Talk:International law

Public international law

The article says: "Public international law (or international public law) concerns the treaty relationships between the nations and persons which are considered the subjects of international law, including sovereign nations, the legal status of the Holy See, international organizations (including especially supranational organizations such as the United Nations), and in some cases, movements of national liberation (wars of national liberation) and armed insurrectional movements (see insurgency).

All of the text in italics requires a reliable source. Is the Holy See not a sovereign nation? Aside from the Geneva Conventions is there any applicable international law for "movements of national liberation (wars of national liberation) and armed insurrectional movements (see insurgency)."

Restore if you can provide the citations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.202.48.48 (talk) 06:55, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

untitled=

Starting proper talk page for International law. There seems to have been some confusion about what this page is meant to be, and I take the blame, because when I moved the page titles half a year ago, I must not have moved the talk page. International law can mean a few things - the one that everyone is familiar with is technically "public international law". All additions on that topic should go there. Wikidea 23:52, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

biased?

The European Union is a concept without definition. The world has never seen such a system.

What's up with that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.119.179.199 (talk) 23:23, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. What a load of crap. I'm tempted to say we should leave it in for amusement. Art Markham (talk) 23:14, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

question about a sentence

The European Union is the first and only example of a supra-national legal framework, where sovereign nations have pooled their authority through a system of courts and political institutions.

I don't know much about the EU, but how is it fundamentally different than the United States? 2nd Piston Honda (talk) 14:42, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

I suppose the main thing is that the US is a nation state. It has a federal government, and authority derives from the Constitution. In the EU, authority derives from the member states. They can opt out if they want. Wikidea 01:18, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

In practical terms it is very different as well. From the outside, the US is a single country with a single foreign policy, a single currency, no internal border restrictions etc. The EU does not (fully) have any of these things. The statement in the article is quite a big one though, and should certainly be referenced. Art Markham (talk) 23:18, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Page targetted by banned user Karmaisking

Just a heads up. The active sockpuppet-using banned user Karmaisking has announced that this is one of the pages that he targets. Please keep an eye out for POV pushing by this user's sockpuppets. --LK (talk) 09:26, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Organization or entity (ie legal entity)

International law is not just about organizations, institutionalized groups of individuals, but about the liability of international legal entities. Law is about failures in responsabilities that are the cause of liabilities due an individual entity or a group entity.

I´ll change organization into legal entity.
(Fractalhints (talk) 15:10, 5 January 2010 (UTC))

Law of Nations

There should be the addition of a section that documents the transition from the language of "law of nations" to international legalism. The former existed following the Congress of Vienna while the later only developed when the work of Jeremy Bentham, in his work on perpetual peace, was released . To say that "international law" or legalism existed much before the 1840s (particularly as a common term) is an anachronism. The actual discussion of law as existing in an "inter-national" capacity did not truly take hold until well after the liberal revolts of 1848 even. The issue is one of universal law (international) and arbitrated common laws (i.e. the law of individual nations being used by the governing jurisdiction. This is a substantive historical distinction. And one that might further be connected to the very rise of "liberal internationalism" which is greatly dependent on the idea of universal law (i.e. universal human rights, universal trade rights, universal access to sea ways) for its world view.

for more see M. W. Janis, Jeremy Bentham and the Fashioning of "International Law", The American Journal of International Law, Vol. 78, No. 2 (Apr., 1984), pp. 405-418. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.26.2.252 (talk) 15:45, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Importnat cases

some of them and there precedence need to be mentioned here, as it is this is a minor article that can be expanded. Here Im thinking of the International Court of Justice advisory opinion on Kosovo's declaration of independence.Lihaas (talk) 08:14, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:Chile signs UN Charter 1945.jpg

The image File:Chile signs UN Charter 1945.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --21:27, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

• • test 208.54.83.217 (talk) 19:09, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

inadequate

I know this is already graded as "start-up class." I'm sorry to say that it is terribly inadequate. Much of it is simply confused. It is worse than nothing. Unfortunately, I do not have time to rewrite it now. Whoever is working on it should be able to find somebody who knows the subject better, though. I have taught International Law for 40 years, and if possible I will get back to it in the future. Eleanor1944 (talk) 03:24, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

inadequate

I know this is already graded as "start-up class." I'm sorry to say that it is terribly inadequate. Much of it is simply confused. It is worse than nothing. Unfortunately, I do not have time to rewrite it now. Whoever is working on it should be able to find somebody who knows the subject better, though. I have taught International Law for 40 years, and if possible I will get back to it in the future. Eleanor1944 (talk) 03:24, 8 January 2012 (UTC)