Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

General Principles of International Law: From Rules to Values?

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Global Justice, Human Rights and the Modernization of International Law

Abstract

The paper analyzes the issue of general principles of international law as a distinct concept from that of general principles of law recognized in foro domestico. The authors maintain that any discussion on the nature and the functions of these principles in contemporary international law must consider, on the one hand, the framework of general theories of law and, on the other, the role that general principles of international law play in a structurally changed legal system, which is becoming increasingly based upon the recognition of common values. The paper is structured in five sections, with Sect. 1 being the introduction and Sect. 2 dealing with the theme of principles in the general theory of law. Then the doctrinal positions on the general principles of international law are examined (Sect. 3); and the authors’ theory on these principles is presented (Sect. 4). The conclusions drawn (Sect. 5) confirm that general principles of international law derive both from abstraction/induction from existing customary norms and from the general recognition by the international community, broadly understood. In the authors’ view, the second category of principles is more relevant and prevailing in the most recent international practice. Such a category confirms that recently a process of widening the foundations of general international law has occurred, with reference to certain shared and fundamental values emerging from the consensus of the international community. Most of these values tend towards goals of global justice.

Respectively, Professor of International Law, University of Siena and Associate Professor of International Human Rights Law, University of Siena, Italy. Sections 1, 2, 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3 were written by Riccardo Pisillo Mazzeschi. Sections 3, 4.4 and 5 were written by Alessandra Viviani.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    On the structural changes of contemporary international law see, e.g., Simma (1994); Tomuschat (1993); Carrillo Salcedo (1997); Meron (2003); Pisillo Mazzeschi (2008); Id. (2014), pp. 89–101; Sicilianos (2012), pp. 5 et seq. and 241 et seq.

  2. 2.

    The literature on principles is very extensive. See, inter alia, Dworkin (1967), pp. 14–46; Id. (1978), Ch. 2 and 3; Id. (1986), Ch. 10 and 11; Hart (1994), pp. 254–268; Rawls (1972), esp. Ch. II; Raz (1972), pp. 823–854; MacCormick (1978); Stone (1981), pp. 224–252; Bobbio (1994), pp. 257–279; Nino (1996), pp. 370–388; Alexy (1996); Id. (2000), pp. 294–304; Id. (2003), pp. 433–449.

  3. 3.

    On this theory see, e.g., Minda (1995), Ch. 3. Within the modern normative theory, one may include the “movement of fundamental rights” and the “process-oriented theory”. In turn, within the “movement of fundamental rights”, one may distinguish between an interpretative and a non-interpretative approach.

  4. 4.

    The term “neo-constitutionalism” can be used with very different meanings. In the theory of law and in the present work, the term “neo-constitutionalism” means a unitary stream of the theory and philosophy of law, which has developed some general theses about law. These theses mainly concern: (a) the connection between law and morality; (b) the nature of law as an interpretative practice; (c) the rationality of the law enforcement process; (d) the twofold dimension (factual and ideal) of law; (e) the clear distinction between rules and principles. These theses intend to overcome the traditional conceptions of law, especially legal positivism and realism. Note that the main exponents of neo-constitutionalism do not qualify themselves as advocates of natural law, but rather as non-positivists; but in reality, in our view, neo-constitutionalism, insisting on the connection between law and morality, the existence of an objective morality, and the ideal dimension of law, can be considered as a particular current of contemporary natural law theories. See, e.g., Dworkin (1967), pp. 14–46; Id. (1978), Ch. 2 and 3; Id. (1986), Ch. 10 and 11; Nino (1996), pp. 370–388; Alexy (1996); Id. (2000), pp. 294–304; Id. (2003), pp. 433–449.

  5. 5.

    See Minda (1995), Parts II and III.

  6. 6.

    See esp. Hart (1994), pp. 238–276.

  7. 7.

    See, inter alia, ‘Legal Positivism’, in Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2016, https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/legal-positivism/.

  8. 8.

    Hart (1994), esp. Ch. V, VI and VII.

  9. 9.

    Ibid., Ch. X.

  10. 10.

    See, inter alia, ‘Natural Law Theories’, in Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2016, https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/natural-law-theories.

  11. 11.

    See supra fn. 4. On neo-constitutionalism see also Bongiovanni (2013), pp. 84–116.

  12. 12.

    Dworkin (1978), esp. Ch. 2 and 3.

  13. 13.

    Ibid., p. 22.

  14. 14.

    See, e.g., Hart (1994), pp. 259–263; Guastini (1993), pp. 76–79, 447–452.

  15. 15.

    Dworkin (1978), pp. 22–23, 28–29.

  16. 16.

    Ibid., p. 22.

  17. 17.

    Ibid.

  18. 18.

    Guastini (1993), pp. 452–455.

  19. 19.

    Dworkin (1978), p. 28.

  20. 20.

    On this issue see Pino (2016), Ch. IV, pp. 73–96. This writer speaks of a “marked” and a weak” distinction between principles and rules.

  21. 21.

    Dworkin (1978), pp. 24–25. See also Alexy (1996), p. 75 et seq.

  22. 22.

    Ibid., p. 26.

  23. 23.

    See, e.g., Hart (1994), pp. 260–263.

  24. 24.

    Guastini (1993), pp. 77, 449–450.

  25. 25.

    Ibid.

  26. 26.

    Zagrebelski (1992), p. 149.

  27. 27.

    Dworkin (1978), p. 26; Alexy (2000), pp. 295–297; Stone (1981), p. 233.

  28. 28.

    Dworkin (1978), p. 72. On balancing see also Alexy (2003).

  29. 29.

    Hart (1994), pp. 261–263.

  30. 30.

    However, some writers maintain that also rules may have the dimension of “weight” and may be balanced against a conflicting rule or principle. See Pino (2016), p. 83.

  31. 31.

    For these distinctions see Guastini (1993), pp. 448–452.

  32. 32.

    D’Amato (2011), p. 165.

  33. 33.

    Besson (2010), pp. 163–185.

  34. 34.

    It must be noted that in early arbitration cases principles derived from national legal systems to fill the gaps in international law were used. See Affaire Yuille Shortridge et Cie and PCA’s Russia Indemnity Case (Russia v Turkey): Différend opposant la Grande-Bretagne et le Portugal dans l’affaire Yuille, Shortridge & Cie. Sentence prononcée par le Sénat de la Ville libre de Hambourg le 21 Octobre 1861, RSA, vol. XXIX, pp. 57–71; PCA, Russian Claim for Interest on Indemnities: Damages Claimed by Russia for Delay in Payment of Compensation Owned to Russian Injured During the War of 1877–1878, Award of 11 November 1912.

  35. 35.

    PCIJ/Advisory Committee of Jurists, Procès-verbaux, 16 June- 24 July 1920, Annexes 310–319 (1920).

  36. 36.

    Gaja (2013), para. 3.

  37. 37.

    PCIJ, Factory at Chorzow (Germany v Poland), Jurisdiction, Judgment of 27 July 1927, Series A, N° 9, esp. p. 31. Similarly, a principle based on both national law and arbitration awards has been used by the ICJ, Corfù Channel (Albania v UK), Merits, Judgment of 9 April 1949, ICJ Reports, 1949, p. 18.

  38. 38.

    ICJ, Oil Platform (Iran v US), Judgment of 6 November 2003, ICJ Reports 2003, p. 324 Judge Simma Separate Opinion paras. 66–74. See Biddulph and Newman (2014), p. 295.

  39. 39.

    ICJ, Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, Advisory Opinion of 8 July 1996, ICJ Reports 1996, p. 226. In his Separate Opinion Judge Fleischauer considers that the right to a have access to a remedy exists both under customary and national law.

  40. 40.

    ICJ, South West Africa (Ethiopia v South Africa, Liberia v South Africa), Second Phase, Judgment of 18 July 1966, Dissenting Opinion of Judge Tanaka, ICJ Reports 1966, p. 6.

  41. 41.

    De Visscher (1933), p. 406.

  42. 42.

    Kadelbach and Kleinlein (2007), pp. 340–348.

  43. 43.

    Venzke (2012), p. 25.

  44. 44.

    Jain (2016), p. 120.

  45. 45.

    Kelsen (1966), pp. 539–540.

  46. 46.

    Scelle (1934), pp. 312–315; Anzilotti (1955), pp. 67 and 107–108, fn. 5, who considers the general principles of international law as a part of customary law. However, this author (pp. 106–109) also maintains that the ICJ may resort to general principles to avoid non liquet and to resolve doubtful cases.

  47. 47.

    Tunkin (1975), pp. 98–106; Akehurst (1976), p. 801; Arangio-Ruiz (1979), p. 66. Sørensen (1960), p. 16, defines general principles mainly as a subsidiary source of international law, meant to fill gaps in positive rules. On these diverse positions see Biddulph and Newmann (2014), p. 298.

  48. 48.

    Certain authors maintain that general principles are rather “material sources” and may represent the premises for the judge to deduct the rules applicable to the specific case (see Virally (1968), pp. 543–546); or material sources useful to avoid non liquet (see Weil 1992, pp. 148–149). In his Dissenting Opinion in the Right of Passage Case, Judge Fernandes affirmed “quelle que se soit la position doctrinale qu’on prenne à l’egard de ces principes, […] tout le monde est. d’accord pour accepter leur existence et leur application comme source de droit positif”; ICJ, Right of Passage over Indian Territories (Portugal v India), Judgment of 12 April 1960, ICJ Reports 1960, pp. 134–135.

  49. 49.

    Lauterpacht (1927), p. 85; Mc Nair (1957), p. 15; Schlesinger (1957), p. 734; Friedmann (1963), pp. 279–283; Gutteridge (1953), p. 127; Sørensen (1960), pp. 20–26. See also Ellis (2011), p. 253–255.

  50. 50.

    Conforti (2015), p. 50; Treves (2005), pp. 248–255; Capotorti (1994), pp. 117–119; Carreau and Marrella (2012), pp. 325–336; Focarelli (2012), pp. 133–144; Salerno (1996), pp. 540–544.

  51. 51.

    Abi-Saab (1987), pp. 188–189.

  52. 52.

    See infra Sect. 3.4.7.

  53. 53.

    See, e.g., Mosler (1984), p. 89; Cheng (1953), pp. 24–26; Schlesinger (1957), p. 739.

  54. 54.

    Dominicé (2013), p. 80.

  55. 55.

    Harle (1935), pp. 679–680; Fitzmaurice (1958), p. 162; Jennings (1998), p. 730.

  56. 56.

    Degan (1997), pp. 72–89. This author considers the existence of two categories of principles: those which are prerequisites to the existence of any legal system and those which are axioms of the international order.

  57. 57.

    Schacther (1991), pp. 50–55; Degan (1997), pp. 72–89; Boas (2012), pp. 105–109; Thirlway (2010), p. 90.

  58. 58.

    Capotorti considers pacta sunt servanda as a “principe constitutif de l’ordre juridique international”. Capotorti (1994), pp. 119–127.

  59. 59.

    Cannizzaro (2014), p. 122.

  60. 60.

    Dupuy (2002), p. 182.

  61. 61.

    Tomuschat (1999), p. 161.

  62. 62.

    Tomuschat (1999), pp. 355–356.

  63. 63.

    According to Arangio-Ruiz (1979), p. 68, principles are induced from customary rules.

  64. 64.

    Schwarzenberger (1955), pp. 201–205; Wengler (1964), pp. 367–371. See also Waldock (1962), p. 69; de Visscher (1953), p. 409.

  65. 65.

    Lammers (1980), pp. 66–69.

  66. 66.

    Brownlie (2008), p. 19 affirms that general principles derive from customary rules or are logical propositions based on existing international law.

  67. 67.

    Wolfrum (2011), paras. 33–39.

  68. 68.

    Protière (2008), pp. 275–276.

  69. 69.

    Gaja (2013), paras. 18, 31–32.

  70. 70.

    Luzzatto (2006), pp. 66–68.

  71. 71.

    Dupuy (2002), p. 183.

  72. 72.

    Dominicé (2013), p. 80.

  73. 73.

    Dominicé (2013), pp. 89–90.

  74. 74.

    Dominicé (2013), pp. 92–93.

  75. 75.

    Bassiouni (1990), pp. 768–769.

  76. 76.

    Buzzini (2004), p. 607.

  77. 77.

    See infra Sect. 3.4.7.

  78. 78.

    Verdross (1968), p. 536.

  79. 79.

    Lammers (1980), p. 72.

  80. 80.

    Gaja (2013), paras. 18–20.

  81. 81.

    Simma and Alston (1992), pp. 102–106, esp. p. 105.

  82. 82.

    Dupuy (2002), pp. 186–187.

  83. 83.

    Tomuschat (1999), p. 356.

  84. 84.

    Cançado Trindade, separate opinion in the Pulp Mills case, ICJ Reports 2010, pp. 135–155, at p. 151, para. 39. However, for this scholar, these principles are at the origins of any legal system (ibidem, paras. 18 and 39).

  85. 85.

    Henkin (1996), pp. 37–38.

  86. 86.

    Charney (1993), pp. 543–551.

  87. 87.

    Abi-Saab (1987), pp. 188–210.

  88. 88.

    Meron (2006), pp. 383–386; Cassese (2005), pp. 65–67.

  89. 89.

    Schachter (1991), pp. 50–55. See also Schwarzenberger (1955), p. 204.

  90. 90.

    Vitanyi (1982), pp. 113–116.

  91. 91.

    Wolfrum (2011), paras. 35–39.

  92. 92.

    Cheng (1953), pp. 390–392.

  93. 93.

    Lammers (1980), p. 65.

  94. 94.

    Cheng (1953), p. 390; Bassiouni (1990), p. 775, Wolfrum (2011), para. 39, Virally (1968), p. 549.

  95. 95.

    Protière (2008), p. 24; Cannizzaro (2014), p. 122.

  96. 96.

    Charney (1993), p. 551, although this author speaks about new “general international law” instead of general principles.

  97. 97.

    Bassiouni (1990), pp. 779–780; Gaja (2013), para. 22; Meron (2003), pp. 418–420.

  98. 98.

    See, supra, Sect. 1.

  99. 99.

    Ibid.

  100. 100.

    ICJ, The Corfu Channel Case (United Kingdom v Albania) Merits, Judgment of 9 April 1949, ICJ Reports 1949, p. 4, at 22 (italics added).

  101. 101.

    See Quadri (1968), p. 119.

  102. 102.

    See Pisillo Mazzeschi (2007), pp. 462–468.

  103. 103.

    Iovane (2008), p. 469.

  104. 104.

    See, e.g., Dominicé (2013).

  105. 105.

    See supra, Sects. 2.2.2 and 2.3.2, the theories of the so called neo-constitutionalism.

  106. 106.

    Trail Smelter (United States v Canada), Award of 11 March 1941, Arbitral Tribunal, RSA, vol. III, pp. 1905–1982.

  107. 107.

    Corfu Channel case, see supra fn. 100.

  108. 108.

    ICJ, Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, Advisory Opinion of 8 July 1996, ICJ Reports 1996, p. 226.

  109. 109.

    ICJ, Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary v Slovakia), Judgment of 25 September 1997, ICJ Reports 1997, p. 7.

  110. 110.

    ICJ, Case Concerning Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (Argentina v Uruguay), Judgment of 20 April 2010, ICJ Reports 2010, p. 425.

  111. 111.

    Arbitration regarding the Iron Rhine (“Ijzeren Rijn”) Railway between the Kingdom of Belgium and the Kingdom of the Netherlands, Award of 24 May 2005, RSA, vol. XXVII, pp. 35–125.

  112. 112.

    Arbitration Lake Lanoux (France v Spain), Award of 1 November 1957, (1957) RSA, vol. XII, p. 281.

  113. 113.

    ICJ, Case Concerning the Frontier Dispute (Burkina Faso v Republic of Mali), Judgment of 22 December 1986, ICJ Reports 1986, p. 554.

  114. 114.

    See Cassese (1984), pp. 166–168.

  115. 115.

    See the Statement of Arvid Pardo of 1 November 1967, First Committee, UNGA, UN GAOR, 1515th and 1516th Meeting.

  116. 116.

    With the exclusion, in our opinion, of the prohibition of massive pollution of common spaces.

  117. 117.

    Report submitted to the UN General Assembly (A/56/10). The report, which also contains commentaries on the draft articles, appears in the Yearbook of the International Law Commission, 2001, vol. II, Part Two.

  118. 118.

    Cassese (1984), p. 160.

  119. 119.

    ICJ, Case Concerning Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v United States), Jurisdiction and Admissibility, Judgment of 26 November 1984, ICJ Reports 1984, p. 437, spec. Para. 187.

  120. 120.

    See supra fn 38, paras. 43 et seq. and 65 et seq.

  121. 121.

    ICJ, Western Sahara, Advisory Opinion of 16 October 1975, ICJ Reports 1975, p. 12.

  122. 122.

    See in this sense the 14th December 1960 GA Resolution 1514 (XV) on Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples; the 14th December 1962 Resolution on Permanent Sovereignty on Natural Resources (GA Res. 1803 (XVII), 17 UN GAOR Supp. N° 17 at 15, UN Doc. A/5217 (1962) and the 1970 Declaration on Friendly Relations and Cooperation Among States (GA Res. 2625 (XXV), UN GAOR, 25th Sess., Supp. N° 28, at 121, UN Doc. A/8028 (1970).

  123. 123.

    ICJ, Reservations to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Advisory Opinion of 28 May 1951, ICJ Reports 1951, p. 15.

  124. 124.

    ICJ, Barcelona Traction, Light and Power Company Limited (New Application, 1962), (Belgium v Spain), Merits, Second Phase, Judgment of 5 February 1970, ICJ Reports 1970, p. 3.

  125. 125.

    ICJ, Case Concerning United States Diplomatic and Consular Staff in Tehran (United States v Iran), Merits, Judgment of 24 May 1980, ICJ Reports 1980, p. 3.

  126. 126.

    See supra Sects. 2.1.2, 2.2.2 and 2.3.2.

  127. 127.

    World Commission on Environment and Development. Our Common Future: Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development (Brundtland Report), 1987.

  128. 128.

    The Future We Want, Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 27 July 2012, A/RES/66/288

  129. 129.

    See also the 2002 ILA New Delhi Declaration of Principles of International Law related to Sustainable Development and the OECD Guidelines: Strategies for Sustainable Development (2001).

  130. 130.

    WTO Appellate Body, United States Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products, Decision of 12 October 1998, WT/DS58/AB/R.

  131. 131.

    See supra fn. 111.

  132. 132.

    ICJ, Request for an Examination of the Situation in Accordance with Paragraph 63 of the Court’s Judgment of 20 December 1974 in the Nuclear Tests (New Zealand v. France) Case, Order of 22 September 1995, ICJ Reports 1995, paras. 34–35.

  133. 133.

    See supra fn. 109.

  134. 134.

    International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, Case Southern Bluefin Tuna Cases (New Zealand v Japan; Australia v Japan), Provisional Measures, International Order of 27 August 1999.

  135. 135.

    WTO Appellate Body, Case EC Measures Concerning Meat and Meat Products (Hormones), Decision of 16 January 1998, WT/DS26/AB/R and WT/DS48/AB/R.

  136. 136.

    Text adopted by the International Law Commission at its 58th session, in 2006, and submitted to the General Assembly as a part of the Commission’s report covering the work of that session (A/61/10), Yearbook of the International Law Commission, 2006, vol. II, Part Two.

  137. 137.

    PCA, The Rhine Chlorides Arbitration Concerning the Auditing of Accounts (The Netherlands v France), Award of 12 March 2014.

  138. 138.

    Common Security. A Program for Disarmament. Report of the Independent Commission on Disarmament and Security Issues under the Chairmanship of O. Palme, London, Pan Books, 1982.

  139. 139.

    The Commission on Human Security was established in January 2001 in response to the UN Secretary-General’s call at the 2000 Millennium Summit for a world “free from want” and “free from fear”. CHS: 2003: 4.

  140. 140.

    UN General Assembly, 66th Session “Follow-up to paragraph 143 on human security of the 2005 World Summit Outcome”, A/RES/66/290 of 25 October 2012.

  141. 141.

    Adopted by the Governing Body of the International Labour Office at its 204th Session (Geneva, November 1977) and amended at its 279th (November 2000), 295th (March 2006) and 329th (March 2017) Sessions.

References

  • Abi-Saab G (1987) Cours général de droit international public. RdC 207:9–464

    Google Scholar 

  • Akehurst M (1976) Equity and general principles of law. ICLQ 25:801–825

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alexy R (1996) Theorie der Grundrechte, 3rd edn. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt. (A Theory of Constitutional Rights, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2002)

    Google Scholar 

  • Alexy R (2000) On the structure of legal principles. Ratio Juris 13:294–304

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alexy R (2003) On balancing and subsumption: a structural analysis. Ratio Juris 16:433–449

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anzilotti D (1955) Corso di diritto internazionale, vol I. Cedam, Padova

    Google Scholar 

  • Arangio-Ruiz G (1979) The UN declaration on friendly relations and the sources of international law. Sijthoff & Noordhoff, Alphen aan den Rijn

    Google Scholar 

  • Bassiouni MC (1990) A functional approach to “general principles of international law”. Mich JIL 11:768–818

    Google Scholar 

  • Besson S (2010) Theorizing the sources of international law. In: Besson S, Tasioulas J (eds) The philosophy of international law. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 163–185

    Google Scholar 

  • Biddulph M, Newman D (2014) A contextualized account of general principles of international law. Pace Int Law Rev 26:286–344

    Google Scholar 

  • Boas G (2012) Public international law: contemporary principles and perspectives. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bobbio N (1994) (1966) Principi generali di diritto. In: Bobbio N (ed) Contributi ad un dizionario giuridico. Giappichelli, Torino, pp 257–279

    Google Scholar 

  • Bongiovanni G (2013) Il neocostituzionalismo: i temi e gli autori. In: Pino G, Schiavello A, Villa V (eds) Filosofia del diritto. Introduzione critica al pensiero giuridico e al diritto positivo. Giappichelli, Torino, pp 84–116

    Google Scholar 

  • Brownlie I (2008) Principles of public international law, 7th edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Buzzini GP (2004) La théorie des sources face au droit international général: Réflexions sur l’émergence du droit objectif dans l’ordre juridique international. RGDIP 106:581–617

    Google Scholar 

  • Cannizzaro E (2014) Diritto internazionale, 2nd edn. Giappichelli, Torino

    Google Scholar 

  • Capotorti F (1994) Cours général de droit international public. RdC 248:9–344

    Google Scholar 

  • Carreau D, Marrella F (2012) Droit international, 11th edn. Editions A. Pedone, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Carrillo Salcedo JA (1997) Reflections on the existence of a hierarchy of norms in international law. EJIL 8:583–595

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cassese A (1984) Il diritto internazionale nel mondo contemporaneo. Il Mulino, Bologna

    Google Scholar 

  • Cassese A (2005) International law, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Charney JI (1993) Universal international law. AJIL 87:529–551

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng B (1953) General principles of law, as applied by international courts and tribunals. Reprint 1987. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Conforti B (2015) Diritto internazionale, 10th edn. Editoriale Scientifica, Napoli

    Google Scholar 

  • D’Amato A (2011) New approaches to customary international law. AJIL 105:163–167

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Visscher C (1933) Contribution à l’étude des sources du droit international. Rev Dr Int Lég Comp:395–420

    Google Scholar 

  • de Visscher C (1953) Théorie et réalités en droit international public. Pedone, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Degan VD (1997) Sources of international law. Nijhoff, The Hague

    Google Scholar 

  • Dominicé C (2013) La société internationale à la recherche de son équilibre, Cours Général de Droit International Public. RdC 370:9–392

    Google Scholar 

  • Dupuy PM (2002) L’unité de l’ordre juridique international, Cours Général de droit international public. RdC 297:9–490

    Google Scholar 

  • Dworkin R (1967) The model of rules. Univ Chic Law Rev 35:14–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dworkin R (1978) Taking rights seriously. New impression with a reply to critics. Duckworth, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Dworkin R (1986) Law’s empire. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (Mass)

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellis J (2011) General principles and comparative law. EJIL 22:949–971

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fitzmaurice G (1958) Some problems regarding the formal sources of international law. In: van Asbeck FM et al (eds) Symbolae Verzijl. Nijhoff, La Haye, pp 153–176

    Google Scholar 

  • Focarelli C (2012) Diritto internazionale. Giuffrè Editore, Milano

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedmann W (1963) The uses of “general principles” in the development of international law. AJIL 57:279–299

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaja G (2013) ‘General principles of law’, Max Planck encyclopedia of public international law, online edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Guastini R (1993) Le fonti del diritto e l’interpretazione. Giuffrè Editore, Milano

    Google Scholar 

  • Gutteridge HC (1953) The meaning and the scope of article 38 (1) (c) of the statute of the International Court of Justice. Trans Grotius Soc 38:125–150

    Google Scholar 

  • Härle E (1935) Les principes généraux de droit et le droit des gens. RDILC 16:663–687

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart HLA (1994) The concept of the law (1961), 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Henkin L (1995-96) Human rights and state sovereignty. Ga J Int Comp Law 25:31–45

    Google Scholar 

  • Iovane M (2008) La participation de la societé civile à l’élaboration et à l’application du droit international de l’environnement. RGDIP 3:465–520

    Google Scholar 

  • Jain N (2016) Judicial lawmaking and general principles in international criminal law. HILJ 57:111–150

    Google Scholar 

  • Jennings RY (1998) What is international law and how do we tell it when we see it? In collected writings of sir Robert Jennings, vol 2. Kluwer, The Hague

    Google Scholar 

  • Kadelbach S, Kleinlein T (2007) International law a constitution for mankind? An attempt at a re-appraisal with an analysis of constitutional principles. GYIL 50:303–348

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelsen H (1966) Principles of international law, 2nd edn. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Lammers JG (1980) General principles of law recognized by civilized nations. In: Kalshoven FP, Kuyper J, Lammers JG (eds) Essays on the development of the international legal order. Kluwer, Alpen aan den Rijn, pp 53–75

    Google Scholar 

  • Lauterpacht H (1927) Private law sources and analogies in international law: with special reference to international arbitration. Longmans Green and Co. Ltd, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Luzzatto R (2006) Il diritto internazionale generale e le sue fonti. In: Carbone SM, Luzzatto R, Santa Maria A (eds) Istituzioni di diritto internazionale, 3rd edn. Giappichelli, Torino

    Google Scholar 

  • MacCormick N (1978) Legal reasoning and legal theory. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • McNair AD (1957) The general principles of law recognized by civilized nations. BYIL 33:1–19

    Google Scholar 

  • Meron T (2003) International law in the age of human rights. General course of public international law. RdC 301:9–490

    Google Scholar 

  • Meron T (2006) The humanization of international law. Martinus-Nijhoff, Leiden/Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Minda G (1995) Postmodern legal movements. Law and jurisprudence at Century’s end. New York University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Mosler H (1984) General principles of law. Encyclopedia Public Int Law 7:511–526

    Google Scholar 

  • Nino CS (1996) Introduzione all’analisi del diritto (1980). Giappichelli, Torino

    Google Scholar 

  • Pino G (2016) Teoria analitica del diritto I. La norma giuridica. Edizioni ETS, Pisa

    Google Scholar 

  • Pisillo Mazzeschi R (2007) Diritto internazionale. In: Mazzeschi F-G-P (ed) Diritti umani- Dizionario, vol I. UTET, Torino, pp 462–468

    Google Scholar 

  • Pisillo Mazzeschi R (2008) Responsabilité de l’Etat pour violation des obligations positives relatives aux droits de l’homme. RdC 333:175–506

    Google Scholar 

  • Pisillo Mazzeschi R (2014) Human rights and the modernization of international law. In: Lenzerini F, Vrdoljak AF (eds) International law for common goods. Normative perspectives on human rights, culture and nature. Hart, Oxford, pp 89–101

    Google Scholar 

  • Protière G (2008) Les principes généreaux dans la jurisprudence internationale: éléments d’une différenciation fonctionnelle. Revue du Droit Public et de la Science Politique en France et à l’Étranger:259–292

    Google Scholar 

  • Quadri R (1968) Diritto internazionale pubblico, 5th edn. Liguori, Napoli

    Google Scholar 

  • Rawls J (1972) A theory of justice (1971). Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Raz J (1972) Legal principles and the limits of law. Yale LJ 81:823–854

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salerno F (1996) Principi generali di diritto (Diritto internazionale). Digesto delle discipline pubblicistiche XI:524–557

    Google Scholar 

  • Scelle G (1934) Précis de Droit des Gens. Principes et systématique. Deuxième partie. Recueil Sirey, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Schachter O (1991) International law in theory and practice. Martinus-Nijhoff, Dordrecht

    Google Scholar 

  • Schlesinger RB (1957) Research on the general principles of law recognized by civilized nations. AJIL 51:734–753

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwarzenberger G (1955) The fundamental principles of international law. RdC 87:195–383

    Google Scholar 

  • Sicilianos LA (2012) L’influence des droits de l’homme sur la structure du droit international. RGDIP 116:241–274

    Google Scholar 

  • Simma B (1994) From bilateralism to community interest in international law. RdC 250:217–384

    Google Scholar 

  • Simma B, Alston P (1992) The sources of human rights law: custom, jus cogens and general principles. AYIL 12:82–108

    Google Scholar 

  • Sørensen M (1960) Les principes de droit international public. Cours général de droit international. RdC 101:1–254

    Google Scholar 

  • Stone J (1981) From principles to principles. Law Q Rev 97:224–253

    Google Scholar 

  • Thirlway H (2010) The sources of international law. In: Evans MD (ed) International law. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 187–203

    Google Scholar 

  • Tomuschat C (1993) Obligations arising for states without or against their will. RdC 241:195–374

    Google Scholar 

  • Tomuschat C (1999) International law: ensuring the survival of mankind on the eve of a new century. General course on public international law. RdC 281:9–438

    Google Scholar 

  • Treves T (2005) Diritto internazionale. Problemi fondamentali. Giuffrè, Milano

    Google Scholar 

  • Tunkin G (1975) International law in the international system. RdC 147:1–218

    Google Scholar 

  • Venzke I (2012) How interpretation makes international law: on semantic change and normative twists. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Verdross A (1968) Les principes généraux de droit dans le système des sources du droit international public. In: Guggeheim P (ed) Receuil d’études de droit international en hommage à P. Guggenheim. En vente à la Librairie de l'Université, Georg, Geneva, pp 521–530

    Google Scholar 

  • Virally M (1968) Le role des «principes» dans le development du droit international. In: Guggeheim P (ed) Recueil des Etudes de droit international en hommage à P. Guggenheim. En vente à la Librairie de l'Université, Georg, Geneva, pp 531–564

    Google Scholar 

  • Vitanyi B (1982) Les positions doctrinales concernant le sens de la notion de principes généraux du droit reconnus par les nations civilisées. RGDIP 86:48–116

    Google Scholar 

  • Waldock H (1962) States and the law governing resort to force. General course on public international law. RdC 106:1–252

    Google Scholar 

  • Weil P (1992) Le droit international en quête de son identité. Cours général de droit international. RdC 237:1–369

    Google Scholar 

  • Wengler W (1964) Völkerrecht, vol 1. Springer, Berlin, pp 361–371

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wolfrum R (2011) Sources of international law. In: Max Plank encyclopedia of public international law, online edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford. 2015

    Google Scholar 

  • Zagrebelski G (1992) Il diritto mite. Legge diritto giustizia. Einaudi, Torino

    Google Scholar 

Further Reading

  • Barberis J (1991) Los Principios Generales de Derecho come Fuente del Derecho Internacional. Revista del Instituto Interamericano de Derechos Humanos 14:11–41

    Google Scholar 

  • Benvenuti P (2004) Principi generali di diritto, giurisdizioni internazionali e mutamenti sociali nella vita di relazione internazionale. In Studi di diritto internazionale in onore di G. Arangio-Ruiz. Giuffré, Milano, pp 295–313

    Google Scholar 

  • Bogdan M (1977) General principles of law and the problem of lacunae in the law of nations. Nordic J Int Law 46:37–53

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bos M (1977) The recognized manifestation of international law: a new theory of sources. GYIL 20:9–76

    Google Scholar 

  • Condorelli L (2006) Fonti (Diritto Internazionale). In: Digesto delle Discipline Pubblicistiche, III, pp 2554–2574

    Google Scholar 

  • Crawford J (2013) General course on public international law. RdC 365:9–390

    Google Scholar 

  • De Sena P (2016) Proportionality and human rights in international law: some … « utilitarian » reflections. RDI 99:1009–1025

    Google Scholar 

  • Degan VD (1989) The sources of international criminal law. Chinese JIL 4:45–83

    Google Scholar 

  • Dupuy PM, Vinuales JE (2015) International environmental law. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Dworkin R (1990) Questioni di principio. Il saggiatore, Milano

    Google Scholar 

  • Fauvre (1974) Principes de droit des gens. Editions Universitaires, Fribourg

    Google Scholar 

  • Fitzmaurice G (1953) The law and procedure of the International Court of Justice 1951-54. General principles and sources of law. BYIL 30:1–70

    Google Scholar 

  • Fitzmaurice G (1957) General principles of international law considered from the standing point of the rule of law. RdC 92:1–228

    Google Scholar 

  • Fitzmaurice G (1959) The law and procedure of the International Court of Justice 1954–59. General principles and sources of law. BYIL 35:183–231

    Google Scholar 

  • Flauss JF (1998) La protection internationale des droits de l’homme et les sources du droit international. Rapport general. In: La protection internationale des droits de l’homme et l’évolution du droit international, SFDI Colloque de Strasbourg

    Google Scholar 

  • Heilborn P (1926) Les sources du droit international. RdC 11:1–64

    Google Scholar 

  • Herczegh G (1969) General principles of law and the international legal order. Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirgis FL (1987) Custom on a sliding scale. AJIL 81:146–151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolb R (1999) La Bonne Foie en Droit International Public: Contribution à l’Etude des Principes Généraux de Droit, PhD diss. Université de Genève, Genève

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolb R (2001) La structure constitutionnelle du droit international public. CanYIL 39:69–115

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolb R (2006) Principles as sources of international law (with special reference to good faith). NILR 53:1–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koskenniemi M (2000) General principles: reflections on constructivist thinking in international law. In: Koskenniemi M (ed) Sources of international law. Ashgate, Aldershot, pp 359–399

    Google Scholar 

  • Lauterpacht H (1933) The function of law in the international community. Clarendon, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Lauterpacht H (1958) The development of international law by the international court. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Nino CS (1980) Dworkin and the legal positivism. Mind 89:519–543

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olufemi E, Chin L (1997) “General principles of law”, “soft law” and the identification of international law. NYIL 38:3–49

    Google Scholar 

  • Pellet A (1974) Recherche sur les Principes Généraux de Droit en Droit International. PhD diss., Université de Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Pellet A (2006) Article 38. In: Zimmerman A, Tomuschat C, Oellers-Frahm K (eds) The statute of the International Court of Justice: a commentary. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 677–792

    Google Scholar 

  • Raimondo FO (2008) General principles of law in the decisions of international criminal courts and tribunals. Martinus Nijhoff, Leiden/Boston

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rousseau C (1970) Droit international public. Sirey, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Simma B, Paulus A (1999) The responsibility of individuals for human rights abuses in internal conflicts: a positivist view. AJIL 93:302–316

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sørensen M (1946) Les sources du droit international. Etude sur la jurisprudence de la Cour Permanente de Justice Internationale. Einar Munksgaard, Copenhague

    Google Scholar 

  • Sur S (2014) La créativité du droit international. Collect Courses The Hague Acad Int Law 363:9–332

    Google Scholar 

  • Tomuschat C (2014) Human rights. Between idealism and realism, 3rd edn. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Hoof GJH (1983) Rethinking the sources of international law. Kluwer, Deventer

    Google Scholar 

  • Verdross A (1935) Les principes généraux du droit dans la jurisprudence international. RdC 52:191–251

    Google Scholar 

  • de Visscher P (1972) Cours général de droit international public. RdC 136:1–202

    Google Scholar 

  • Weil P (1983) Towards relative normativity in international law. CJTL 77:413–442

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Siena, Siena, Italy

    Riccardo Pisillo Mazzeschi & Alessandra Viviani

Authors
  1. Riccardo Pisillo Mazzeschi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Alessandra Viviani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Riccardo Pisillo Mazzeschi .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Political and International Sciences, University of Siena, Siena, Italy

    Riccardo Pisillo Mazzeschi

  2. Faculty of Law, Catholic University of Milan, Milan, Italy

    Pasquale De Sena

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Pisillo Mazzeschi, R., Viviani, A. (2018). General Principles of International Law: From Rules to Values?. In: Pisillo Mazzeschi, R., De Sena, P. (eds) Global Justice, Human Rights and the Modernization of International Law. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90227-2_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90227-2_6

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-90226-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-90227-2

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation