MODERN NATURAL PHILOSPHERS 1) Lon .N. Fuller: He was a great legal philosopher, who criticized legal positivism and appreciated a secular and procedural form of natural law theory. He does not said that the principles of the legal system should adhere to the rules of morality or such any other standard. According to him morality can be broadly classified into A) Substantive morality (ii) procedural morality. He believes that law is essentially subject to a procedural morality.
Liberal is a paradigm which is a belief in the positive uses of government to bring justice, equality of opportunity, peace and looks more to the nature of state. Liberalism is a philosophy based on the belief about the ultimate value of individual freedom and the opportunities for human progress. Liberalism is talking about rationality, moral autonomy, human rights, democracy, opportunity, and choice that built upon commitment to the principles of freedom and equality. There is a long traditional in Liberal thinking about international relations’ characteristic. .
International human rights law (HRL) is applicable during times of peace; and International humanitarian law (IHL) is applicable during time of armed conflict, war, and occupation. These two laws are founded to complete each other and both are part of international law which recognizes relations between states. International human rights law and international humanitarian law are applicable in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, but Israel is trying to evade its responsibility in the application of them and violate them. International human rights law aims to protect the fundamental rights of individuals and groups from violations. It depends on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in1948, also there
Institutionalists also focus on the free riding problem, which assumes that nations will tend to cheat and not do their part in producing public goods. International institutions, such as the United Nations or World Trade Organization, can help in establishing and sustaining cooperation among states by reducing transaction costs, helping with monitoring (free riding problem), and offering third party mediation. Neorealism and institutionalism have their differences, but they share also some common assumptions. Therefore, both perspectives agree that states are the main actors in international relations, act in rational self-interest, and are faced with anarchy as an obstacle to cooperation. However, neorealists view anarchy as a threat to survival, while institutionalists see it as a threat to cooperation.
The differential meaning between procedural justice and substantive justice is that substantive justice examines the outcome of the dispute and seeks that the correct outcome has been reached. Comparatively procedural justice as discussed in Cooperation in Groups: Procedural Justice, Social Identity and Behavioural Engagement by Tyler and Blader and from a legal and psychological view describes it as justice which looks to achieve a just outcome. A system of law aims to set rules and regulations which result in disputes being determined in accordance with a fair process. This said the process of law is one that results in a fair outcome. Martin Luther King Jr himself believed "Justice denied anywhere diminishes justice everywhere," backing the notion of importance of a fair trial and a just outcome.
This paper will assess the theory of justice articulated by John Rawls ‘A theory of justice’. It will look at the original position, the two principles of justice and will discuss the relationship between distributive justice, liberty and equality. This paper argues that Rawls’ approach provides a persuasive method of evaluating a political - moral conception of justice. He offers a framework for the legitimate use of power. However, legitimacy is only the minimal standard of moral acceptability, it is justice that sets the maximal standard; justice is the only mechanism that can arrange social institutions the best (morally).
The implication of this definition, as many may choose to understand it is that justice is equal and strictly tied to the rule of law. However, the moment one takes a keen and conservative look into what the meaning of the law is and the operations of legal systems of the past and contemporary societies, it is possible to understand that this definition is based on issues far deeper than the superficial aspect of rigid following of the laws. A law is a form of guideline, as indicated through technical, philosophical, and ethical logistics, that gives direction as to the course of action or order of events in case of various scenarios arising (Plato 104). The law is coined in such a way that, in order to discern what is right and what is wrong in decision-making, the system has to consider that the involved are human beings with feelings, ethical values, and varying temperaments among other
At some point if the state agrees to the terms of the international agreement, it will consider the provisions of the agreement as a natural and morally accepted culture within the state, and thus changing their preferences completely. With knowing how states and individuals react on International Policies we can figure out how does a state come into a decision of accepting, adopting and potentially making an appeal to create international Laws and Policies. This essay dwells on how different factors such as economics, society and politics affect the acceptance and comprehension of the state and its people with regards to International Laws and Policies. How does factors such as economic, social and political issues affect the International Arena in general? According to Thomas Hobbes, Political Realism is a key factor in analyzing International Relations, International Relations is a struggle of self-interested states bound on making their own state stronger and more capable than
The advocates of culture in conflict resolution such as Stephen Weiss (1994) and Glen Fisher (1980) believe that that culture affects negotiations and mediation because there is a logical chain between culture and human behaviour and perceptions which in turn has an impact on their decision making style. Bercovitch and Elgström also, stress the importance of culture in conflict resolution. They noted that “culture can also influence negotiations regardless of misunderstandings: it affects the positions as well as the strategies of the conflict parties” . On the other hand, some scholars oppose the argument that culture plays a crucial role in conflict resolution. They explained that mediation and conflict resolution is a ‘universal diplomatic culture’, which in turn minimises the impact of individual national cultures .
In moral code / moral code of conduct, which it is only kind of basic agreement, the violation over it there will be no punishment and if there is the agreement is going to be changed by the actor who involve in the agreement. Yet, in law there will be punishment if we see there is violation towards the rule which is legalized and implemented. Therefore, it is clear that international law is a law not just kind of moral code / moral code of conduct, based on its definition and its