Chapter 7: Jus cogens and the concept of a normative conflict
This chapter inquires into the respective ideas of legal positivism and legal idealism regarding the proper use of the concept of a normative conflict in the particular context of secondary jus cogens obligations and no-competences. It finds that depending on which of these two schools of thought a lawyer endorses, he or she will define this concept differently. According to legal positivists, a jus cogens rule is in conflict with a rule of ordinary international law when, depending on which of two rules is applied, the conduct of a state is either consistent or inconsistent with international law. According to legal idealists, a jus cogens rule is in conflict with a rule of ordinary international law when the effect of the application of the latter would be contrary to the teleological principle underlying the former, or inconsistent with a commitment to the ideal that this rule is assumed to serve.
You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.
Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.
Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.
Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.