PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW
PROJECT ON
PLACE OF INDIVIDUAL
IN INTERNATIONAL LAW
SUBMITTED TO:PROF GHULAM YAZDANI
FACULTY OF LAW,JAMIA MILLIA ISLAMIA
SUBMITTED BY:MOHD MUNIS SIDDIQUI
2ND YEAR, SECTION B
FACULTY OF LAW
JAMIA MILLIA ISLAMIA
ROLE OF INDIVIDUAL IN PIL
Page 1
Acknowledgement
I am feeling highly elated to work on the project role of individual in public
international law under the guidance of my faculty of public international law
prof. Ghulam yazdani. I am very grateful to him for his exemplary guidance. I would like to
enlighten my readers regarding this topic and I hope I have tried my best to pave the way for
bringing more luminosity to this topic.
I also want to thank all of my friends, without whose cooperation this project was not
possible. Apart from all these, I want to give special thanks to the librarian of my
university who made every relevant materials regarding to my topic available to me at the
time of my busy research work and gave me assistance. And at last I am very much obliged
to the God who provided me the potential for the rigorous research work.
ROLE OF INDIVIDUAL IN PIL
Page 2
Table of content
Introduction of international laws
Origin of international law
Role of individual in public international law
Theory of hans kelsen
Function of state and individual in public international law
Structural individual rights
International court of justice
Conclusion
Bibliography
ROLE OF INDIVIDUAL IN PIL
Page 3
INTRODUCTION TO INTERNATIONAL LAW
International law is the body of rules that nations consider to be binding in their relations
.International law governs relations between independent states. the rule of law binding upon
states therefore emanates from free will as expressed in conventions (treaties) or usage
(customary state practice) generally accepted as expressing principle of law established in order
to regulate the relations between these co-existing independent communities or with a view to
achievement of common aims.
For one to understand international law its wise for him or her to note that there are basically
two types of international law and they are private international law and public international law
Private International Law1 Deals with those cases within particular legal systems in which
foreign elements obtrude rising questions as to the application of foreign law or the rule of
foreign courts For example, if two English men make a contract in France to sell goods situated
in Paris, an English court would apply French law as regards to the validity of that contract.
Whereas on the other hands public international law covers the relationship between states in all
myriads forms, from war to satellite and regulates the operation of the many international
institutions, it may be universal or general in which case the stipulated rules behind all the states
or particular all depending upon the nature of the rule or regional , where by a group of states
linked geographically or ideologically may recognize special rules applying to them ,for example
the practice Diplomatic asylum that has developed into its greatest extent in Latin America.
In my own view I would say public international law is a set of laws , rules and customs that
govern or regulate the political,social,economic and military relationship between two or more
states, which relationship is entered in to through agreements, treaties or convention with free
consent reached upon by heads of state ,minister, diplomats or any other person(s) appointed by
a responsible authority such as a president to negotiate and sign binding agreement on behalf of
a state .
The rules of International law must be distinguish from what is called international comity or
practices such as saluting the flag of foreign warships at sea which are implemented solely
through courtesy and not regarded as legally binding.
International law is the legal system governing the relationship between nations, more modernly,
the law of international law embracing not only nations but also (such participants as
international organization and individuals (such as those who invoke their Human rights or
1 PROFESSOR LOUIS HENKIN, COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY LAW SCHOOL
ROLE OF INDIVIDUAL IN PIL
Page 4
commit war crimes)2. International law is applicable to sates in their mutual relations and to
individual in relation with states.
Traditionally, international law was defined as the body of rules which nations recognize as
binding upon one another in their mutual relations .this approach was adopted by the permanent
court international justice in the case of SS LOTUS ( France Vs Turkey)3 case in which the
court stated that international law governs relations between independent states. The rule of law
binding states therefore emanates from their own free will as expressed in the convention
(treaties) or usage (customary state practice) generally accepted as expressing principle of law
and established in order to regulate relations between these co-existing independent
communities or with a view of achieving common aims
Municipal law governs the domestic aspects of government and deals with issues between
individuals and the administrative apparatus4
Municipal law refers to the ordinance and other law applicable within a city, town, or other local
Government entity .its the internal law of a national as opposed to international law5.
ORIGIN OF INTERNATIONAL LAW
Though there were some elements of international law in the ancient period going as far back as
the Egypt (paranoiac era), the ancient Greeks and the Roman empire, modern international law
can be traced to the medieval period culminating in the 1648 peace of Westphalia which ended
thirty years of the war in Europe and gave rise to the nation state concept. The Dutch writer,
Hugo Grotius was the major contributor to this development and because of his contribution to
the development of modern international law he has been often referred to as the father of
international law, his major contribution to the theory of international law was his book the law
of war and peace. It postulated a voluntary law of nations based on consent and the territorial
norms should be expressly stated in treaties or implicitly drawn from customary state practice in
the international relations.
Although the embryo of international law concept was apparent within the ancient Greek city
states, International law system is a recent as the seventeenth century. modern International law
2 BLACKS LAW DICTIONARY
3 10 (1927) P CIJ SERIAL NO.18.
4 INTERNATIONAL LAW BY MALCOM N SHAW 6TH EDITION PAGE 130
5 BLACKS LAW DICTIONARY PG 1043
ROLE OF INDIVIDUAL IN PIL
Page 5
grew from the rise of secular sovereign states in western Europe, it arose as a means of
regulating the relations of states with each other . the rules of war and those of diplomatic
relations were the earliest expression of international law .the so-called Age of discovery
necessitated the evolution of rules of governing the acquisition of territory and the principle of
freedom of the sea . Thus International law grew out of necessity in response to the need of states
to co-exist, it was largely decided by the main actors on the scene of International activities even
as International law continued to expand with increase in international intercourse, it remained
rooted in the western European tradition for so long time.
Essentially the evolution of international law was Eurocentric. this manifested itself in a series of
treaties between European nations which were joined later by the united states of America
eighteenth century and Latin America in the ninetieth century this law centered for the interest
of these nations it led to the congress of Vienna(1814-1815) initially designed to be an
international organization for maintenance of peace after the Napoleonic war but which
however was not very successful . the self interest of the then major actors in the international
arena was demonstrated in the infamous Berlin conference of 1884-1885 wherein the western
European powers divided the entire African continent for colonialism ,a practice they legalized
as their civilizing mission international law so conceived suffered major joit in twentieth
century through the horrendous experience of the two world wars and emergence of numerous
new of decolonization, particularly in the sixties and seventies.
However the twentieth century witnessed a major change resulting from the two world wars
causing major devastation and breakdown of the colonial system and attainment of independence
by numerous states in Asia and Africa previously denied voice in international affairs. Emphasis
has since shifted from individual action to International Corporation; the use of force, except in
defined circumstance has been prohibited.
In showing the distinction between public international law and municipal law its indispensable
to discuss the main two theories in public international law and municipal law. These are known
as the monism and dualism theories. Monist and dualists hold diametrically opposite views as
discussed below.
Monism was propounded by Kelsen an Austrian jurist and the monist holds a view that
International law and municipal law are concomitant aspects of one legal system. They contend
that International and Municipal law not only resemble each other but, at the same time spring
from a single ground norm or standard which is the fountain head of all laws. According to
them International law and Municipal law mediate or immediately regulates the conduct of
individuals6.
On the other hand the Dualist holds that International law and Municipal law are entirely
distinct legal systems. International law dualists contend has a different character from that of
6 KELSEN ,THE PRINCIPLE OF INTERNATIONAL LAW 1952 P 446-47
ROLE OF INDIVIDUAL IN PIL
Page 6
Municipal law in other words ,international law and municipal law have no relation whatsoever
with each other . In support of their stand, dualists give their reasons which are as follows
(a). the origin of international law and municipal law are different in as far much as sources of
municipal is the will of the state itself whereas the sources of international law is the common
will (gameinwille)of states
(b). the subjects of municipal law are individuals whereas the subjects of international law states.
(c) International law and municipal law differs in regards to the subsistence of their law in as
much as municipal law, not above but sovereign state is therefore a weaker law.
Dualists contend that international law cannot be directly applied within the municipal sphere by
a state courts, rules of international law become binding on municipal courts if and only if, such
rules are transformed in to municipal legislation .in other words municipal law strengthens
international law and makes it operative by incorporating it in to national law by legislation and
thereby making international law binds municipal law.
International laws are governed by treaties which by nature promissory while Municipal laws are
statute which are by nature of command.
Its on the dualistic school of thought that I discuss the distinctions between municipal law
and public international law as discussed below
1.In the first place municipal law regulates the relations between people of a particular country or
entity or territorial jurisdiction, for instance when a law is passed by parliament and assented to
by the president such law shall take effect within the boundaries of that country ,it will regulate
the relations between the individuals and individuals(civil cases) or individuals and the state(in
criminal case).While on the other hand international law regulates or governs the relationship
between states ,so when two(bia-laterial) or many countries(muti-latrial) come together and
agree on a particular law or agreement or treaty such agreements as trade ,diplomatic or non
aggression agreements, such agreements will be intended to regulate the relations between those
states. For example the East Africa common market protocol is meant to regulate trade among
East African Countries. Also in West Rands Central Gold Mining Co ltd and Chung Chi
Chic hung Vs R .Lord Atkins observed that the courts acknowledge the existence of a body of
rules which nations accept among themselves on any judicial issue they seek to ascertain what
the relevant rule is and having found it, they will treat it as incorporated in to the domestic laws
so far as it is not inconsistent with the rules enacted by statute or finally declared by the
tribunal. This therefore proves that public international law regulates the relationship among
states while municipal law regulates the relations between individual within the territorial
ROLE OF INDIVIDUAL IN PIL
Page 7
boundaries of a given state hence a distinction between public international law and municipal
law
2. Under Municipal law individuals are held liable for their individual crimes or violations of
both civil and criminal law. in this system when a person commits an offence such as murder
(criminal) or breach of contract (civil) cases such person is made personally accountable for his
or her acts or omissions against the other person, and in case of criminal offences which amounts
to offences against the state, such a person is made to be individually accountable to the state
hence under municipal law the principle of individual responsibility is exercised. While the
system is very different under Public International Law since a state is made liable to another
state much as the offence against that state could have been committed by personalities of the
accounting state, such personalities are presumed to have acted on behalf their state not in
personal capacity hence the principle of collective state responsibity where the whole state is
collectively held accountable for the acts committed by their representatives in certain countries.
for instance when the Uganda peoples defense forces (UPDF) were alleged and proved that they
had stolen gold and timber in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) during military
missions, Uganda as a whole was held accountable for the acts of their soldiers hence the case of
Democratic Republic of Congo Vs Uganda hence principle of collective responsibility which
brings a distinction between public international and municipal law.
3. Under public international law, which basically relates the relationship between states , there
are no courts with compulsory jurisdiction, its true that under public international law courts do
exists such as the International Criminal Court (Uganda Vs LRA) , the International court of
justice( ICJ) ,and war crimes tribunal such as one set after genocide in Rwanda ( ICTR) and the
international crimes tribunal for former Yugoslavia (ICTY) but it on record that none of these
courts has compulsory to try all cases across the world, their jurisdiction only binds countries
that are members of a particular treaty ,convention or agreement for instance the united states of
America and most Arab countries are not party to the Rome therefore not affected by the
international criminal court (ICC)s jurisdiction. Hence in the case of Democratic Republic of
Congo Vs Uganda hence principle of collective responsibility which brings a distinction
between public international and municipal law. when the Uganda peoples defense forces
(UPDF) were alleged and proved that they had stolen gold and timber in the Democratic
Republic of Congo (DRC) during military missions, Uganda as a whole was held accountable for
the acts of their soldiers
4. Under municipal law national rules and Governance can be created through
institutionalization of power and formulation of relationship between ruling groups and
communities , for example political parties can hold power and exercise central authority in a
particular state as the government in operation e.g. the National Resistance Movement (NRM)
took over power in Uganda in 1986, UPC in 1962 , Kenya African union(KAU) in 1963 and
many other such political institutions have been able to wholesomely and fully exercise authority
in a country. However this is not the case in international law ,since no single country nor group
ROLE OF INDIVIDUAL IN PIL
Page 8
of countries can hold everlasting power to rule over other countries even during colonization
no single country managed to exercise authority over all colonies and the same was the case
with the League of Nations and United Nations none of them had full power or control as a
central authority of all states not even the super powers such as the united states of America,
Britain , china Russia or even the United nations has authority over other states directly.
5.International law is created through treaties, conventions or customs of state practice for
example, for an International Law to be binding between Uganda and Kenya there must be an
International treaty between the two countries entered in to with free consent or else there will be
no public international law unless the law is of jus cogens nature which bind all States regardless
of whether a state consents or not. But unless such law is of a jus cogens norm there will always
be necessity for Consent in order for a state to be bound by a treaty under public international
law. This has also been affirmed by case law in the case of Norman Vs Union7 of India .in
which it was held that there can be no doubt that the union Government has the right by
executive action to enter in to treaties and agreements with foreign countries to create
international relations between them.
7 AIR (1954) CALCUTTA P 615
ROLE OF INDIVIDUAL IN PIL
Page 9
ROLE OF INDIVIDUAL IN PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW
International law is seen as primarily concerned with the rights and duties of States, seemingly to
the exclusion of the individual. The individual is an object, not a subject of international law.
International law only operates on the individual indirectly through the State; international
responsibility is owed to the State. Thus any rights or obligations imposed by international law
are 'enjoyed' through an exercise of a right held by the State of which the individual is a national,
not by virtue of the individual's international status. In fact in the absence of citizenship, the
individual has no legal significance in the international arena. Even the international rights and
duties apparently operating directly on pirates and slaves, technically are still the rights and
duties of the State, not these individuals.
Under the traditional theory, before any international rights or duties may be enjoyed by or bind
individuals they must be transformed into municipal rights and duties. In the positivists' eyes, it
is only when these legal rights or duties have been transformed into municipal law, and thus are
no longer international rights and duties, that they may be 'enjoyed' by individuals.
However, the traditional theory draws no distinction between private wrongs and breaches of
international law concerning all States and all individuals. Thus in the past under this traditional
approach nobody except the particular States affected by the breach of international law had a
right to object. As a corollary, aggrieved individuals could not call upon other States to save them
from breaches of their human rights. It will be seen below that today there are emerging
principles, such as the doctrine of humanitarian intervention and customary international laws
prohibiting torture and genocide, that undermine this traditional approach.
Clearly this traditional approach was and is inappropriate. If international law is to be truly
binding, at the very least, breaches that threaten the peace and order of the international
community should be seen as a violation of the rights of each State comprising that international
community.
ROLE OF INDIVIDUAL IN PIL
Page 10
In recent decades, however, there has been a gradual shift towards re-accepting the individual as
an international juristic entity, at least in certain contexts such as human rights. International law
has come full circle, recent practices evidencing the return of the individual into the international
arena. Today the traditional premises underlying the exclusion of the individual are no longer
immutable principles of international law and practice. International law, like all legal systems,
has its background and roots in the society it governs. As the needs and values underlying that
society change, so too should the governing legal system. Thus, as a corollary of changing
concerns in the international community, international law has changed and developed. Two
consequent changes relate directly to the place of the individual in the international arena,
extending to individuals international rights and obligations.
It is being appreciated that ultimately individuals alone are the subjects of international
law. The subjects of international law are like the subjects of national law - individual
human beings. The duties and rights of States are only the duties and rights of the
[persons] who compose them. This is now being accepted by the courts and tribunals
applying international law.
The interest all States have in the observance of international law and the preservation of
international peace is being accepted. Increasingly breaches of international law are seen
as directly concerning all States, not only those physically affected by the violation. As a
result of this shared concern with humanity, international law has moved into the socalled domestic arena and with increasing vigour defended the right of all States to
intervene where international peace is threatened.
ROLE OF INDIVIDUAL IN PIL
Page 11
THEORY OF HANS KELSEN
Kelsen begins his analysis of legal norms by stressing that law is by definition the regulation of
human conduct.8 A responsibility not directed towards an individual and not involving the
execution of a sanction by an individual, would not in his eyes be a legal responsibility. The
traditional doctrine excluding the individual from the international legal arena is consequently
untenable to Kelsen.
The State is only a juristic entity, like a company, created by law. In international law, as in
company law, ultimately the individual is the subject of the legal rights and responsibilities
conferred on the State. This only differs from strict individual legal responsibility in so far as
international rights are acquired by the individual in the capacity of a member of a territorial
unit. In the international arena the individual is bound to act, or enjoy certain rights, in the name
of the community to which he or she belongs.9 Again the point is clearer if a parallel is drawn
with corporate responsibility.
Duties and rights of a corporation are duties and rights of individuals in their capacity as
members or organs of the corporation. The statement that a corporation has certain duties and
certain rights does not mean that the duties and rights in question are duties and rights of a
juristic person and consequently not the duties and rights of individuals. On the contrary, they are
duties and rights of individuals, but of individuals in their capacity as members or organs of the
corporation.
Juristic entities created by law cannot be said to be the only subjects of a legal order. As juristic
entities can only act through individuals, if such juristic entities are involved, individuals must
8
Kelsen
Hans Kelsen, Hague Recueil (1926) Vol 14 231, 239
ROLE OF INDIVIDUAL IN PIL
Page 12
also be subject to the legal order. The rights and duties of a State are ultimately the rights and
duties of these individuals. There is, therefore, no real difference between national and
international law. Both confer rights on individuals; international law conferring these upon
individuals indirectly and collectively in their capacity as members of a State.
Even from a purely practical perspective, when a State is obliged to act, in reality this means the
organ competent under national law to regulate the matter is bound by international law to
perform the requisite acts. Similarly, when a State has an international right this really means
certain persons are empowered to act upon and, if required, enforce that right in an international
tribunal. While the State is sanctioned if this organ fails to act, ultimately the sanction or reprisal
will either directly or indirectly affect the individual(s) belonging to the State. International
sanctions only differ from municipal punishments in so far as responsibility is determined in the
former case collectively, while in the latter case on an individual basis.
Kelsen defines a subject of international law in terms of ability to exercise the procedural
capacity required to bring a claim before an international tribunal, ratherthan the mere possessor
of interests protected by international law. It is in this regard that Kelsen and Lauterpacht
disagree. As individuals traditionally lack procedural capacity to enforce international rights, or
only possess this ability as representatives of the State, they are not subjects of international
law within Kelsen's strict definition.10 Not even an international tribunal can enforce an
individual's rights independently of the State. Enforcement must be undertaken by States and
will therefore depend upon whether the State's interests warrant such steps.11 According to
Kelsen, the State's power to act and enforce international law is not a duty to protect the rights
of the individual. It is a right which the State may freely exercise. As any apparent rights held
by individuals are always dependent upon the State exercising its right, individuals are
personally subjects of international rights only in an imperfect sense. A customary international
law protecting the basic human rights of all individuals would not, in Kelsen's eyes, give such
10
Hans Kelsen, Hague Recueil (1926) Vol 14
11
Hans Kelsen, Hague Recueil (1926) Vol 14
ROLE OF INDIVIDUAL IN PIL
Page 13
individuals international legal rights. In accordance with the traditional theory, technically it is
not the individual, but the State that Kelsen sees as having the right to see these rights respected.
FUNCTIONS OF STATE AND INDIVIDUAL IN PUBLIC
INTERNATIONAL LAW
Great inroads have been made into the established doctrine and further developments are
constantly emerging. State practice reveals that today, in many respects, individuals enjoy the
status of an international entity. As stated above, the established doctrine is no longer
established.
The relevant practice can be divided up into a consideration of three distinct movements; first,
the creation of international laws recognising the fundamental rights of individuals held
independently of the State, second, the direct conferral of procedural capacity upon individuals
and third, the acceptance of each States interest in the maintenance of order in the international
arena.
STRUCTURAL INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS
Over the years, there have been many treaties and conventions recognising the fundamental
rights of individuals in international law. The Covenant of the League of Nations provided just
one mechanism members utilised for the creation of a system of interlocking treaties protecting
the rights of minority groups. These treaties included clauses protecting the life and liberty of the
subject peoples, the free exercise of religion, prohibiting discrimination on the grounds of
language, race or religion, asserting equality before the law and protecting civil and political
rights. Nationals were to enjoy freedom of organisation for religious and educational purposes
and, in certain circumstances, the State was to provide for elementary instruction of children in
their native language.
ROLE OF INDIVIDUAL IN PIL
Page 14
While, except in the case of Upper Silesia, there was no right of individual petition for breaches
of these rights, in practice the Council did receive and consider such petitions which were in turn
finally dealt with by the Permanent Court of International Justice.
It was in the Charter of the United Nations, however, that the individual was first truly
acknowledged as the subject of international rights, fundamental to human freedom. The horrors
of the Second World War and fears for the repetition of such heinous crimes spurred an increased
concern for the rights of individuals.
The United Nations Charter provides an important declaration of these basic human rights and
establishes a broad basis for further development in this area of international protection.
In the preamble members reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the equal rights of men
and women. Article 1 defines the purposes of the United Nations to include co-operating to
promote and encourage respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all without
distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion. These articles are supported by more specific
protections.
With a view to the creation of conditions of stability and well-being which are necessary for
peaceful and friendly relations among nations...the United Nations shall promote... higher
standards of living, full employment, and conditions of economic and social progress and
development ... universal respect for, and observance of, human rights and fundamental freedoms
for all without distinctions as to race, sex, language or religion.
While there is no universal agreement as to the exact meaning of the human rights guaranteed
under the Charter, indisputably it guarantees at least a bare minimum of basic fundamental
individual rights and is now considered binding customary international law. As binding
customary international law, it flows into the municipal legal system of countries becoming
enforceable legal protections.
The Mandate system12 and the establishment of Trust territories under the Charter provide further
notable developments towards the protection of individual rights. The mandate was created, in
the interests of the inhabitants of the territory, and of humanity in general, as an international
12
Established by the League of Nations
ROLE OF INDIVIDUAL IN PIL
Page 15
institution with an international object - a sacred trust of civilization.13Similarly, under the
trustee system, the administering authority14 was obliged to promote self-government and
independence and to respect the fundamental human rights and freedoms of these peoples. Such
territories were supervised by the Trusteeship Council or the Security Council15 who received
and considered petitions from the inhabitants of the territories relating to possible breaches.
THE APEX DECIDING AUTHORITY FOR INTERNATIONAL ISSUES
The International Court of Justice
Bearing the above developments in mind, Articles 2, 34 and 6 of the Statute of the International
Court of Justice, precluding individuals from bringing actions before it, appear to be excessively
rigid and outdated. Their reflection of the traditional theory places an unnecessary constraint
upon legal adjudication and stand in stark contrast to international state practice today.
Article 34, paragraph 1 of the statute of the Court provides only States may beparties in cases
before the Court. This constraint prevents individuals or minority groups from bringing an
action before the Court unless they can establish they have retained their character as a sovereign
State.
The possible injustice that could stem from these procedural constraints has been acknowledged
by organs of the United Nations who have on occasion resolved to forgo their procedural rights
and/or utilise a special pre-trial procedure allowing individuals to take a more active part in the
dispute. An example of such a pretrial arrangement can be found in the steps taken by the
Council of the League of Nations on 14 December 1939.The Council allowed the complainants
to lodge representations with the Secretariat and within a certain time the Secretary General was
required to furnish the complainants with a statement of the point of view of the League. The
complainants could then make further submissions if they wished in reply to this statement. All
these documents were ultimately passed on to the International Court of Justice with a request
13
International Status of South West Africa ICJ Reports (1950) 125.
14
Article 76 of the United Nations Charter
15
Chapter XI and XIII of the Charter and Article 83 respectively
ROLE OF INDIVIDUAL IN PIL
Page 16
for an advisory opinion. In this way, despite the procedural constraints before the complainants,
their views were placed before the Court.
In time, the League actually renounced its right to present written and oral submissions when the
same right was not given to petitioners. The Council did not wish to have greater opportunities
of furnishing information to the Court than the petitioners themselves.Strictly, however, the
Court is still bound by the limitations set out in the statute and prevented from receiving written
or oral submission from bodies other than States.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion International Law is a branch of law which relates the relationship between states
but many jurists still doubts if this breach of Law does exist in reality since states are free to
decide or consent whether or not they are to be part of the law , also the difficulty in the
enforcement mechanism has made many people to doubt whether this breach of law is a reality
for instance the International criminal court does not have the mechanism to arrest the criminals
who commit war crimes and crimes against humanity hence leaving it at the marcy of individual
state to arrest and hand over the criminal so to an extent municipal law is more effective
compared to public international law .
Modern day state practice provides strong support for the existence of a new customary
international law recognising the individual as an international juristic entity, with international
rights and procedural capacity. Even if international law does not as yet recognise the individual
as possessing such procedural capacity, international practice suggests States are at least obliged
to acknowledge and enforce individual rights. If as a matter of practice States acknowledge the
existence of individual rights and act on the behalf of aggrieved individuals, it could be that
States are now obliged to respect and enforce these international rights on the behalf of
individuals. In this case, it would be trite to try to argue, as positivists do, that these rights are no
longer the individual's just because it is the State that ultimately has the power of enforcement.
Role of individual in the modern day context, where they have often been modified and at times
completely rejected. In recent decades there has been a return to the principles advocated by the
founders of international law; The United Nations Charter perhaps marking the turning point in
ROLE OF INDIVIDUAL IN PIL
Page 17
international practice by transforming the individual from an object of international
benevolence into a subject of international rights.
There is no rule of international law, or anything inherent in the structural basis of international
adjudication, precluding an individual from directly acquiring rights under international
customary law. International law is a flexible system of law which has for centuries adapted and
changed to complement the needs of the international community.
It is not a rigid body of unchangeable archaic notions glorifying State sovereignty. Given this
flexibility, there is nothing to prevent further developments recognising the individual as a
subject of international law and acknowledging the collective interests of all States. As outlined
in this article, we are more than half way there, and there seems nothing to prevent the
establishment of a broader basis for international rights and adjudication.
Bibliography
BOOKS REFERRED
INTERNAL LAW 2ND EDITION BY GURDIP SINGH
International law and human rights by Dr. H.O.AGARWA
STATUTES
1. UN CHARTER
REFERENCE
WWW.LIVELAW.COM
WWW.LEGALASPIRATION.COM
WWW.WIKIPEDIA.COM
WWW.IIMLOG.ORG/INTERNATIONAL LAW
ROLE OF INDIVIDUAL IN PIL
Page 18
ROLE OF INDIVIDUAL IN PIL
Page 19
