Perspective of the Newly Independent States on the Binding Quality of International Law

Abstract

THE texture of international society has changed in recent years. New States have emerged on the Asian and African continents. The newly independent States aspire to be modernising States. Caught in the revolution of rising expectations, they wish to transform their political, economic and social institutions so that they may have a greater freedom and a greater opportunity to participate in good life. 1 In this process, they have adopted a revolutionary attitude.2 They emphasise the emergence of a new international order. They challenge some of the rules of international law as not consistent with their view of the new order and they point to the need for international law to reflect a consensus of the entire world community, including theirs, and promote the widest sharing of values. They criticise the system of international law as being a product of relations among imperialist States and of relations of an imperial character between imperialist States and colonial peoples. They challenge the extent of the universality of some of the doctrines of international law. They challenge some specific principles of international law. However, they do not deny either the existence or the binding force of international law. They resort to its norms in their disputes with other States. They utter its rules in debates in international organisations. They participate in the work of the Sixth (Legal) Committee of the United Nations General Assembly. They make their influence felt in diplomatic conferences convened for codification of international law. They are active participants in the proceedings of the International Law Commission, such as in the discussion on the law of State responsibility. They have entered into numerous treaties, thereby extending the scope of the application of