Some methodological remarks regarding the concept of interational lawmaking (outside theoretical perspective)

Abstract

SOME METHODOLOGICAL REMARKS REGARDING THE CONCEPT

OF INTERNATIONAL LAWMAKING (OUTSIDE THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVE)

Problem statem ent . M odern civilized society cannot be im agined w ithout appropriate rules of behavior, de signed to regulate everyday relationships. This is precisely w hy issues related to the law m aking activity rem ain relevant and require continuous evaluation of new situations and opportunities for establishing an adequate legal reg ulation of particular public relations. Thus, the relevance of the current article is resulted prim arily from the inten sification of international legal relations and particular need of m odern nations in cooperation and coordination of their legal policies.

Reviewing existing literature on the current subject . There is a rapidly grow ing literature on international law m aking. D ifferent aspects of this phenom enon w ere discussed and outlined in researches of both Ukrainian and © Yu. Yu. Rem ins’ka , 201 7

foreign legal scholars. Particularly, am ong national scientists are O.O.N igreeva and O.I.C hapliuk. Also certain is sues concerning international law m aking process w ere represented in w orks w ritten by such foreign legal experts as C . Brölm ann, H.H.Koh, J.K.Levit, Y. Radi, W .M .Reism an, B.K.W oodw ard. At the sam e tim e, instead of com p lex theoretical review, overw helm ing m ajority of legal scientists exam ines questions about so-called “inform al in ternational law m aking” (for exam ple, J.Pauw elyn, R.A.W essel, J. W outers). But the lack of academ ic evaluation of general law m aking practice m atters a great deal: w ithout appropriate theoretical foundations, there w ill be legal

lacunas in international legal practice that in its turn w ill have a negative effect on cooperation betw een States and other international institutions. Based on problem definition, the m ain aim of the current article is to show in outlined w ay w hat exactly international law m aking is, w hat attributes it possesses and w hat unique features it has.

Abovem entioned has resulted in specific structure of the research , intentionally selected by the author in order to revitalize the doctrine of international law m aking in its general theoretical dim ension. Paragraph I predom inantly focused on im portant features of law m aking, w hich enabled author to draw a distinction betw een this and other re lated processes. Paragraph IIprovides w ith necessary m ethodological background, in term s of w hich all issues re lated to the international law m aking purposefulness are assessed. Paragraph IIIaim s at exam ining existed in scien tific literature approaches to the international law m aking definition. And, finally, in Conclusions, the author suggests

original system of international law m aking attributes that constitute its theoretical m odel. On this basis, a unique definition of international law m aking is also offered. I. Lawm aking: essential characteristics and related concepts W ithout any qualm s, am ong m ost interesting and “hard-hitting” issues is the question about law making defi nition . As the authors of “Handbook on the Theory and Practice of International Law m aking” Y. Radi and C . Brölm ann noted: “Linguistic instability is one sign of a changing w orld, and the w ord ‘law m aking’ is indeed used w ith various and divergent m eanings – depending on one’s prem ises… This m akes the term lim ited in theoretical vigor but flexible enough to describe the m ultifaceted norm ative practice that is observed by policy-m akers and law yers

today” 1. It is fair to say, how ever, that such “linguistic instability” particularly refers to the issue of dem arcation of “law m aking” from other sim ilar (to som e extent) concepts. Today, unfortunately, there is no interdisciplinary experience in foreign legal science that w ould com bine the m ethodology of legal research w ith the basic ideas and categorical apparatus of linguistics. W ithout getting into specifics, consistent w ith the key tenets of legal linguistics , it is pertinent to suggest the unique delineation of processes aim ed at the creation various form s of rules of conduct. In view of this, “ delineation scheme ” can be con structed as follow s:

1)Law-form ation – relatively lengthy m ultidim ensional process covering various form s and m ethods of the law m aterialization, its existence, harm onization and further developm ent; inherently, this concept is the m ost ex tensive in scope, because includes a w ide range of social, econom ic and cultural factors influencing the need for the em ergence of law (in its objective sense); this process begins w ith the society needs in the regulation of certain legal relations.

2)Lawm aking in m ost general sense can be defined as a creative intellectual process associated w ith the ac tivities of authorized representatives (actors) (states, intergovernm ental and non-governm ental international orga nizations, local self-governm ent bodies, different public and civic organizations etc.) aim ed at creating, alteration or abolishing the legal norm (as a rule of conduct).

3) Legislative drafting – concept, w hich is substantively narrow er in its content than the previous one; the m a -

terialized result of this process is the piece of legislation; according to this, legislative drafting serves as a type of law -m aking and denotes the process of creation, changing or repealing of norm ative legal acts of the higher legal force.

4)Rulem aking – is one of the key categories in legal techniques; considering rulem aking in a narrow legal and technical sense, it can be defined as a form al process of creating a legal prescription; from this angle, the aim of rule m aking is to identify reasons for adopting regulatory act as w ell as necessary technical instrum ents for its further func tioning (it refers to the special technique used in the process of creation and structuring regulatory legal acts).

The proposed dem arcation can serve as an appropriate m ethodological fram ew ork for the present scientific re search. Suggested “delineation schem e” w ill help to address one of the crucial questions about international law m aking – a question about its purposefulness.

II. Law-m aking on the global level: the relevance of existence Scientific discourse has alw ays been characterized by a pluralism of opinions about a certain phenom enon. The concept of international law m aking is not an exception. In scholar’s w orld, all the doubts about relevance of international law m aking are de facto lim ited to the follow ing three major premises :

1)decentralized and unsystematic arrangement of international law functioning ; this includes tw o m ain as pects: first one related to the fact that the system of international law has not classic triangular separation of pow ers;

continuing in this direction, the absence of unified legislator should be taken into account; consequently, all of this leads to the further academ ic debates concerning the question about contem porary system of international law sources, precisely that is the question about hard and soft international law ; another quite challenging question is the question about different legal regim es operating under the international law ; such is denoted by a so-called “frag m entation of international law ” – process em erging as a result of diversification and expansion of international law 2;

Remins’ka Yu. Som e m ethodologica l rem a rks rega rding the concept of interna tiona l la w-m a king… 59 Часопис Київського університету права • 201 7/3

2)overriding importance of the consent in international law ; as A.Guzm an aptly rem arked: “The im portance of consent is built into the DNA of international law scholars”; it is believed, the concept of consent in international law is designed to protect the State interests and support their sovereign equality; it is recognized that since States act on behalf of their populations; hence, every State in its politics seeks to ensure respect for dom estic interests; so, any rule of international law m ade w ithout consent cannot be regarded as legitim ate; that is exactly w hy the con sent-based theory is considered one of the scientific m ost form idable challenges in general theory of (international)

law ; furtherm ore idea about the need for state consent is intertw ined enough w ith concept of national interest preva lence and state interest-based theory (see inform ation given in the next prem ise)3;

3) nationalist critique of international law , w hich is reflected in follow ing statem ents: a)only national interests

are “the sole m eans to “suppress the chaotic and dangerous aspirations of governm ents in the international field” and b)globalization itself “has thrust the “sovereign” into a zero-sum pow er grab w ith international regim es”; in this context, all critic discussions are dom inated by the concept of national interest prevalence ; conversely, this is reflected in state interest-based theory , w hich m eans that from the nationalists’ point of view, international law rep resents a num ber of rules w hich reflect or/and coincide w ith “state interest” and to a large extent are “executive in terests”; in case w here international law “interrupts” or otherw ise restricts w ill of state authority to gain “state inte -

rests”, governm ental authority w ould sim ply bypass or even disregard such norm s 4. All these issues have a direct im pact on the m ethodological understanding of international law m aking process. At the sam e tim e, it is im portant to recognize that social progress depends prim arily on increm ental changes in in ternational legal field. In this endeavor, the interrelationships betw een dom estic and international legal orders are undeniable. Being under intensive globalization transform ations, national legal system s need to be stream lined and their law m aking processes should be unified (in sense of standardization) w ith a special focus on reorientation to the new spheres of the hum an activity. W ithin this fram ew ork, som e authors suggested w hat is euphem istically

called “ cognitive landscapes ” – understood as specific factors, according to w hich there is an urgent need for an in ternational law -m aking to exist. Strong em phasis should be m ade especially on the “ socio-legal landscape ” w hich includes follow ing facts: a)social – the urgent need of interstate cooperation results in the grow ing interdependency betw een States (as w ell as other legal actors); such interdependence is caused by the w ill of States to cooperate w ith each other in order to prom ote their com m on interests; b)legal facts prim arily encom pass phenom enon of an in creasing num ber of international organizations, w hich intrinsically “create norm ativity both in their relations w ith

third parties and vis-à-vis their m em ber states (so-called phenom enon of proliferation of international organiza tions); alongside w ith “judicialisation” of international affairs, rapid grow th of such institutions show s that they can be assigned to the full-fledged subjects of international law m aking; c)doctrinal facts presuppose that all represen tations about the essence and specificity of international law are dynam ic and develop in accordance w ith the m ain challenges faced by the international society; m ore broadly speaking, this m eans that legal doctrine in its practical dim ension plays an im portant role for the developm ent of international law m aking (for exam ple, the notion of “legal

personality” is am ong key concepts in contem porary international legal doctrine); in its turn, w ith the aid of certain legal doctrine it is possible to conceptualize new phenom ena and then incorporate them into a particular set of rules (as it w as w ith the soft law )5.

As a m atter for discussion, all the m ethodological aspects analyzed above can serve as a pillar for reflection an equally im portant theoretical issue – the question of international law m aking definition, w hat w ill be done in the next paragraph.

III. The concept of international lawm aking in contem porary scholarly studies: the issue of definition The situation regarding definition and com prehensive understanding of international law m aking concept can be characterized as rudim entary. Regardless, there is no cohesive approach to the definition of international law m a king at the present m om ent. In addition, there are only few researches devoted to the international law m aking, w hich contain definition of the current phenom enon.

Therefore, in order to ensure system ic view, it is essential to subdivide approaches to the understanding of in ternational law m aking into special groups. The first group related to the Ukrainian scholar’s ideas, and the second one – to the foreign.

National theory of international law making . Som etim es, in dom estic academ ic literature extended references are m ade to the international law m aking as a purposeful activity of States in the developm ent of international legal norm s. Such-like point of view, in our opinion, is to som e extent incorrect for tw o basic reasons. Firstly, defining States as only subjects of international law m aking, there is a question of abusing of pow er by them and their reluc tance to take into account public interests. Secondly, during the active globalization processes and w orld civic society transform ations, am ong subjects of international law m aking are also various international organizations.

How ever, there are m ore progressive visions regarding the notion of international law m aking. For instance, O.I.C hapliuk defines international law m aking as historically changing, creative, international initiative process, carried out by the subjects of international law in order to create norm of international law by harm onization the in terests (positions) of the parties involved, w hich results in the adoption of an international instrum ent containing in ternational legal norm s 6.

Another author, O.O.N igreyeva, has rightly observed there are only few researches m ade by dom estic legal scientists devoted to the assessm ent of the international law m aking process (especially from the theoretically-legal perspective – added by the author). In researcher’s opinion, international law m aking should be view ed from tw o tra -

ditional (for Ukrainian legal doctrine) perspectives – narrow and broad. According to the narrow understanding , in ternational law m aking is considered as the form ation of new international legal norm : m aking a certain rule of con duct (in international relations) as a legally binding by expressing opinio juris. At the sam e tim e, another, broad un derstanding of the international law m aking assum es this notion can be defined as the entire process of developing rules of international law, w hich includes tw o m ain stages: coherence in w illingness of international law subjects re garding the certain rule of conduct and providing by them a consent to m ake such rule of conduct legally binding.

For the author, in this case, the subjects of international law m aking can have traditional form (for exam ple, States or international intergovernm ental organizations) or w hose international legal personality is controversial (for in stance, international non-governm ental organizations and transnational corporation)7. The abovem entioned ap proach to the understanding of the international law m aking is undoubtedly should be com m ended. How ever, tw o m ain observations should be m ade. First and forem ost, now, in the contem porary general law theory, there are no contentious debates about “controversial” legal personality of non-traditional international law m aking subjects.

M oreover, a review of recent academ ic papers suggests that at the present m om ent traditional international law m a king is currently under the stagnation process. W ith increasing attention by the international com m unity being given to the legal approxim ation, there has been a m ajor shift in the selection of the m ost appropriate w ays and types of law m aking. This w ill create opportunities to apply qualitatively new legal instrum ents to public relations regulations (so-called “inform al law m aking”). Secondly, it w ould seem that such approach has lent a sense of “am bivalence”, that is a great risk to perceive the international law m aking sim ultaneously in tw o w ays: as a preferential benefit for

States and intergovernm ental bodies and as a process of creating legally binding rules of conduct. Given a num ber of factors including enorm ous potential of different international organizations acts (w hich shall be treated as re com m endatory) the scope of international law m aking has been expanded significantly.

Foreign theory of international law -making . It is fair to say, there are cases, w hen the authors in theirs scien tific investigations have used such expressions as “ transnational lawmaking ”, “ international norm generating process”, “ world legislation ”, “ global rulemaking ”, “ lawmaking in international affairs” etc. instead of w ell-know n “international law m aking”.

Surprisingly, how ever, there is no com m on understanding of “international law m aking” in foreign legal theory. As an exam ple, back in 1981, Professor of Yale Law School, W . M ichael Reism an, in his Lecture “International Law m aking: A Process of C om m unication” rightly pointed out that “the problem of law m aking has alw ays been m ore urgent and, apparently, m ore com plicated in international law ”. On the scholar’s opinion, international law m aking can be understood as the process in w hich certain policies that self-described as law are m ade. In broader sense, international law m aking m ay be represented as “the aggregate of processes in the [international] com m unity by w hich political representatives at varying levels of consciousness are shaped and changed”. The international

law m aking, in this sense, is a process of communication and all subjects involved in this processes, form so-called “com m unications netw orks” 8. Talking about international law m aking definition, there is also another special m ethodological approach, ac cording to w hich the term itself is divided into three segments :

–“law ”, w hich is understood statically as a body of rules (this segm ent can visually show all possible w ays and m ethods for law creation); –“m aking” serves as a m arker for the type of process used to m ake such law ; this m eans that law m aking by its nature can be taken in various w ays; for instance, there is such-like “conscious law m aking”, w hich intended to create different treaties; conversely, there are also a w ide range of “diffuse processes of interaction betw een actors and involuntary crystallization of norm ativity”;

–“international” identifies norm ative authority, that determ ines subject of international law m aking and em pha sizes on its unlim ited character (in com parison w ith dom estic analogue)9. As can be seen from the inform ation analyzed above, international law m aking is fundam entally m ultifaceted concept. W ith an aim to m ake profound theoretical evaluation, follow ing conclusions should be m ade. Essentially, there is som e m ethodological confusion regarding the notion of international law m aking. Foreign legal tradition m akes no distinction betw een law m aking and other related processes. This creates additional theoretical debates am ong scholars about the relevance of international law m aking as a full-fledged process aim ed at developing Law

in its objective m eaning. International law m aking controversy based prim arily on argum ents w hether or not this con cept is relevant for m odern international com m unity. Beyond all doubts, national law s, international jurisprudence and doctrine are in agreem ent that international law m aking establishes the appropriate fram ew ork and criteria for States and different institutions to becom e principal actors on the w orld scene. All this is done in order to com ply w ith m ain obligation – prom otion and protection of hum an rights. W ithin this intensely regulatory global fram e w ork, it is necessary to suggest author’s ow n vision of “ constitutional attributes ” inherent in theoretical construc -

tion of international law m aking: –com plex intellectual and m ultileveled process of com m unication, w hich is supported sim ultaneously by in ternational and national authority and different levels of governance; –is based on the principle of the Rule of Law, according to w hich all subjects of international law are equal in their w ill to ensure the national interest as w ell as are bound by universally acknow ledged rules of conduct;

–provides for the international legal personality; is carried out by authorized subjects; –has various aspects of norm ativity; in this context, w e are talking about different degrees of norm ativity and divergent legal regim es;

Remins’ka Yu. Som e m ethodologica l rem a rks rega rding the concept of interna tiona l la w-m a king… 61 Часопис Київського університету права • 201 7/3

– has no distinct lim its on the creation of law ; this is probably could be linked to particular law traditions, func tioning at international level; –as one of the form of m ultilateral cooperation, takes place w ithin certain legal procedures;

–depending on various types, has a w ide range of outputs – legal instrum ents that has different legal status, intended use and objective; as a result, m any types of this process should be identified: form al (traditional) and in form al, consensual and non-consensual, aim ed at harm onization of dom estic rules w orldw ide or regulating a con crete situation etc.

Hence, it follow s that international law m aking should be defined as based on the Rule of Law principle comp lex intellectual and multileveled process of communication betw een authorized subjects that takes place w ithin certain legal procedure and focuses on materialization of the global community needs in particular legal instru ment w hich constitute appropriate conditions for international institutions practices related to the fostering of so cial and economic development .

Prospects for the further scientific research.There is an urgent need in unification and systematization of current know ledge regarding the structural elem ents of the international law m aking and its stages (phases), “biodiversity” of actors of international law m aking process; scientific classification of international law m aking and a host of other scientifically im portant issues.

1Brölmann C.Research Handbook on the Theory and Practice of International Law m aking / C .Brölm ann, Y.Radi, 2016. – 512 p. – (Research Handbooks in International Law series). – P. 1 . 2see, for example , Fragm entation of International Law : difficulties arising from the diversification and expansion of international law [D igital resource] // Report of the Study Group of the International Law C om m ission: D ata access m ode:http://repositoriocdpd.

net:8080/bitstream /handle/123456789/676/Inf_Koskenniem iM _Fragm entationInternationalLaw _2006.pdf?sequence=1 3Guzman A.Against C onsent [D igital resource] / Andrew Guzm an // Virginia Journal of International Law, Vol. 52, N o 4. – 2012. – D ata access m ode: https://papers.ssrn.com /sol3/papers.cfm ?abstract_id=1862354 – pp. 748–752 .

4Levit J. K.Bottom -Up International Law m aking: Reflections on the N ew Haven School of International Law [D igital resource] / Janet Koven Levit // Yale Journal of International Law. – Volum e 32, Issue 2. – 2007. – D ata access m ode: http://digitalcom m ons.law.

yale.edu/cgi/view content.cgi?article=1301& context=yjil – P. 396 . 5Brölm ann C . Ib . – pp . 3–7. 6Чаплюк О. І.Міжнародна правотворчість як категорія [Електронний ресурс] / Оксана Іванівна Чаплюк // Часопис Ки ївського університету права. – № 4. – С. 96 –101. – 2009. – Режим доступу: http://kul.kiev.ua/images/chasop/2009_4/96.pdf – С. 99 .

7 Нігреєва О. О.Правотворчість у міжнародному праві: до питання про визначення [Електронний ресурс] // Науковий вісник міжнародного гуманітарного університету. Серія: Юриспруденція. – № 6-3 . – Т.2 . – 2 013 . – С. 157–160. – Режим досту пу : http :// w w w .vestnik -pravo .m gu .od .ua /archive /juspradenc 6-3 -2 /40. pdf– С. 158 .

8 Reisman W. M.International Law -m aking: A Process of C om m unication [D igital resource] / W . M ichael Reism an // Yale Law School Faculty Scholarship. – Faculty Scholarship Series. Paper 713. – P.101–120. – 1981. – D ata access m ode: http://digitalcom m ons.

law.yale.edu/cgi/view content.cgi?article=1719& context=fss_papers – P. 101 . 9Brölmann C.Ib . – P. 2. Резюме Ремінська Ю. Ю. Деякі методологічні зауваги відносно концепції міжнародної правотворчості (за межами теоре тичного розуміння).

Стаття присвячена характеристиці міжнародної правотворчості в рамках спеціальної теоретико-правової методології. Особливо наголошується на необхідності відрізняти правотворчість від інших, схожих за своєю правовою природою, процесів.

Враховуючи це, автор пропонує новий підхід до вирішення вищеозначеної проблеми. З-поміж іншого, ключовими питаннями, розглянутими в поточному дослідженні є: доцільність існування правотворчості на міжнародному рівні та найбільш оптималь ний підхід до визначення поняття, що позначає цей процес. Зроблено висновок, що міжнародна правотворча діяльність за сво єю природою є явищем комплексним та багатогранним.Маючи у своєму складі особливі «конститутивні ознаки» , міжнародна правотворчість уявляє собою складний інтелектуальний та різновекторний комунікативний процес, спрямований на якісне вдосконалення існуючих суспільних відносин за допомогою правової норми.

Ключові слова : правотворчість, міжнародна правотворчість, правоутворення, законотворчість, нормотворчість, теорія

узгодження воль, норми міжнародного права, концепція національного інтересу, теорія державного інтересу. Резюме Реминская Ю. Ю. Некоторые методологические замечания относительно концепции международного правотвор чества (за пределами теоретического понимания).

Статья посвящена характеристике международного правотворчества в рамках специальной теоретико-правовой методо логии. Особенно подчеркивается необходимость отличать правотворчество от других подобных процессов. Учитывая это, ав тор предлагает новый подход к решению вышеуказанной проблемы. Среди прочего, ключевыми вопросами, рассмотренными в текущем исследовании являются: целесообразность существования правотворчества на международном уровне и наиболее оптимальный подход к определению понятия, обозначающего этот процесс. Сделан вывод о том , что международная право творческая деятельность по своей природе является комплексным и многогранным явлением . Владея особыми «конститутив ными признаками» , международное правотворчество представляет собой сложный интеллектуальный и разновекторный ком -

муникативный процесс, направленный на качественное совершенствование существующих общественных отношений с помо щью правовой нормы.