INTERNATIONAL LAW Chapter 1 GENERAL PRINCIPLES Nature and Scope THE EXPANDING SCOPE of international law has modified its traditional concept as “a body of rules and principles of action which are binding upon civilized states in their relations with one another.” Although this defini- tion is still widely accepted, it is now admitted that there are other entities besides states that are also governed in varying degree by the law of nations. A notable example is the United Nations. Another is the individual himself, who has even been suggested as the real and only subject of international law, on the ground that “all law is a regula- tion of human conduct.” In view of these, many writers now agree with Schwarzenberger that— International law is the body of legal rules which apply between sovereign states and such other entities as have been granted international personality. Briefly, 1. * Hans Kelsen, Thearie Generale due Droit International Pub- lic, 1932, 148. Schwarzenberger, 1.2 EvrernationaL Law As thus understood, the phrase “international law” is obviously a misnomer in so far as it suggests that it relates to the intercourse of nations rather than of states, Fur- thermore, its restrictive import would exclude from its operation those other international persons which, al- though non-states, are directly assigned certain rights and responsibilities in the international community. Never- theless, the nomenclature has achieved practically univer- sal acceptance since it was first employed in 1870 by Jer- emy Bentham in his /ntroduction to the Principles of Mor- als and Legislation. It is now used interchangeably with another familiar term, “the law of nations.” Divisions of International Law The grand divisions of international law are the laws of peace, the laws of war, and the laws of neutrality. The laws of peace govern the normal relations of states, When war breaks out between or among some of them, the relations of these states cease to be regulated under the laws of peace and come under the laws of war for the duration of the hostilities. Those states not in- volved in the war continue to be regulated under the laws of peace in their relations inter se, However, their relations with the belligerents, or those involved in the war, are governed by the laws of neutrality. When the war ends and peace is restored, the rela- tions of all the members of the family of nations will come again under the laws of peace, until another war breaks out. Distinctions with Municipal Law Most present-day legal analysis regards private in- ternational law, so-called, or conflict of laws, as pertainingGeneral. Princir.es 3 to the municipal or private law of each state rather than as a part of international law. While it has been suggested in one oft-cited case’ that international law covers both public and private international law, the consensus is that only those precepts applicable to relations of international persons infer se fall within the field of international law. The monists do not share this opinion because they believe in the oneness or unity of all law. To them, “the main reason for the essential identity of the two spheres of law is . . . that some of the fundamental notions of Inter- national Law cannot be comprehended without the as- sumption of a superior legal order from which the various systems of Municipal Law are, in a sense, derived by way of delegation.” In both spheres, they contend, law is es- sentially a command binding upon the subjects independ- ently of their will, and it is ultimately the conduct of indi- viduals which it regulates. To the dualists, however, who believe in the dichot- omy of the law, there are certain well-established differ- ences between international law and municipal law. In the first place, municipal law is issued by a politi cal superior for observance by those under its authority whereas international law is not imposed upon but simply adopted by states as a common rule of action among them- selves. As Oppenheim points out, “Whereas Municipal Law is a law of a sovereign over those subjected to his sway, the Law of Nations is a law, not above, but between, sovereign states and is, therefore, a weaker law.” Secondly, municipal law consists mainly of enact- ments from the lawmaking authority of each state whereas international law is derived not from any par- } Hilton v. Guyot, 159 U.8, 112. Oppenheim-Lauterpacht, 38. CL. Minon, Conflict of Laws, 2-4.