Category: Writing

State sovereignty

Order Instructions:

1.claim of the article may be:(a).state sovereignty need not be understood in absolute terms to obstruct direct application of international law.apprehension of superiority of international law over domestic law,serious undermine state sovereignty and power of the legislative organ of the state.
(b).impugned conflict is more imaginary than real.viz,states are presumed not to assume international obligations under treaties which are contrary to their domestic laws.on the other hand customary norm are universally assumed to be part of the law of the land.
2.suggesting measures to avoid major conflict between treaties and statutes.
3.to critique.
4.creativity and original in perspective and approach
4.to use footnotes.

SAMPLE ANSWER

State sovereignty

To fully understand the term state sovereignty, we must first comprehend the meaning of state and sovereignty. The word state has a lot of meanings which is attached to the particular context the word is being used. However, in the context of international law, the word state has the following meaning. A state is a territory or a nation that can be considered to have only one government and defined as an organized political community (Arend et al., 2014). Examples of states can be countries that are dependent on their own and are ruled by the government that exists in the country. Furthermore, the meaning of sovereignty in the contextual use of the word state has the following meaning. Sovereignty is referred to as the absolute right and power of a government or a governing body to govern itself without ant outside interferences from other regulatory bodies (Armstrong et al., 2012).

Therefore, a sovereign state it a territory or nation that comprises of an organized political community that is governed by one government without outside interferences from other governing bodies. In the context of international law, state sovereignty, therefore, refers to the ability of a country, state or nation to have the complete power or absolute control over what goes on within its territories (Gould et al., 2015).

The issue of sovereignty in countries has been a major one in the discussions about the international law. The ability of a nation to make its decisions can be excellent and wrong at the same time in the context of international law or law itself. For a sovereign state, the decision made by the state government cannot be influenced by any other outside party. This gives the country the power to be the judge and the jury of whatever happens within its territories.

However, this leaves the country at a disadvantage because its citizens stand to lose at any minute the government decides to make decisions that harm or endanger their lives.

The state sovereignty also gives a nation the power to decide to enter into deals with other sovereign states or not. It gives the government control over what the country does and how it acts in the international community. A sovereign state is considered as an individual whose actions are accountable only to itself alone and to no other individual. Therefore, a sovereign state may wage war on its citizens or conduct acts against the human rights of their citizens.

In international law, a state is considered as sovereign according to the following guiding factors. One of the factors is there be a permanent population (Law, 2014). The permanency of the population refers to the nation having its citizens not migrants from another nation, country or state. The second factor that defined a sovereign state has a defined territory. Without no defined territory, a state cannot be considered to be sovereign. Thirdly, for a state to become sovereign, it must have a government. The government should be a governing body that has no influence on any outside parties. Furthermore, the government should have the complete power and control over what happens within its territories. Lastly, for a state to be considered as a sovereign one, the government should have the capacity of entering into relations with other states (Law, 2014).

This paper will focus on state sovereignty and the obstruction it has on the direct application of international law in sovereign states. State sovereignty must not be defined or practiced in complete terms for it to make difficult any efforts regarding the application of international law. It is quite a hard task for international law to have full effect on sovereign states. However, much state sovereignty stands in the way of implementation of international law. At some point, the international law finds its way into sovereign states and takes charge of the government from the sovereign governing body of that particular nation.

In the context of international law, state sovereignty needs to be limited to some point. International law is what makes possible the existence of some international organizations. Examples of international organizations include The United Nations, The European Union, and the African Union. For this international organization, international law is significant. Organizations like the United Nations are very influential in most countries when it comes to matters concerning economy, human rights, education and war. It is just impossible to run international organizations without cooperation among states. However, state sovereignty is making it difficult for the association to exist among some states.

At some point, a sovereign state will decide to do something that well affects the international community. Most of the times, the significance of the actions of a sovereign state may impact negatively on the international community. It may even impact adversely on the effort of human rights in the said sovereign state. Consequently, the international community, through some international organizations will want to exercise international law in the given state. Therefore, if the sovereign state refuses to enter into a deal with the international community, the sovereignty will be seen as an act that diminishes the efforts of international law. The international community is left with no choice but to intervene.

In most instances, the international community will invade the sovereign state and conduct acts aimed at taking the governing power from the sovereign governing body and give it to a more reasonable administrative body. The interference is then used to distrust the actions of the sovereign governing body of its citizens. For example, the United Nations will make every effort to enter into a deal with the sovereign state to stop act against human rights in the sovereign state (Cosentino, 2015). However, if the state refuses to cooperate. The international organization, United Nations will have to intervene to save the citizens from the dehumanizing acts of their sovereign government. Hence, state sovereignty need not be defined in a complete term to create a barrier to the application of international law in a country. Where the significance of the application of the international law will be for the greater good of the international society.
The international community had witnessed a worrying trend of state sovereignty during the Second World War. Some to the aspects of the international law were being violated regarding the capacity of national sovereignty. Due to the significance of these violations in the states ant the presence of national sovereignty, there was an obstacle in the application of international law. However, the recent trend in the international community is to restrain sovereignty in a country to a point where it is appropriate and acceptable. Some of the aspects of the international law have witnessed quite a development due to the restraint on the power of sovereignty in the international community.

The aspects of international law include foreign; human rights law and international environmental law. For some time in the international community, there has been a noted awareness of on the adverse effects that sovereignty cause to the efforts of the application of these aspects of international law. It has been noted that sovereignty has been quite an obstacle to the application of these international laws. Therefore, the international community has made an effort to restrain sovereignty in matters that touch on international law.

For example, when an authoritarian administration goes ahead and places fundamental importance on the economic development of its state through prioritization of expanding the scale of the economy through means that endanger the environment, violate human rights laws and environmental laws. Such violations include industrial pollution caused by massive burning of fossil fuels. What leads is the pollution of air, coastal waters and the rivers (Juda, 2014). Restraining of sovereignty was made necessary due to such acts that violated international human rights laws and environmental laws. To avoid such abuse I the future or currently, a restraint has to be put on state sovereignty. Therefore, the obstruction created by sovereignty will be dissolved to give way to the application of international law in a various way. The different ways involve super state controls that will be advocated by environmental and some human rights law experts.

In the issue of the apprehension of the superiority of international law over domestic law, regarding the power vested in governing bodies of sovereign states. The international law sometimes has to be made clear that it is superior to the domestic law that exists in such countries. For most sovereign states, some laws may be introduced that are not of positivity to human rights or environmental conditions. The laws or policies may even lead to the undermining of international law. The international community thereby pulls in to re-affirm the superiority of international law over the domestic law. The acts of the international community will thus undermine the power of the legislative organ of the state as well as state sovereignty.

To reinforce the superiority of international law over domestic law, the following acts are conducted by the international community through the jurisdiction of the formed international organizations like the United Nations. The significance of the actions come in when protecting the environmental conditions and human rights conditions in various states against the destruct caused by some authoritarian administration of some sovereign states. Some actions include decisions that are taken by the international organization concerning international laws the sovereign country in which the government of these States has no decisive influence over. The other thing allowed by the international community is the jurisdiction mandated to regional or international judicial institutions that an individual can turn to on issues that concern the violation of human rights. Lastly, in situations of war like foreign invention, internal conflicts or civil war, the international community is allowed to intervene, thereby infringing sovereignty in these states to protect individuals for the grave violations of human rights that comes with the acts of war.

Through the intervention by the international community on matters concerning a sovereign state, sovereignty is said to be restrained. In agreement with the international law, the infringement on sovereignty is a necessity to show the superiority of international law over domestic law. The advantage is shown when the sovereignty is undermined through various ways as indicated in the paragraphs above. Therefore, a sovereign state can cooperate with the international law. However, the sovereignty of these state cause an obstacle to the display of the superiority of international law over domestic law.

Speaking, international law, from its definition has jurisdiction over international law. However, domestic law has its authority within the confines of its territory. Therefore, the magnificence of international law is thereby said be glorified by the undermining of sovereignty through the acts of international organizations that apply international law in different instances that prove to be endangering to the environmental conditions and the grave violations of human rights laws.

The state of the sovereignty of a nation is a very conflicting one. In the sense that it conflicts majorly with international laws, the domestic laws that are created as a result of sovereignty have no regard for international obligations that go with them. Therefore, a sovereign state which is presumed to acknowledge international obligations bounded in treaties and statutes will not do so in an effort to protect their own sovereignty and pride of the country in an ever global world in terms of economy and other significant aspects of power. A developing or a small country will want to be seen as powerful or in the same way as a large and powerful country. In the road to achieving this power or state of pride, a state adopts sovereignty that highly disregards the significance of international law to demonstrate its power to the international community. It is therefore very common nowadays to see developing countries be in more conflicts that are more internal than external. The conflicts arise from the efforts of the governing body to exercise its power on its citizens. Therefore, the government of these sovereign states overdoes it, and this leads to internal conflicts that capture the attention of the international community. The international community, therefore, intervenes to apply international law in these nations and protect human rights laws and environmental laws (Sassen, 2013). What follows are treaties and statutes that need to be enforced in the conflicting society. The sovereign nations, therefore, disregard the obligations of the international law through disagreeing to sign the treaties to regain peace and order in the sovereign states.

In the same context of domestic laws and disregarding of the obligations that come with treaties and statutes, sovereign states need not fight with the powers that be. The reason being the international law will ever be superior to domestic law. In the instances that the sovereign state refuses to perform its obligation to the international community by refusing to sign the treaties and recognize the statutes. The governing bodies of the sovereign states will be shown the upper hand of the international law. However, international laws may sometimes or many times conflict with the customary law. Customary law is regarded as the law of the land. In instances, that international law conflicts with the customary law. Then the law of the land may have an upper hand at some point. Being that most sovereign states are not amongst the most powerful nations in the world. They can be pressured into disregarding their customary laws in favor of the international law.

For example, if a sovereign state that is currently experiencing internal disputes or civil war. The international community will take note of the situation and try to intervene to neutralize the situation. You may find that the war in these sovereign states will mostly affect the human rights laws and environmental laws in an adverse manner, especially when there is the breaking of any international recognized statute. Therefore, the situation will catch the attention of the international community, and they will try to correct the situation. This leaves the international community with no choice but to intervene. They will intervene in various ways. The possible way being the signing of treaties between the two conflicting parties.

To save face and regain their pride, the governing body will choose not to sign the treaty. This in turn will be perceived negatively by the international community. The international community will view that action as one of deciding not to cooperate with any efforts of applying international law. Therefore, action will be taken against such states. The international organizations will gang up to come in and try to neutralize the situations. All the efforts of the international community will be aiming towards restoring peace and order in the war-stricken nation. Furthermore, also there will be efforts in enforcing international judicial jurisdiction in such countries, protection of human rights laws as well as environmental laws.

Sovereignty cannot be absolute. The complete nature of sovereignty can never be agreed upon to exist in the international community. Moreover, the absolute nature of sovereignty will deny the very nature of international law to exist in the first place. However, as sovereignty has its limits, also international law does. Therefore, there are some boundaries that cannot be crossed whatsoever the urgency the international community has. For example, the international community can not apply international law to touch on issues such as an election process in a sovereign nation. Such issues are regarded to be internal affairs that need no helping hand from the international community.

There is one significant measure that can be put in place in the process of resolving conflicts between statutes and treaties. The measure involves putting into effect the one that was enacted later that the other. In a state where a treaty and a statute seem to conflict, the measure above will be of significance to the goal of resolving the conflict between the two aspects of the law. Treaties are regarded as the law of the land. However, a statute may be an international law that has an effect on cooperating nations in the international community. Therefore, as a treaty is regarded a customary law and the statute as an international law. It is easier for a sovereign state to choose the customary law over the international one. The reason being the customary law is considered domestic as opposed to the contrary, international law.

References

Arend, A. C., & Beck, R. J. (2014). International law and the use of force: beyond the UN Charter paradigm. Routledge.

Armstrong, D., Farrell, T., & Lambert, H. (2012). International law and international relations. Cambridge University Press.

Bartolini, G. (2014). Universal Approach to International Law in Contemporary Cosntitutions: Does It Exist, A. Cambridge J. Int’l & Comp. L., 3, 1287.

Bremer, E. S. (2012). The Dynamic Last-In-Time Rule. Indiana International & Comparative Law Review, 22(1).

Bull, H. (2012). The anarchical society: a study of order in world politics. Palgrave Macmillan.

Chen, L. C. (2014). An introduction to contemporary international law: a policy-oriented perspective. Oxford University Press.

Crawford, J. (2012). Brownlie’s principles of public international law. Oxford University Press.

Crawford, J., & Koskenniemi, M. (Eds.). (2012). The Cambridge companion to international law. Cambridge University Press.

Cook, R. J. (Ed.). (2012). Human rights of women: National and international perspectives. University of Pennsylvania Press.

Cosentino, C. (2015). Safe and Legal Abortion: An Emerging Human Right? The Long-lasting Dispute with State Sovereignty in ECHR Jurisprudence. Human Rights Law Review, ngv013.

Davis, M. C. (2012). State sovereignty and indigenous rights in China: the global dimension of China’s Tibet Policy. In ISA Annual Convention 2012 (pp. 23-23). International Studies Association.

Dixon, M. (2013). Textbook on international law. Oxford University Press.

Dixon, M., McCorquodale, R., & Williams, S. (2011). Cases and materials on international law. Oxford University Press.

Donnelly, J. (2013). Universal human rights in theory and practice. Cornell University Press.

Falk, R. A. (2015). The Vietnam War and International Law, Volume 3: The Widening Context (Vol. 3). Princeton University Press.

Greenberg, J. (2011). On the road to normal: Negotiating agency and state sovereignty in postsocialist Serbia. American Anthropologist, 113(1), 88-100.

Greve, H. S. (2015). State Sovereignty and International Criminal Law. Nordic Journal of Human Rights, 33(1), 104-107.

Gould, W. L., & Barkun, M. (2015). International law and the social sciences. Princeton University Press.

Habermas, J. (2012). The crisis of the European Union in the light of a constitutionalization of international law. European Journal of International Law, 23(2), 335-348.

Hafner-Burton, E. M., Victor, D. G., & Lupu, Y. (2012). Political science research on international law: the state of the field. American Journal of International Law, 106(1), 47-97.

Holden, B. (Ed.). (2013). Global democracy: Key debates. Routledge.

Jeffrey, A. (2012). The improvised state: Sovereignty, performance and agency in Dayton Bosnia. John Wiley & Sons.

Juda, L. (2013). International Law and Ocean Management. Routledge.

Keck, M. E., & Sikkink, K. (2014). Activists beyond borders: Advocacy networks in international politics. Cornell University Press.

Michaels, R., & Paulwelyn, J. (2011). Conflict of Norms or Conflict of Laws: Different Techniques in the Fragmentation of Public International Law. Duke J. Comp. & Int’l L., 22, 349.

Miranda, L. A. (2012). The role of international law in intrastate natural resource allocation: sovereignty, human rights, and peoples-based development. Human Rights, and Peoples-Based Development (May 1, 2012). Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law, 45(3), 12-17.

Murdoch, I. (2013). The sovereignty of good. Routledge.

Mullerson, R. (2013). International law, rights and politics: developments in Eastern Europe and the CIS. Routledge.

Lauterpacht, H., & Crawford, J. (2012). Recognition in international law (Vol. 3). Cambridge University Press.

Law, C. (2014). Morten Bergsmo and Ling Yan (eds). State Sovereignty and International Law.

Posner, E. A., & Sykes, A. O. (2013). Economic foundations of international law. Harvard University Press.

Ranganathan, S. (2013). Between Philosophy and Anxiety? The Early International Law Commission, Treaty Conflict and the Project of International Law. British Yearbook of International Law, 83(1), 82-114.

Sassen, S. (2013). Losing control?: sovereignty in the age of globalization. Columbia University Press.

Schermers, H. G., & Blokker, N. M. (2011). International institutional law: unity within diversity. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.

Saul, B. (2013). China, Natural Resources, Sovereignty and International Law. Asian Studies Review, 37(2), 196-214.

Viljoen, F. (2012). International human rights law in Africa. Oxford University Press.

Von Glahn, G., & Taulbee, J. L. (2015). Law among nations: An introduction to public international law. Routledge.

Wallerstein, I. (2011). The modern world-system I: capitalist agriculture and the origins of the European world-economy in the sixteenth century, with a new prologue (Vol. 1). Univ of California Press.

Weiner, A. S. (2014). The Protection Human Rights in the United States. Austrian Review of International and European Law Online, 16(1), 33-40.

Werksman, J., Cameron, J., & Roderick, P. (2014). Improving compliance with international environmental law. Routledge.

Whytock, C. A., Childress III, D. E., & Ramsey, M. D. (2013). Foreword: After Kiobel: International Human Rights Litigation in State Courts and Under State Law. UC Irvine Law Review, 3(1).

We can write this or a similar paper for you! Simply fill the order form!