The Paradoxes of Sovereigns as Trustees of Humanity: Concluding Remarks

Abstract

This issue of Theoretical Inquiries in Law critically explores efforts to address the paradoxes of sovereignty. One paradox is internal, and was formulated by David Dyzenhaus in his contribution to this issue: “if the sovereign is the highest authority, and hence not answerable to any other authority, how can the sovereign be subject to law?”1 The second paradox is external, and could perhaps be phrased, along Dyzenhaus’s lines, as follows: “if the sovereign is independent, and hence not answerable to any other authority, how can the sovereign be subject to the duty to recognize and respect the independence of other sovereigns?”2 Responses to both types of paradoxes have been reflected in states’ claims to legitimacy from within, through, for example, their commitment to the rule of law; and to legitimacy from without, through their assertion of “statehood” as understood by the contemporaneous international