If international law suddenly did not exist, what difference would it make?
Some major states are acting as if it does not exist
If international law suddenly did not exist, what difference would it make?
27th June 2025
There was once an eminent and erudite law professor – whose name is on the spines of books on the shelves of legal practitioners and academics throughout the land – who said in a lecture:
“In court, the laws of England and Wales are a matter of law. You just have to show the relevant legal authority or instrument and the court should accept that as what the law is.
“Foreign law – say the law of France – is different. This is a matter of evidence – expert evidence. You get an expert in that foreign law and their evidence is put before the court.
And international law, well. (Pause). International law is a matter of fiction.”
*
This is not an uncommon view in legal circles, though often said off the record. International law, this view insists, is essentially made up: it is whatever you believe it to be.
This is not the view of this blog, but there is an important distinction to be made between the recognition of international law and its enforcement.
And some will maintain that if a law ain’t enforceable, it ain’t law – just like some say that there is no such thing as alternative medicine, just medicine that works and medicine which does not.
Anyway, I have written about International law at perhaps its lowest post-war point at Prospect – click and read here.
