Agora 12 : le droit international et le droit interne

Présidée par Dr August Reinisch

Depuis 1989, beaucoup des barrières érigées entre les nations se sont effondrées. Qu’en est-il de la séparation érigée par les juristes internationaux entre droit international et droit interne ? Les juges nationaux ont-ils adopté une approche différente du droit international ? Comment les juges internationaux ont-ils utilisé le droit international ? Les termes comme ‘monisme’ et ‘dualisme’ se sont-ils avérés moins pertinents ? Peut-on toujours parler de droit ‘international’ et de droit ‘interne’, ou y a-t-il du droit qui puisse être considéré comme à la fois interne ou international, ou ni l’un ni l’autre ?

Les organismes de coopération transfrontière: un droit transnational dépassant la dialectique interne/international?

MR ROMELIEN COLAVITTI, Doctorant, ATER, Université Paul Cézanne Aix-Marseille III

Résumé: À partir de l'adoption de la Convention-cadre sur la coopération transfrontalière des collectivités territoriales du Conseil de l'Europe et de ses protocoles additionnels, nombre d'États européens ont conclu des traités - pluri ou bilatéraux - précisant la portée des règles dégagées par ce système cadre et organisant spécifiquement les relations entre leurs collectivités respectives. L'UE (Groupement européen de coopération territoriale), le Conseil de l'Europe (Groupement euro-régional de coopération) et certains États dans leurs relations respectives (Groupement local de coopération transfrontalière franco-allemand), ont ensuite élaboré des structures juridiques nouvelles que des collectivités infra-étatiques issues d'États distincts peuvent instituer en vue d'organiser leurs relations.

Internationaux quant au fondement juridique de leur création, ces organismes peuvent également être considérés comme internes, au regard du droit applicable à leurs actes. En effet, l'activité de ces organismes, créés sur le fondement du droit international ou communautaire, est tout à la fois régie par ces règles constitutives, mais également par le droit interne du lieu du siège de l'organisme (en matière d'enregistrement, publicité, actes unilatéraux, relations contractuelles et responsabilité extracontractuelle). Mi-international, mi-interne, le droit applicable à ces organismes opère ainsi progressivement une fuite du droit international public vers le droit interne des États et, partant, vers le droit international privé. Mais le droit ici applicable peut également être considéré comme ni-international, ni-interne, dans la mesure où les collectivités en présence pourront, lors de l'institution d'un tel organisme, établir un accord statutaire prévoyant l'application d'usages nouveaux et innover alors en sécrétant un réel droit transnational.

Biographie: Romélien Colavitti prépare actuellement une thèse de doctorat ayant pour titre : le statut international des collectivités infra-étatiques à l'épreuve de la construction européenne (codirection du Professeur Rostane Mehdi et de Mme Marie-Pierre Lanfranchi). Il est attaché temporaire d'enseignement et de recherche à l'Université de Cergy-Pontoise, où il enseigne le droit international et le droit constitutionnel. Il est également consultant auprès de la Commission pour la démocratie par le droit du Conseil de l'Europe (Commission de Venise). Ses principaux domaines de recherches portent sur l'action extérieure des collectivités infra-étatiques, le processus de construction européenne et la protection des minorités.

top »

Revisiting monism's ethical dimension

DR GEORGE GALINDO, Professor of International Law, University of Brasilia, Brazil

Abstract: Monism has been discredited as, maybe, no other international legal theory developed in the interwar period. If, in the past, it was criticized because of its lack of practical relevance and capacity to explain the reality, more recently it has been discredited because of its allegedly theoretical inconsistencies: unity and hierarchy cannot explain a world where different legal orders (domestic, international, supranational and transnational) refuse to subordinate to each other. In the post-cold war international law, dualism seems to have finally become victorious.

New versions of dualism are popular because of its explanatory force and supposedly closeness to reality. This kind of discourse, however, is profoundly apologetic. Due to that, almost every ethical reference disappears from the discussion of the relationship among legal orders. In this state of affairs, legal orders must dialogue not to achieve justice, but to avoid disorder.

A ‘reborn’ of monism becomes urgent. Different from many think, monism’s main contribution to the discipline is not to provide unity and coherence to international law; it is, instead, to provide a deep ethical dimension to it as shown by the doctrines of three important interwar jurists: international federation (Scelle), World State (Lauterpacht) and Civitas maxima (Kelsen).

Revisiting monism’s ethical dimension does not mean finding an answer to the uncountable issues concerning the relationship among legal orders; however, retelling the stories of those interwar jurists offers ways to future research in which ethics can play an important role in the international legal discipline.

Biography: George Galindo is Bachelor in Law, Federal University of Pernambuco, Master in Law and PhD in International Relations, University of Brasilia. He was Legal Clerk at the Federal Supreme Court (Brazil). At the University of Brasilia, he was Director of Post-Graduate Studies and is currently Adjunct Professor and Vice-Dean of the Faculty of Law. He attended the Hague Academy`s Centre of Studies and Research and published around 20 articles, including in the European Journal of International Law. His main fields of research are: State responsibility, theory and history of international law, relationship between international and domestic law and human rights.

top »

Domestic Courts as the 'Natural Judge' of International Law: A Change in Physiognomy

DR ANTONIOS TZANAKOPOULOS, Lecturer in Public International Law, University of Glasgow

Abstract: Since 1989, domestic courts have certainly become more visible in their application of international law. They are today more powerful and more threatening.

The international legal system has long suffered from the scarcity of objective determinations of law. Domestic courts are increasingly assuming a role in this respect: by interpreting and applying international law, they can be seen as removing in part the element of uncertainty generated by the lack of centralized compulsory jurisdiction. However, domestic courts being organs of their respective states, their act of asserting jurisdiction over conduct of other subjects can also be seen as engaging their state’s responsibility.

The paper surveys recent developments, in particular with respect to domestic court reactions to binding decisions of international organizations, in order to determine whether domestic courts asserting jurisdiction in such cases are violating international law when they strike down - even if indirectly - binding international acts. It suggests that courts are rather assuming their position as the ‘ordinary’ or ‘immediate’ judge of international law, who can only be removed through a centrally instituted judge. Accepting such a position for domestic courts has significant repercussions on the physiognomy of the international legal system. The application by a domestic court of law based on internationally agreed standards, and the provision of effective remedies for the violation of rights influenced or shaped by, or interpreted under, international law, can signify the move to a more effective application of international law. Effective application taking place in court, even if a domestic court, rather than by a decision of the Executive to invoke responsibility of another actor, or bring an international claim.

Biography: Antonios Tzanakopoulos is Lecturer in Public International Law at the University of Glasgow. He previously taught for three years at the University of Oxford. He studied law in Athens (LLB, LLM), New York (NYU LLM), and Oxford (DPhil). Antonios has worked as a researcher for the Greek Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Athens and New York and for the UN Office in Geneva. He is member of the Athens Bar in Greece and Associate Editor for International Law in Domestic Courts . His book on Disobeying the Security Council is forthcoming with Oxford University Press.

top »