Abstract

AbstractSentenza238/2014 once more highlights the important role domestic courts play in international law. More than prior examples, it illustrates the ever more autonomous and self-confident stance of domestic courts on the international plane. But the ruling of the Italian Constitutional Court (ItCC) also shows that more engagement with international law does not necessarily mean that domestic courts enhance the effectiveness of international law and become ‘compliance partners’ of international courts.Sentenza238/2014 suggests that domestic courts, in times of global governance and increased activity of international courts, see the role they play at the intersection of legal orders also as ‘gate-keepers’, ready to cushion the domestic impact of international law if deemed necessary. The judgment of the ItCC thus offers a new opportunity to examine the multifaceted and complex role of these important actors that apply and shape international law, while always remaining bound by domestic (constitutional) law. This chapter does so by exploring how domestic courts deal with rulings of the World Court. It shows that despite the fact that in numerous situations domestic courts could act as compliance partners of the International Court of Justice, in reality, more often than not, they have refused to do so, arguing that its judgments are not self-executing and thus deferring the implementation to the political branches. Assessing this practice, the chapter argues that domestic courts should take a more active stance and overcome the purely interstate view that seems at odds with present-day international law. While it seems too far-reaching to expect domestic courts to follow international courts unconditionally, the chapter cautions that there is a considerable risk of setting dangerous precedents by openly defying international judgments. Domestic courts should carefully balance the different interests at stake, namely an effective system of international adjudication on the one hand and the protection of fundamental domestic principles on the other hand. The chapter finds that the ItCC’s attempt to reintroduce clear boundaries between legal orders lacks the openness and flexibility needed to effectively cope with today’s complex and plural legal reality.

Highlights

  • Judgment 238/2014 of the Italian Constitutional Court (ItCC)[1] is worth exploring from an international law perspective

  • The ruling of the Italian Constitutional Court (ItCC) shows that more engagement with international law does not necessarily mean that domestic courts enhance the effectiveness of international law and become ‘compliance partners’ of international courts

  • Sentenza 238/2014 suggests that domestic courts, in times of global governance and increased activity of international courts, see the role they play at the intersection of legal orders as ‘gate-keepers’, ready to cushion the domestic impact of international law if deemed necessary

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Judgment 238/2014 of the Italian Constitutional Court (ItCC)[1] is worth exploring from an international law perspective. The ruling of the ItCC, more than prior examples of domestic court engagement with international law, illustrates the ever more autonomous and self-confident role domestic courts play on the international plane—they do not even seem anymore to shy away from contradicting their governments, a development that seemed nearly impossible only years ago.[7] In this sense, Sentenza appears to suggest that the quest of the Institut de Droit. In times of global governance probably increasingly will be, torn between the sometimes not reconcilable commands of domestic and international law: between an effective system of international adjudication on the one hand and key values of pluralism and constitutionalism on the other hand Against this backdrop, Judgment 238/2014 offers a new opportunity to examine the role of domestic courts in international law, and, more concretely, in the implementation of the rulings of the International Court of Justice (ICJ/World Court). The chapter concludes by finding that the ItCC’s attempt to reintroduce clear boundaries between legal orders lacks the openness and flexibility needed to effectively cope with today’s complex and plural legal reality (section IV)

Domestic Courts as Law Enforcers
Domestic Courts as ‘Gate-Keepers’
Which Role for Courts at the Intersection of Legal Orders?
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

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