Abstract

This chapter focuses on the key inquiry of what styles of international legal historiography are within the realm of acceptable scholarship, advocacy, and judicial decision. In this manner, it opens a discussion as to the best practices and methods of international legal history. The chapter first charts the criticisms that have come to be levelled against many forms of legal history, as practiced by lawyers, judges, and (some) scholars. Next, it offers up two case studies, Sosa v. Alverez-Machain case and Kasikili/Sedudu Island case, of relatively recent judicial decisions (one domestic and one international) in which international legal history figures prominently in the resolution of albeit very different kinds of disputes. The purpose of these two case studies was to illustrate possible uses and abuses of history in particular litigation or forensic contexts. Keywords: foreign office international legal history; international law doctrines; judicial decision; Kasikili/Sedudu island case; Sosa v. Alverez-Machain case

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.