New Voices Two Kinds Of Systemic Consistency In International Law

Henrique Marcos*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

The systemic view of international law has grown in popularity in recent decades. Even central authors who endorse the fragmentation of international law have recognised it as a legal system. Despite its popularity, however, some unresolved issues still obscure the systemic view. If international law is a system, does that mean it has no rule conflicts ? Or is it that a system can handle these conflicts in a way that preserves legal consistency ? In this respect, this article aims to contribute to a better understanding of international law as a legal system by rationally reconstructing the concept of consistency in international law. To make its argument,this research distinguishes rules from statements, as well as the consistency of rulesets (R-consistency) from the consistency of statement sets (S-consistency). With this differentiation, this article then explains how the internal logic of international law allows subjects to derive an S-consistent set of legal consequences even if the ruleset of international law is R-inconsistent.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)65-83
Number of pages19
JournalEuropean Journal of Legal Studies
Volume15
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jun 2023

Keywords

  • International Law
  • Legal Systems
  • Rule Conflicts
  • Legal Logic
  • Legal Reasoning
  • FRAGMENTATION

Cite this