INTERNATIONAL LAW

AS A
TRUE OR A WEAK LAW

Submitted To Submitted By

Mr Yatin Kathuria Varun Pandit

A3221516159
BBA LLB(H)
Section- C
Batch -2016-21
Amity Law School
 INTRODUCTION

Rules of international law have been developed in a systematic

manner since last 5 centuries, but some provisions have there roots
in antiquity. Greeks, Romans, Jews and Hindus have practiced
those rules in war and peace.
Ancient India was divided into kingdoms, all those kingdom had
some characteristics of international law though they were not
sovereign in true sense.
International law or law of nations can be used interchangeably,
that means law of countries.
First time in 1780s, British Jurist Jeremy Bentham used the term
International law. Since then many jurist have defined
international law in there own sense.
 INTERNATIONAL LAW
AS A
TRUE LAW OR WEAK LAW ?

According to Oppenheim,“International law is the name for the

body of customary and conventional rules which are considered
legally binding by civilised states in there intercourse with each
other”
Oppenheim treated international law as true law because of the 2
reasons -
a. International law is constantly recognised as law in practice.
Government of different nations feel that they are legally
bound to follow international law.

b. While breaking the international law, state never denies it’s

legal existence, rather they recognise it and try to interpret it
in order to justify there conduct.

But as per Austin, International law is not a true law but a positive
morality. According to him International law is, “ Law is the
command of sovereign attended by sanctions if not followed”
Reasons laid down by Austin for not treating international law as
true law was that it had neither sovereign authority to enact law
and nor there was enforcement agency which can enforce
international law. But during the time Austin gave his definition,
international law was not quite developed leaving to which Austin
gave this kind of remarks.
But in today’s world International law definition can be matched
with definition given by Austin.
First, in present, we have international legislative authority for law
making. United Nation Council in 1948 established expert legal
body knows as international work commission. Therefore one
element of his definition is present now.
Second, in present time if rules are violated by countries, sanction
may be applied against it. Not only by the aggrieved state, but by
UN too. Therefore another element of his definition is matching,
i.e, attended by sanctions if not followed.
Third, in present times, International court of justice is formed
whose decisions are binding upon the parties to the case. If parties
fail to perform as per the judgment passed by the ICJ then, UN
Security Council can take appropriate steps to enforce the
judgement.
Lastly, existence of international legislation, a sanctioning
authority are recent development in international law.
Seeing all the four points above regarding current scenario of
International law, it can be said that the definition of international
law fits the definition of given by Austin, and hence be called true
law too.
 CONCLUSION

To my conclusion, I would treat international law a true law.

Keeping in mind Austin definition, we can say that international
law as punishment if laws are not followed, the law is formed by a
sanction and there is enforcing mechanism too.
International Court of Justice is set for enforcing all the
international laws which are binding on all the countries. If
decisions of the ICJ is not abided by then UN Security Councils
take appropriate steps to enforce the judgment.
For example - Nuremberg Trials- The trial was held against all
prominent Nazi Army Generals who ever involved in mass
massacre of jews. The proceeding were held by allied forces for
World War II.
International law have been like any other law has been supported
by all nations and are abided by them too with great care. All
country try not to violate the international law or else they will
have to bear the punishment for violation of international law, like
ay other law on whose violation punishment is enforced by law
defaulter. Like any other law, International law is not
discriminatory or partial towards one country, it is unbiased and
just for all.
Therefore, I conclude international law as a true law in all sense.