At a time when many uncertainties remain as to 'who will identify the fundamental values [of the international community] and by what process', any excess in characterizing rules as peremptory ones, without carefully considering whether or not such characterization is shared by the international community, risks undermining the credibility of jus cogens as a legal category, distinct from natural law and apt to perform important systemic functions.
The article doesn't shed much light on jus cogens as a doctrine, which is a shame, since jus cogens is one of those doctrines that appears virtually everywhere when a handy reason to overcome sovereignty or other international law is needed.* It does carry forward the history of the doctrine through the US's torture policies, and plays with the common understanding of jus cogens and appropriate metaphors, both useful contributions.
*I'm beginning to be of the opinion that the decisive feature of 'soft' international law is the desire to give no comprehensive articulation of its origins, structure or justification; this wouldn't be a problem if hard law weren't distinguished by exactly these features.
(h/t IL Reports)
No comments:
Post a Comment