[Music] [Applause] hello everyone we continue our discussion in constitutional law review We Touch on public international law we are on the first part an introduction to public international law the topic guide for this discussion is what is public international law what are the sources of international law is international law true law and the relationship between International and national law what is public international law we have a traditional definition which is that branch of public law which regulates the relations of states and of other entities which have been granted International personality and we have a more modern definition it is the law that deals with the conduct of states and international organizations their relations with each others with each other and in certain circumstances their relations with persons natural or judical of course of course the modern definition is an expansion of the traditional one where the modern definition identifies International organizations while in the traditional one it merely States other entities which have been granted International personality so basically these entities are of course the international organizations and of course it includes the phrase no that in certain circumstances it deals with the relation of states and international organizations with persons which will be more explained in our discussions on the subjects of international law while why this particular definition is significant traditionally international law has been seen as a complex of norms regulating the mutual behavior of states the specific subjects of international law by Norms we mean the standards of behavior defined in terms of Rights and obligations what are the sources of international law there are two categories they are differentiated as primary sources and subsidiary sources now you will see how international law is different from our common understanding of what law is from the sources what are the primary sources of international law we have of course International treaties and conventions whether general or particular establishing rules expressly recognized by the contesting States so what is the law in this particular situation it is the treaty itself or the convention what are the obligations what are the rules that have been established in such treaties and conventions and that is what is considered as to be the law between these particular States or between these particular Nations so uh generally or principally that is the source of international law in that particular kind of situation and of course we have international Customs or the consistent practice of States undertaken in the belief that the conduct is permitted required or prohibited by international law so International customs of course most of intern of these International Customs are Incorporated in treaties and conventions when they pertain to the subject particular subject which is already part of Customs now in order for Customs to be considered as a source of international law it must be shown that the custom is a prevailing practice by a number of states so that in order for to be considered as International custom of course it must be exercised by a sufficient number of states to bind other states which would like to be a part of that particular community and another requirement is that these particular practices must be repeated over a considerable period of time in order for it to be considered as a custom okay for a number of decades probably or for uh time immemorial okay and that it is attended by a sense of legal obligation that uh there is a sense of that it is being required of a particular state to act in a certain way to to observe that particular practice now the third Source the third primary source is the general principles of law these are the rules derived mainly from natural law observed and recognized by civilized Nations such as res judicata prescription pakaur and Estel recognized by and typically derived from domestic legal systems of States so these are the primary sources of international law now the subsidiary source our es would include judicial decisions generally of international tribunals and most authoritative being the international court of justice of course these judicial decisions uh these particular decisions are based on on on its interpretation of what the law is between and among the states in a particular situation on a particular issue what is the applicable um treaty or convention or whether or not it is considered to be a customary law or not now another subsidiary Source are writings of publicists which must be fair and unbiased representation of international law by acknowledge authorities in the field field no of course of the most highly qualified publicists this not just because you are now how a uh or someone who wrote a book on public international law would you be considered as one which is acknowledged to be a publicist and therefore a subsidiary source of of uh international law so you must be a highly qualified publicist in order to be considered as a subsidiary source of of uh international law because we have seen the sources of international law we now come to the question of whether international law is considered to be a true law because how do we understand what law is now in the Philippines in in civil law we defer to the definition by Sanchez Roman on in a specific sense of what law is where he defined it as a role of conduct just obligatory promulgated by the competent Authority for the common good of a people or a nation which constitutes an obligatory rule of conduct for all its members so what Sanchez Roman in his definition requires is that it is promulgated by a competent Authority and as I mentioned there is no such Authority in international law there is no International legislative body from when a uh from when's law would originate nor is there now a competent Sovereign which in forces these rules and this is uh as now um conceptualized by John Austin who requires that there must be a Sovereign which enforces the rules and imposes sanctions and penalties for nonone compliance and because there is no Sovereign and because there is no uh no obligatory compulsion for the um for the state to uh comply with its obligation and and merely relying upon the uh self-imposed um compulsion of the state no to comply with the obligation that John Austin conceptualized it as a positive International morality merely a a guideline uh or a guide for how um a state should act in certain situations and therefore it does it is not of course true law according to John Austin now if we look at another definition of law by Justice Bradley of the US Supreme Court he says that law is a signs of principles by which Civil Society is regulated and held together by which right is enforced and wrong is detected and punished and there is no conceptualization of course of a sovereign from which law shall originate or a necessity of a sovereign which would enforce sanctions for non compliance but what makes now international law true law and this is of course on the on the other the other side of the argument is that it is internation it is law because these particular agreements these particular rules have been agreed upon by the states as the rule or the law that would bind them that binds them okay that uh therefore it is law because it is recognized as law by the states themselves by by the object or by the subjects of interational law so they recognize it as law and therefore it is law there is no necessity of a a a uh of a sovereign Authority in order to enforce it now this is likened no by a a a discussion by some no in by some uh authors to say that well you you take it like this no like children playing in a park that when there is no teacher when there is no parent that oversees them they come to an agreement on how they should conduct themselves in the in the playground or in in a particular game okay so it is a selfregulation so therefore rules can exist without a particular Authority that would now enforce it so despite the fact that there is no Sovereign Authority there is no uh legislature that makes the laws or there is no Sovereign Authority that enforces the laws which would provide sanctions for non-compliance still international law is obligatory why is it then obligatory because it is uh implicit in the concept of an international community that international law is universal it applies to all there is no exception no state is outside the International System because we belong to One International Community new states are immediately Bound by General customary law and succeeded as succeed to treaties of their predecessors the International Community under international law is not only open to but also obligatory for all states being a member therefore of the International Community you are then obligated to comply with the uh the the the rules the laws that are being enforced in this particular International Community of course that is the weakness of international law no that is the weakness of international law if a particular state does not or fails on his obligations or reneges on in his obligations under the uh under a treaty or a convention or contrary to what is required by customary law how how do you punish and how do you sanction this this particular State when there is no no sanctioning body when there is no no Sovereign Authority that would now sanction that particular body so that is one of the weaknesses of of uh international law unlike of course in domestic laws where you have of course the government that would enforce it and provide sanctions for non-compliance of the law how is then international law relate with or interact with our national law or Municipal law there are different concepts to consider here no you we have uh the dualism and the monism concepts where the dualists approach uh views of international and National laws are as two distinct system two separate system that exist independently of one another this uh particular theory is based on the assumption that international law and Municipal legal system constitute two distinct and formally separate categories of legal orders because they defer as to their Source the relations they regulate and their legal content therefore uh these two systems according to uh dualism or dualist Theory are seen to be firmly independent from one another as and neither can can claim Supremacy the monis theory on the other hand developed by Kelson asserts that there is a relationship between National and international law with international law being Supreme the monists argue that as law ultimately regulates the conduct of individuals there is a commonality between International and national law which both ultimately regulate the conduct of the individual therefore each system is a manifestation of a single conception of law that is the uh concept of dualism and monism on the other hand we have uh incorporation versus transformation the doctrine of incorporation is expressed of course in section 2 Article 2 of the Philippine Constitution which states that the Philippine renounces War as an instrument of national policy and adopts the generally accepted principles of international law as part of the law of the land and aderes to the policy of Peace equality Justice Freedom cooperation and Amity of all Nations meaning that generally accepted principles of international law are now Incorporated no to our domestic laws for as long as they are generally accepted principles of international law we are now Bound by uh by these particular Customs the customary laws and of course this is of course expressly provided under the Constitution and the principle of transformation or the doctrine of transformation requires the enactment by the legislative body of such international law principles as are sought to be part of Municipal law so there is a necessity for a uh law no to to make international law or a a particular international law to become a part of our of our local laws so what happens now if there is a conflict between international law and Municipal law well it depends no if the uh interpretation or the conflict involves an issue which is being decided by local tribunals me meaning Philippine courts now if international law conflicts with the Constitution then the Constitution prevails now if it the conflict uh or international law conflicts with a particular statute they are given a an equal standing in the law neither is superior to each other now remember that there is a uh principle known as Lex posterior derat prior which means that which comes last in time will usually be upheld by the municipal tribunal meaning that a treaty May repeal a statute and the statute May repeal a treaty why is this so because remember that a treaty once it is incorporated or once it is transformed into local law is in itself now a a domestic law and laws of course can repeal laws that were previously uh enacted so that is the principle there now if the conflict if there there's a conflict between um our national laws even our Constitution and this is being heard by International tribunals then international law prevails because international law is supreme in its own domain therefore international law shall be upheld because international law provides the standards by which to determine the legality of a States conduct and again there is also the principle that the state cannot make use or of its local laws or its Municipal laws in order to avoid their obligations in international treaties or in international law these are our references for our discussion in this particular topic so next time again thank you [Music] [Applause]