Globalization is mostly described as posing new challenges to international law and legal theory. These challenges are the question of soft law, global law, non-state actors’ role in international law, private mechanisms of law making at global level, judicial fragmentation of international law etc.As a response, international lawyers tended to their long-standing approaches and constitutionalism became international constitutionalism and legal pluralism became global legal pluralism. In other words, old approaches, old machines, old tools were to rescue international law from the diseases of globalization with their ill-adapted global versions. In addition, these old approaches could not work out how to approach to soft law and related soft challenges such as non-state actors, private mechanisms of law making, global governance legal regimes etc. because they only knew hard law. Therefore, they focused on hard challenges such as the fragmentation of international law and related questions of overlapping jurisdictions, conflicting interpretations, forum shopping etc. and ignored or undermined soft challenges of international law.In this regard, it seems to us that these hard and soft challenges of international law require a different approach and a global governance approach to international law might be a solution as it worked in the discipline of international relations. Our work will demonstrate that there is a “global governance reflex” among international judges and this reflex offers much better solutions to the fragmentation of international law than international constitutionalism or global legal pluralism. In the light of the above, this paper will first sketch a distinctive understanding of global governance. Secondly it will treat the fragmentation of international law as a hard challenge of international law. In other words, it will demonstrate that the anxieties about the fragmentation issue are a bit exaggerated and things are not as dramatic as described. It will exemplify this point by analyzing the jurisprudence of main international judicial bodies in order to better grasp feasibility, frequency and risks of overlapping jurisdictions, conflicting interpretations etc. This will show how far the idea of a global governance approach to international judicial bodies is feasible. In the literature, a good number of scholars already mentioned and produced ideas such as comity, judicial community, dialogue of courts etc. This work will attempt to take these propositions to the next step. A rethinking of these proposals within the concept of global governance will be proposed. And it will be concluded that there is a “global governance reflex” among international judges and a global governance approach to international judicial bodies is the cure to the fragmentation of international law and it actually might be a path towards the idea of global law.