3. Individual as a subject of International Law – Explain.

(Repeated
across all papers)
Synopsis

The evolution of international law has progressively recognized individuals not merely as
passive entities but as active subjects endowed with rights and responsibilities. This essay
delves into this transformation, exploring the historical context, the expansion of individual
rights, mechanisms facilitating individual participation, and the challenges that persist in fully
integrating individuals into the international legal framework.

Introduction

Traditionally, international law was perceived as a domain governing relations exclusively

between sovereign states, with individuals considered indirect beneficiaries or subjects
through their national governments. Over time, this state-centric perspective has shifted,
acknowledging individuals as direct subjects of international law. This shift underscores a
broader recognition of human rights and the imperative for individual accountability in global
affairs.

Historical Context

The Westphalian system of 1648 emphasized state sovereignty, positioning states as the
primary actors in international law. Individuals had no direct standing; their rights and
obligations were mediated through their states. This paradigm began to change post-World
War II, notably with the establishment of the United Nations and the adoption of the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948, which highlighted the inherent rights of
individuals beyond state boundaries.

Expansion of Individual Rights in International Law

The recognition of individuals as subjects of international law has led to a significant

expansion of their rights on the global stage. This development is evident in several key
areas:

Human Rights Instruments

The adoption of comprehensive human rights instruments has been instrumental in this
evolution. Documents such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) and
subsequent treaties have articulated a broad spectrum of rights, including civil, political,
economic, social, and cultural rights. These instruments serve as benchmarks for state
behavior and provide individuals with a framework to assert their rights internationally.

International Humanitarian Law

International humanitarian law (IHL), particularly the Geneva Conventions, directly
addresses the rights of individuals during armed conflicts. IHL sets out protections for
non-combatants, prisoners of war, and other vulnerable groups, emphasizing the humane
treatment of individuals irrespective of the conflict's nature.

International Criminal Law

The establishment of international criminal tribunals and the International Criminal Court
(ICC) has reinforced the notion that individuals can be held accountable for violations of
international law. These institutions prosecute individuals for crimes such as genocide, war
crimes, and crimes against humanity, underscoring personal responsibility in the
international legal system.

Mechanisms of Individual Participation

Several mechanisms facilitate the participation of individuals in international law:

● International Courts and Tribunals: Bodies like the European Court of Human
Rights allow individuals to bring cases directly against states for human rights
violations.
● Human Rights Committees: Treaty-based bodies, such as the Human Rights
Committee under the ICCPR, permit individuals to submit complaints alleging
violations of their rights.
● Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs): NGOs often act on behalf of individuals
or groups, advocating for rights and providing a conduit for individual concerns to
reach international forums.

Limitations and Challenges

Despite these advancements, challenges remain in fully realizing the individual's role in
international law:

● State Sovereignty: The principle of state sovereignty can impede the enforcement of
international legal norms, especially when states are unwilling to hold individuals
accountable or provide redress for violations.
● Access to Justice: Practical barriers, such as limited access to international legal
mechanisms and resources, can hinder individuals from effectively asserting their
rights on the global stage.
● Inconsistent Implementation: Variations in how international legal standards are
implemented across different jurisdictions can lead to unequal protection and
recognition of individual rights.

Conclusion

The evolving recognition of individuals as subjects of international law marks a significant

shift towards a more inclusive and human-centered legal order. While substantial progress
has been made in granting individuals rights and responsibilities, ongoing efforts are
necessary to address the challenges that persist. Strengthening international legal
mechanisms, enhancing access to justice, and ensuring consistent implementation of
international norms are crucial steps towards fully realizing the potential of individuals within
the international legal framework

Write a short note on Hugo Grotius

Introduction

Hugo Grotius (1583–1645), a Dutch jurist, philosopher, and theologian, is widely regarded as
the "father of international law." His pioneering work laid the foundation for modern legal
principles governing the conduct of nations and the concept of natural law.

Early Life and Career

Born in Delft, Netherlands, Grotius was a child prodigy, entering the University of Leiden at
the age of 11. By 15, he had published his first book, and at 16, he accompanied a Dutch
diplomatic mission to France, where he was received by King Henry IV as the "miracle of
Holland." Grotius's early exposure to politics, law, and international affairs significantly
influenced his later works.

Contributions to International Law

Grotius's most influential work, De Jure Belli ac Pacis (On the Law of War and Peace),
published in 1625, systematically addressed the laws of war and peace. In this treatise, he
articulated that natural law—rooted in human nature and reason—governs all individuals and
nations, providing a universal legal framework. This perspective was revolutionary, as it
suggested that international relations should be subject to legal norms rather than mere
power dynamics.

One of Grotius's notable contributions was his argument for the freedom of the seas,
asserting that the oceans should remain international territories open to all nations for
navigation and trade. This principle, presented in his earlier work Mare Liberum (The Free
Sea), has had a lasting impact on maritime law and international trade regulations.

Furthermore, Grotius introduced the concept of "just war," outlining conditions under which
war could be morally and legally justified. He emphasized that wars should be fought for just
causes, conducted in a lawful manner, and aimed at establishing peace. His criteria for just
war have influenced contemporary international humanitarian law and the rules of
engagement.

Philosophical Foundations

Grotius's work was deeply rooted in natural law theory, which posits that certain rights and
moral values are inherent in human nature and universally cognizable through human
reason. He argued that even in the absence of divine intervention, natural law would
possess intrinsic validity, a concept encapsulated in his assertion that natural law would hold
"even if we should concede that which cannot be conceded without the utmost wickedness:
that there is no God, or that the affairs of men are of no concern to Him." citeturn0search9

Legacy and Impact

Grotius's ideas have had a profound and lasting impact on the development of international
law. His emphasis on natural law and the legal regulation of war and peace laid the
groundwork for the establishment of a system of international norms and principles that
continue to influence contemporary international relations. His work has been valorized by
contemporary international theorists, and his views on sovereignty, international rights of
commerce, and the norms of just war continue to inform theories of the international legal
order. citeturn0search0

Conclusion

Hugo Grotius's innovative ideas and writings established a legal framework for international
relations based on natural law and justice. His work continues to influence modern
international law, underscoring the importance of legal principles in governing the conduct of
nations. Grotius's legacy endures as a testament to the enduring relevance of natural law
and the pursuit of justice in international affairs.
Sources of international law

International law, unlike national systems, lacks a centralized legislature or comprehensive code. Its rules
emerge from decentralized actions of states and other entities. The primary sources of international law
are outlined in Article 38 of the ICJ Statute, supplemented by other modern influences.

1. Treaties

Treaties are formal agreements between states or between states and international organizations. They are
referred to by various names, including conventions, protocols, and agreements. Treaties create binding
obligations for signatories, governed by the customary rule of pacta sunt servanda (agreements must be
honored).

Treaties bind only the parties that sign and ratify them, but their impact often extends further. Many
treaties codify existing customary law, as seen in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969),
whose provisions are widely regarded as authoritative even for non-parties. Treaties may also contribute
to the development of customary law when widely accepted and applied. For instance, the ICJ in the
North Sea Continental Shelf Cases (1969) noted that a treaty provision could evolve into customary law if
accompanied by consistent state practice and opinio juris.

Furthermore, treaties often function as transformative instruments in international law. By addressing new
areas like human rights, environmental protection, and global security, treaties have been pivotal in
reshaping international legal norms, especially since 1945.

2. Customary International Law

Customary law is an unwritten but universally binding source of international law, predating treaties. It
arises from two critical elements:

● State Practice: This includes consistent and widespread actions or statements by states, encompassing
actions by governments, courts, and legislatures. It also includes verbal commitments or official positions.

● Opinio Juris: A belief among states that their practice is legally obligatory. The ICJ in the North Sea
Continental Shelf Cases (1969) and the SS Lotus Case (1927) stressed that both elements must coexist for
customary law to emerge. For example, the immunity of heads of state from foreign jurisdiction is
established through widespread state practice accompanied by opinio juris.

However, inconsistent practice does not negate customary law if deviations are treated as breaches rather
than evidence of a new rule, as explained in the Nicaragua Case (1986). States can also invoke the
persistent objector principle, which allows them to reject emerging customs by consistently opposing
them before they solidify.

3. General Principles of Law

These principles are derived from widely recognized legal norms across national legal systems. They are
invoked to fill gaps in international law, particularly in areas not covered by treaties or customs.
Examples include the principles of good faith, equity, and the recognition of legal personality. In the
Barcelona Traction Case (1970), the ICJ used general principles to adapt concepts from domestic legal
systems to an international context. These principles are seldom adopted wholesale from any one legal
system; instead, they represent commonalities across jurisdictions.

4. Judicial Decisions

Judicial decisions serve as a subsidiary source of international law under Article 38(1)(d) of the ICJ
Statute. Although there is no doctrine of binding precedent in international law, previous judgments of the
ICJ and other tribunals are often used as persuasive authority. Domestic court decisions also play a role in
shaping customary international law, as they reflect state practice. Article 38(1)(d) recognizes both
international and national court decisions as valuable interpretive tools.

5. Writings of Publicists

The scholarly works of distinguished international lawyers provide guidance in understanding and
interpreting international law. These writings, however, do not independently create legal norms. They are
persuasive rather than authoritative and must be considered within the broader context of state practice
and opinio juris.

6. Other Influences on International Law The sources listed in Article 38 have been expanded in
practice to include contributions from international organizations, particularly the United Nations.

● UNGeneralAssembly Resolutions: Though not legally binding, resolutions can influence customary
law when widely accepted and treated as evidence of opinio juris. For example, the Nuclear Weapons
Advisory Opinion (1996) highlighted how consistent state positions in the UN could contribute to custom.
● Security Council Decisions: Binding under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, Security Council decisions
impose obligations on all UN member states. However, they do not create general legal norms but rather
address specific situations, as noted in the Tadic Case (1995).

● International Law Commission (ILC): The ILC’s studies, such as the Articles on State Responsibility
(2001), contribute significantly to the development of customary law and treaty frameworks.

7. Hierarchy of Norms in International Law While international law does not have a strict hierarchy,
certain norms hold superior status:

● JusCogens (Peremptory Norms): These are fundamental rules, such as prohibitions on genocide,
slavery, torture, and aggression, from which no derogation is allowed. Under Article 53 of the Vienna
Convention, treaties conflicting with jus cogens norms are void.

● Treaties vs. Customary Law: Treaties generally prevail over customary law among their parties but do
not override the rights or obligations of non-parties. Conflicts involving jus cogens norms are rare and
require careful scrutiny. For example, in the Arrest Warrant Case (2002), claims of conflict between
sovereign immunity and the prohibition of torture were rejected.

Conclusion

International law’s decentralized and flexible nature allows it to adapt to the evolving needs of the global
community. Its primary sources—treaties, customs, general principles, judicial decisions, and scholarly
writings—are complemented by the growing influence of international organizations. Together, these
sources ensure the dynamism and resilience of international legal norms, balancing state sovereignty with
global cooperation

Subjects of International Law

International law encompasses a diverse range of entities, each recognized for its ability to hold rights,
duties, and responsibilities within its framework. Traditionally, states have been the primary subjects,
given their sovereignty and central role in international relations. States possess inherent rights, such as
independence, equality, and self-determination, and corresponding duties to respect treaties, uphold
international peace, and honor the sovereignty of other nations. The Montevideo Convention outlines the
criteria for statehood, including a permanent population, defined territory, government, and the capacity to
engage in international relations.

Expansion of Subjects in Modern International Law

Beyond states, international law has evolved to include individuals, international organizations, and other
non-state actors. Historically, individuals were considered indirect subjects, but today they play a
significant role. International law grants individuals protections through treaties like the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and holds them accountable for crimes such as genocide,
war crimes, and crimes against humanity. This shift was underscored by landmark events such as the
Nuremberg Trials, which affirmed that international law applies to individuals directly, ensuring
accountability for atrocities.

Role of International Organizations

International organizations like the United Nations (UN), European Union (EU), and World Trade
Organization (WTO) are recognized as subjects of international law, deriving their legal personality from
treaties and charters. This status enables them to enter into agreements, bring claims in courts, and enjoy
specific immunities. These organizations are instrumental in fostering global cooperation, addressing
international challenges, and ensuring compliance with international norms.

Recognition of Non-State Actors

Non-state actors, including armed groups, liberation movements, and multinational corporations, have
also gained recognition under specific circumstances. For example, armed groups advocating for
self-determination in decolonization contexts have been acknowledged as subjects under international
frameworks. Their recognition reflects the dynamic nature of international law, which adapts to address
emerging global issues.
Theories on Subjects of International Law
Various theories provide perspectives on the subjects of international law. The realist theory contends that
only states are true subjects, as they are the primary actors in international relations. On the other hand,
the fictional theory emphasizes individuals as the ultimate subjects, suggesting that states and
organizations derive their roles from the rights and duties of individuals. The functional theory strikes a
balance, recognizing states, individuals, and international organizations as subjects, each with distinct
roles and responsibilities.

Conclusion
Modern international law has expanded its ambit to address global challenges such as human rights,
environmental protection, and security, reflecting the interconnected nature of its subjects. While states
remain central to the system, the inclusion of individuals, organizations, and non-state entities highlights
the evolving and inclusive character of international law. This adaptability ensures that the legal
framework remains effective in a complex and globalized world

Relationship between International Law and Municipal law

Introduction

The relationship between international law and municipal law addresses how global legal norms interact
with a country's domestic legal system. It reflects the coexistence of two distinct legal orders: one
governing relations between states and the other regulating internal affairs within a state. Theoretical
approaches to this relationship include monism, where international law is automatically part of domestic
law, and dualism, which views the two systems as separate, requiring explicit incorporation of
international norms into domestic legislation. This interplay is crucial in areas such as human rights,
trade, and environmental protection, as states navigate the balance between adhering to international
obligations and maintaining national sovereignty.

■ Thereare two principal theories on the relationship between international law and municipal law:
○ Monism ○ Dualism
■ Theseare two diametrically opposite theories.

Monism

■ Kelsen, an Austrian Jurist is the leader of Monist school of law.

■ TheMonists hold the view that international and municipal law are a part of one legal system.
■ Theycontend that both international law and municipal law not only resemble each other but also spring
from the same grundnorm or standard which is the fountainhead of all laws.

■ Delegation theory
○ TheMonists support this theory.
○ According to this theory international law will apply to municipal law without any specific delegation.
○ According to this theory there is no transformation of international law into municipal law.
○ Theprocess of creation of municipal law is prolongation of one single act of creation i.e. creation of
international norms.
○ Thetheory, therefore, attaches primacy to international law over municipal law ○ Hungaryv.Slovak
Republic (2012)
● Thiscase is related to the prohibition of entry of President of Hungary in Slovak Republic.
● Thejudgment was a result of Hungary’s appeal in the European Union (EU) Court against Slovak
Republic.
● TheCourt held that the EU law has to be read in consonance with the international law and the
international law is the part of EU law.
● TheCourt observed that according to international law the head of state enjoys a particular status in
international relations which entails privileges and immunities.

Dualism
■ The Proponents of Dualism are Triepel and Anzilotti.
■ Thedualists give primacy to municipal law and consider it superior.
■ Dualists contend that the international law and the municipal law have no relation to each other.
■ Theyhold that international and municipal law hold a completely different character.
■ Dualists give three reasons in support their stance: Aspects Source Subjects Substance International
Law Common will of States States Municipal Law Will of the State Individuals Law between sovereign
states and hence a weaker law

■ Transformation or Specific Adoption Theory

○ TheDualists support this theory. Law of sovereign over individuals
○ According to this theory, international law rules become binding on municipal courts only if they are
transformed into municipal legislations.
○ According to this theory there is a difference between international treaties which is in the form of
promises and the municipal legislations which are in the form of commands.
○ Therefore, there must be a transformation of international law in the form of municipal law.

Practice Followed in India

■ International Customs
○ Thedoctrine of incorporation propounded by Blackstone is not followed in India.
○ Article 51 (c) of the Constitution of India (COI) is the guiding light in this regard which provides that
the State shall endeavor to “foster respect for international law and treaty obligations.”
○ However, this does not mean that international law is not given due regard in India. ○ Inthecase of
Annakumaru Pillai v. Muthupayal (1907), the Supreme Court recognised the existence of historic title on
the basis of prescription and acquiescence. Thus, the Court enforced international customary norm.
○ However, in the case of ADM, Jabalpur v. Shivakant Shukla (1976), the Supreme Court rejected the
argument that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights are part of municipal laws. It was held that they
are mere ethical rules. However, this was touted to be a fallacious interpretation.
○ Itis to be noted that the much-celebrated dissenting opinion of Justice Khanna in the above case laid
down that that where there is a conflict between the municipal law and the international law the former
would prevail.
● However, in case two construction of municipal law are possible the Court should lean towards the
construction that in harmony with international law or treaty obligations. ○ InVellore Citizens Welfare
Forum v. Union of India (1996), the Supreme Court held that the precautionary principle and the
polluter’s pay principle have acquired a character of international custom and hence they are a part of
Indian law. ○ Thus, the Supreme Court treats international custom as a part of Indian law in case there is
no conflict between International Law and Indian Law.

■ International Treaties
○ Constitutional Provisions
● Article 246 of the COI provides that the Parliament can make laws on any matter enumerated in the List
I of Seventh Schedule. Entry 14 of List I deals with entering into treaties and agreements and the
implementation of those treaties and agreements.
● Article 253 of the Constitution provides that the Parliament can make laws with a view to implementing
the international treaties. ○ Treaty Making– AnExecutive Act
● In Case of Union of India v. Manmull Jain (1954), the Court held that treaty making is an executive act
and not a legislative act. However, legislation may be required to give effect to the terms of the treaty. ○
Implementation of Treaties in India
● On The issue of implementation of treaties, the practice in India resembles both England and the United
States.
● InIndia, international treaty calls for legislative action if it affects application of existing laws, imposes
financial obligations or requires specific legislative authority for execution.

● The Concept of self-executing and non–self executing treaties is also recognized by the Supreme Court
in India in the case of Maganbhai Ishwarbhai Patel v. Union of India (1970).

Conclusion The two theories monism and dualism provide for relation between municipal and
international law. These theories help in determining the effect of international treaties and customs on
municipal laws. These are diametrically opposite theories, and each State follows its own practice

Detailed Explanation of British Practice Regarding the Application of International Law

within the Municipal Sphere

● Dualist Approach to International Law

● The UK adopts a dualist approach, which means that international law and
domestic law are treated as separate legal systems.
● International law does not automatically become part of UK domestic law; it
requires incorporation through domestic legislation to have any legal effect.
● Parliamentary Sovereignty
 ● The principle of parliamentary sovereignty is fundamental in the UK, allowing
Parliament to make or unmake any law, even if such laws may conflict with
international obligations.
● This means that while the UK is bound by international law on the international
stage, it can legislate contrary to its international obligations domestically.
● Incorporation of International Treaties
● Provisions of international treaties can only have effect in domestic law if they are
incorporated into national legislation.
● Treaties that are not incorporated are generally not recognized by UK courts,
reflecting the dualist approach.
● The UK courts have accepted customary international law as a source of common
law, which can influence judicial decisions but does not have direct effect unless
incorporated.
● Judicial Interpretation and Case Law
● The UK courts have established that they lack jurisdiction to construe or apply
treaties that have not been incorporated into national law, rendering them
effectively non-justiciable.
● In the case of R (S G) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, it was
emphasized that treaties not incorporated into domestic law cannot create rights or
obligations under UK law.
● The Miller case further confirmed the dualist approach, stating that international
law and domestic law operate in independent spheres. The court noted that while
Parliament can legislate without regard to international law, such legislation may
still breach international obligations.
● Impact of International Law on Domestic Legislation
● Although Parliament is sovereign, the UK Government has acknowledged that it
cannot use domestic law to justify a breach of international obligations, as per
Article 27 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.
● The courts may consider international law when interpreting ambiguous statutory
provisions, guiding judicial discretion and influencing the development of
common law, but they are not compelled to do so.
● Examples of Legislative Incorporation
● Certain treaties require specific domestic legislation before they can have any
legal effect in the UK.
● For instance, the Human Rights Act 1998 incorporates the European Convention
on Human Rights into UK law, allowing individuals to bring claims based on the
Convention in domestic courts.
● Conclusion
● The British practice regarding the application of international law within the
municipal sphere is characterized by a dualist framework, where international
 obligations must be explicitly incorporated into domestic law to have effect. This
approach underscores the sovereignty of Parliament while also recognizing the
influence of international law on the interpretation and development of domestic
legal principles. The courts play a crucial role in determining the applicability of
international law within the UK legal system, often navigating the complexities of
parliamentary sovereignty and international obligations.

Examine the theories relating to nature and basis of lnternational Law.

● International Law is essential for maintaining international relations, providing a set of rules that
regulate the conduct of nation-states.
● It serves as a framework for resolving conflicts and ensuring peace and harmony, with states
feeling obliged to adhere to its rules.
● Violations of International Law can damage a state's credibility and undermine the value of the
legal system in the eyes of its citizens.

DEFINITIONS OF INTERNATIONAL LAW

Earlier, instead of International Law, the term used was “Law of Nations”. The term International Law
was first coined by Jeremy Bentham in 1780. Various definitions of International Law were given by
Oppenheim, Brierly, Torsten Gill, Hackworth, Fenwick, Schwarzenberger; since, time and again,
International Law has been defined by focusing on different factors, so there can be no single universally
acceptable definition to the same. Some of the definitions are mentioned below:

Oppenheim defined international law as the name for the body of customary and conventional rules which
are considered legally binding by the civilised states in their intercourse with each other.[5]

Brierly defined it as the body of rules and principles of action which are binding upon civilised states in
their mutual dealings, maybe when they are in hostility or in peace.[6]

According to Hackworth, international law consists of a body of rules governing the relations between the
states. It is a system of jurisprudence which, for the most part, has evolved out of the experiences and the
necessities of situations that have arisen from time to time.[7]

Fenwick defined it as the body of general principles and specific rules which are binding upon the
members of the international community in their mutual relations.[8]

The definitions mentioned above are not the only ones and there exists many more, which depict the
expansive nature of the law and a distinct definition would tend to restrict the scope of the subject. In the
puritan form, International Law can be defined as the sum of the rules accepted by the nation states as to
determine their code of conduct towards each other’s and to their subjects also; in its broadest sense it can
be said that this law governs people of the world irrespective of the political and geographical constraints
and colour, creed, religion.

International Law deals with States as entities irrespective of their size or power. It provides with rules
and regulations to the nation states and expects that the states abide by the same. As the scope and nature
of International is dynamic, now these rules are not only applicable to states but to International
Institutions, non-State entities and individuals also.

NATURE OF INTERNATIONAL LAW

Earlier, the basis of international law was based totally on municipal law and for the same reason was
considered to be law of nature. The controversy on its nature emerged with the advent of 19th century i.e.,
due to positivists, that whether international law is true law or not and the answer to this question varies
with the definition of law as given by various jurists. Thus there are two distinct thoughts on this view.
The positivists are of the view that international law is no law and consists merely of rules of positive
morality and stated that there cannot be no international law since there is no international legislature to
make it, no international executive to enforce it, and no effective international judiciary to develop it or to
resolve disputes about it.[9] According to them as there is no superior authority to enforce the law
therefore the states do not have much respect for it and thus has lack of intent to obey it and they obey it
only if there is some personal interest in it.

But the modern jurists are of a different view and state that international law is not a set of rules of
positive morality, but it is as much a legal system as any other municipal legal system. The international
law is very much considered law by the international communities and those who conduct international
business in various capacities. Even the State which wishes to escape from an inconvenient rule of
international law would not deny the existence of international law as such, but would justify its action
either by challenging the existence of such a rule or by invoking another rule applicable to its case or
claiming that the rule should be modified to meet a new situation.
The above mentioned schools of law have different views regarding the nature of international law due to
difference of view in the definition of the word “law”.

THEORIES AS TO THE BASIS OF INTERNATIONAL LAW

There are mainly two theories as to the basis of international law due to difference in opinion as to where
does the international law derive its binding authority, which are mentioned below:

● NATURALIST THEORY: Most of the jurists of 16th and 17th century were of the view that the
basis of any law is law of nature and international law being part of law has the same basis and
for the same reason is binding on the states. At a point of time, Natural Law was regarded to be
Divine Law connected with religion, but later this definition changes and Natural Law was
considered to be an ideal law which dictated as to what is right and wrong behaviour of human.
Thus, all States, as members of universal community, are obliged in order to conserve peace and
security to act always in accordance with the principle that the common good of mankind is
 paramount to their individual interest.[14] Thus, international law was considered to be binding in
nature by this school of thought because its basis was natural law.
In the 18th and 19th century, naturalists faced severe criticism and declined and led to rise of positivists.

● POSITIVIST THEORY: This school of thought was in vogue in the 19th century and was of the
view that people would be bound to obey law if it was created by appropriate legislative authority
or sovereign irrespective of its being reasonable or unreasonable.[15] According to them, law
must be analysed empirically, irrespective of its ethical elements, i.e., law must be studied as it
exists and law is the command of the sovereign having sanction. The rules of international law
and municipal law are equally binding, since both are issued by the will of the state, which is the
source of validity of law.[16] Thus, it is the will of State, which commands obedience and is the
basis of international law.
●
The two above mentioned schools of thoughts are extreme and the true basis of international law, vests
neither solely with natural law nor with will or consent of the state, rather there are varieties of factors due
to which States obey international law. International law is the necessary concomitant of statehood, and is
binding on states because they are states and with the canons of international law, the rights and duties of
states are defined.

DEVELOPMENT OF INTERNATIONAL LAW

The position occupied by International Law and International Organizations has varied from time to time.
Earlier there was no universal law binding on all the nation states but now they have to abide by laws. The
law was once restricted to one’s region, slowly and steadily, it included in its arena such laws as would
help in maintaining peace in the neighbouring land. The enactment of International Law was always
essential and will be essential in the time to come provided amendments take place according to the world
scenario. As earlier none would have imagined that restricting the use of nuclear plants would be
important but now, the scenario is such that if it is not forbidden then nation states would not think twice
to have a nuclear war. International Law has always acted in the promotion of peace and security, as with
the establishment of International Court of Justice, various nations’ disputes have been resolved, if there
would have been no International Law then the scenario would be such that the nation states would be
waging war even for trivial disputes. International Law has always been and will be one of the most
essential laws, without which the world could even come to an end.