrium’, American Journal of International Law, 100, 88–106
Gandhi, M. K., 1938. Hind Swaraj, Ahmedabad: Navijivan Publishing House
Gramsci, A., 1971. Selection from Prison Notebooks, London: Lawrence & Wishart
Habermas, J., 1987. Theory of Communicative Action, Cambridge: Polity
Kaviraj, S., 2005. ‘An Outline of a Revisionist Theory of Modernity’, Archives of European Sociology, XLVI, 497–526
Koskenniemi, M., 2005. From Apology to Utopia: The Structure of International Legal Argument. Reissue with a New Epilogue, Cambridge University Press
Marks, S., 2003. The Riddle of all Constitutions: International Law, Democracy, and the Critique of Ideology, Oxford University Press
Mehta, U. S., 1999. Liberalism and Empire: India in British Liberal Thought, Oxford University Press
Meinecke, F., 1984. Machiavellism: The Doctrine of Raison d’état and its Place in Modern History, Boulder, CO: Westview Press
Menski, W., 2006. Comparative Law in the Global Context: The Legal Systems of Asia and Africa, Cambridge University Press
Mill, J. S., 1984. ‘A Few Words on Non-intervention’, in Essays on Equality, Law and Education, University of Toronto Press, 111–124
Morgenthau, H. J., 1948. Politics among Nations, New York: Alfred A. Knopf
Morgenthau, H. J., 1981. In Defense of the National Interest, New York: Alfred A. Knopf
Mukerji, D. P., 1942. Sociology of Indian Culture, Jaipur: Rawat
Neumann, F., 1985. The Rule of Law: Political Theory and the Legal System in Modern Society, Leamington Spa: Berg
Orford, A., 2009. ‘Jurisdiction without Territory: From the Holy Roman Empire to the Responsibility to Protect’, Michigan Journal of International Law, 30, 984–1014
Parekh, B., 2007. ‘Composite Culture and Multicultural Society’, in Chandra, B. and Mahajan, S., (eds.), Composite Culture in a Multinational Society, Delhi: National Book Trust, 3–17
Pollock, S., 2000. ‘Cosmopolitan and Vernacular in History’, Public Culture, 12, 591–625
Roht-Arriaza, N., 2004. ‘Universal Jurisdiction: Steps Forward, Steps Back’, Leiden Journal of International Law, 17, 375–389
Sen, A., 2005. The Argumentative Indian, London: Allen Lane
Singh, N., 1973. India and International Law: Ancient and Mediaeval, vol. I, New Delhi: S. Chand
Aurobindo, Sri, 1970. The Ideal of Human Unity, Pondicherry: Sri Aurobindo Ashram
Sypnowich, C., 1990. The Concept of Socialist Law, Oxford: Clarendon Press
Tamanaha, B., 2004. On the Rule of Law: History, Politics, Theory, Cambridge University Press
Taylor, C., 1979. Hegel and Modern Society, Cambridge University Press
Taylor, C., 1992. Sources of the Self: The Making of Modern Identity, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press
Thapar, R., 2003. Cultural Pasts: Essays in Early Indian History, Oxford University Press
Thompson, E. P., 1975. Whigs and Hunters: The Origins of the Black Act, New York: Pantheon
Unger, R. M., 1976. Law in Modern Society, New York: Free Press
Weeramantry, C. G., 1997. ‘The Function of the International Court of Justice in the Development of International Law’, Leiden Journal of International Law, 10, 309–340