Abstract
Abstract
The metaphysical essence of Justice-As-Sovereignty is revealed in a dialectic model that integrates the four systematic policy precepts representing the rules of adjudication, change, and local/universal recognition. No longer relegated to the status of “organized hypocrisy,” sovereignty becomes the “genuine” product of the evolution of international law from its genesis in social convention. The state becomes simply one of a number of possible social constructions available for the continued stability of international society as it evolves within a unique strategic environment that is not a state of nature but a transition from the “rule of convention” to the “rule of law.” As a result of the application of Hume’s philosophical-policy as legal design, the essence of Justice-As-Sovereignty is revealed as the logical source of the definition of practical reason as utility.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
Emer de Vattel, The Law of Nations, ed. Knud Haakonssen, Bela Kapossy, and Richard Whatmore, Natural Law and Enlightenment Classics (Indianoplis, IN: Liberty Fund, 2008), 289.
Joseph Frankel, International Politics: Conflict and Harmony, A Pelican Book (Harmondsworth, Middlesex, England: Penguin Books, 1973), 38—see also
Daniel Philpott, Revolutions in Sovereignty: How Ideas Shaped Modern International Relations (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2001), 16.
Jens Bartelson, A Genealogy of Sovereignty, ed. Steve Smith. Vol. 39, Cambridge Studies in International Relations (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995), 239—see also
John H. Jackson, “Sovereignty-Modern: A New Approach to an Outdated Concept,” American Journal of International Law 97 (2003): x.
A. Pellet, “The Opinions of the Badinter Abitration Committee,” European Journal of International Law 3 (1982): 185.
Michael Fowler and Julie Marie Bunck, Law, Power and the Sovereign State: The Evolution and Application of the Concept of Sovereignty (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1995), 164.
Eli Lauterpacht, “Sovereignty—Myth or Reality?” International Affairs 73, no. 1 (1997): 141.
L. Oppenheim, International Law: A Treatise, ed. Ronald F. Roxburgh, 3rd ed. (London: Longmans, Green and Co., 1920. Reprint, Lawbook Exchange 2005), §123, 206–207—see also Jackson, “Sovereignty-Modern,” 782.
Stephen D. Krasner, Sovereignty: Organized Hypocrisy (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1999), 3–4.
Dominik Zaum, The Sovereignty Paradox: The Norms and Politics of International Statebuilding (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007), 3.
Daniel Philpott, Revolutions in Sovereignty: How Ideas Shaped Modern International Relations (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2001), 16—see also
Cynthia Weber, Simulating Sovereignty: Intervention, the State and Symbolic Exchange, ed. Steve Smith. vol. 37, Cambridge Studies in International Relations (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995), 1.
Thomas J. Biersteker and Cynthia Weber, eds, State Sovereignty as Social Construct, Cambridge Studies in International Relations (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), 14.
James N. Rosenau, Along the Domestic-Foreign Frontier: Exploring Governance in a Turbulent World. Vol. 53, Cambridge Studies in International Relations (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997), 218.
Henry Schermers, “Different Aspects of Sovereignty,” in State, Sovereignty, and International Governance, ed. Gerard Kreijen, Marcel Brus, Jorri Duursma, Elisabeth De Vos, and John Dugard (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002), 185.
Jutta Brunneé and Stephen J. Troope, Legitimacy and Legality in International Law: An Interactional Account, Cambridge Studies in International and Comparative Law (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010).
See Chester Brown, A Common Law of International Adjudication (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007) for evidence supporting the dominance of process in the international system.
John Gerard Ruggie, “Territoriality and Beyond: Problematizing Moderity in International Relations,” International Organization 47 (Winter 1993): 140, 143–144.
H. L. A. Hart, “Definition and Theory in Jurisprudence,” in Essays in Jurisprudence and Philosophy, ed. H. L. A. Hart (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1983), 21.
Copyright information
© 2013 John Martin Gillroy
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Gillroy, J.M. (2013). Conclusion: The Metaphysical Elements of Sovereignty. In: An Evolutionary Paradigm for International Law. Philosophy, Public Policy, and Transnational Law. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137376657_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137376657_7
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, New York
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-47779-1
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-37665-7
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)