Edited by Jorge L. Fabra-Zamora
Chapter 12: Neither democratic nor constitutional but legitimate: fragmentation and the legitimation of international law
In this chapter, I develop an alternative framework for a critical theory of international law. Critical theorists have previously attempted to develop a theory of international law which began from the concern that the development of international law has led to the fragmentation of the international legal order. Inspired by the Habermasian view that legitimate law emerged, as a historical phenomenon, alongside the rationalization of the state, critical theorists have been reluctant to theorize the conditions of legitimacy of a global order where constitutionalization and democracy do not obtain. They have instead argued for constitutionalization as a means of assuring international law’s legitimacy. I argue that a critical theory of international law should not depend on the existence of a constitutional order, but could instead begin from a fragmented legal order and involve means of legitimation separate from those normally invoked to explain the legitimacy of the nation-state.
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.