Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The International Rule of Law Time After Time: Temporary Institutions Between Change and Continuity

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Netherlands Yearbook of International Law 2014

Part of the book series: Netherlands Yearbook of International Law ((NYIL,volume 45))

Abstract

The rule of law has emerged both on the domestic and international levels as a promise of longstanding democracy, economic development and peace. On both levels, the rule of law is often associated with the longstanding character of institutions and the predictability of rules, meaning that ‘citizens are entitled to laws that are neither murky nor uncertain’. However, does this always mean in practice that the rule of law can only be concretized by laws and legal institutions that last forever? More specifically in the international context, can we guarantee the consolidation of the international rule of law through the coexistence of both permanent and temporary institutions and instruments? In this chapter, I analyse the meaning of the rule of law at the domestic and international levels and discuss its complex relationship with time. I argue that the past, present and future of the rule of law can be, in some cases, united by the use of temporary institutions such as international criminal tribunals or truth commissions, rules and measures. Temporariness can be essential to react swiftly to humanitarian crises, provide transitory justice, gradually concretize the rule of law in fragile democracies, and adapt legal orders to evolving economic and political circumstances.

Sofia Ranchordás is Assistant Professor at Tilburg Law School, The Netherlands. She would like to thank the Editorial Board of the Netherlands Yearbook of International Law and the anonymous reviewers for useful comments and insights.

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 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
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.

    Alott 2005, at 7.

  2. 2.

    Peerenboom 2005, at 809; Appicciafuoco 2010, at 741. See also Nollkaemper et al. 2012.

  3. 3.

    Krever 2011, at 287.

  4. 4.

    Sannerholm 2009, at 15.

  5. 5.

    Waldron 2009, at 15; Tamanaha 2004.

  6. 6.

    Chesterman 2008, at 331.

  7. 7.

    Overy 2003, at 1, 14–15.

  8. 8.

    Ibid., at 1 and 23.

  9. 9.

    Crawford 2003, at 109 and 129. The topic of the legitimacy of international criminal courts was raised before the ICTY in the Tadic case. Prosecutor v. Tadic, Appeals Chamber, Decision on the Defense Motion for Interlocutory Appeal on Jurisdiction, Case No. IT-94-I-AR72, 2 October 1995.

  10. 10.

    Stromseth 2009, at 87 and 88.

  11. 11.

    Nollkaemper et al. 2012, at 2.

  12. 12.

    Carothers 2006. For a thorough analysis, see Sannerholm 2009. See also Kleinfeld 2012.

  13. 13.

    More generally, on the relationship between time and law, see Ost 1999.

  14. 14.

    Allain 2000, at 1.

  15. 15.

    Nelson and Cabatingan 2010, at 2.

  16. 16.

    Eijsbouts 2001, at 3.

  17. 17.

    Georgiev 1993, at 4.

  18. 18.

    Frankenberg 2014.

  19. 19.

    For a distinction between Rechtsstaat and rule of law, see Blaam 1990, at 76.

  20. 20.

    Nagle 2008, at 3.

  21. 21.

    Dicey 1885.

  22. 22.

    Peerenboom 2005, at 809.

  23. 23.

    For a discussion of the different perceptions of the rule of law, see Humphreys 2010. See also Raz 2001.

  24. 24.

    Humphreys 2010, at 9–10.

  25. 25.

    Chesterman 2008, at 331.

  26. 26.

    Kötter and Schuppert 2014, at 71.

  27. 27.

    Carothers 2006, at 15.

  28. 28.

    World Bank Legal Vice Presidency, Initiatives in Legal and Judicial Reform 3 (World Bank 2004), http://www-wds.worldbank.org/servlet/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2004/03/01/000012009_20040301142827/Rendered/PDF/250820040Edition.pdf. Accessed 15 September 2014. On the specific role of the World Bank in the promotion of the rule of law, see Krever 2011, at 287.

  29. 29.

    Nollkaemper et al. 2012, at 2.

  30. 30.

    Ibid., at 4.

  31. 31.

    Ibid., at 5.

  32. 32.

    Tamanaha 2011, at 4; Waldron 2009, at 16.

  33. 33.

    Waldron 2011, at 315.

  34. 34.

    Ibid.

  35. 35.

    Ibid.

  36. 36.

    Waldron 2014.

  37. 37.

    The path to the rule of law might however be long in some cases. See Peerenboom 2002.

  38. 38.

    Waldron 2011, at 316.

  39. 39.

    UN Secretary-General, The rule of law and transitional justice in conflict and post-conflict societies, 2004, http://www.unrol.org/files/2004%20report.pdf. Accessed 15 September 2014.

  40. 40.

    UNGA Res. 55/2, 18 September 2000.

  41. 41.

    UNGA Res. 61/39, 4 December 2006.

  42. 42.

    Chesterman 2009, at 67.

  43. 43.

    Kumm 2003, at 19–32.

  44. 44.

    Kumm 2004, at 909.

  45. 45.

    Carothers 2006, at 19.

  46. 46.

    Marauhn 2011, at 52.

  47. 47.

    Ibid., at 54.

  48. 48.

    Ost 1998, at 14.

  49. 49.

    Eyer 2008, at 666.

  50. 50.

    Fitzpatrick 1998, at 185.

  51. 51.

    Friedman 1959, at ix.

  52. 52.

    Kammerhofer 2011, at 62.

  53. 53.

    Asylum case (Colombia/Peru), ICJ, Judgment of 2 November 1950.

  54. 54.

    Guzman 2005, at 158.

  55. 55.

    UN Security Council, The rule of law and transitional justice in conflict and post-conflict societies, S/2004/616, 23 August 2004.

  56. 56.

    Allott 2005, at 13.

  57. 57.

    For a thorough analysis of the principle of legal certainty, see Popelier 1997; Oldenziel 1998.

  58. 58.

    See Bayern 2012, at 53.

  59. 59.

    For a comparative legal study analysis of the principle of legal certainty, see Maxeiner 2006, at 541.

  60. 60.

    Scalia 1989, at 1175.

  61. 61.

    Carothers 2006, at 17.

  62. 62.

    Allott 2005, at 13.

  63. 63.

    Koskenniemi 2006.

  64. 64.

    Steiger 2011, at 13 and 34.

  65. 65.

    Thomas Jefferson, Letter to James Madison, 6 September 1789, www.thefederalistpapers.org. Accessed 15 September 2014. In this letter, the Founding Father refused ‘perpetual constitutions’ and argued that ‘no society can make a perpetual constitution or even a perpetual law. The earth belongs to the living. [Therefore] every constitution … and every law naturally expires at the end of thirty-four years.’

  66. 66.

    Referring to K. Llewellyn, see Scalia 1989, at 56. See also Strauss 2008, at 997.

  67. 67.

    Weingast 2010, at 29.

  68. 68.

    Ibid., at 39.

  69. 69.

    Steiger 2011, at 13 and 35.

  70. 70.

    See, for example, Declaration on principles of international law concerning friendly relations and co-operation among states in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, G.A. res. 2625, Annex, 25 UN GAOR, Supp. (No. 28), U. N. Doc. A/5217, 1970, at 121.

  71. 71.

    Steiger 2011, at 13 and 36.

  72. 72.

    Daintith 2001, at 115 and 119–120.

  73. 73.

    Steiger at 13 and 16.

  74. 74.

    Weingast 2010, at 50.

  75. 75.

    See Cassesse 2012.

  76. 76.

    Omeziri and Gore 2014, at 43.

  77. 77.

    Steiger 2011, at 13 and 15.

  78. 78.

    Gersen 2007, at 247.

  79. 79.

    Ibid.

  80. 80.

    Omeziri and Gore 2014, at 44.

  81. 81.

    See Ranchordás 2014a.

  82. 82.

    Uniting and strengthening America by providing appropriate tools required to intercept and obstruct terrorism (USA PATRIOT) Act of 2001, 18 USC 1, Public Law 107–56, 26 October 2001.

  83. 83.

    Davis 1981, at 383.

  84. 84.

    Gesetz zur Bekämpfung des internationalen Terrorismus (Terrorismusbekämpfung), Bundesgesetzblatt, Teil I, Nr. 3, 9 January 2002, at 361. See also Ranchordás 2014a, at 64–65.

  85. 85.

    Regels inzake het opleggen van beperkende maatregelen aan personen met het oog op de bescherming van de nationale veiligheid (Wet bestuurlijke maatregelen nationale veiligheid), Opinion of the Dutch Council of State and ministerial report, Kamerstukken II, 30 566, nr. 4, 2005–2006, at 12.

  86. 86.

    Ginsburg et al. 2013, at 42.

  87. 87.

    Maltzman and Shipan 2008, at 255.

  88. 88.

    Ranchordás 2014b.

  89. 89.

    For arguments that judicial sunsets promote the rule of law, see Gentithes 2014, at 411–412.

  90. 90.

    Popelier 1997, at 115.

  91. 91.

    Chesterman 2008, at 331.

  92. 92.

    Ibid.

  93. 93.

    Stromseth 2009, at 90.

  94. 94.

    Allain 2000, at 126.

  95. 95.

    UN Security Council, The rule of law and transitional justice in conflict and post-conflict societies, S/2004/616, 23 August 2002.

  96. 96.

    Peijic 2001, at 2.

  97. 97.

    For example, in March 2014, Indonesia announced the intention to terminate 60 bilateral investment treaties with multiple countries. The country would only remain bound for another 15 years to the Netherlands due to a sunset clause in the bilateral treaty with the latter, see http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/3755c1b2-b4e2-11e3-af92-00144feabdc0.html#axzz3FrFPpbmN. Accessed 15 September 2014.

  98. 98.

    Alter and Steinberg 2007.

  99. 99.

    Broomhall 2003, at 19–20 and 56.

  100. 100.

    Ibid., at 21.

  101. 101.

    Crawford 2003, at 109 and 125.

  102. 102.

    Stromseth 2009, at 87 and 88.

  103. 103.

    For a framework and the limits of the application of temporary legislation at the domestic level, see Ranchordás 2014a.

  104. 104.

    Rosenfeld 2001, at 1307.

  105. 105.

    Tamanaha 2011, at 2.

  106. 106.

    See Guthrie 2013, at 1175–1180.

  107. 107.

    Tamanaha 2011, at 11.

  108. 108.

    Van Wynen and Thomas 1975.

References

  • Allain J (2000) A century of international adjudication: the rule of law and its limits. T.M.C Asser Press, The Hague

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Allott P (2005) Towards the international rule of law: essays in integrated constitutional theory. Cameron May, Folkestone

    Google Scholar 

  • Alter KJ, Steinberg D (2007) The theory and reality of the European Coal and Steel Community. In: Meunier S, McNamara K (eds) European integration and institutional change in historical perspective. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Appicciafuoco L (2010) The promotion of the rule of law in the Western Balkans: the European Union’s role. Ger Law J 11:741–768

    Google Scholar 

  • Bayern SJ (2012) Against certainty. Hofstra Law Rev 41:53–90

    Google Scholar 

  • Blaam LC (1990) The Rechstaat idea compared with the rule of law as a paradigm for protecting rights. S Afr Law J 107:76–96

    Google Scholar 

  • Broomhall B (2003) International justice and the International Criminal Court: between sovereignty and the rule of law. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Cabatingan L, Nelson R (2010) A preface and an introduction. In: Cabatingan L, Heckman J, Nelson RL (eds) Global perspectives on the rule of law. Routledge, London, pp 1–13

    Google Scholar 

  • Carothers T (2006) Promoting the rule of law abroad: in search of knowledge. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Cassesse A (ed) (2012) Realizing utopia: the future of international law. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Chesterman S (2008) An international rule of law? Am J Comp Law 56:331–362

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chesterman S (2009) I’ll take Manhattan: the international rule of law and the United Nations Security Council. The Hague J Rule Law 1:67–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crawford J (2003) The drafting of the Rome Statute. In: Sands P (ed) From Nuremberg to The Hague: the future of international criminal justice. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Daintith T (2001) Is international law the enemy of national democracy? In: Reestman AJA, Vandamme T (eds) Ambiguity in the rule of law: the interface between national and international legal systems. Europa Law Publishing, Groningen, pp 114–122

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis A (1981) Review procedures and public accountability in sunset legislation: an analysis and proposal for reform. Adm Law Rev 33:393–413

    Google Scholar 

  • Dicey A V (1885) Introduction to the study of law of the constitution. 8th reprint, Liberty Fund, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Eijsbouts W (2001) Introduction. In: Vandamme TAJ, Reestman JH (eds) Ambiguity in the rule of law: the interface between national and international legal systems. Europa Law Publishing, Groningen, pp 3–10

    Google Scholar 

  • Eyer KE (2008) Administrative adjudication and the rule of law. Adm Law Rev 60:647–682

    Google Scholar 

  • Fitzpatrick P (1998) Law in the antinomy of time: a miscellany. In: Ost F, Van Hoecke M (eds) Temps et droit. Bruylant, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • Frankenberg G (2014) Political technology and the erosion of the rule of law: normalizing the state of exception. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Friedman WG (1959) Law in a changing society. University of California Press, Los Angeles

    Google Scholar 

  • Gentithes M (2014) Sunsets on constitutionality and Supreme Court efficiency. Va J Soc Policy Law 21:373–421

    Google Scholar 

  • Georgiev D (1993) Politics of rule of law: deconstruction and legitimacy in international law. Eur J Int Law 4:1–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gersen JA (2007) Temporary legislation. Univ Chic Law Rev 74:247–298

    Google Scholar 

  • Ginsburg T, Mansur J, McAdams R (2013) Libertarian paternalism, path dependence, and temporary law. Coase-Sandor Institute for Law and Economics Working Paper No. 645 (2d Series) Public Law and Legal Theory Working Paper No. 431, www.ssrn.com. Accessed 15 Sept 2014

  • Guthrie BJ (2013) Beyond investment protection: an examination of the potential influence of investment treaties on domestic rule of law. N Y Univ J Int Law & Polit 45:1151–1180

    Google Scholar 

  • Guzman AG (2005) Saving customary international law. Mich J Int Law 27:115–176

    Google Scholar 

  • Humphreys S (2010) Theatre of the rule of law: transnational legal intervention in theory and practice. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kammerhofer J (2011) Uncertainty in international law: a Kelsenian perspective. Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Kleinfeld R (2012) Advancing the rule of law abroad: next generation abroad. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Koskenniemi M (2006) From apology to utopia: the structure of international legal argument. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kötter M, Schuppert G (2014) Applying the rule of law to contexts beyond the state. In: Barenbom P, Silkenat J, Hickey J Jr (eds) The legal doctrines of the rule of law and the legal state (Rechtsstaat). Springer, Heidelberg, pp 71–89

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Krever T (2011) The legal turn in late development theory: the rule of law and the World Bank’s development model. Harv Int Law J 52:287–319

    Google Scholar 

  • Kumm M (2003) International law in national courts: the international rule of law and the limits of the internationalist model. Va J Int Law 44:19–32

    Google Scholar 

  • Kumm M (2004) The legitimacy of international law: a constitutionalist framework of analysis. Eur J Int Law 15:907–931

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maltzman F, Shipan CR (2008) Change, continuity, and the evolution of the law. Am J Polit Sci 42:252–267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marauhn T (2011) The relevance of culture in framing international law. In: Marauhn T, Steiger H (eds) Universality and continuity in international law. Eleven International Publishing, The Hague, pp 45–59

    Google Scholar 

  • Maxeiner J (2006) Legal certainty: a European alternative to American legal indeterminacy? Tulane J Int Comp Law 15:541–607

    Google Scholar 

  • Nagle L (2008) On armed conflict, human rights, and preserving the rule of law in Latin America. Penn State Int Law Rev 27:1–44

    Google Scholar 

  • Nollkaemper A, Peerenboom R, Zürn M (eds) (2012) Rule of law dynamics: in an era of international and transnational governance. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Oldenziel HA (1998) Wetgeving en rechtszekerheid: een onderzoek aar de bijdrage van het legaliteitsvereiste aan de rechtszekerheid van de burger. Kluwer, Alphen aan den Rijn

    Google Scholar 

  • Omeziri E, Gore C (2014) Temporary measures: Canadian refugee policy and environmental migration. Refuge 29:43–53

    Google Scholar 

  • Ost F (1998) L’instantané ou l’institué? L’institué ou l’instituant? Le droit a-t-il pour vocation de durer? In: Ost F, Van Hoecke M (eds) Temps et droit. Bruylant, Brussels, pp 14–30

    Google Scholar 

  • Ost F (1999) Le temps du droit. Éditions Odile Jacob, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Overy R (2003) The Nuremberg trials: international law in the making. In: Sands P (ed) From Nuremberg to The Hague: the future of international criminal justice. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Peerenboom R (2002) China’s long march toward rule of law. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Peerenboom R (2005) Human rights and rule of law: what’s the relationship? Georget J Int Law 36:809–946

    Google Scholar 

  • Pejic J (2001) The Yugoslav Truth and Reconciliation Commission: a shaky start. Fordham Int Law J 25:1–22

    Google Scholar 

  • Popelier P (1997) Rechtszekerheid als beginsel van behoorlijke wetgeving. Intersentia, Antwerp

    Google Scholar 

  • Ranchordás S (2014a) Constitutional sunsets and experimental legislation: a comparative perspective. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ranchordás S (2014b) Sunset clauses and experimental legislation: blessing or curse for legal certainty? Statute Law Rev, Advance Access, 11 Feb 2014

    Google Scholar 

  • Raz J (2001) The rule of law and its virtue. In: Dyzenhaus D, Ripstein A (eds) Law and morality. University of Toronto Press, Toronto, pp 210–230

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenfeld M (2001) The rule of law and the legitimacy of constitutional democracy. South Calif Law Rev 74:1307–1352

    Google Scholar 

  • Sannerholm RZ (2009) Rule of law after war: ideologies, norms and methods for legal and judicial reform (Doctoral Dissertation). Örebro Studies in Law, Örebro

    Google Scholar 

  • Scalia A (1989) The rule of law as a law of rules. Univ Chic Law Rev 56:1175–1181

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steiger H (2011) Universality and continuity in international public law? In: Marauhn T, Steiger H (eds) Universality and continuity in international law. Eleven International Publishing, The Hague

    Google Scholar 

  • Strauss DA (2008) On the origin of rules (with apologies to Darwin): a Comment on Antonin Scalia’s the rule of law as a law of rules. Univ Chic Law Rev 75:997–1013

    Google Scholar 

  • Stromseth J (2009) Justice on the ground: can international courts strengthen domestic rule of law in post-conflict societies? Hague J Rule Law 1:87–97

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tamanaha BZ (2004) On the rule of law: history, politics, theory. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Tamanaha BZ (2011) The rule of law and legal pluralism in development. Hague J Rule Law 3:1–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Wynen TA, Thomas AJ Jr (1975) A world rule of law: prospects and problems. SMU Press, Dallas

    Google Scholar 

  • Waldron J (2009) The rule of international law. Harv J Law & Publ Policy 30:15–30

    Google Scholar 

  • Waldron J (2011) Are sovereigns entitled to the benefit of the international rule of law? Eur J Int Law 22:315–343

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waldron J (2014) The rule of law in public law. New York University Public Law and Legal Theory Working Papers. Paper 481, http://lsr.nellco.org/nyu_plltwp/481. Accessed 15 Sept 2014

  • Weingast BR (2010) Why developing countries prove so resistant to the rule of law. In: Cabatingan L, Heckman J, Nelson R (eds) Global perspectives on the rule of law. Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands

    Sofia Ranchordás

Authors
  1. Sofia Ranchordás
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sofia Ranchordás .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of International and Constitutional Law, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands

    Mónika Ambrus

  2. Centre for European Studies, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands

    Ramses A. Wessel

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 T.M.C. Asser Press and the authors

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Ranchordás, S. (2015). The International Rule of Law Time After Time: Temporary Institutions Between Change and Continuity. In: Ambrus, M., Wessel, R. (eds) Netherlands Yearbook of International Law 2014. Netherlands Yearbook of International Law, vol 45. T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6265-060-2_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Societies and partnerships

Search

Navigation