The Theory of the Law Creators' Circle: Re-Conceptualizing the Monism–Dualism–Pluralism Debate

Author:

Kirchmair Lando

Abstract

The aim of this Article is to re-conceptualize the debate about the (theoretical) relationship between international and national law, which has been debated for centuries. Generally, the floor is divided between dualism as developed by Heinrich Triepel and monism developed mainly by Hans Kelsen. In the light of new developments since their inception, I argue that these theories can no longer comprehensively explain the relationship between international or European Union (EU) and national law. Yet, the Article is based on the conviction that a common denominator of international and national law is elementary (i.e. here “the law creators' circle,” in German, “Die Theorie des Rechtserzeugerkreises,” in short “TREK”) in order to solve possible norm conflicts between different but overlapping legal orders. Therefore, pluralism is also limited in my eyes because it does not offer a satisfying prescriptive account. This common legal framework, however, must not be understood as the “constitutionalization” of international (or EU law) either, as this easily implies too many substantial values, which are not (yet) a common reality.

Publisher

Cambridge University Press (CUP)

Subject

Law

Reference137 articles.

1. See Delbrück, supra note 48, at 263f; see also Griller, supra note 1 at 96 & 98 et seq.

2. See Bleckmann Albert, Begriff und Kriterien der innerstaatlichen Anwendbarkeit völkerrechtlicher Verträge - Versuch einer Theorie des self-executing treaty auf rechtsvergleichender Grundlage 124 (1970) (referencing the Austrian and the Dutch doctrine in n.19-20); Nollkaemper, supra note 16, at 164; Karen Kaiser, Treaties, direct applicability, in Max Planck Encyclodpedia of Public International Law Online Edition [MPEPIL] para. 6 (R. Wolfrum ed., 2011); Gaby Buchs, Die unmittelbare Anwendbarkeit völkerrechtlicher Vertragsbestimmungen-Am Beispiel der Rechtsprechung der Gerichte Deutschlands, Österreichs, der Schweiz und der Vereinigten Staaten von Amerika 37, 43 (1993);

3. Martin Franz, Die unmittelbare Anwendbarkeit von TRIPS in Argentinien und Brasilien, 12 Gewerblicher Rechtsschutz & Urheberrecht Internationaler Teil 1001, 1004 (2002);

4. Keller, supra note 12, at 14 n.40.

5. See Vranes Erich , Lex superior, lex specialis, lex posterior—Rechtsnatur der ‘Konfliktlösungsregeln, 65 Heidelberg J. Int‘l L. 391, 402 n.48 (2005).

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3