A PROJECT ON

“CRITICALLY ANALYZE THE CONCEPT OF

INTERNATIONAL LAW BY HUGO

GROTIUS”

SUBMITTED TO:

DR. RAJEEV RANJAN

SUBMITTED BY

ASHWINA NAMTA

BALLB-A

4TH YEAR

ENROLLMENT NO. – 18FLICDDN02034

ICFAI LAW SCHOOL,

THE ICFAI UNIVERSITY,DEHRADUN

 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would like to express my special thanks of gratitude to my Professor Dr. Rajeev

Ranjan who gave me the golden opportunity to do this wonderful project on the
topic “CRITICALLY ANALYZE THE CONCEPT OF INTERNATIONAL LAW BY
HUGO GROTIUS”which also helped me in doing a lot of Research and I came to
know about so many new things I am really thankful to them.

I extend my heartfelt thanks to my family and friends for their moral support and
encouragement. I also take this opportunity to thank all those people who
contribute in their own small ways but fail to get a mention.

Name of Student

Ashwina Namta

Enrollment No.

18FLICDDN02034
  List of Abbreviations(ALPHABETICAL ORDER)

 A.I.R - All India Reporter

 Ors. - Others
 S. - Section
 v. - Versus

 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

The methodology used in this research project is simply based on the contents
provided in different books and self analysis through internet sources as well
meaning thereby sources of this project is based on the method of book reading
and internet. Articles and reports from different websites have been used in order
to get comprehensive dataon the subject

 AIM AND OBJECTICE OF RESEARCH

The main aim behind making this project is to find out the various aspects of international law
through the eyes of Hugo Grotius and appropriate suggestions will be given accordingly
  TABLE OF CONTENTS

 CHAPTER-1
 INTRODUCTION

 ORIGIN AND DEVELOPMENT

 CHAPTER- 2
 BY HUGO GROTIUS (His View)
 SOVEREIGNTY:
 NATURAL RIGHT AND THE LAW OF NATIONS

 CONCLUSION
 REFERENCES
 CHAPTER-1

INTRODUCTION
International Law has always been a controversial area as to whether it can be considered as a
law or not. Different scholars and philosophers have distinct perspectives and theories on
international law. Some prominent thinkers such as Thomas Hobbes and Jeremy Bentham
believe that since international law is not binding and enforceable, therefore, it cannot be
considered as a law. On the other hand scholars like Oppenheim and Starke, believe that
international law can be considered as a law as it could be implemented or enforced. A major
question arises here: Can we enforce a rule of law against an entire nation, especially when it
comes to superpowers like USA or Soviet Union. Is there a proper international order for the
implementation of international law? To answer these questions we need to look after its
enforceability and binding nature.

We have seen that International Law has developed considerably in recent decades. Now in this
vast independent world, the question arises whether international law matters? There are several
criticisms at the effectiveness of international law and whether it should be considered as a law
or not, there are various challenges to its enforcement but still international law put a
heavyweight. There are numerous interpretations on the compliance of international law. Many
questions arises why do individuals comply with international law? Does it have the obligatory
force like the other laws? There are various theories on international law but the problem with
the theories is that they concentrate on the state rather than individuals. The effectiveness of
international law hugely depends on the actions of the individuals1

The modern-day UN Charter relies on the rule of international law to bind states to accept the
will of the Security Council. As a multilateral convention, the charter imposes a treaty obligation
on its members but although sovereign governments still get to decide whether to execute UN

1
https://iep.utm.edu/grotius/
resolutions or not, their basis in international law is not often challenged. 2 The UN relies on two
kinds of dispute resolution—the International Court of Justice, of which 65 states have accepted
compulsory jurisdiction; and the arbitration powers given under the charter to the Security
Council.1 The roots of this twofold division date back to antiquity and this chapter traces the
emergence of the first forms of international law and the way that a key thinker in this field,
Hugo Grotius, helped organize an inchoate mass of legal precedents that flowed from the courts
of arbitration and shaped them into a body of international law capable of serving as the binding
force behind the United Nations (UN).3

ORIGIN AND DEVELOPMENT

In general, International Law is the law which is recognized by the nations and is binding ontheir
relation to each other. Now when this grand law began? There is an ambiguity in tracing the
origin and development of the international law. Some scholars thought that international law
originated during the First World War to control the nation’s activities and maintain peace and
stability in the world. Some historians believe that international law has been in practice since
ancient times as there were trade relations between kingdoms of various countries. Some other
scholars regarded it as a substantial code of conduct guiding the nations which originated in
classical period and middle ages. Some scholars claim that international law is originated in
Rome as certain principles of international law have been adopted from the philosophical
concepts of Greece. The idea of an universal set of principles of justice, the idea of a substantial
code of conduct found in the writings of the Aristotle, the idea of state governed by the laws o f
nature that can be found in the stoic philosophy. The stoic philosopher Cicero regarded this law
of nature as eternal and unchangeable. This concept later inspired the roman and canon law and
became a supreme law in the medieval period.

2
https://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/view/document/obo-9780199796953/obo-9780199796953-0139.xml
3
https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-1-137-52866-7_5
 There develops two concepts:

Jus naturale

(Natural law) and

Jus gentium

(Law of nations). One is the law governing the whole universe the laws are subjugated to natural
law and the other is the law governing the nations4. But there is an interconnection between the
two. The natural law is a broader concept which includes all the peoples and animal kingdom
while the other is confined to the people. One is universal to the natural world while the other is
universal to the human world. But the human world is a part ofthe natural world so as the laws of
the nations are derivations of natural law.

In the middle ages, the Jus gentium was seen as an application of natural law to . The jus
gentium was basically a collection of laws that are common to all nations governing all aspects
of individual’s life.

In the classical period, the Jus gentium is basically confined to the set of principles governing
the relations between nations. Hugo Grotius and Jeremy Bentham would label this as
international law. According to Grotius, international law has received its obligatory force from
the will of the nations. In 19th and 20th century,international law developed a lot. During the inter-
war period from 1914-18, there was a transition from ancient Jus gentium to medieval natural
law philosophy to the setting up of League of Nations, an agreement made in the Versailles
treaty of 1919. The League of Nations was set up for the sole purpose of international peace and
security and also to strengthen the international co-operation. The codification of international
law had started since the establishment of League of Nations. Many international institutions
have also been set up as part of the United Nations to regulate the workings of the organization.
A permanent court of international justice was set up in 1921 at Hague, Netherlands. Many
tribunals have been set up and numerous conventions and treaties came up to maintain peace and
security in the world
4
https://iep.utm.edu/grotius/
 CHAPTER-2

BY HUGO GROTIOUS

There are multiple philosophies on international law. Different jurist had distinctive views
onwhether international law is a law in its true sense. To understand this we need to understand
the philosophy behind law. What constitute a law? What are the sources of law? Is it right
todesignate the international rules as law? All this will be discussed in relation to different
philosophies laid down by the jurists.5

HIS VIEW :

“Grotius laid the foundations for international law, based on natural law. A teenage intellectual
prodigy, he was imprisoned for his involvement in the intra-Calvinist disputes of the Dutch
Republic, but escaped hidden in a chest of books. He wrote most of his major works in exile in
France.6

It is thought that Hugo Grotius was not the first to formulate the international society doctrine,
but he was one of the first to define expressly the idea of one society of states, governed not by
force or warfare but by actual laws and mutual agreement to enforce those laws. As Hedley Bull
declared in 1990: "The idea of international society which Grotius propounded was given
concrete expression in the Peace of Westphalia, and Grotius may be considered the intellectual
father of this first general peace settlement of modern times."

Hugo Grotius was basically a Dutch philosopher and Jurist whose philosophy of natural law put
a new dimension to the development of seventeenth century political thought and is considered
as the father of international law. He had shared his views on various issues such as sovereignty,
international rights and the norms of just war and theories of international legal order. His major
work is De Jure Belli ac Pacis (The Rights of War and Peace) where he talks about just war is

5
https://iep.utm.edu/grotius/
6
notable. Grotius was highly influenced by classical philosophy, mostly by Aristotle and the
Stoics and later by the humanistic tradition.

SOVEREIGNTY:

 According to Grotius, the supreme right of governing cannot be made void by any other
human will. The sovereign power is the highest authority within a state. And when it
comes to international arena, it comes up with other sovereign powers where none has the
superior authority. According to Grotius, it is up to the people how they treat the
sovereignty, what rights they want to confer to the sovereign and what they want to
dispose of and this will vary societies widely in how they organize the powers of
sovereignty. Grotius argued against the view of the royalists who defined sovereignty as
an indivisible package of entitlement that can be vested in a singular will. He argued that
indivisibility is totally a conceptual point, the induction of civil power in a society consist
of certain governmental rights and the choosing of a sovereign who will hold those rights.
To better understand the Grotius’ view on sovereignty; we can take up the example of the
Dutch war against the rule of the king of Spain. According to Grotius, the warm doesn’t
originate as a revolt for the rights of the people to outrage a tyrannical ruler rather as a
war between sovereign powers. In the Dutch case, the people did not transfer all the
governing rights to the king but reserved some particular rights such as the right to levy
taxes to the state.The king had the supreme power over many areas which the king had
tried to take over a further supreme power from the state which gave the people a just
cause to wage war in protection of their rights. Now Grotius would say the king had no
right to render void the will of the state, just as the state couldn’t render void the will of
the king, each one was supreme within the scope of its own authority. Grotius basic
argument was that the rights basically originated from the people; so it is up to their
discretion if they want to alienate some rights or subjugate their rights to others.7

NATURAL RIGHT AND THE LAW OF NATIONS:

7
http://www.judicialmonitor.org/archive_1007/leadingfigures.html
Grotius conception of just war is based on two sources: one is the norms of the natural justice
and the customary law of nations. Grotius talked about the obligations received form nature and
custom. He argued that natural law is binding upon the humans in virtue of the divine will that
commands them. Later Grotius take up the intellectual position by arguing that natural law binds
us by understanding what both humans and God can recognize as necessary for human life.
Grotius made a basic distinction between obligations that is derived from nature and that is
derived from an authoritative will. He maintained that the sovereign and his people give their
ssent to the law of nations not by positive agreement but through custom. And if they abide by
the norm for a long time give it the force of law. Grotius had an enormous contribution to the
international legal theory and his efforts to institutionalize the norms of international law.

Hugo Grotius (Huig De Groot) was a Dutch wunderkind of the 17th Century. He was a child
prodigy who entered university at age 11, a member of an important diplomatic delegation from
his native Holland to France at age 15, awarded a French doctor of laws at age 16, an Attorney
General of The Netherlands at age 24. He is now remembered as the “father of international
law.” Adam Smith described him in 1762 as “the first…to give the world anything like a regular
system of natural jurisprudence.”

Grotius was born in Delft, Holland in 1583. After matriculating at Leiden University in 1594, he
was chosen to accompany a Dutch diplomatic mission to the court of King Henry IV of France in
1598. The following year the University of Orléans awarded him a degree of doctor of laws.

When Grotius returned to Holland, he began a career in politics. While serving as the Advocate-
Fiscal (Attorney General) of Holland, he became involved in a theological controversy between
the Arminian Remonstrants and the conservative Gomarists, (a religious controversy that would
puzzle most persons living today) which ultimately led to his imprisonment for life in 1619.
After a legendary escape (he was smuggled out of his cell in a trunk thought to be filled with
books), he lived the remainder of his life (except for one brief period) in political exile in France,
Germany and Sweden. He was at one time Sweden’s ambassador to France.

During these periods of personal and political turmoil in Europe, Grotius began to formulate his
own ideas on the law of nations that he saw as a system of mutual legal restraints, based on the
belief that the law emanated both from human reason, or natural law, and from custom. He
authored numerous essays and treatises and 60 books, among which were De Jure Praedae (On
the Law of Prize) and Mare Liberum (Freedom of the Seas). However, it is De Jure Belli ac
Pacis (On the Law of War and Peace), published in 1625, that had the most profound impact on
the development of international law.8

Grotius sought in this latter book to produce a work that effectively addressed the idea of
international society, asserting the identity of individual states within the context of a larger
community bound together by a body of laws. This formed the basis of the “Grotian tradition” of
international society - the idea that while states are the primary actors, both individuals and non-
state entities have rights and duties that give them a place in a “great society of all mankind.”

Among the issues addressed by Grotius in his various writings were:

(1) Jus ad Bellum (right to war)

 Grotius represented a divergence from the ancient just war theory, which gave little attention to
the doctrine of self-defense. He believed that actions taken in self-defense fell within the realm
of just war. While Grotius’ other views on the justification of resort to war, namely for
punishment or for recovery of property are inconsistent with modern interpretations of the jus ad
bellum, his main contribution lies in the fact that he put forth strict limitations on the resort to
war.

(2) Jus in Bello:

  Greatly disturbed by the brutality of war, Grotius centralized the notion of jus in bello (rights in
war) by making it part of the obligations found under just war theory. He believed states were
not unlimited in the ways in which they could pursue war, and that they were obligated to act
justly and prudently when conducting and concluding war. Most notably the Hague Conventions
of 1899 and 1907 embraced his notion of a prohibition on unnecessary suffering.

(3) Rights of Individuals:

8
http://www.judicialmonitor.org/archive_1007/leadingfigures.html
   Because Grotius endorsed a society of mankind and considered individuals to be actors in
international society, he wrote extensively on human law, a precursor of what is today known
as international human rights law. He presupposed certain fundamental human rights, such as
the right to life, food, and medicine. More importantly though, he argued for the protection of
non-combatants during times of war (part of international humanitarian law), an idea that
foreshadowed the “protected persons” found in the current discourse on international
relations.

(4) Humanitarian Intervention: 

In general, Grotius was a non-interventionist. However, he did argue that states might be able to
act on behalf of individuals who were victims “of injuries which…excessively violate the law of
nature or of nations in regards to any person.” Many scholars view this as an implicit
justification for humanitarian intervention in certain instances.

(5) Freedom of the Seas: 

Grotius firmly believed that no state could claim exclusive ownership over any part of the
seas, although he did acknowledge the sovereignty of coastal states. In his view, freedom of
the seas meant freedom of navigation. There is a direct link between Grotius’ concept of
freedom of the seas and the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. Although the UN
Convention places spatial limitations on the high seas, it built upon Grotius’ ideas and
expanded freedom of the high seas to include, in addition to basic navigation, overflight,
scientific research, and clearer responsibilities of jurisdiction, protection, and enforcement.9

CONCLUSION

9
https://iep.utm.edu/grotius/
Hugo Grotius crafted his work in direct response to the political situations facing Europe during
his lifetime, but which transcended and had important implications beyond his time and
geographical place. His thoughts and ideas were clearly discerning as they foreshadowed modern
dialogue on international law.

It is thus appropriate that Hugo Grotius, the “father of international law,” be recognized today
as a “leading figure in international law.”

Contemporary international lawyers sympathize with Grotius’s eclectic use of sources

(nowadays under the rubric of inter-disciplinarity), but too often “appear both ashamed of their
inability to propound doctrine in the imperious tone of traditional texts” and “proud of having
avoided the [methodological] difficulties plaguing each traditional scheme of authority.”109
While international law should by no means lose sight of the lessons and (partial) victories
against oppression (whether that was expressed as child labor, homophobia, racism, sexism, and
so on), too often the condition of accepting any principle only when methodologically defensible
leads to a retreat into some politics not simply of humility, but deferral.
 REFERENCES

 https://iep.utm.edu/grotius/

 http://www.judicialmonitor.org/archive_1007/leadingfigures.html

 https://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/view/document/obo-9780199796953/obo-
9780199796953-0139.xml
 https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-1-137-52866-7_5