{"title":"习惯国际法的性质:我们所需要的只是实践","authors":"Miloš Hrnjaz","doi":"10.5937/pravzap0-34452","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The main objective of this paper is to critically assess the dominant additive theory of the formation of Customary International Law by using the concept of discursive normative practice and the work of Gerald Postema. My central conclusion is that the use of this concept provides an explanation of the process of formation of Customary International Law that is superior to the additive theory which consists of two elements - practice and opinio juris. On the other hand, Postema's theory also has its own weaknesses, and this paper explores ways to improve it.","PeriodicalId":53056,"journal":{"name":"Pravni Zapisi","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Nature of Customary international law: All we need is practice\",\"authors\":\"Miloš Hrnjaz\",\"doi\":\"10.5937/pravzap0-34452\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The main objective of this paper is to critically assess the dominant additive theory of the formation of Customary International Law by using the concept of discursive normative practice and the work of Gerald Postema. My central conclusion is that the use of this concept provides an explanation of the process of formation of Customary International Law that is superior to the additive theory which consists of two elements - practice and opinio juris. On the other hand, Postema's theory also has its own weaknesses, and this paper explores ways to improve it.\",\"PeriodicalId\":53056,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pravni Zapisi\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pravni Zapisi\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5937/pravzap0-34452\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pravni Zapisi","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5937/pravzap0-34452","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
Nature of Customary international law: All we need is practice
The main objective of this paper is to critically assess the dominant additive theory of the formation of Customary International Law by using the concept of discursive normative practice and the work of Gerald Postema. My central conclusion is that the use of this concept provides an explanation of the process of formation of Customary International Law that is superior to the additive theory which consists of two elements - practice and opinio juris. On the other hand, Postema's theory also has its own weaknesses, and this paper explores ways to improve it.