This issue is centered between Monism and Dualism Theory. These two theories contradict in terms of application and understanding between International Law and Municipal Law. For the Monism theory, there is a union between International Law and Municipal Law and it asserts that International Law is automatically affects the Domestic Law of a country. According also in this theory, International Law prevails over Municipal Law because this theory asserts that Municipal Law is considered weak if it does not conform to the provisions of International Law.
On the other hand is the Dualism Theory that negates Monism Theory. For this theory, International Law and Municipal Law is totally distinct and separate from each other.
…show more content…
Allow me to put some political theory in this paper. According to Machiavelli” the absence of sound law assures the absence of sound military, while the presence of sound military assures the presence of sound laws”. This quoted statement has been accepted by the many as a best way to preserve order which was one of the center objectives of International Law. In the dispute over West Philippine Sea or South China Sea, the decision is rendered in favor to Philippines. But China stood firm in the premise of Spratly. It did not accept the jurisdiction of ICJ to hear this case. In this scenario, China should be liable. But is there any super body that can enforce strict compliance to China? No. It is very different if we commit violations to other country, we see patrol police and etc. How about China committing violation under International Law, is there any that will arrest China? None, but only through the use force. Now if this is the case Municipal prevails over International Law and should prevail over International Law because International Law lacks the sound military power as what Machiavelli said as a foundation of an orderly
This proves that with two similar cases analyzed , there are not only complexities within the law, but rather inconsistencies as likes cases are being treated differently, and with that, results in a number of differed
All people of China shall receive some type of right of course. The emperor has right to rule the entire population, if only he treats properly and follows the basic principles of good
Clear concise policy guidelines on the use of military force need to formulated. Our national interests will clash with the national interests of other countries or groups; we must be committed to following through with defending our policies, or we further loose our national
For Mearsheimer, this is the very basis of realistic thinking and in turn equates international order to anarchy. 2. Great powers maintain and continue to acquire militaristic capabilities in order to eradicate the idea of weakness and establish sovereignty over lesser powers. 3. A country can never be sure of another country’s motive hence each party is left
He should be turned over to the Board of Punishment, and should be tried and severely sentenced.” The Chinese government felt that their opinions and values were being ignored by the british despite their
In April of 2010, China’s government revised a previously existing amendment to increase their control of information flows. This law deals with the endangerment of
In the article, it reads, " Criticism of the government isn't tolerated, and people who speak out are routinely imprisoned. China's government throws people in jail if they are caught talking poorly about the government, or using a VPN (virtual private networks). " People are thrown in jail, just for talking poorly of the government. Talk about cruel, and
Many people consider the repressive capability of an authoritarian regime as the most serious factor as to why these regimes remains durable. They are able to some what manipulate and establish their rule as almost a norm in society. It is obvious that repression is very much present in china in a number of different ways for example in relation to internet censorship. Internet censorship being the great firewall of china a surveillance project controlled and operated by the Ministry of Public Security (MPS) division of the Chinese government. Internet censorship breaches the right to freedom of expression and the surveillance of it also breaches the right to privacy (Morozov,2011).
The first great-war shattered the human mind so profound that out of its aftermaths’ emerged a fresh discipline (in 1919 at the University of Whales known to us as International Relations) proposed to prevent war. “It was deemed by the scholars that the study of International Politics shall find the root cause of the worlds political problems and put forward solutions to help politicians solve them” (Baylis 2014:03). International Relations happened to play the role of a ‘correcting-mechanism’ restoring the world order of peace and amity by efforting at its best to maintain the worlds’ status quo. However with the emergence of a second world war much more massive that the first put at stake all the values of that young discipline of IR. The
Thousands of demonstrators for democracy in China filled Beijing’s Tiananmen Square. They paraded around with a thirty-foot-high statue of the “Goddess of Democracy”. However China’s autocratic rulers weren’t in favor of democracy and got rid of all the notions that they were going to change. They ruined the festivities by running over the crowds with large tanks,
After all, the law which is inseparable from the justice is understandable as civilized communication and background for nonviolent conflict solving process. On the other hand, the war is also the way to solve conflicts, but in a different way, using the suffering and the price of life. Apparently, because everyone understands that war is extreme and unacceptable social situation, States and international society are trying to find its reasoning or justification. “The just war tradition, and the international law which follows it, is thus a middle-ground moral tradition trying to regulate armed force in a way which is fair, reasonable, and mindful of consequences.”
Introduction In this article, Eric Poser has elaborated several reasons which made human rights a failure in international legal regime. The most highlighted issues are hypocrite policies of US and EU which has directly questioned credibility and integrity of their law and justice. The second reason is role played by Russia and China, the two major economic powers who in order to sustain their power, are involved in human rights violations. The third most important reason is standardized model of Universal Declaration of Human Rights which is ideal but not practical in various countries.
There are reasons for this, first is that, internal implementation of international law is always conditioned by a rule of the state’s municipal law. Clearly stating that international law’ internal interpretation is always governed by the municipal constitution. Second is that in national courts, even a monist country, their courts may fail sometimes to execute treaties which are binding under international law. United State law is an example of non-self-executing treaty. While dualist country’s courts, unincorporated treaties are given limited effect on the internal process.
GLOBALIZATION, TECHNOLOGY AND LAW Globalization and Technology Globalization has completely transformed the way in which the world and its people interact. Earlier there were several roadblocks in the ability to communicate and interact with the people worldwide. But now, the world is becoming more and more globalized in all spheres: Business, financial, social, economical, etc. Over the years, a lot of technological advancements have come into picture including the changes in the field of Information Technology, having a significant impact on the global landscape.
The weakness of international law becomes evident when we compare it with municipal law. The greatest shortcoming of international law is that it is not enforceable and it lacks effective legislative machinery. International court of justice lacks compulsory jurisdiction. The sanctions and the enforcement machinery of the international law are so weak. International law cannot be invoked to settle a dispute which is essentially a domestic matter of that state.