This article has been written by Ms.Ekta Bhardwaj, a 2nd year Ballb (H) student of National Law University , Delhi
Abstract-:The methods for resolving conflicts under international law through the involvement of domestic courts are discussed in this article. I analyze the various conflicts that arise in international law and examine the powers of domestic courts to act in international affairs. I mentioned the criteria that domestic courts use to determine jurisdiction and competence in international law cases.
It also examines the equilibrium between international law and domestic law. I explained the factors that domestic courts consider while choosing between competing legal systems. Finally, I present the most effective ways to resolve international conflicts through domestic courts.
Keywords-: Domestic Courts, Conflicts, International Law, Jurisdiction, Doctrine.
Introduction-: International law plays a vital role in maintaining order and promoting cooperation among nations. However, conflicts can arise when international law clashes with a country’s domestic laws. In such situations, it is the responsibility of domestic courts to resolve these conflicts and uphold the principles of international law. This article will explore the various types of conflicts that can arise in international law, the powers and limitations of domestic courts in handling these conflicts, and the factors that influence their decisions.
Domestic courts have the authority to interpret and apply both domestic and international laws within their jurisdiction. Their powers and limitations are often influenced by the political and legal landscape of their country.
Determining jurisdiction and competence in international law cases involves considering factors such as the subject matter, the nationality of the parties involved, and the location of the incident. For a domestic court to have jurisdiction, there must be a valid legal claim under domestic laws, the defendant must be within the court’s jurisdiction, and there should be no objections.
Handling cases where foreign courts have issued conflicting judgments poses challenges for domestic courts. They must strike a balance between international law principles and national sovereignty. When dealing with disputes involving multiple legal systems, domestic courts must determine which country’s law should govern, taking into account factors such as contract provisions, nationality, and the location of the dispute. Balancing international law with national sovereignty presents a significant challenge for domestic courts.
Domestic courts must also consider the impact of their decisions on their country’s sovereignty and establish limits on their enforcement. In cases where international law remedies conflict with domestic law, they may need to adjust remedies and sanctions to ensure consistency. Domestic courts play a crucial role in resolving conflicts and promoting cooperation in the realm of international law.
Different Types of Conflicts in International Law-:
International law encompasses a range of conflicts, including legal, political, and jurisdictional conflicts. Legal conflicts arise when there is a clash or contradiction between two or more norms of international law, which can stem from overlapping treaties, customary international law, or general doctrines of law. Political conflicts, on the other hand, emerge from disparities in political interests, values, or ideologies among nations and can be resolved through diplomatic negotiations or other political mechanisms. Conflicts of interests occur when the interests of one nation clash with those of another, while conflicts of values arise from differences in beliefs and principles. Lastly, jurisdictional conflicts include disputes over the power of numerous international legal entities about the same issue or territory. For example -: a dispute between Israel and Palestine in the Middle East.
Power of Domestic Courts -:
Due to the principles of sovereignty and separation of powers, domestic courts have defined powers in matters of world affairs. Nevertheless, they can still handle legal cases related to international treaties, foreign sovereign immunity, transnational crimes, and human rights violations. These courts understand and enforce international treaties, safeguard foreign actors from legal matters, and prosecute individuals engaged in transnational criminal activities. Principles of comity and respect for other states’ jurisdiction usually restrict the powers of international courts. The implementation of judgments can be intricate and influenced by diplomatic factors. Domestic courts play a crucial role in interpreting and implementing national laws, resolving conflicts, and upholding the rule of law. Nonetheless, they lack jurisdiction over foreign entities and can only handle cases within their own jurisdiction.
What Criteria Do Domestic Courts Use to Determine Jurisdiction and Competence in International Law Cases?
Numerous elements are taken into account when deciding the jurisdiction and competence of domestic courts in cases pertaining to international law. These elements include subject-matter jurisdiction, personal jurisdiction, and territorial jurisdiction. In addition, courts must also entertain the choice of forum, comity and reciprocity, international treaties and customary law, as well as procedural fairness. Subject-matter jurisdiction pertains to the power to adjudicate cases concerning specific subject matters. Personal jurisdiction is established by factors such as a party’s domicile, citizenship, or conduct within a particular jurisdiction. Conversely, territorial jurisdiction is determined by events or actions occurring within a defined geographical region. The acknowledgment of foreign legal systems and judgments is known as comity and reciprocity. Procedural fairness guarantees equitable and impartial proceedings. By upholding these principles and following established procedures, domestic courts can actively participate in the advancement of a reasonable and efficacious legal system in issues pertaining to international law.
If there is an obvious link between a conflict concerning international law and a domestic court, the domestic court can settle the conflict. This link can be founded by varied factors like nationality, territorial connection, or a choice of forum clause. To be assessed as admissible, the conflict must meet certain prerequisites. These comprise exhausting regional remedies, showing respect for international law, and ensuring that the conflict coordinates with the substantive and procedural regulations of the domestic legal system. Before pursuing international resolution, parties must first exhaust all available local remedies within the country. Also, the domestic court must not impede judgments made by international courts and must maintain international legal principles. By doing so, the domestic court ensures that the conflict is consistent with the domestic legal system and does not mandate the application of foreign procedural regulations.
Role of Domestic Courts in Balancing International Law & Domestic Law-:
Domestic courts play a vital role in preserving global stability and safeguarding national sovereignty through the delicate balance they strike between international law and national interests. They carefully analyze and interpret both international and domestic legal instruments to cater to the specific requirements of their respective countries, sometimes adopting a narrow interpretation of treaty provisions or declaring them inapplicable. Although international law is generally regarded as superior to domestic legislation, there are instances where national interests take precedence. In such scenarios, Collaboration between domestic courts and international organizations such as the UN and WHO becomes indispensable. These partnerships offer valuable guidance and support in comprehending and implementing international law, thereby enabling domestic courts to make well-informed decisions.
Domestic courts have the ability to recognize and enforce foreign judgments in certain situations. Typically, the presence of reciprocity or bilateral treaties is crucial, as they allow for recognition and enforcement when the country that issued the judgment has an agreement with the country seeking enforcement. It is important to follow proper legal procedures and jurisdiction to ensure that defendants are properly informed and given the opportunity to present their case. Additionally, adherence to domestic public policy is significant, as domestic courts may refuse to recognize or enforce a foreign judgment if it goes against the public policy of the enforcing country. The judgment must be both final and authentic, and there may be specific reasons for non-recognition, such as disputes involving family law, local laws, or inconsistent domestic judgments.
Factors to Consider When Choosing Between Competing Legal Systems-:
When making a decision about which legal system to adopt, several factors should be taken into account. These factors encompass cultural and social aspects, economic considerations, political influence, legal traditions and principles, and the protection of human rights. Cultural and social aspects involve the values and rights of society and individuals. Economic considerations aim to promote growth and stability. Political influence refers to the impact of the political context. Legal traditions and principles differ between the common law and civil law systems. Lastly, it is of utmost importance to ensure the protection of human rights.
The Most Effective Ways to Resolve International Conflict by Domestic Courts-:
- The Doctrine of Incorporation-: Domestic law can include international law, whether explicitly or implicitly, to resolve conflicts that may emerge between the two legal systems.
- The Doctrine of Implied Powers -: Domestic courts are empowered to interpret a state’s judicial powers in a manner that encompasses its international law obligations, thereby resolving any conflicts that may arise between international law and domestic law.
- The Doctrine of Preemption-: In accordance with this doctrine, if there is a conflict between two legal systems, the higher legal system will have priority over the lower legal system. As a result, this principle supports the idea of supremacy.
4.The Doctrine of Implicit Dynamic Supremacy -: The determination of the applicable law will depend on its degree of specificity, precision, development, and comprehensiveness in both domestic and international legal systems.
5.Domestic courts have come up with various methods to resolve conflicts between international and national law. These methods include monism, dualism, pluralism, and transformation.
(a)Monism views international law as an integral part of national law, allowing domestic courts to consider it alongside national law when making decisions.
(b)Dualism sees international law as separate from national law, requiring domestic courts to interpret national law in light of international law but not mandating direct application of international law.
(c) Pluralism recognizes that international and national law operate on different levels and sources of authority, giving domestic courts the flexibility to consider both without favoring one over the other.
(d) Lastly, transformation, which combines elements of monism and dualism, suggests that international law should be converted into national law before being applied in domestic courts.
6.The Principle of Effectiveness-: It is a crucial method employed by national courts to resolve conflicts in international law. It requires the efficient interpretation of domestic law to achieve the objectives of the relevant international legal instrument. This ensures that domestic law complies with international law and avoids clashes between national and international legal systems. National courts must consider the hierarchy of international law sources, interpret provisions, and demonstrate respect for foreign sovereigns. They must also possess knowledge of treaties, customary international law, and general principles of law. Additionally, national courts must take into account principles of international law, such as jurisdictional immunity, state responsibility, and self-determination, to prevent conflicts between domestic and international legal systems.
- The Doctrine of Proportionality Analysis -: The court assesses the significance of each obligation and subsequently decides the level to which each can be accommodated in this method.
8.Judicial Discretion & National Interests-: Domestic courts ensure the resolution of conflicts by interpreting laws, applying legal principles, and considering societal, economic, and political factors. By doing so, they ensure that their decisions align with the nation’s interests and contribute to its stability and progress. Judicial discretion is crucial in domestic courts when handling cases involving conflicts between foreign court judgments and domestic law. The courts have the authority to evaluate different factors and make decisions based on specific facts and legal principles, considering all relevant aspects.
Conclusion -: International law encompasses a broad range of conflicts, including legal, political, and jurisdictional disputes. Legal conflicts arise when there are overlapping treaties, customary international law, or general legal principles. Political conflicts occur due to differences in political interests, values, or ideologies among nations and can be resolved through diplomatic negotiations. Interest conflicts arise when one nation’s interests clash with another’s, while conflicts stem from differences in beliefs and principles.
Jurisdictional conflicts involve disputes over the authority of multiple international legal entities regarding the same issue or territory. Domestic courts, which are based on sovereignty and separation of powers, have defined powers in global affairs. They can handle legal cases related to international treaties, foreign sovereign immunity, transnational crimes, and human rights violations. In doing so, they must consider factors such as subject-matter jurisdiction, personal jurisdiction, territorial jurisdiction, comity and reciprocity, international treaties and customary law, and procedural fairness.
Domestic courts play a crucial role in maintaining both global stability and national sovereignty by striking a balance between international law and national interests. They analyze and interpret both international and domestic legal instruments, sometimes adopting narrow interpretations or declaring them inapplicable. Collaboration with international organizations like the UN and WHO is vital for understanding and implementing international law. Domestic courts can recognize and enforce foreign judgments, but they must adhere to domestic public policy and follow proper procedures.
The choice of a legal system depends on cultural, social, economic, political, legal traditions, and human rights protection. These factors ensure the protection of human rights and promote growth and stability. To handle conflicts between domestic and international legal systems, domestic courts can adopt international law. They have the power to interpret a country’s judicial authority to include its international law responsibilities. In conflicts, the doctrine of preemption prioritizes the higher legal system. On the other hand, the Doctrine of Implicit Dynamic Supremacy determines the applicable law based on its specificity, precision, and development. Domestic courts use various approaches like monism, dualism, pluralism, and transformation to resolve conflicts. The Principle of Effectiveness ensures the effective interpretation of domestic law to achieve international legal objectives. Moreover, the Doctrine of Proportionality Analysis assesses the importance of each obligation and determines its level. Domestic courts also uphold judicial discretion and national interests by interpreting laws, applying legal principles, and considering societal, economic, and political factors.
References-:
1.Kennedy, David. (2000). When renewal repeats: thinking against the box. New York
University Journal of International Law and Politcs, 32(2), 335-500.
2.Lillich, R. B. (1970). The proper role of domestic courts in the international legal
order. Virginia Journal of International Law, 11(1), 9-50.
3.Kline, J. Anthony. (1966-1967). An Examination of the Competence of National Courts
to Prescribe and Apply International Law: The Sabbatino Case Revisited. University of
San Francisco Law Review, 1, 49-130.
4.Ion Galea, ‘The Role of Domestic Courts in Applying International Law’ (2015) JL &
Admin Sci 839
5.Knop, Karen; Michaels, Ralf; and Riles, Annelise, “International Law in Domestic Courts: A Conflict of Laws Approach” (2009).
Cornell Law Faculty Publications. Paper 1378.
http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/facpub/1378
6.Whytock, C. A. (2009). Domestic courts and global governance. Tulane Law Review,
84(1), 67-124.
7.Sandholtz, W. (2015). How domestic courts use international law. Fordham International Law Journal, 38(2), 595. https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2384&context=ilj
8.Born, G. B. (1987). Reflections on judicial jurisdiction in international cases. The Georgia Journal of International and Comparative Law, 17(1), 1. https://digitalcommons.law.uga.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1716&context=gjicl
9.Aust, H. P., & Nolte, G. (2016). The interpretation of international law by domestic courts. In Oxford University Press eBooks. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198738923.001.0001
10.Sloss, D. L., & Van Alstine, M. P. (2017). International law in domestic courts. In Edward Elgar Publishing eBooks. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781783473984.00012