Conflict Of Norms In A Fragmented International Legal System A Critical Analysis

Master's Thesis from the year 2010 in the subject Politics - International Politics - Topic: Public International Law and Human Rights, grade: A plus, Jawaharlal Nehru University, course: Master of Philosophy (M.Phil.), language: English, abstract: From the beginning of the twenty-first century the international community started addressing the issue of fragmentation of international law. In 2000, the International Law Commission (ILC) decided to include the topic "[r]isks ensuing from the fragmentation of international law" into its long-term programme of work. This initiative raises some basic questions: is international law a fragmented system? If it is so, what is the problem with the fragmentation? and how can the problem be resolved? This dissertation mainly revolves around these three major issues. It assumes that today's fragmented international law is part of historical evolution or process. In contemporary times, the term 'fragmentation' is commonly used to refer to the slicing up of international law 'into regional or functional regimes that cater for special audiences with special interests and ethos'. The most notable functional regimes are international trade law, environmental law, human rights law, humanitarian law, law of the sea and so on - when there is a collision between these regimes - than the conflict of norms becomes an unavoidable consequence - because each regime seeks favorable treatment towards its own. The absence of normative and institutional hierarchy in international law means that the evolution of such regimes is perceived by some as posing a threat to the coherence, effectiveness and predictability of international law. Others see these regimes as contributing to the development of international law. To respond to the problem of fragmentation, the ILC examined the regimes in detail and tentatively concluded that these specialized legal regimes are merely informal labels with no normative value per se - hence, it viewed that they

Based on doctoral thesis, University of Cambridge, 2015. --Page vii.

Master's Thesis from the year 2010 in the subject Politics - International Politics - Topic: Public International Law and Human Rights, grade: A plus, Jawaharlal Nehru University , course: Master of Philosophy (M.Phil.), language: English, abstract: From the beginning of the twenty-first century the international community started addressing the issue of fragmentation of international law. In 2000, the International Law Commission (ILC) decided to include the topic “[r]isks ensuing from the fragmentation of international law” into its long-term programme of work. This initiative raises some basic questions: is international law a fragmented system? If it is so, what is the problem with the fragmentation? and how can the problem be resolved? This dissertation mainly revolves around these three major issues. It assumes that today’s fragmented international law is part of historical evolution or process. In contemporary times, the term ‘fragmentation’ is commonly used to refer to the slicing up of international law ‘into regional or functional regimes that cater for special audiences with special interests and ethos’. The most notable functional regimes are international trade law, environmental law, human rights law, humanitarian law, law of the sea and so on – when there is a collision between these regimes – than the conflict of norms becomes an unavoidable consequence – because each regime seeks favorable treatment towards its own. The absence of normative and institutional hierarchy in international law means that the evolution of such regimes is perceived by some as posing a threat to the coherence, effectiveness and predictability of international law. Others see these regimes as contributing to the development of international law. To respond to the problem of fragmentation, the ILC examined the regimes in detail and tentatively concluded that these specialized legal regimes are merely informal labels with no normative value per se – hence, it viewed that they are all within or part of broader territorial domain of general international law – and codified some of existing conflict resolving techniques to solve the problem of conflict of norms. However, the proposed techniques solve the conflict of norms only within regimes but not across regimes. The question remains as to how to solve the norm conflict across regimes?

In The Right to Food and the World Trade Organization’s Rules on Agriculture, Rhonda Ferguson explores the relationship between the right to food and agricultural trade. The analysis is situated within the context of debates surrounding the fragmentation of international law.

Media interest in the fates of people at sea has heightened across the last decade. The attacks and the hostage taking of victims by Somali pirates, and the treatment of migrants and asylum seekers in the Mediterranean, ask pressing questions, as does the sinking of the Costa Concordia off the Italian island of Giglio which, one hundred years after the Titanic capsized, reminded the world that, despite modern navigation systems and technology, shipping is still fallible. Do pirates have human rights? Can migrants at sea be turned back to the State from which they have sailed? How can the crews of vessels be protected against inhuman and degrading working and living conditions? And are States liable under international human rights treaties for arresting drug traffickers on the high seas? The first text to comprehensively compare the legal rights of different people at sea, Irini Papanicolopulu's timely text argues that there is an overarching duty of the state to protect people at sea and adopt all necessary acts with a view towards ensuring enjoyment of their rights. Rather than being in doubt, she reveals that the emerging law in this area is watertight.

This major extension of existing scholarship on the fragmentation of international law utilises the concept of 'regimes' from international law and international relations literature to define functional areas such as human rights or trade law. Responding to existing approaches, which focus on the resolution of conflicting norms between regimes, it contains a variety of critical, sociological and doctrinal perspectives on regime interaction. Leading international law scholars and practitioners reflect on how, in situations of diversity and concurrent activity, such interaction shapes and controls knowledge and norms in often hegemonic ways. The contributors draw on topical examples of interacting regimes, including climate, trade and investment regimes, to argue for new methods of regime interaction. Together, the essays combine approaches from international, transnational and comparative constitutional law to provide important insights into an issue that continues to challenge international legal theory and practice.

One of the most prominent and urgent problems in international governance is how the different branches and norms of international law interact and what to do in the event of conflict. With no single 'international legislator' and a multitude of states, international organisations and tribunals making and enforcing the law, the international legal system is decentralised. This leads to a wide variety of international norms, ranging from customary international law and general principles of law, to multilateral and bilateral treaties on trade, the environment, human rights, the law of the sea, etc. Pauwelyn provides a framework on how these different norms interact, focusing on the relationship between the law of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) and other rules of international law. He also examines the hierarchy of norms within the WTO treaty. His recurring theme is how to marry trade and non-trade rules, or economic and non-economic objectives at the international level.