1 / 26

Government S-1740

Government S-1740. INTERNATIONAL LAW Summer 2006. Lecture 2: Explaining the “Legalization” of International Relations. OUTLINE. I. Legalization: a growing trend? II. The Debate over “Law” A. J. Austin: Rules backed by force B. H.L.A.Hart: Primary & secondary rules

billy
Download Presentation

Government S-1740

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Government S-1740 INTERNATIONAL LAW Summer 2006 Lecture 2: Explaining the “Legalization” of International Relations

  2. OUTLINE I. Legalization: a growing trend? II. The Debate over “Law” A. J. Austin: Rules backed by force B. H.L.A.Hart: Primary & secondary rules C. H. Bull: subjective acceptance III. An alternative conception - “Legalization”: Obligation, Precision, Delegation IV. What explains the legalization trend? V. What explains the form agreements take?

  3. I. Legalization: A Growing Trend? Coverage

  4. Source:CharlotteKu, 2001

  5. Growth of international trade law 1946 1995 World trade: Of which, % covered by multilateral agreements $10 billion 20% $150 Billion 90%

  6. I. Legalization: A Growing Trend? • Institutionalization Coverage

  7. I. Legalization: A Growing Trend? Coverage Institutionalization • Judicialization

  8. International Criminal Tribunals since World War II • 1993: Yugoslavia • 1994: Rwanda • 2000: East Timor • 2001: Sierra Leone • 2003: Cambodia • 1998-2003: International Criminal Court

  9. III. The Debate over “Law” • J. Austin: Rules backed by force • H.L.A. Hart: Primary & secondary rules • H. Bull: subjective acceptance

  10. IV. An alternative conception - “Legalization”

  11. IV. An alternative conception - “Legalization”: • Obligation: States are legally bound to a particular rule or commitment; bound to do something or refrain from so doing.

  12. IV. An alternative conception - “Legalization”: • Obligation: States are legally bound to a particular rule or commitment; bound to do something or refrain from so doing. • Precision: the exactness, definiteness of a rule.

  13. IV. An alternative conception - “Legalization”: • Obligation: States are legally bound to a particular rule or commitment; bound to do something or refrain from so doing. • Precision: the exactness, definiteness of a rule. • Delegation: Acceptance of 3rd party authority in dispute settlement, rule making, and rule interpretation.

  14. V. What explains the legalization trend? • More transactions, more to regulate?

  15. V. What explains the legalization trend? • More transactions, more to regulate? • Complexity of interactions? • Demands of smaller states, newer states? • Increased perceptions of interdependence? • New norms that require codification? • End of the Cold War? • Democratization?

  16. V. What explains the legalization trend? • More transactions, more to regulate? • Complexity of interactions? • Demands of smaller states, newer states? • Increased perceptions of interdependence? • New norms that require codification? • End of the Cold War? • Democratization? • US leadership/hegemony? • Too many lawyers?

  17. VI. What explains the form that international agreements take? • Hard versus soft law • Duration and renegotiation provisions

  18. Hard versus Soft Law • HARD: • clear, legally binding obligations • precise language • high delegation • Parties “shall”, “are obligated”, “must…” • SOFT: States should “strive to…” “Efforts will be made to…” “to the best of their abilities…” “as conditions permit…”

  19. Legalization: Hard v Soft Law Hard law Non-self enforcing, Transactions costs Soft law Sovereignty costs Contracting costs Uncertainty

  20. Transition from Soft to Hard Law • Trade: broad liberalization principles specific barrier reductions • Arms control: from confidence building measures to weapons reductions • Environmental agreements: adjustments to small non-binding agreements.

  21. Summary: • Increasingly, states are making more highly “legalized” agreements to regulate their mutual relations • By legalization we mean agreements with greater precision, obligation, and delegation • This is probably due to the density of interactions and growing interdependence • Rational perspective: governments make strategic, purposive decisions about what form these agreements take. • The form these “contracts” take depends on sovereignty costs, transactions costs, contracting costs, and the structure of the information environment. • Next: what about compliance?

More Related