You may have to Search all our reviewed books and magazines, click the sign up button below to create a free account.
Introduction -- Historical perspectives -- Actor-centred perspectives -- System- oriented perspectives -- Justice and legitimacy.
Norms research in international relations has developed sufficiently over the past thirty-five years to become its own sub-discipline within the field. It has its own corresponding 'toolbox' of concepts, approaches, and methods which have often resulted from debates representing distinct perspectives on how norms matter for IR as a field and for global international relations more generally. Even so, three groups of enduring questions continue to sit at the heart of norms research: first, the processes by which norms emerge, change or disappear, on the one hand, and by which they are contested, violated, diffused, or replaced on the other; second, the agency of actors at sites on the macro-,...
This book is about judicial reasoning in human rights cases. The aim is to explore the question: how is it that notionally universal norms are reasoned by courts in such significantly different ways? What is the shape of this reasoning; which techniques are common across the transnational jurisprudence; and which are particular? The book, comprising contributions by a team of world-leading human rights scholars, moves beyond simply addressing the institutional questions concerning courts and human rights, which often dominate discussions of this kind, seeking instead a deeper examination of the similarities and divergence of reasonings by different courts when addressing comparable human rights questions. These differences, while partly influenced by institutional concerns, cannot be attributed to them alone. This book explores the diverse and rich underlying spectrum of human rights reasoning, as a distinctive and particular form of legal reasoning, evident in the case studies across the selected jurisdictions.
The most important (in)determinacy theses in international law since the 1920s are scrutinised in this book. As Severin Meier demonstrates, the extent of legal determinacy depends neither on some linguistic essence found in the text nor on theories that allegedly stand above practice. Instead, the (in)determinacy of law is shown to arise purely from practice. This reconceptualisation of a key discussion in legal philosophy provides a new perspective on the frame of meaning of legal norms.
This volume brings together a group of renowned experts to discuss the question of whether international law could have developed differently. Contributors explore contingency in theory and practice across a range of fields, including those related to migrants and refugees, the sea and natural resources, and human rights.
This analysis of Hans Kelsen's international law theory takes into account the context of the German international legal discourse in the first half of the twentieth century, including the reactions of Carl Schmitt and other Weimar opponents of Kelsen. The relationship between his Pure Theory of Law and his international law writings is examined, enabling the reader to understand how Kelsen tried to square his own liberal cosmopolitan project with his methodological convictions as laid out in his Pure Theory of Law. Finally, Jochen von Bernstorff discusses the limits and continuing relevance of Kelsenian formalism for international law under the term of 'reflexive formalism', and offers a reflection on Kelsen's theory of international law against the background of current debates over constitutionalisation, institutionalisation and fragmentation of international law. The book also includes biographical sketches of Hans Kelsen and his main students Alfred Verdross and Joseph L. Kunz.