FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W3126051232> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W3126051232 endingPage "182" @default.
• W3126051232 startingPage "163" @default.
• W3126051232 abstract "International courts serve an important function in finding and interpreting existing law, but as noted already forty years ago the focal problem of international courts is that: “the borderlines between interpretation of existing law and the making of new law are inevitably fluid.” Particularly in interpreting customary international law the courts face situations which call for innovative methods in determining the definition and the scope of the law. International criminal law has only recently grown more coherently codified, but still bears much on customary law elements, unlike some other fields of public international law, in which rules have been quite thoroughly codified. Additionally, in criminal law issues such as foreseeability, and non-retroactivity, to mention a few, ought to be given a high credence, or the reason that it is the liberty of an individual that is at stake. In discovering and applying customary international law, international criminal courts are confronted with the balancing exercise between following positivist approach – attaching itself to law as it is, as enacted or adopted by an authority, and may lead to an undesired, even unjust outcome in criminal trials – and natural law approach – arising from inherent rights and duties regardless of their formal recognition, and may risk the violation of the principle of legality. Principle of legality determines the limits of the law-making process and encompasses norms that legal rules must adhere to, such as clarity, promulgation and non-retroactivity.The question arises, how can the courts preserve the principle of legality, and especially the prohibition of retroactive effect of law, in interpreting – and in formulating – customary international law in a progressive manner. Should the principle of legality be applied liberally in order to bring perpetrators to justice, or is strict application necessary in criminal courts, even at the cost of some impunity? This paper analyses how these two aspects should be balanced and reconciled against one another in discovering, interpreting, and applying customary international law, with reflections on theories of H.L.A. Hart and Lon Fuller – the two influential proponents of modern positivist and natural legal thought, respectively – and recent case-law of international courts in fields of international criminal law and human rights law. Also, Hart‟s primary and secondary rules, and rule of recognition are considered in the determination of what may count as customary international law. First, I consider the principle of legality and its importance in the formation of law – with emphasis on customary international law, followed analysis of its link to morality and the concepts of lex lata and lex ferenda. I have included a brief discussion on the application of primary and secondary rules and rule of recognition in the formation of (customary) international law. Finally, I analyze selected recent court decisions which deal with international crimes and the principle of legality, with the aim of reflecting on the above issues." @default.
• W3126051232 created "2021-02-01" @default.
• W3126051232 creator A5008715201 @default.
• W3126051232 date "2010-10-31" @default.
• W3126051232 modified "2023-10-16" @default.
• W3126051232 title "Between Lex Lata and Lex Ferenda? Customary International (Criminal) Law and the Principle of Legality" @default.
• W3126051232 doi "https://doi.org/10.1163/22112596-90000011" @default.
• W3126051232 hasPublicationYear "2010" @default.
• W3126051232 type Work @default.
• W3126051232 sameAs 3126051232 @default.
• W3126051232 citedByCount "5" @default.
• W3126051232 countsByYear W31260512322013 @default.
• W3126051232 countsByYear W31260512322014 @default.
• W3126051232 countsByYear W31260512322017 @default.
• W3126051232 countsByYear W31260512322021 @default.
• W3126051232 countsByYear W31260512322022 @default.
• W3126051232 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W3126051232 hasAuthorship W3126051232A5008715201 @default.
• W3126051232 hasConcept C149209484 @default.
• W3126051232 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W3126051232 hasConcept C185436325 @default.
• W3126051232 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W3126051232 hasConcept C202565627 @default.
• W3126051232 hasConcept C2779921323 @default.
• W3126051232 hasConcept C42027317 @default.
• W3126051232 hasConcept C55447825 @default.
• W3126051232 hasConceptScore W3126051232C149209484 @default.
• W3126051232 hasConceptScore W3126051232C17744445 @default.
• W3126051232 hasConceptScore W3126051232C185436325 @default.
• W3126051232 hasConceptScore W3126051232C199539241 @default.
• W3126051232 hasConceptScore W3126051232C202565627 @default.
• W3126051232 hasConceptScore W3126051232C2779921323 @default.
• W3126051232 hasConceptScore W3126051232C42027317 @default.
• W3126051232 hasConceptScore W3126051232C55447825 @default.
• W3126051232 hasIssue "2" @default.
• W3126051232 hasLocation W31260512321 @default.
• W3126051232 hasOpenAccess W3126051232 @default.
• W3126051232 hasPrimaryLocation W31260512321 @default.
• W3126051232 hasRelatedWork W110179113 @default.
• W3126051232 hasRelatedWork W1760167517 @default.
• W3126051232 hasRelatedWork W1785944207 @default.
• W3126051232 hasRelatedWork W2186161415 @default.
• W3126051232 hasRelatedWork W2264227912 @default.
• W3126051232 hasRelatedWork W2360471670 @default.
• W3126051232 hasRelatedWork W2397363453 @default.
• W3126051232 hasRelatedWork W3124465765 @default.
• W3126051232 hasRelatedWork W3126051232 @default.
• W3126051232 hasRelatedWork W3210607422 @default.
• W3126051232 hasVolume "15" @default.
• W3126051232 isParatext "false" @default.
• W3126051232 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W3126051232 magId "3126051232" @default.
• W3126051232 workType "article" @default.