A Global Law of Diversity: Evolving Models and Concepts

At meantime the era of human rights succeeding the end of World War Ⅱ, the institution and order of international society underwent dramatic transformation that obviously featured in the expansion, specialization and systemization of international organizations, for example, the United Nations and its sub-organizations such as the unification of the European Union and American and African regional organizations. In addition, the order of international laws has changed radically. Besides the interacting development among the independent systems of international environmental law, international criminal law, international economic law, that has delicately constituted both the procedural and essential rules of international law, the relation between international laws and sovereign nations has also been re-defined. Through the introduction to the concept of ”complete value of international society”, the connection between sovereignty and international law has been re-interpreted. The most innovative breakthrough was nothing but the concepts of Jus Cogens and Obligations Erga Omnes, as well as the acceptance of the philosophical reasoning behind the concepts. Thus international law has gradually diversified its appearance and, by further development of the above concepts that jointed the different fields of international law, the institution of international law has been overturned. From the aspect of substantial norm, the continuing restriction of applying the opposition rule, development of treaty reservation, succession and admission of nation, ruling of extradition treaties, restriction on national exemption, defining the serious jeopardizing act of international crime, the gradual change of the status of international soft law and the transforming of the national liability system, have attributed to revolution of the content of international law. From the aspect of the procedural norm, the expansion of common jurisdiction and the change of international/domestic lawsuit initiation, have shown great influence that closely connected international criminal law. Therefore, Jus Cogens ought to be the most important medium of the recent development of international law that revealing the combination of Jus Cogens and state responsibility law system, also further led international law to the equivalence of rights and obligations. Frankly, the Vienna Treaty Law Convention signed in 1969, was the milestone of the international law development, which positioned the Jus Cogens in the statute law. If ”power-oriented” is the characteristic of international law in 19th century, then international law after 1950s has gradually dispensed primitiveness and become ”rule-oriented”. Although 1969 could be the beginning of Jus Cognes, suspicion on carrying out this concept in international law still remains. International law scholar, Ian Sinclair, concluded opinions toward Jus Cogens that further confirmed ”Jus Cogens is still a mystery”. Some scholars even express directly that nevertheless adopting Jus Cogens has essentially attributed to the transformation of international law, yet there is worry about the application of Jus Cognes could be contradictive, and even opening the gate for some certain countries to import particular international law systems matching their ideology, thus becoming denial to a diversified international society. Even though contrary opinions toward Jus Cogens remain, from 1968 the concept has been accepted by sovereign countries and also adopted to judgments that further expand Jus Cogens, making this theory combine with other institutions of the international law rather than be confined within treaty law field. Hence, focusing on Jus Cogens and the connection as well as the change of Jus Cogens in the late 40 years, this thesis analyzes the elaboration on Jus Cogens from national practice, international justice and scholars. However, this thesis could only be able to introduce this theory briefly due to the limited length. Therefore, this thesis mainly discuss the following particular sectors of the theory of Jus Cogens: (1) the definition and development of Jus Cogens. (2) the objects regulated by Jus Cogens and the effect. (3) connections between Jus Cogens and other international law concepts newly developing trend. (4) At last, examining and looking back to dialogues made between Jus Cogens and international law.

The question of relation between the treaty and custom does not present a topic worth particular scientific attention there where the two institutions are not being confused. This does not only occur in Czechoslovak Doctrine of international law, but the reasons for such confusion imprint – in juristic works interpretation – on the functionality of the two institutions a content that is no longer in harmony with the development stage of the contemporary general international law and above all with its peremptory rules. The qualification of international custom as tacit treaty hitherto upheld in Czechoslovak writings of international jurists – is in respect of development essentially in accord with the international law prior to the Great October Socialist Revolution and the actual exposition of the relation between treaty and custom corresponds rather to the period when the coming Soviet power was confronted (also from the power aspect) with the imperialist international legal superstructure. This old conception is, therefore, incapable to express the nowadays indisputable normative reflection of the presence of the socialist social system within the class structure of the international community of states, in the content of its legal order – in the contemporary general international law. The question of the grounds of the origin and binding character of the customary law too little pursued by our juristic works is one of the main reasons for scientifically unfounded favouring of the international treaty to the detriment of international custom – of its functional importance in present day international law. This is in particular evident in the definition of peremptority of profiling rules of the contemporary general international law, their origin and reason for their binding character can not possibly be grasped by treaty form at all. Inapplicable, therefore, are also positivistic interpretations of the origin and binding character of customary law – the interpretation both by fiction of tacit treaty and by means of the so called “recognition” theory – at their time intentionally restricting attention to form which was to be complied with by rule makers, though from such mere form the content of unwritten law can not be known: or just in order to provide room to the positivistic doctrine for speculative deductions about the law as it should be. If it is impossible to elucidate the binding character of treaty rules without taking acount of material sources only sometimes (clausula rebus sic stantibus), then it is necessary to take acount of social and political circumstances – i. e. of material sources – attendant upon the origin of a rule of law and in abstractness expressed in the hypothesis of such rule, in the customary law always. This is indirectly but convincingly corroborated by the most refined of schools of legal formalism – the normativist school – declaring, namely, as a point of its programme material sources an unfit subject of interest of the international law theory, yet in the end the Very same school came to confess its inability to elucidate the origin and reasons for the binding character of international custom just by means of the formal sources of the law. The theoretical foundation for the exposition of the grounds of origin and binding character of international customary law – making use of the material sources of the law – was laid by the Anglo-Saxon law school and so by the school working currently with the instrument of custom even in the domestic field. Decisive for the school is not an a-priori form hypothetically set down by the international law, with which – according to the requirement of the doctrine – practice must comply to enable a customary rule to come into existence, but the very practice of the states is law constituting if it is also general (usus generalis) and if accompanied by awareness of necessity (opinio necessitatis), i. e. by the realisation of unfortunate consequences in the event of different procedure. The Anglo-Saxon interpretation of the grounds of the origin and binding character of the international customary law was adopted by authors of Soviet Doctrine of international law by stating (G. I. Tunkin) that for individual countries it is necessary to regard as binding rules that are recognised by the absolute majority of countries and governed by them, if among them are states of both systems, big powers included. Here the parallel appearing endeavour to bridge the existing dissension in the interpretation of the origin and binding character of international customary law led, however, in the end (most significantly in the instance of G. I. Tunkin) to emphasizing consensus and thereby – conformably to the positivistic school – to the qualification of the international customary law as unwritten treaty; from there is but a little step to absolute favouring of the written treaty against custom, if custom be so described as unwritten treaty. In the Czechoslovak juristic works the treaty is favoured too not only because it is accompanied by an explicit expression of will compared to the hypothetical tacit and moreover presumed expression of will in the instance of custom (whereby treaty character is assigned to custom), but also because written law is attributed a higher value as compared to unwritten law and written treaty rules owing to their precision are designated as more reliable for legal regulation among states, in particular of different systems. The misconception of the value approach is proved by the relation between the customary (i. e. unwritten) general international law as treated in this country on the one hand and its codification on the other which relation is considered to be determined by the principle lex posterior derogat priori. Actually codification does not override any prior generally valid custom regulation, since universality in the acceptance of a codification treaty is as a matter of principle not required for coming in force in the instance of codification. In particular it is impossible Ito split jus cogens by such codification treaty in two particular regulations – one acting among the treaty signatories, the other for the remaining relations, since thereby would be abolished the jus cogens itself which in general international law is invalid ab initio – as also worded in Art. 53 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969). The purport of codification is, therefore, merely to provide the general international customary law with a binding interpretation otherwise taken care of in the first place by the doctrine. Regarding the rules with which a codification treaty contributes to international law developments, these are of particular validity so long until rendered generally valid by law-creating custom, to which quality the codification treaty could have given just the stabilising impuls, but not the very binding character of legal validity: the same result could be brought about by a universal adoption of the codification treaty which is practically unrealistic. It is therefore wrong to see in the codification primarily a formulation of new rules in written form as currently handed down in the Czechoslovak international law literature, a codification treaty serving in the first place the written exposition of the general international law, a quality not met by newly provided rules in such treaty. Favouring of the treaty on the grounds of its written character to the detriment of custom because of its unwritten form has in the Czechoslovak Doctrine of international law the most serious consequences possibly there where written statements acquire principles of international law in the acts of potentially universal international organisations. To them should allegedly belong the part of general international law or even of a “constitution” wherefrom the validity of concrete rules of the international law is derived, though the very acts of such organisations are but of a recommending nature and the principles contained therein are no rules of international law whatever, being just a generalising interpretation of concrete rules of this law.

The general understanding of law is that, it is ‘a body of rules’ or ‘social order’ that regulate the relations in human community, various entities, societal harmonization and individuals to govern their respective mutual understanding. The law defines and regulates societal relationships. It “is an element, the only one, by which we are able to differentiate definitely and successfully between a legal, moral and religious order.” It is a balancing technique of the rights and obligations of humans in their daily life. The term law is a “grand norm” and thus, a general concept replacing all kinds of “laws”; It could be municipal law of states such as civil law, criminal law, liberal law, business law, intellectual property law, economic law, feudal law, socialist law, law, medical law, land law, media law, etc. Municipal law is a domestic law, or name used in replace of the national, statutory, internal law or domestic law of states. It applies to nationals, body of politic and others within state in that limited territorial jurisdiction. The legislative organ of state has supreme power to enact and enforce such laws in the country. The municipal law of the state is usually limited in the scope to nations and regulates the domestic issues, international law is a beyond that. On the other hand, there are certain areas of law developed at international level. These are; private international Law, international human rights law, international humanitarian law, international criminal law, refugee law, international environmental law, international economic & trade law, international space law, and Islamic law [Sharia law] is among few to mention. Municipal law and international law share something communal (or have similar normative conducts as being a law and regulate certain acts). Laws, whether national or international are not permanent; it can be made, amended, reformed and altered at any time. There is no clear way to measure law, its purpose and identify clear line between them to develop a certain model for each of them. The question may arise does international law satisfy legal requirements or normative standards to be considered as [international] law? Some legal scholars and jurists argue ‘if international law can be entitled as a true law or not’. To know whether international law is a true law or not it is would be nice to know the nature and functions of international law. Those who accept the legality of international law consider it as a prefect law with similar footing as the municipal law. Is international law a law? Those who support this view says, it is law because it doesn’t have another name than to be considered as [international] law; it is law because it has a certain procedural and substantive rules to follow; it is a law because, it regulates certain international acts conducted worldwide; it is a law because municipal law is usually limited to a territorial jurisdiction and do not reach for international remedies; it is a law because world nations have something to use separately and to share communally based on general principles of international law; international law regulates the relationship between states, international organizations and individuals across the globe; international law is designed in its own way, applies among sovereign states, and usually applied by international tribunals; international laws are sometimes practiced in national courts, in foreign offices, in international organization offices, and in regional organization offices. Therefore, international law exists as a law, even as a perfect law. International law is a prefect legal system has yet to develop and it doesn’t have to be seen through the ‘eyeglass’ of the municipal law of the states. Thus, the purpose of this article is to elaborate the views regarding this issue and to forward different legal arguments. Under the following title, I have provided three topics. Opposing view, proponents, my take regarding these views and application of international law.

The general understanding of the law is that it is ‘a body of rules’ or ‘social order’ that regulates the relations in the human community, various entities, societal harmonization, and individuals to govern their respective mutual understanding. The law defines and regulates societal relationships. It “is an element, the only one, by which we are able to differentiate definitely and successfully between a legal, moral and religious order.” It is a balancing technique of the rights and obligations of humans in their daily life. The term law is a “grand norm” and thus, a general concept replacing all kinds of “laws”; It could be municipal law of states such as civil law, criminal law, liberal law, business law, intellectual property law, economic law, feudal law, socialist law, law, medical law, land law, media law, etc. Municipal law is domestic law or name used in replace of the national, statutory, internal law, or domestic law of states. It applies to nationals, the body of politics, and others within the state in that limited territorial jurisdiction. The legislative organ of the state has supreme power to enact and enforce such laws in the country. The municipal law of the state is usually limited in the scope to nations and regulates the domestic issues, international law is beyond that. On the other hand, there are certain areas of law developed at the international level. These are; private international law, international human rights law, international humanitarian law, international criminal law, refugee law, international environmental law, international economic & trade law, international space law, and Islamic law [Sharia law] is among a few to mention. Municipal law and international law share something communal (or have similar normative conducts as being a law and regulate certain acts). Laws, whether national or international are not permanent; it can be made, amended, reformed, and altered at any time. There is no clear way to measure law, its purpose, and identify a clear line between them to develop a certain model for each of them. The question may arise does international law satisfy legal requirements or normative standards to be considered as [international] law? Some legal scholars and jurists argue ‘if international law can be entitled as a true law or not’. To know whether international law is a true law or not it is would be nice to know the nature and functions of international law. Those who accept the legality of international law consider it a perfect law with a similar footing as the municipal law. Is international law a law? Those who support this view says, it is law because it doesn’t have another name than to be considered as [international] law; it is law because it has certain procedural and substantive rules to follow; it is a law because it regulates certain international acts conducted worldwide; it is a law because municipal law is usually limited to a territorial jurisdiction and do not reach for international remedies; it is a law because world nations have something to use separately and to share communally based on general principles of international law; international law regulates the relationship between states, international organizations, and individuals across the globe; international law is designed in its own way, applies among sovereign states and usually applied by international tribunals; international laws are sometimes practiced in national courts, in foreign offices, in international organization offices, and in regional organization offices. Therefore, international law exists as a law, even as a perfect law. International law is a perfect legal system that has yet to develop and it doesn’t have to be seen through the ‘eyeglass’ of the municipal law of the states. Thus, the purpose of this article is to elaborate on the views regarding this issue and to forward different legal arguments. Under the following title, I have provided three topics. An opposing view, proponents, my take regarding these views and application of international law.

Snapshot: The Process of Change in International Space Law Politics

Ratner, Steven R. <i>The Thin Justice of International Law: A Moral Reckoning of the Law of Nations</i>.New York: Oxford University Press, 2015. Pp. 496. $85.00 (cloth).

The article is devoted to one of the aspects of the problem of correlation between international and domestic law, namely the relationship between international and national law. This relationship is developing dynamically. The development of the interconnectedness of international and domestic law occurs in connection with the constant increase in the number of international treaties and national legal acts aimed at regulating social and domestic relations, which is the object of international cooperation. At present, trends in the further development of international law and its interaction with national legal systems have begun to emerge clearly. The process of globalization has strengthened the interconnection of states, expanded the range of intrastate social relations that are a common object of regulation of two legal systems - the international legal system and the domestic legal system. Based on the analysis of the provisions of the general theory of law and the doctrine of international law and international normative acts, the theoretical and legal problems of the relationship between domestic and international law are considered. It explores the social and legal nature of the relationship between the two legal systems and explores the importance of harmonizing domestic state law with international law. It is noted that although international law and domestic law have a single social nature, they functionally act as two relatively independent and closely interacting and interdependent systems of law. The nature of their interrelations, methods and forms of interaction, as well as their functional connection, interdependence and the role of the state in this process are revealed. It is emphasized that the relationship and interaction are not limited only to the norms of the two legal systems, but cover the two legal systems as a whole. Consequently, there must be harmonization of the norms of national law with all sources of international law, including with the individual international obligations of states. The article notes that the state is a participant in the creation of legal norms of both domestic and international law. The process of coordinating the will or position of states when concluding international treaties is regulated by the norms of international law, and the process and procedure for expressing these declarations of will or positions are determined by the norms of national law. At the same time, international law does not belong to the legal system of specific states, although in fact it is part of all legal systems. If the object of regulation coincides, the norms of international law always take precedence over domestic ones. According to the author of the article, the concept of a legal conflict should not be identified with the invalidity of international treaties. It is argued that the case of conflict occurs only with a valid contract. It is also emphasized that many norms, enshrined in international law by treaty or customary means, acquire the character of jus cogens and therefore are binding on all states, regardless of ratification or accession to certain treaties or agreements. The article points out that international law imposes an obligation on the state as a whole, but it is domestic law that determines state bodies and officials who are responsible for fulfilling the international obligations of the state.&#x0D; The purpose of the article is to theoretically clarify the essence of the relationship and interaction between international and domestic law, to identify the importance of harmonizing domestic legislation with international law and the grounds for the priority of international norms over national law.

Economic Sanctions Against Human Rights Violations

INTRODUCTION. Climate change is the most important megatrend, which has a multiplier effect on the following: sovereignty of States (especially in contrast to the example of small island developing States whose territories may soon disappear – “to go under water”), forced displacement of the population both within States and outside (“environmental refugees”, “climate refugees”), increasing pressure on natural resources, increasing the number of natural disasters, desertification and water deficiency. It is possible to combat climate change only jointly at the international level and in accordance with international law. Since the problem of climate change has recently been discussed in the international field, there is an urgent need to create new instruments in international law and to adapt existing instruments. As a result of the consensus of positions of developed and developing States in 1992, the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, then in 1997 by the Kyoto Protocol, and in 2015 – the Paris Agreement. Dozens of decisions are issued at the annual Conferences of the parties to these international agreements, which have a recommendatory force, but which have a significant impact on the maintenance of the international regime for combating the climate change. Furthermore, in various branches of international law (international human rights law, international economic law, international air law, international maritime law), mandatory and recommendatory acts are adopted to prevent climate change and adapt to the happened changes. MATERIALS AND METHODS. This study is based on a significant amount of materials, including international legal acts, recommendatory acts, national legislation of the Russian Federation, as well as modern doctrinal studies of Russian and foreign authors. The methodological basis of the research is the general methods of cognition (method of logical and systematic analysis, dialectical method, methods of deduction and induction) and specific methods of science (historical legal, comparative legal and formal legal methods, method of legal modeling and forecasting), and the method of legal forecasting. RESEARCH RESULTS. In this research the author analyzed various international mandatory and recommendatory instruments summarized the doctrinal positions of Russian and Western legal scholars and set out in domestic and foreign scientific literature, proposed amendments to Russian legislation to comply with international law in the field of combating climate change. The article summarizes the approaches under consideration and draws conclusions regarding the positioning of the Russian Federation and the United States in relation to the formation of an international legal regime for combating climate change. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. International legal documents on combating climate change, both binding and recommendatory, are adopted in the field of international environmental law, international human rights law, international air law, international maritime law, international economic law. This shows that today there is an international legal regime to combat climate change. The combating climate change is closely interconnected with the Sustainable Development Goals (2016–2030), which should also be taken into account in the implementation of international and national law. Moreover, not only States and international intergovernmental organizations, but also non-governmental actors (large cities, TNCs, NGOs) are being called to implement the provisions of international legal instruments. It is concluded that there is a necessity to closely monitor the ongoing changes in the international field in the fight against climate change, the participation of the Russian Federation in them in order to develop their own position regarding the regulation of various issues related to combating climate change.

As an important actor in the geopolitical arena, to suggest that India has played and continues to play, an extremely significant role in influencing the growth of international law would not be an overstatement. Indeed, spanning from international institutions, international economic law to human rights and humanitarian law, from international environmental law to the international law of the sea, there are scarcely areas of international law where the influence of contemporary Indian state practice can be considered marginal. Yet, as the following sections will demonstrate, India’s engagement with international law is, in many ways, sui generis. This is owing to the relentless tension between, on the one hand, a desire to actively participate in the international legal system to establish its centrality as a global actor, and on the other, the acute realization that international law was the principal vocabulary of its subjugation through the colonial encounter. This dialectic means that it is rather difficult to articulate a comprehensive “Indian” international law vision despite early postcolonial views on the subject. Rather (and not unlike other states), India’s stance on diverse international law aspects is interest-based, issue-specific and ad-hoc. Thus, while quick to point out the unique concerns of the Global South in areas of international trade and environmental law, in arguing for a permanent seat at the UN Security Council or claiming the “unable or unwilling state” doctrine to use force, for instance, the Indian stance is often not altogether dissimilar to that of powerful states in the West. Scholarship on Indian engagement with international law, much like India’s state practice, vacillates between the broad spectrum of eschewing universalism in critique and working with positivist doctrine akin to the methodology of the mainstream. There have been many scholars in India whose exceptional works have greatly enriched the understanding of international law both within the state as well as around the world. Yet, barring a few, many of their contributions, not unlike the South itself, have been ignored in mainstream scholarship. Without attempting to be exhaustive in its coverage, this chapter captures salient works within the broader theme of India and international law. The chapter is divided into subthemes within the international law discipline and attempts to provide a review of important works discussing India’s trysts with each branch. Being primarily a dualist country, many international obligations have been translated into the domestic law through legislation; this chapter, however, largely omits works focusing exclusively, or even primarily, on such municipal laws. Even within international law works, in providing a broad overview, many significant pieces have been omitted—however, this is not a comment on their importance, but rather a constraint based on space and length.

Numerous commentators have lauded international trade law, and the WTO dispute resolution mechanism in particular, as vehicles for change in international law more generally. In the sense that new rules of international trade law enhance international law, by creating new rights and obligations for the States parties to trade agreements, it is true that international trade law develops international law generally. In preparing the Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts for example, the International Law Commission (ILC) had frequent regard to international trade law and the WTO. However, the influence of international trade law remains curtailed within the wider field of international law, outside the realm of WTO adjudication. Such influence in non-trade areas has been restricted for reasons such as its jurisdictional separateness, its limited relevance as part of the applicable law or even source of interpretation (due to the distinct or ‘sui generis’ character of trade law) and the informal hierarchy of international norms. But, there is room for non-trade-related areas of international law, and associated dispute resolution institutions, to learn from international trade law and in particular from the WTO as an institution.

Numerous commentators have lauded international trade law, and the WTO dispute resolution mechanism in particular, as vehicles for change in international law more generally. In the sense that new rules of international trade law enhance international law, by creating new rights and obligations for the States parties to trade agreements, it is true that international trade law develops international law generally. In preparing the Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts for example, the International Law Commission (ILC) had frequent regard to international trade law and the WTO. However, the influence of international trade law remains curtailed within the wider field of international law, outside the realm of WTO adjudication. Such influence in non-trade areas has been restricted for reasons such as its jurisdictional separateness, its limited relevance as part of the applicable law or even source of interpretation (due to the distinct or ‘sui generis’ character of trade law) and the informal hierarchy of international norms. But, there is room for non-trade-related areas of international law, and associated dispute resolution institutions, to learn from international trade law and in particular from the WTO as an institution.

The article is devoted to the problem of the formation of international municipal law as a branch of current international public law. There is a focus on studying the international aspects of local self- determination in foreign legal sciences, with an emphasis on exploring the problems of the new role of cities in international relations, as well as managerial problems of the municipal self-government between national powers. Participation of cities in global political structures and international rule- making, according to foreign experts, will provide the basis for the emergence of international municipal law. For the development of the concept of international municipal law, an important role was played by the work of the research group “The Role of Сities in International Law”, created by the International Law Association (ILA), as well as the academic publication “Research Handbook on International Law and Cities”, which brought together a great international team of scholars. A comprehensive analysis of the impact of international law on cities, which act as leading units of local self-government, sheds light on the growing global role of cities and argues for a new understanding of international law in light of the urban turn. The materials of this collection allow us to identify the components of the concept of international municipal law, or international local government law, formed in Western legal thought. In domestic jurisprudence, the concept of international municipal law was formed primarily in the works of M.O. Baymuratov, who was a pioneer in this area and remains a leading researcher of international legal aspects of local self-government to this day. Unlike the Western doctrine, which emphasizes the development and involvement of cities in international activities, M.O. Baymuratov and his scholars link the emergence of international municipal law with the processes of constitutionalization of international public law and the internationalization of the constitutional legal order of states. These processes are accompanied by growing international recognition of the institution of local self-government, primarily through its international legal regulation and contextualization of relevant aspects of the activities of local self-government bodies, taking into account their international activities, in particular through the development and adoption of a number of international multilateral intergovernmental treaties and the preparation at the UN level of a draft World Charter of Local Self-Government. In the field of municipal law, significant processes of borrowing international legal standards of local self-government by national constitutional law are taking place, primarily through the system of international legal treaties of the UN and the Council of Europe. These “external” factors are associated with legal globalization, which is aimed at the standardization and unification of the most important social-state relations, which are of significant importance not only for the nation-state, but also for the entire international community of states. Local self-government is also included in the circle of such priority-most important relations.

Branches of international law arise mainly as a result of the following factors: 1) complications of international legal consciousness (international human rightslaw, international security law, international environmental law, international criminal law, etc.) and 2) technological progress (international air, space, nuclear law, relevant innovations in international maritime law, etc.). Under the influence of the same factors, new institutions are formed within existing branches (responsibility for international crimes, prohibitions of genocide, prohibitions of apartheid, responsibility for environmental pollution, instant custom, etc.). The article examines the mechanism of formation of the international humanitarian law, the law of armed conflicts, international security law, international human rights law, and international criminal law. It is claimed that they are based on a traditional section of pre-classical international law - the law of war. The first attempts to regulate the conduct of armed conflicts formed the basis for the creation of these branches. The first scientific systematization of international law was one proposed by Hugo Grotius. The scholar proposed to divide the system of this law into two interrelated components - the law of war and the law of peace. Grotian systematization formed the basis of further scientific systematics of international law in the 17th-19th centuries. The Hague Peace Conferences changed the traditional view of the division of international law into the law of war and peace. The Hague peace conventions influenced on formation of the international humanitarian law. The 20th century became a period of active formation of new branches of international law within the framework of the process of "codification and progressive development of international law" under the auspices of the United Nations. So the traditional law of war gave birth to several branches of modern international law.

The Khmer Rouge under their leader Saloth Sar (“Pol Pot”) were in power in Cambodia between April 1975 and January 1979.1 They came into control of the country after a long and brutal civil war2 an...