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 language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 65-83 |
Number of pages | 19 |
Journal | European Journal of Legal Studies |
Volume | 15 |
Issue number | 1 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - 1 Jun 2023 |
Keywords
- International Law
- Legal Systems
- Rule Conflicts
- Legal Logic
- Legal Reasoning
- FRAGMENTATION