Suchergebnisse

In this paper I am going to argue a familiar but still controversial thesis about the relation between international ethics and international law, which I would sum up in the following list of propositions:First, international law is a source as well as an object of ethical judgements. The idea of legality or the rule of law is an ethical one, and international law has ethical significance because it gives institutional expression to the rule of law in international relations.Secondly, international law—or, more precisely, the idea of the rule of law in international relations—reflects a rule-oriented rather than outcome-oriented ethic of international affairs. By insisting on the priority of rules over outcomes, this ethic rejects consequentialism in all its forms.

Analysis and studying of the terrorism in all its facets is a complex entangled problem with less clear legal regulation that it might seem at first glance, especially after its transformation from local phenomenon into a world threat. Hitherto terrorism and actions connected to it have been criminalized by the majority of states. There are in modern criminal law whole systems of rules on criminal liability for terrorism which differs considerably from country to country. Terrorism has been criminalized in numerous international regional and universal antiterrorist legal instruments. The author notes that differences in definitions that are enshrined in them hinders international cooperation in criminal matters with respect to terrorist cases. Difficulties reside in the necessity to meet the dual criminality requirement and in the political offense exception. These difficulties can only be overcome through elaboration of a universally recognized definition of the notion of international terrorism and making it legally binding via its inclusion into a universal convention. The issue of definition of international terrorism is an important part of an efficient mutual assistance among states in fight against this crime. In this article the author accounts of actual ways of tackling by the international community of the issue of criminalization of international terrorism and of factors influencing them.

"Eine Ausdehnung des Selbstverteidigungsrechts auf 'vorbeugende Verteidigung' ist unnötig. Das bestehende Völkerrecht bietet einen hinreichenden Rahmen, um dem internationalen Terrorismus zu begegnen. Unilaterale Antworten sind kontraproduktiv, denn sie spielen dem terroristischen Angriff auf die internationale Ordnung in die Hände." (Autorenreferat)

The purpose of this essay is twofold. First, it proposes to undertake, in introductory form, one of the many tasks a historical sociology of international relations could perform: the comparative study of one of those relations which appear in almost any international system, i.e., international law. Secondly, this essay will try to present the rudimentary outlines of a theory of international law which might be called sociological or functional.International law is one of the aspects of international politics which reflect most sharply the essential differences between domestic and world affairs. Many traditional distinctions tend to disappear, owing to an "international civil war" which projects what are primarily domestic institutions (such as parliaments and pressure groups) into world politics, and injects world-wide ideological clashes into domestic affairs. International law, like its Siamese twin and enemy, war, remains a crystallization of all that keeps world politics sui generis. If theory is to be primarily concerned with the distinctive features of systems rather than wim the search for regularities, international law becomes a most useful approach to international politics.