7 décembre 2016
Ce document est lié à :
info:eu-repo/semantics/reference/issn/1581-7652
Ce document est lié à :
info:eu-repo/semantics/reference/issn/1855-7112
All rights reserved , info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Alberto Puppo, « Reasonable stability vs. radical indeterminacy », Revus, ID : 10.4000/revus.3698
The main argument of this article is based on a functional disanalogy, between what I will call ‘international humanity-based law’, constituted by human rights and criminal law, and the domestic rule of law. If we adopt a functionalist approach, the attention has to be focused both on Rule of Law’s pragmatical objective – a reasonable stability – and on its means – formalism and legality, for dealing with indeterminacy. Do international key players share such values, embedded in the Rule of Law’s political project? Does humanity-based international law fulfil the requirements of the Rule of Law? The conclusion of this work is that institutions and mechanism to which usually legal scholars refer when stating that a legal order is a Rule of Law, are almost absent in humanity-based international law. That implies that radical indeterminacy is, in humanity issues, a too strong obstacle for achieving the ideal of the Rule of Law.