Opinya Roy Ronnie
Public international law
The relationship that exists between and international law and municipal law has caused a lot of trouble to theorists and courts alike, international law principles force states to respect treaties and respond to them, international law does not rule on how conditions therein international provisions in treaties are to be intergraded on international legal systems of states which in effect leaves each and every state to decide how to. As per governing principles of international law, states have committed to respecting the established treaties1 and also determine their application by their own executive, legal and judicial institutions. Solutions for the problems arising from lack of conditions on how to integrate legal provisions in treaties into states internal legal system are found in the monist concept and the dualist concept; these two theories are used to describe the relationship between international law and national law. Monists accept municipal and international legal systems as forming a unity, both internal an d international rule should be accepted by the state in determining whether an action is legal or illegal. Monism theory mostly advocates for state sovereignty as absolute power, it is more of the states will rather than international law that establishes relations between different nations. International law is only enforced upon a state because the state has limited its sovereignty. Strictly monist states don’t need to translate international law to national law, ratifying an international treaty incorporates the law into municipal law, international law can be applied by a judge directly and easily invoked by citizens as municipal law. Verdoss, scelle and kelsen argue that municipal courts are obliged to apply rules of international law directly without need for any act of adoption by courts or transformation by legislature; they insist that international law is incorporated...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document