Public International law

M.Haseef Hamid F2017117052

Q:John Austin says Internal law is not a real law but a positive
international morality Do you agree with him. Give arguments
in support of your answer ?

Ans. There are two schools of thought which argue the legality of International Law. The I- Law
serves the purpose of regulating the conduct among the states but still the question prevails is
international true law or not.

This question has two schools of thoughts : Positive school of thought and Historical School of
Thought

Positivist School is led by John Austin.Austin called international law “positive international
morality.” According to Austin, law is the command of the sovereign, and the indeterminacy
of sovereign at the international level and the lack of coercive force had made him classify
international law as mere positive morality.

Arguments in support

Theoretically one can say the concept of International law is very good, strong brings
peace to human race all around the world but practically and historically we see that
Internally law is only used to protect the interest of Power full states and to full fill there
agenda. There are many practical examples which show that the where a power full states
have no interest they don’t take interest in those matters like India Pakistan Kashmir issue,
Myanmar and rohingia Muslims , Iraq war , Palestine and Israel , North Korea issue yet
there are a lot of issues in this world which internal law failed to resolve and when it comes
to the interest of any super power war begins sanctions imposed and suddenly whole
world gather on same platform. Here are somepoint mentioned below to show lack of
implementations and weaknesses of internal law
  No Sovereign and Law Giving Authority

 Absence of Legislative machinery

 Lacks Executive Power

 Little Sanctions

 Vague and Uncertain rules

 No potent Judiciary

 Limited scope

Holland Summarized beautifully sum up my point of view

“Observed that International Law differed from ordinary law and not supported by the
authority of a state. According to him, the law of nations is but private law ‘writ large’. In
this view of the matter, he called “International Law as the vanishing point of
Jurisprudence”. According to him, rules of International Law cannot be kept into the
category of law because it lacks sanction, which is an essential element of municipal law.”

In the end we can say Internal law is not a real law but a positive international morality but
we need it and these small steps will definitely lead humanity to a better world and better
future.The sovereignty of the nation State is one of the foundational principles of
international law. International norms were binding on the States only to the extent
expressly consented to by them. Enforcement was based on, what may be called, “naming
and shaming”. The loss of good faith at the international arena functioned as the only
mechanism to ensure compliance with international norms. Over the years now the
concept and vigour of international law has seen gradual and momentous change. The
concept of sovereignty as traditionally understood is no longer valid to the current world.
The human pursuit for development and growth brought people together breaking the
barriers of time, space and distance. From arrangements for facilitating smoother trade
relations, we have come to a scenario were the individual needs and aspirations are taken
care of by the international community.