| Summary/Abstract |
Currently, there exist several academic and legal questions on which common perception is not established among states. One of them concerns the interpretation of ‘general principles of law’ mentioned in Article 38(1)(c) of the Statute of the International Court of Justice. Variance in the interpretation of ‘general principles of law’ manifests itself mainly in controversies over whether they are principles of domestic law or international law and over the implication of ‘civilized nations’ that qualifies ‘general principles of law’. The article aims at analysing such divergent views surrounding ‘general principles of law’ and voicing the authors’ view on the matter. By examining the principles in comparison with international conventions and custom, and in terms of wordings employed in the relevant provisions, the article attempts to demonstrate that they must be viewed as principles shared by national law systems of certain states. It also argues that in view of the essential characteristics of international law, and in terms of the meaning of the term ‘civilized nations’, ‘general principles of law’ cannot be deemed a universal source of international law, and in particular, that since the phrase ‘civilized nations’ was not intended to include all states in the world, it is necessary to amend the relevant wording.
|