Concept and Position of Peremptory Norms (Jus Cogens) in International Law: A Preliminary Study

Q3 Social Sciences Hasanuddin Law Review Pub Date : 2019-08-23 DOI:10.20956/HALREV.V5I2.1709
I. Handayani
{"title":"Concept and Position of Peremptory Norms (Jus Cogens) in International Law: A Preliminary Study","authors":"I. Handayani","doi":"10.20956/HALREV.V5I2.1709","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Peremptory norms or jus cogens hold a unique position in international law. Unlike customary international law and treaty law, they abide no derivation and bind all states regardless of their willingness to be bound. Some scholars had elaborated fundamental theories to answer the theoretical background of jus cogens. However, they have never reached a satisfactory result. This study aims to elaborate the theoretical background of jus cogens and to observe the relationship between jus cogens, obligation erga omnes, and customary international law. The positivists recognize that jus cogens is an imperative norm within state practice and opinio juris. The positivist theory is not in line with the concept that jus cogens bound to states without their consent since every state has their sovereignty and cannot be bound by any kind of provision without consent. The proponents of the natural law theory stated that peremptory norms are inherited from the tradition of natural law so that it is the highest norm in international law that directly binds countries. On the other hand, the public order theory states that international law recognizes important (imperative) norms, which are hierarchically higher than ordinary norms and customary international law to advance the interests of the international community and to preserve the main values of international law. The three theories are considered insufficient to answer the philosophical basis of jus cogens. In its development, therefore, some new theories have been developed to challenge the basis of jus cogens.","PeriodicalId":30743,"journal":{"name":"Hasanuddin Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hasanuddin Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20956/HALREV.V5I2.1709","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Peremptory norms or jus cogens hold a unique position in international law. Unlike customary international law and treaty law, they abide no derivation and bind all states regardless of their willingness to be bound. Some scholars had elaborated fundamental theories to answer the theoretical background of jus cogens. However, they have never reached a satisfactory result. This study aims to elaborate the theoretical background of jus cogens and to observe the relationship between jus cogens, obligation erga omnes, and customary international law. The positivists recognize that jus cogens is an imperative norm within state practice and opinio juris. The positivist theory is not in line with the concept that jus cogens bound to states without their consent since every state has their sovereignty and cannot be bound by any kind of provision without consent. The proponents of the natural law theory stated that peremptory norms are inherited from the tradition of natural law so that it is the highest norm in international law that directly binds countries. On the other hand, the public order theory states that international law recognizes important (imperative) norms, which are hierarchically higher than ordinary norms and customary international law to advance the interests of the international community and to preserve the main values of international law. The three theories are considered insufficient to answer the philosophical basis of jus cogens. In its development, therefore, some new theories have been developed to challenge the basis of jus cogens.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
超越规范在国际法中的概念与地位初探
永久性规范或强制法在国际法中具有独特的地位。与习惯国际法和条约法不同,它们不受派生法的约束,对所有国家都有约束力,无论它们是否愿意受到约束。一些学者阐述了基本理论来回答强制法的理论背景。然而,他们从未取得令人满意的结果。本研究旨在阐述强制法的理论背景,并观察强制法、普遍义务和习惯国际法之间的关系。实证主义者认识到,强制法是国家实践和法律确信中必不可少的规范。实证主义理论不符合强制法未经国家同意对其具有约束力的概念,因为每个国家都有主权,未经同意不受任何条款的约束。自然法理论的支持者指出,强制性规范继承了自然法的传统,因此它是国际法中直接约束各国的最高规范。另一方面,公共秩序理论指出,国际法承认重要(强制性)规范,这些规范在等级上高于普通规范和习惯国际法,以促进国际社会的利益并维护国际法的主要价值观。这三种理论被认为不足以回答强制法的哲学基础。因此,在其发展过程中,出现了一些新的理论来挑战强制法的基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Hasanuddin Law Review
Hasanuddin Law Review Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
The Use of Artificial Intelligence in Armed Conflict under International Law Artificial Intelligence and Administrative Justice: An Analysis of Predictive Justice in France Strengthening National Regulations in Combating Cross-Border Trafficking: Empirical Approach and the Way Forward Navigating Ambiguity: Critiques of Indonesia's Health Law and its Impact on Legal Redress for Medical Malpractice Victims The Constitutionality of Inheritance Rights for Extramarital Children: Assessing the Legal Response under Balinese Customary Law
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1