International Norm Conflicts Through the Lens of Alexy's Principles Theory
Dates:
- Tue 20 Nov 2018 15.00 - 17.00
Add to Calendar
2018-11-20 15:00
2018-11-20 17:00
Europe/Paris
International Norm Conflicts Through the Lens of Alexy's Principles Theory
The likelihood of clashes between international norms has increased in correlation with the
upsurge in the number of specialised regimes emerging within the international legal field. The
present thesis takes a closer look at the different ways in which such norm conflicts can be
addressed at the international level. In particular, it distinguishes between conflict resolution
based on establishing priority by means of traditional maxims, and resolution based on the
weighing of clashing norms to determine which prevails in the case at hand. To do so, the thesis
takes a step back from the existing literature and examines the distinction within norms
between rules and principles, relying predominantly on Robert Alexy’s theory on this subject.
Taking a legal-theoretical approach to the subject of international norm conflicts, this thesis
shows that Alexy’s principles theory is not only transferrable to international law in theory, but
that we can, moreover, identify international norms as rules and principles respectively.
Distinguishing between the different ways in which conflicts are resolved depending on
whether the norms involved are rules or principles, it is shown that while both approaches are
susceptible to certain conceptual uncertainties and pitfalls, this dichotomy nevertheless plays
an important role in the efficiency of the international legal system, ensuring that a certain
balance between stability and flexibility is maintained. Ultimately, it is demonstrated that by
viewing international law, and international norm conflicts in particular, through the lens of
Alexy’s principles theory, we can gain a clearer understanding of the structure and application
of international norms on the one hand and, as a result, how to resolve international norm
conflicts on the other. Thus, drawing a distinction between rules and principles among
international legal norms can be a means by which scholars (as well as judicial bodies or even
states) may analyse ambiguous judicial decisions or international legal provisions, and can thus
foster greater clarity in the field of international law.
Sala degli Stemmi 1st Floor, V.Sa.
DD/MM/YYYY
Sala degli Stemmi 1st Floor, V.Sa.
The likelihood of clashes between international norms has increased in correlation with the
upsurge in the number of specialised regimes emerging within the international legal field. The
present thesis takes a closer look at the different ways in which such norm conflicts can be
addressed at the international level. In particular, it distinguishes between conflict resolution
based on establishing priority by means of traditional maxims, and resolution based on the
weighing of clashing norms to determine which prevails in the case at hand. To do so, the thesis
takes a step back from the existing literature and examines the distinction within norms
between rules and principles, relying predominantly on Robert Alexy’s theory on this subject.
Taking a legal-theoretical approach to the subject of international norm conflicts, this thesis
shows that Alexy’s principles theory is not only transferrable to international law in theory, but
that we can, moreover, identify international norms as rules and principles respectively.
Distinguishing between the different ways in which conflicts are resolved depending on
whether the norms involved are rules or principles, it is shown that while both approaches are
susceptible to certain conceptual uncertainties and pitfalls, this dichotomy nevertheless plays
an important role in the efficiency of the international legal system, ensuring that a certain
balance between stability and flexibility is maintained. Ultimately, it is demonstrated that by
viewing international law, and international norm conflicts in particular, through the lens of
Alexy’s principles theory, we can gain a clearer understanding of the structure and application
of international norms on the one hand and, as a result, how to resolve international norm
conflicts on the other. Thus, drawing a distinction between rules and principles among
international legal norms can be a means by which scholars (as well as judicial bodies or even
states) may analyse ambiguous judicial decisions or international legal provisions, and can thus
foster greater clarity in the field of international law.
- Location:
- Sala degli Stemmi 1st Floor, V.Sa.
- Affiliation:
- Department of Law
- Type:
- Thesis defence
- Defendant:
-
Birte Annika Böök (EUI - Law)
- Supervisor:
-
Prof. Martin Scheinin (European University Institute)
- Examiner:
-
Prof. Giovanni Sartor (EUI - Law Department)
-
Prof. Matthias Klatt (University of Graz)
-
Dr. Rosanne van Alebeek (University of Amsterdam)
- Contact:
-
Claudia de Concini (EUI - Law)
-
Send a mail
Similar events