Western Centrism, Contemporary International Law, and International Courts

Abstract

The paper unpacks the notion of western centrism in contemporary international law by developing a framework to capture the its varied patterns. It argues that western centrism can have three different manifestations – Systemic, Evaluative, and Professional – depending on whether it refers to the rationality, the narratives, or the actors at play in the international legal field. The paper then discusses three theoretical approaches that can help scholars dealing with western centrism in international (legal) scholarship. These are: the critical readings of those scholars that explain international law through the lens of power and domination; II) the Stanford school of sociological institutionalism, which explains international institutions and norms through the role of culture and global scripts; and III) the post-Bourdieusian reflexive sociology, which analyses the roles of transnational legal elites in colonial and post-colonial settings. Finally, the paper reconstructs the experience of the Caribbean Court of Justice in the light of Western Centrism, demonstrating that, different from what often argued in the literature, the court is not a failed replica of the Court of Justice of the EU, but an institution in its own right, with its own approach to international law, its own successes and failures.