Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The International Rule of Law

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
International Conflict and Security Law

  • 1544 Accesses

Abstract

The chapter explores the significance of the international rule of law for international conflict and security law. The first section of the chapter investigates how the international rule of law is conceptualised, unpacking its formal and substantive requirements. The second section applies the concept in the context of international conflict and security law, focusing in particular on the implications for the use of lethal force. In doing so, an argument is advanced for the prioritisation of compliance with both formal and substantive requirements of the international rule of law. Necessary for the maintenance of international peace and security, and for the prevention and punishment of international crimes, emphasis is placed on the importance of the international rule of law for the integrity of the international legal order and for the future development of international conflict and security law.

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 349.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 449.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 449.99
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

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    During recent decades, the international rule of law has become a widely-discussed topic. We base our analysis on works by Beaulac 2009, Chesterman 2008, Hurd 2014, 2015a, 2015b, Nardin 2008, Nollkaemper 2009 and others.

  2. 2.

    Tamanaha 2004, pp. 114–126.

  3. 3.

    See Hurd 2015b; Nardin 2008.

  4. 4.

    ‘A principle of governance in which all persons, institutions and entities, public and private, including the State itself, are accountable to laws that are publicly promulgated, equally enforced and independently adjudicated, and which are consistent with international human rights norms and standards. It requires, as well, measures to ensure adherence to the principles of supremacy of law, equality before the law, accountability to the law, fairness in the application of the law, separation of powers, participation in decision-making, legal certainty, avoidance of arbitrariness and procedural and legal transparency.’

    The rule of law and transitional justice in conflict and post-conflict societies: Report of the Secretary-General (S/2004/616), para 6.

  5. 5.

    McCorquodale 2016, p. 286.

  6. 6.

    See Beaulac 2007.

  7. 7.

    Nijman 2015, p. 135.

  8. 8.

    Kanetake 2016, p. 16.

  9. 9.

    Bingham 2010; Gowder 2016; Tamanaha 2004.

  10. 10.

    The idea behind the ‘thin’ version of the rule of law is that law is considered to be morally indifferent. See Raz 1979, pp. 212–218.

  11. 11.

    See, for example, Spijkers 2011.

  12. 12.

    Westerman 2018, pp. 141–167.

  13. 13.

    See Beaulac 2009; Hurd 2015b.

  14. 14.

    Gowder insists that the ‘thin’ and ‘thick’ rule of law are better called the ‘weak’ and the ‘strong’ versions of the rule of law. Formal legality is ‘weak’ exactly because it does not encompass substantive values represented by the rules of law. For instance, the requirement of equality can be treated formally through the formula ‘treat like cases alike’, yet to determine which cases are indeed ‘like’ and which are not, one must always consider the substance of the rules. Gowder 2016, Chapters 2–3.

  15. 15.

    Kumm 2003–2004, p. 19.

  16. 16.

    As noted by Raz, these requirements do not exist for their own sake. They simply determine some minimal qualities any law must possess so that its addressees can be guided by it, see Raz 1979.

  17. 17.

    This list of formal qualities of legal rules is not exhaustive. One of the most widely recognised lists of such formal qualities of law is offered by Fuller (see Fuller 1964; for the application to international law, see also Kumm 2004; Brunnée and Toope 2010). It is beyond the scope of this chapter to discuss all the intricacies of formal legality in international law.

  18. 18.

    Randelzhofer and Dörr 2012. See also Hathaway and Shapiro 2017 for a discussion of the interplay between rule of law rhetoric and outlawing war.

  19. 19.

    It is beyond the scope of this contribution to discuss whether Article 51 and Ch. VII of the UN Charter constitute exceptions from the general prohibition of the use of force. For discussion, see de Hoogh 2015.

  20. 20.

    See for discussion Chesterman 2001; Hurd 2011; Rodley 2015; Simma 1999; Tesón 2005; Koh 2016.

  21. 21.

    See Bingham 2010; Dicey 1897; Hayek 2012.

  22. 22.

    Jessup 1945; Lauterpacht 2011; for a recent inquiry, see Feinäugle 2016a.

  23. 23.

    See Simma 2004, 2009.

  24. 24.

    This ratio stands behind the Draft Articles on the Responsibility of International Organizations. ILC, ‘Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of its 43rd Session’ (26 April–3 June and 4 July–12 August 2011) UN Doc A/66/10.

  25. 25.

    General Assembly (GA) Res 67/1 UN Doc A/RES/67/1, 30 November 2012, para 2.

  26. 26.

    Feinäugle 2016b, p. 161.

  27. 27.

    Joined Cases C-402/05 P and C-415/05 P Yassin Abdullah Kadi and Al Barakaat International Foundation v Council of the European Union and Commission of the European Communities [2008] ECR 461, paras 323–325.

  28. 28.

    See Bailey and Daws 2003, pp. 379–412.

  29. 29.

    See Harrington 2017, p. 42 ff.

  30. 30.

    Spijkers 2012, p. 365.

  31. 31.

    See Wolfrum 2012, pp. 109–115.

  32. 32.

    This goes back to Hobbesian conceptions of law- or rule-based order as opposed to the natural condition states would inevitably fall into if there were no international law. See Dyzenhaus 2014.

  33. 33.

    Pavel 2019, p. 3.

  34. 34.

    Also see Fasbender 2018, pp. 771–72. McCorquodale emphasises the importance of human rights for the definition of the international rule of law through the arguments of legal pluralism, McCorquodale 2016, pp. 292–94.

  35. 35.

    Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development: UN General Assembly Resolution (A/RES/70/1), para 59, target 16.3.

  36. 36.

    Report of the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, Christof Heyns, UN Doc A/68/382, 13 September 2013, para 97.

  37. 37.

    Report of the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, Christof Heyns, UN Doc A/68/382, 13 September 2013, para 97.

  38. 38.

    ‘Oral Intervention by Amnesty International in the UN Human Rights Council’s panel discussion on “Ensuring use of remotely piloted aircraft or armed drones in counterterrorism and military operations in accordance with international law, including international human rights and humanitarian law”,’ statement by Amnesty International, UN Human Rights Council, Geneva, 22 September 2014.

  39. 39.

    Bingham 2007, p. 69–70.

  40. 40.

    Summary of the Human Rights Council interactive panel discussion of experts on the use of remotely piloted aircraft or armed drones in compliance with international law: Report of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, UN Doc. A/HRC/28/38, 15 December 2014, para 46.

  41. 41.

    UN Human Rights Council, Resolution 25/22, Ensuring use of remotely piloted aircraft or armed drones in counterterrorism and military operations in accordance with international law, including international human rights and humanitarian law, adopted on 28 March 2014, UN Doc. A/HRC/RES/25/22, 15 April 2014.

  42. 42.

    European Parliament resolution on the use of armed drones, 2014/2567(RSP), 25 February 2014, para 4. It is instructive to recall the rule of law as one of the fundamental values upon which the European Union is based. See: Treaty on European Union, 31 I.L.M. 253 (1992), Article 6(1): ‘The Union is founded on the principles of liberty, democracy, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, and the rule of law, principles which are common to the Member States.’ See Pech 2009, 2010.

  43. 43.

    Report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism, Ben Emmerson, UN Doc A/HRC/25/59, 11 March 2014, para 73.

  44. 44.

    UK Parliament Joint Committee on Human Rights, The Government’s policy on the use of drones for targeted killing: Second Report of Session 2015–16, HC 574, HL Paper 141, 10 May 2016, p. 6.

  45. 45.

    Universal Declaration of Human Rights, G.A. res. 217A (III), U.N. Doc A/810 at 71 (1948), preamble.

  46. 46.

    Heyns and Probert 2016.

  47. 47.

    Heyns and Probert 2016.

  48. 48.

    Summary of the Human Rights Council interactive panel discussion of experts on the use of remotely piloted aircraft or armed drones in compliance with international law: Report of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, UN Doc. A/HRC/28/38, 15 December 2014, para 54.

  49. 49.

    Henckaert and Doswald-Beck 2005, p. 607.

  50. 50.

    Henckaert and Doswald-Beck 2005, p. 509.

  51. 51.

    UN General Assembly Resolution 68/178, Protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism, adopted on 18 December 2013, UN Doc A/RES/68/178, 28 January 2014, para 6(s).

  52. 52.

    Maurer 2019.

  53. 53.

    Crawford 2014, p. 492.

  54. 54.

    Armed Activities on the Territory of Congo, ICJ Reports (2005) 168 at para 148, 45 ILM (2006) 271.

References

  • Bailey D, Daws S (2003) The Procedure of the UN Security Council. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Beaulac S (2007) An inquiry into the international rule of law. EUI Working Paper MWP 1–35. http://hdl.handle.net/1814/6957

  • Beaulac S (2009) The Rule of Law in International Law Today. In: Palombella G, Walker N (eds) Relocating the Rule of Law. Hart Publishing, Oxford, pp 197–223

    Google Scholar 

  • Bingham T (2007) The Rule of Law. Camb. Law J.66:67–85

    Google Scholar 

  • Bingham T (2010) The Rule of Law. Allen Lane, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Brunnée J, Toope S (2010) Legitimacy and Legality in International Law. Cambridge University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Chesterman S (2001) Just War or Just Peace: Humanitarian Intervention and International Law. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Chesterman S (2008) An International Rule of Law? Am. J. Com. Law 56:331–62

    Google Scholar 

  • Crawford J (2014) Chance, Order, Change: The Course of International Law. Brill, The Hague

    Google Scholar 

  • Dicey A (1897) Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution, 5th edn. Macmillan, London

    Google Scholar 

  • de Hoogh A (2015) Jus Cogens and the Use of Armed Force. In: Weller M (ed) The Oxford Handbook of the Use of Force in International Law. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 1161–86

    Google Scholar 

  • Dyzenhaus D (2014) Hobbes on the International Rule of Law. Ethics Int. Aff. 28:53–64

    Google Scholar 

  • Fasbender B (2018) What’s in a Name? The International Rule of Law and the United Nations Charter. Chinese Journal of International Law 17:761–97

    Google Scholar 

  • Feinäugle C (2016a) The International Court of Justice and the Rule of Law. In: Feinäugle C (ed) The Rule of Law and Its Application to the United Nations. Hart Publishing, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Feinläuge C (2016b) The UN Declaration on the Rule of Law and the Application of the Rule of Law to the UN: A Reconstruction from an International Public Authority Perspective. Goet. J. Int. Law 7:157–85

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuller L (1964) The Morality of Law. Yale University Press, New Haven

    Google Scholar 

  • Gowder P (2016) The Rule of Law in the Real World. Cambridge University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrington J (2017) The Working Methods of the United Nations Security Council: Maintaining the Implementation of Change. ICLQ 66:39–70

    Google Scholar 

  • Hathaway O, Shapiro S (2017) The Internationalists: How a Radical Plan to Outlaw War Remade the World. Simon & Schuster, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayek F (2012) Law, Legislation and Liberty: a New Statement of the Liberal Principles of Justice and Political Economy. Taylor and Francis, Hoboken

    Google Scholar 

  • Henckaerts J-M, Doswald-Beck L (eds) (2005) Customary International Humanitarian Law, Volume I: Rules. Cambridge University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Heyns C, Probert T (2016) Securing the Right to Life: A Cornerstone of the Human Rights System. EJIL:Talk! https://www.ejiltalk.org/securing-the-right-to-life-a-cornerstone-of-the-human-rights-system/

  • Hurd I (2011) Is Humanitarian Intervention Legal? The Rule of Law in an Incoherent World. Ethics & Intern. Aff. 25:293–313

    Google Scholar 

  • Hurd I (2014) The International Rule of Law: Law and the Limit of Politics. Ethics and International Affairs 28:39–51

    Google Scholar 

  • Hurd I (2015a) Three Models of the International Rule of Law. Eidos 23:37–48

    Google Scholar 

  • Hurd I (2015b) The International Rule of Law and the Domestic Analogy. Global Constitutionalism 4:365–95

    Google Scholar 

  • Jessup P (1945) The International Court of Justice and the Rule of Law. World Aff. 108:234–38

    Google Scholar 

  • Kanetake M (2016) The Interfaces Between the National and International Rule of Law: A Framework Paper. In: Nollkaemper A, Kanetake M (eds) The Rule of Law at the National and International Levels: Contestations and Deference. Hart Publishing, Oxford/Portland, OR, pp 11–41

    Google Scholar 

  • Koh H (2016) The War Powers and Humanitarian Intervention. Houst. L. Rev. 53:971–1033

    Google Scholar 

  • Kumm M (2003-2004) 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. EJIL 15:907–31

    Google Scholar 

  • Lauterpacht H (2011) The Function of Law in the International Community. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Maurer P (2019) Changing world, unchanged protection? 70 Years of the Geneva Conventions. https://www.icrc.org/en/document/changing-world-unchanged-protection-70-years-geneva-conventions

  • McCorquodale R (2016) Defining the International Rule of Law: Defying Gravity? ICLQ 65:277–304

    Google Scholar 

  • Nardin T (2008) Theorising the International Rule of Law. Rev. Int’l Stud. 34:385–401

    Google Scholar 

  • Nijman J (2015) Images of Grotius, or the International Rule of Law beyond Historiographical Oscillation. Journal of the History of International Law 17: 83–137

    Google Scholar 

  • Nollkaemper A (2009) The Internationalized Rule of Law. HJRL 1: 74–78

    Google Scholar 

  • Pavel C E (2019) The International Rule of Law. CRISPP 22:1–20

    Google Scholar 

  • Pech L (2009) The rule of law as a constitutional principle of the European Union. Jean Monnet working paper series 4: 1–79

    Google Scholar 

  • Pech L (2010) ‘A Union Founded on the Rule of Law’: Meaning and Reality of the Rule of Law as a Constitutional Principle of EU Law. European Constitutional Law Review 6: 359–396

    Google Scholar 

  • Randelzhofer A, Dörr O (2012) ‘Article 2(4).’ In: Simma B et al (eds) The Charter of the United Nations. A Commentary, 3rd edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 201–34

    Google Scholar 

  • Raz J (1979) Authority of Law. Essays on Law and Morality. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Rodley N (2015) Humanitarian Intervention. In: Weller M (ed) The Oxford Handbook of the Use of Force in International Law. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 775–96

    Google Scholar 

  • Simma B (1999) NATO, the UN and the Use of Force: Legal Aspects. EJIL 10:1–22

    Google Scholar 

  • Simma B (2004) Fragmentation in a Positive Light. Mich. J. Int. L. 25:845–48

    Google Scholar 

  • Simma B (2009) Fragmentation of International Law From the Perspective of a Practitioner. EJIL 20:265–97

    Google Scholar 

  • Spijkers O (2011) The United Nations, the Evolution of Global Values and International Law. Intersentia, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Spijkers O (2012) Global Values In the United Nations Charter. Neth. Int’l L. Rev. 59:361–397

    Google Scholar 

  • Tamanaha B (2004) On the Rule of Law: History, Politics, Theory. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Tesón F (2005) Humanitarian Intervention: An Inquiry into Law and Morality, 3rd edn. Transnational, Ardsley

    Google Scholar 

  • Westerman P (2018) Outsourcing the Law: A Philosophical Perspective on Regulation. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolfrum R (2012) Article 1. In: Simma B et al (eds) The Charter of the United Nations. A Commentary, 3rd edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 107–20

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Middlesex University, London, UK

    Anthony Cullen

  2. University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands

    Kostiantyn Gorobets

Authors
  1. Anthony Cullen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kostiantyn Gorobets
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kostiantyn Gorobets .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. School of Law, KIMEP University, Almaty, Kazakhstan

    Sergey Sayapin

  2. School of Law, KIMEP University, Almaty, Kazakhstan

    Rustam Atadjanov

  3. National Law School of India, Pune, India

    Umesh Kadam

  4. Law and Social Sciences, University of Derby, Derby, UK

    Gerhard Kemp

  5. School of Law, KIMEP University, Almaty, Kazakhstan

    Nicolás Zambrana-Tévar

  6. Bristol Law School, University of the West of England, Bristol, UK

    Noëlle Quénivet

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 T.M.C. Asser Press and the authors

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Cullen, A., Gorobets, K. (2022). The International Rule of Law. In: Sayapin, S., Atadjanov, R., Kadam, U., Kemp, G., Zambrana-Tévar, N., Quénivet, N. (eds) International Conflict and Security Law. T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6265-515-7_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6265-515-7_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague

  • Print ISBN: 978-94-6265-514-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-6265-515-7

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

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation